One of the contenders for the new Army sidearm contract is Detonics.
At first glance, it seems absurd to suggest that a small company on the outskirts of St. Louis could be a serious player in the race to provide the U.S. Army with its next handgun.
This is, after all, a major event in the realm of military weapons having happened only twice in the past 100 or so years. And it's expected to draw the attention of the industry's most powerful names, including Smith & Wesson, Beretta, Ruger and Glock.
And then there's tiny Detonics, a five-person operation in Millstadt that fashions itself more tech company than gunmaker.
They'll be facing deep-pocketed competitors with lobbyists, squads of marketing and public relations staffers, and friends in Congress.
"There's just no comparison to what these large companies have in the way of resources," said Bruce Siddle, Detonics' chief executive.
But what his company does have, he said, is a gun that would give the military what it craves a weapon with a modular design offering easy customizing to fit different hands as well as different missions. The ideas behind it even prompted a 2013 invitation from the Army's modular handguns group, which asked for a presentation on the company's efforts.
Various military branches make smaller-scale purchases of handguns from time to time, particularly in the case of special operations units. But the last time there was a wholesale change was in 1985, when the Army pushed aside its iconic, but aging, Colt 1911 pistols carried by soldiers for more than seven decades in favor of the Beretta M9.
The Beretta offered a smaller caliber 9 mm versus .45-caliber and considerably more capacity. But it's a gun that's been hard-pressed to gain the love of critics, who remain unhappy with various design elements, including its caliber and a slide-mounted safety that can be accidentally engaged while clearing malfunctions.
Those guns are nearing the end of their service life. And with the composition of the Army changing there are more female soldiers today than when the Beretta was chosen military leaders are looking for what could be a less expensive gun and one that will fit a wider range of hand sizes. They are expected to buy more than 500,000 of them.
The Detonics STX, still in prototype, is essentially a 1911-style gun that's been modified to use an internal striker instead of a visible external hammer. They've also tinkered with the grip angles and shape to achieve what they say is better recoil absorption and performance drawn from Siddle's research on how the body responds to the stress of shooting.
"We want to bring a more ergonomical, more accurate, more comfortable gun to shoot," said Kevin Siddle, Bruce's son and the company's chief engineer.
cComments
Still, it may not help that the firm is a relative unknown these days, even among gun enthusiasts.
"The people who know Detonics know them from 'Miami Vice,'" said Bob Owens, editor of Bearingarms.com, which covers industry happenings. "That was three generations and several owners ago."
The company, formerly a division of a Seattle-based explosives maker, was founded in the mid-1970s with the launch of its highly regarded Combat Master, the first compact version of the .45-caliber 1911.
The company's guns were popular, even snagging a co-starring role on the ankle of Sonny Crockett (actor Don Johnson) in the Miami-based TV crime series. Regardless, Detonics was out of business by the late 1980s and then bounced from one owner to the next before ending up with Siddle and a group of investors in 2007.
Few things, however, have the ability to place a firearms company on the map faster than putting one of its guns into the holsters of U.S. soldiers.
Indeed, one of the reasons these companies will chase the Army contract is because of what it can mean for sales to the public. Whichever gun is chosen will develop an instant fan following, with buyers eager to own the same, or at least similar, pistol, said Roy Huntington, editor of American Handgunner magazine.
"There is a certain geeky, coolness factor," Huntington said. "There seems to be an almost immediate transition to the civilian market."
Assessing Detonics' chances is difficult at best, particularly given all that's not known about the military contract, which isn't expected to be unveiled until later this year if at all.
There's still a chance the military won't do anything. That's what happened 10 years ago, when the Army sought, through its Joint Combat Pistol program, to replace the Beretta with a new .45-caliber pistol. The program drew a lot of interest from the industry but never selected a winner.
Beretta clearly hopes for a similar result this time around and already has submitted a modified version of its gun in hopes of heading off the contract fight before it even starts.
But if things do move forward, much depends on the contract particulars.
"The thing that's going to make or break these guys is what kind of contract the military wants," said Owens, of Bearingarms.com.
The worst-case scenario would be a decision to go with something already being made such as Sig Sauer's new P320, which shares some of the modular features of the Detonics gun.
Almost as problematic would be a bid process requiring a heavy production capacity. It's something Detonics doesn't have and might be hard-pressed to come up with, given that many of the largest manufacturers are likely to be involved in the bidding.
Bruce Siddle said the company is in talks with numerous manufacturers though he wouldn't offer any names.
The best-case scenario is one in which the military is willing to go with an intellectual property route, where it could license the Detonics design and then find its own builders.
"Then they're a legitimate player," Owens said.
There is one downside to that approach, at least from the standpoint of ego: It's unlikely the Detonics name would be emblazoned on the sides of guns made through such a contract. Siddle, however, doesn't seem to mind.
"My goal for the shareholders is to bring them value," he said. "None of us particularly care what the label says."
But simply entering the competition won't be cheap, said retired Lt. Col. Freddie Blish, general manager of the Robar Companies, a maker of custom guns and finishes.
The evaluation period, which will take a year or longer, will involve each company supplying the military with several dozen guns for torture testing and field trials in the hands of soldiers.
"They'll have to have deep pockets to do what it takes to get the military's attention," Blish said.
And in the end, the top gun won't necessarily be the one that's chosen. The military will be looking at a combination of quality and cost.
"The chances of them winning are fairly slim," Blish said. "Unless they have something extraordinarily unusual, that's a tough uphill battle."
