Ammo For Sale

« « True | Home | Bumpstock numbers » »

The Army’s new subgun

The B&T APC9K. I’m surprised Sig wasn’t in the running with some sort of subbie that took mags compatible with the P320.

13 Responses to “The Army’s new subgun”

  1. Ken in NH Says:

    You expect the Pentagon to logically assess the possibility of interchangeable weapons and parts thus minimizing costs, weight to be carried into battle, and training? Have you been hit on the head by a coconut?

  2. Bram Says:

    For $7k each. Way to spend my money carefully Army. Couldn’t they just order up some new Greaseguns from a machine shop for $200 each?

  3. nk Says:

    $7,142.86 to be exact. It is obscene. Some procurement officers need investigating and thoroughly.

  4. emdfl Says:

    Considering that the semi version costs about 2K, I’d be inclined to suspect that the military specified the platinum selector option, the 22kt gold trigger, and of course the sterling silver mags.

  5. Michael Quinn Says:

    How does a plastic straight blowback 9mm subgun wind up costing $2k let alone $7k?

  6. totc Says:

    “For $7k each. Way to spend my money carefully Army. Couldn’t they just order up some new Greaseguns from a machine shop for $200 each?”

    They could, but sufficient baksheesh would not have greased certain hands.

  7. ExpatNJ Says:

    HK MP5, UZI, and many others (excepting the Ingram Mac-9/10) would have been very reliable, and possibly a better, make/model/brand choice. Probably heaper, too (as said by others above). But, it seems a US-manufacturer was preferred (as ‘totc’ says above) to facilitate ‘negotiated remuneration commissions’ (ie kick-backs).

  8. Paul Says:

    Subguns are short range weapons. Now WHY put the sights high and barrel low on a weapon made for short range??

    See, like the AR, that makes the POI vary greatly as the range increases or decreases. Precision head shots become iffy due to the gun shooting low or high.

    Any shoulder fired pistol cartridge weapon needs, like the M1 Carbine, to have sights near the bore.

  9. Lyle Says:

    Many moons ago, in the musical instrument business there was a meme floating around;

    Would you rather have a ten thousand dollar instrument or a five hundred dollar instrument?

    So there was, in fact, at one time, something of a competition among the manufacturers to offer the most expensive instrument. The way it was done was to take an existing model and doll it up with frills. Regardless; that concept, addressing an aspect of human psychology which is often quite apart from objectivity, still holds.

    And so, if you can afford anything you want, you opt for the more expensive item on the assumption, or hope, or delusion, that it is therefore “better”. Who knows?– It may even be true in some cases! And if it’s better, then by golly; nothing but the “best” for our troops, etc… Simple as that. That’s how anyone will tend to spend other people’s money under several different circumstances, and when it comes to military there is always that desire to have the very best even if you don’t necessarily understand that “best” means.

    In musical instruments the difference between “good”, “very good” and “the best” is often so subjective as to be safely regarded as totally subjective. This is of course where clever marketing beats objective quality almost every time. And you may recall some of the double blind tests done with wine tasting as related to price.

    (Maybe I’d best shut up though, huh, ’cause I still have another pending order with the Dept, of the Army… But then again; my stuff is a relative bargain)

  10. Michael Quinn Says:

    They keep the barrel in line with the stock and the shooter’s shoulder to keep muzzle climb to a minimum. As a consequence, you have to put the sights high to get them in line with the shooter’s eye. You give up point of aim for better controllability in full auto.

  11. Flight-ER-Doc Says:

    Logic and reason from the Army?

  12. rickn8or Says:

    Doc: “Logic and reason from the Army Supply Corps??

  13. mikee Says:

    So 9mm vs .45ACP is apparently not an issue any more?
    (Ducks for cover as people start throwing things)

Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.

Uncle Pays the Bills

Find Local
Gun Shops & Shooting Ranges