Walther Forums banner
1 - 20 of 47 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,913 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
As the title says, do you think the P99 AS 9mm could pass the US Army reliability testing regime used for the MHS program?

It's purely an academic exercise, as most of us will never push our personal P99s like that, but it's interesting to think about.

What say ye fine gentlemen?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,032 Posts
Mine sees a decent number of rounds and not much cleaning, so in terms of function while dirty, I think the gun is good to go, but I really don't know about sand/salt/cold while being carried exposed to the elements. There might be some concerns about sand getting into the striker channel through the hole in the back plate if you were in an environment with fine enough sand and high enough winds, I suppose?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,913 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Not "modular", not caliber neutral. The PPQ M2 was rumored to be submitted, but wasn't.

Not the point, Glock also failed because they were not modular. I'm just wondering about the MTBF, reliability stuff.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
632 Posts
More importantly than anything, I don't think they would pass an endurance test. Drop it wrong and suddenly you don't have a rear site.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,040 Posts
More importantly than anything, I don't think they would pass an endurance test. Drop it wrong and suddenly you don't have a rear site.
The click adjustable sight is only put on for the American civilian market for sporting/import points. A mil and LEO version would have the press-fit sights, like the PPS.

But even so, better to loose the rear sight than have it go off when dropped, cough cough.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
291 Posts
P99 has been in service for more than two decades. It has two internal drop safeties and a firing pin safety plus a decocker on the AS model. I’d believe there are a lot of test report available already.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
518 Posts
Does anyone know that the test requirements were or could reduce them for the uninitiated?

Does anyone know why Walther still imports with these adjustable sights? HK, CZ, and others import with decent steel sights on guns that aren't cluttered with "point catching" features.

I personally think the P99 is a VERY reliable and rugged gun - and VERY well suited to military use - and better than the P320, Glock, etc. DA/SA is good for troops in terms of safety and just requires proper range instruction for DA/SA transition. MUCH safer than your average SF gun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Likely so they have enough 'points' to be imported. Click adjustable 'target' sights are worth 10 or 15 points. Personally, I think the factory sights are more than up to the task and, no, I don't baby my P99.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
518 Posts
Points make no sense these days - again why do a dozen other European gun makers offer real sights as standard.

The factory sights are adequate for competition or casual use until changed out. They are not adequate for LE/MIL and Walther needs to make a change.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Points make no sense these days - again why do a dozen other European gun makers offer real sights as standard.

The factory sights are adequate for competition or casual use until changed out. They are not adequate for LE/MIL and Walther needs to make a change.
It makes a lot of sense when it's the difference between your gun being importable or not. Other companies might swap out the sights, I know Glock has in the past, but why? What makes the factory sights inadequate for serious use seeing as they are being used by LE/Mil (who are probably nicer to their guns than most American citizens)? It seems like you're letting your personal opinion and desires get in the way of reality. The factory sights are indeed 'real' sights and steel sights are a factory option if you want them, anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
518 Posts
If you don't understand why a sight that comes off with your thumbnail is not adequate for LE/MIL lets just agree that its good you are not on a LE/MIL source selection board. I've spent the better part of 3 decades on AD, so I know how soldiers treat weapons.

It makes all the sense in the world to import these to cut costs because you've been tooled to supply them in the past - but it makes no sense when all your European competition provides a better option as standard on their guns. None.

I may be right, but its not because its my personal opinion. Its right because it is supported by facts and argued with logic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,998 Posts
If you don't understand why a sight that comes off with your thumbnail is not adequate for LE/MIL lets just agree that its good you are not on a LE/MIL source selection board.
That's why they don't submit pistols with the click-adjustable sight system. This is strictly an American thing to get the pistols to be allowed to be imported here. From what I understand, most Glock pistols are imported with adjustable sights as well, and then are swapped to the fixed sights when they get here. Is the argument that pistols with substandard sights should not do well with police and military agencies, because I just mentioned what could be the most prevalent pistol used in these organizations with what could be the worst factory sights available on pistols?



https://www.nraila.org/articles/19990728/federal-handgun-importation-criteria
 
1 - 20 of 47 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top