Time For A New Military Sidearm?

ruger22 · Post by **ruger22** » Wed Feb 16, 2011 11:36 am

Written in the Marine Gazette by a Marine Major.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=41786

KAZ · Post by **KAZ** » Wed Feb 16, 2011 12:21 pm

ALAS, a great idea that will never happen. Small units will always be allowed to spec tools that fit special warfare requirements. The 9mm is the result of deep water politics infringing into weapons acquisition with fact obscured by false premise to support goals that have nothing to do with what the actual military might need. The slope began with a misplaced desire to standardize the NATO pistol round with us being the only country not 9mm at the time. Throw in the fact that less recoil was better for "smaller stature" (read female) shooters, and not many were comfortable with "cocked and locked" 45 1911 carry which most will agree is the only way to carry a 1911 ready for instant use. That requires a lot of training as we 1911 fans will all agree. The last nail is the fact that if your large unit non special warfare mission comes down to deployment of a side arm things have gone way south

ruger22 · Post by **ruger22** » Wed Feb 16, 2011 12:34 pm

The article is a bit biased, and has some inaccuacies, such as stating the XD has a metal frame!

I can see revived interest in the .45, but I can't imagine the DOD going with polymer unless their budget is doing really bad. Much less a pistol made in Croatia.

My vote would be more something like the Colt Double Eagle, the DA/SA 1911. Made in stainless, made in standard and Commander size. What more do they need?

bgreenea3 · Post by **bgreenea3** » Wed Feb 16, 2011 2:40 pm

Wow the author does not have very much in the way of firearms knowledge..... I think if the Military was going to go to a new sidearm in 45 they would probably go with the Sig 220 or something along those lines. the m&p 45 would be a nice choice too...

bigfatdave · Post by **bigfatdave** » Wed Feb 16, 2011 4:29 pm

I'm fairly sure the XD has a steel internal frame inside the polymer grip/external frame.

I'm more concerned about an article written by someone who believes in "knockdown power" in a controllable duty handgun firing FMJ ammo.

Hakaman · Post by **Hakaman** » Wed Feb 16, 2011 5:06 pm

I have a Beretta M9A1 pistol. I think it is a "nostalgic" hg, cool looking, well built, with a solid steel frame. I purchased it because of this, and the fact that my late father served in the marines. Although he never used one, a certain respect is brought on owning one. It is probably one of my favorite guns to shoot for the above reasons, but I never seem to be accurate with it. As hard as I try, I always pull to the left. I have four 9mm hg's, and the S&W m&p pro is by far the best shooter for me. The ergonomics fits my hand just right, as there are 3 different sized backstraps included. Polymer hg's are very tough guns, and a 45acp might be the way to go if you could find one that loads more then 7 rounds or so. 9mm's puncture the target, 45acp's put big holes in the target. Then again, maybe this baby is the best of both worlds?:
http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/ ... rrorView_Y
Regardless which direction the military goes, I will always enjoy my Beretta M9.
Haka

greener · Post by **greener** » Wed Feb 16, 2011 8:08 pm

Being an old brown shoe type, I don't know what's wrong with the 1911. I'm not sure why the good major wants to go from the Italian gun to the Croation gun.

My first experience with the M9 left me with a very low opinion of 9mm. I couldn't hit squat with it and figured I'd shoot better groups throwing them at the target. I fired a Beretta 92 a couple years ago and had a much better experience. However, I still feel the 9mm round is inferior to either the .40 or .45.

I like the M&P version of either .40 or .45 and when DoD calls, I'll decide which one.

99/100 · Post by **99/100** » Wed Feb 16, 2011 8:33 pm

The "spec ops" folks have moved back to 45's due to the the original reason it was adopted stopping power. I suspect they are shooting and "enhanced" 1911 variant but don't know for sure. We adopted the 9mm as a sop to NATO in 1981 and because the 1911's were plain worn out, though as I recall most countries retained the original caliber of their MBR.I had an Italian made 92 I bought in 81 that I later sold to a Delta guy I knew after much pleading, that pistol was superior to the "mil spec" model issued.

bgreenea3 · Post by **bgreenea3** » Thu Feb 17, 2011 12:27 pm

another reason for the spec ops guys to use the 45 is it is always subsonic with a 230fmj so it is much quieter with a suppressor.

my impression of stopping power is that a 45 is more like getting hit with a fist than poked with a couple of fingers. biggger holes do more damage too.

ruger22 · Post by **ruger22** » Fri Feb 18, 2011 1:00 pm

greener wrote:Being an old brown shoe type, I don't know what's wrong with the 1911.

The reason I thought the Double Eagle was a contender, is that it eliminates the "problem" of cocked and locked. Many people are uncomfortable with that, and I admit I would be, too.

A DA 1911 without the grip safety would be much more appealing to me as a personal handgun. Throw in the two sizes and stainless as choices, and you have more features and quality than the M9.

I don't know what Colt entered in the "competition", but since 9mm was a requirement, that likely tossed out 1911 designs. I remember at one time Colt had a somewhat High Power clone called the 2000, I think.

greener · Post by **greener** » Fri Feb 18, 2011 8:44 pm

For holster carry, cocked and locked isn't a problem. I suppose if you were worried, you could drop the hammer. The 1911 is a classic, good shooting handgun. Newer wrinkles like double stack improve it. Of course when you go to the new tupperware .45's you get some pretty good pistols. As long as they carried, didn't break and you could lug the ammo, any of the new or old .45's would be pretty good as a military sidearm.

bgreenea3 · Post by **bgreenea3** » Fri Feb 18, 2011 9:02 pm

Just think of the surplus m9's that could be put out to the civillian market.....

maybe through CMP

99/100 · Post by **99/100** » Fri Feb 18, 2011 9:51 pm

Think of all the M1's the current administration didn't let back in............

bgreenea3 · Post by **bgreenea3** » Sat Feb 19, 2011 1:13 am

99/100 wrote:Think of all the M1's the current administration didn't let back in............

Post by **Bullseye** » Sat Feb 19, 2011 2:28 am

Just think of the surplus m9's that could be put out to the civillian market..... maybe through CMP

The CMP is prohibited from selling pistols or fully automatic rifles by Congressional charter. The older version, The DCM, once sold surplus 1911 pistols but had to stop with the passing of the 1968 Gun Control Act.

R,
Bullseye