Modular Handgun System Program Overview

9809Combat_Diver-114

For many of you, it will feel like “that time of year again”, so many US pistol competitions have come and gone. The Army’s Modular Handgun System program is gearing up to replace current service pistols with a new suite of pistols, holsters, and accessories. Still, despite efforts to replace it, the M9 remains the standard handgun of US armed forces. Well, Paul M. Barrett (no relation), author of GLOCK: The Rise of America’s Gun and writing for Businessweek has weighed in on the probable MHS contenders:

For gun manufacturers, no customer rivals the Pentagon for prestige and revenue potential. That’s why, after years of anticipation, firearm makers are mobilizing for the U.S. Army’s imminent competition to replace the Beretta M9 pistol, the American soldier’s standard sidearm since 1985.

The procurement process for several hundred thousand new pistols formally begins in January and is expected to last about two years. Based on more than 15 years of reporting on the gun business, I’d identify the early favorites as a much-improvedSmith & Wesson (SWHC), which enjoys a made-in-the-USA marketing edge, and the formidable Glock of Austria.

For a second opinion, I asked longtime industry consultant and former National Rifle Association organizer Richard Feldman for some snap handicapping. “Beretta starts with a 30-year history of supplying the Army, and that counts for something,” said Feldman, now the president of the Independent Firearm Owners Association, an advocacy group based in Rindge, N.H. “S&W, which lost a lot of police and civilian business to Glock in the 1980s and 1990s, has transformed itself into a modern firearm manufacturing enterprise with much better quality than in the past. Glock, barely in existence the last time this contract was up, is undeniably a powerful contender.”

“Oddly,” Feldman continued, “Colt, despite its iconic role in American firearm history, isn’t even a contender.” That won’t come as news to readers of Bloomberg Businessweek. We’ve charted the demise of West Hartford (Conn.)-based Colt under the control of latter-day private equity owners.

Pentagon officials have been talking for years about shelving the semiautomatic M9, made by an American unit of the Italian-owned Beretta. Daryl Easlick, a project officer with the Army’s Maneuver Center of Excellence at Fort Benning, Ga., told the website Military.com in July that the Pentagon would replace its entire inventory of 9mm Berettas for something more accurate, lethal, and reliable: “It’s a total system replacement—new gun, new ammo, new holster, everything.”

Handguns are secondary weapons for rank-and-file infantry soldiers armed with rifles. Pistols are carried by certain officers, tank crew members, truck drivers, special operations troops, and others on the battlefield.

While I have no particular expertise in handguns, this sounds like a reasonable assessment to me. However:

For years, front-line war fighters have complained that the M9′s 9mm round lacks sufficient stopping power. “The 9mm doesn’t score high with soldier feedback,” Easlick told Military.com. The Army and its sister services—the Marines, Air Force, and Navy—want a sidearm and ammunition round that will cause more damage, he said. “We have to do better than our current 9mm.”

In a sense, the military appears poised to go back to the future. The Beretta 9mm replaced a Colt .45 caliber model that had served as the Army standard for generations. The .45 round is larger and therefore deadlier than the 9mm. In the 1980s, however, the Pentagon decided to follow the lead of NATO allies that preferred lighter, less expensive 9mm ammunition.

[emphasis mine]

This is something I’ve addressed before:

That’s right, standard pressure 9mm ball loads are pretty much directly comparable in energy with standard-pressure .45 ACP loads. Now, sometimes you’ll see cheaper plinking loads that produce less velocity, and often 9mm is shot from 4″ barrels, where .45 is normally shot from 5″ barrels, but in an apples-to-apples comparison, they’re about the same.

But why? The .45 is much larger, surely it should be more powerful. Yes, but the .45 ACP is much lower pressure (circa 22,000 PSI) versus the 9mm (circa 32,000 PSI), which accounts for its pretty mediocre performance.

Pistol rounds, whether they be 9mm, .45, .40, or .380 ACP, produce similar wound channels if they have similar bullet construction. FMJ bullets will perform the same typically, more or less regardless of what tissue they hit. They produce a tubular temporary cavity, and a relatively mediocre permanent cavity.

Unfortunately, there is a relatively limited range of options available to the military if improving the effectiveness of their pistols is their goal. There’s some evidence that high velocity rounds like 5.7×28 suffer less from encountering bone, but that ammunition comes with a considerable penalty in terms of muzzle flash and blast, and is considerably handicapped in available subsonic ammunition. It’s conceivable that an expanding FMJ bullet could be adopted, though in my opinion these won’t pass the Hague convention muster (which prohibits piercings or incisions intended to make the bullet flatten in the target – exactly what the EFMJ bullets possess).

My guess is that, at best, a new sort of FMJ round will be introduced for the 9mm cartridge. What that could eventually look like is beyond my ability to predict; though the Army has considerable tools at their disposal to be applied in the effort.



Nathaniel F

Nathaniel is a history enthusiast and firearms hobbyist whose primary interest lies in military small arms technological developments beginning with the smokeless powder era. In addition to contributing to The Firearm Blog, he runs 196,800 Revolutions Per Minute, a blog devoted to modern small arms design and theory. He can be reached via email at nathaniel.f@staff.thefirearmblog.com.


Advertisement

  • Menger40

    I’m interested in what happens to all the old M9’s if the army actually adopts something new. Would they sell them off? Let them rot in a warehouse forever? Or just bulldoze them?

    • SM

      Knowing the US government, they would melt them down before we got a shot at them.

    • Zachary marrs

      99% chance of bulldoze
      .5% chance of civilian sales
      .5% chance of warehouse

      • billyoblivion

        Nah.

        50% chance of melt down.
        49% chance of “sold to allies”[1]
        1% Transfered to CMP.

        [1] Allies, [n], People who hate us, but we’re too dumb to realize.

    • KestrelBike

      Well if this program takes 2 years, and if the M9 is actually replaced (which I doubt, I think this is another dog & pony show) then we could have a Republican president in office. Then we’d have a fairer shake at some surplus M9s.

      • Grindstone50k

        The question is, would you WANT a surplus M9? I’ve shot some ratty old M9s during qual. Those had definitely seen some better days.

        • JumpIf NotZero

          But they did work!

          • Grindstone50k

            Not the three different ones I was issued. Constant stoppages.

    • two_amber_lamps

      I’m sure they’ll either dump them on our “allies” or chop them.

  • mechamaster

    Personally, I think Smith&Wesson m&p has the bigger chances to win the battle in striker fired handgun better than Glock. ( as long S&W maintain their best quality )
    It has nice ergonomic shape and trigger design ( it doesn’t intimidating-look like ‘glock syle-dingus’ ) and more traditionalist-friendly design.
    And of course, it’s America – champion handgun. ^^

  • Paladin

    The army doesn’t really need a new handgun so much as they need a new bullet. They’re hamstrung by the Hague conventions. FMJ ball from a handgun simply is not effective, regardless of caliber.

    Perhaps the Lehigh Defense XP projectiles offer an interesting possibility. They’re machined copper (environmentally friendly, bonus!) do not expand, thereby avoiding the Hague conventions, and produce wound channels similar to JHPs.

    • ExurbanKevin

      I’d never heard of Leigh Defense before, but wow, that is an interesting bullet.

    • Sulaco

      And on average go deeper, their .380 is awesome.

    • Grindstone50k

      Now that is some good information.

    • USMC03Vet

      With the proliferation of body armor the standard pistol calibers aren’t cutting it any longer. That is the real caliber issue right now with military handguns.

      • Paladin

        I don’t think there are very many jihadis with the budget for body armor in Derkaderkastan, at least not enough to make AP handgun rounds a necessity. Additionally, AP rounds tend to sacrifice wound ballistics for armor penetration.

        There may come a war where AP handguns are needed, but in that case the Russians have already developed an effective bullet for the job in 9x19mm with their 7N21 and 7N31 cartridges.

        • USMC03Vet

          You have to look beyond the immediate and plan for the future both Russia and China are building up military capabilities and both use body armor.

          • Paladin

            Professional soldiers generally use armor equivalent to or in excess of NIJ III armor. Try all you want you’re not going to get a handgun cartridge through that armor. If you’re fighting an armored soldier with a handgun, aim for the face.

            Handguns don’t win wars. Let’s take a step back and frame what we’re talking about here. AP handgun ammunition is necessary under a very specific set of circumstances. First, the enemy must be within the effective range of the handgun, let’s say about 10 metres. Second, the enemy must be wearing body armor, but no stronger than NIJ IIIA. Third, conditions must be such that it is necessary to rely on a handgun rather than a rifle, either none are equipped, or they are non-operable. In the whole course of a war how many instances fulfilling these conditions do you think are likely to occur?

            Rather than trying to develop some whiz-bang handgun cartridge it would be more efficient and more effective to equip people who would otherwise receive handguns with a short light carbine firing rifle ammunition.

          • They are calling out a 90% hit rate at 50 meters. I know some who would have trouble with that with a rifle.

          • Hyok Kim

            Talk about trying to make a meal out of an egg roll!

          • Hyok Kim

            I think handguns have long been military obsolete. Only military people with legit needs for handguns would be pilots, tank crew, long range light recon/scouts.

        • T Sheehan

          Actually, IBA’s were not uncommon on those we neutralized. Neither were DCU and MCP uniform segments. We even found a few bodies with E-SAPI plates.
          Stolen or black market US gear was fairly common on Mahdi Army goons and Promise Day Brigade hostiles.

          • Paladin

            That is actually pretty interesting. Most of the footage I’ve seen showed a distinct lack of armor. It is somewhat of a moot point for this discussion though, since an E-SAPI plate will easily stop any handgun AP ammunition.

      • Anonymoose

        .454 Casull. :^)

        • I wasn’t aware the US Army is composed of superhuman vampires.

    • GordonTrenchard

      Whatever system is chosen is bound to be controversial especially among the American firearms community. The group of people on this forum would be considered pistol experts in the rest of the world. Most of us have our personal preferences that will factor into whatever is chosen. Let’s hope that whatever is chosen is more lethal and works for most users including women and lefties and remember that a pistol is a backup weapon. I am more concerned about the replacement for the M4 and the 5.56 which is a huge issue.

    • Perhaps it would just be easier to opt out of certain portions of the hague convention. Police everywhere use hollowpoint ammunition

  • William Litten

    Seriously, no mention of Sig Sauer? They just came out with the P320 and it is almost literally what the military is asking for. It is certainly the most modular and the reviews have been excellent. Sig just built a new plant in NH, they bought an ammunition manufacturer, and they are almost entirely an American company now. Sig is also like the number 3 or 4 handgun manufacturer in the US.
    Smith & Wesson makes a good product and I’m sure our military would be well served by the M&P. But they partnered with Global Dynamics, an army of lobbyists, to get ahead. Much like back when the M9 was originally adopted the best design won’t win.

    • ExurbanKevin

      Paul Barrett, the author of the Business Week article, knows a lot about Glock, so that’s what he writes about, and I agree, Sig has an inside track here.

    • JSmath

      I agree with you, except for the fact that the P320 is “only” capable of 9mm, 357Sig, and .40SW. All damned fine performing rounds, especially 180 and up for the .40SW in suppressed capacity, “but not as deadly as .45ACP”…

      • Don’t Drone Me Bro

        The .45 ACP model is coming in 2015. Check a video of it out on SIG’s social media

      • William Litten

        LOL snort. Yeah, look I prefer .45 myself but I would never try to suggest that it is “deadlier” than 9mm. Stopping power is such a fuzzy concept. I love America, we get nostalgic about a caliber of bullet. Anyway, as mentioned in the other comments Sig is coming out with a .45 acp model soon. Though I kind of doubt it will have full parts interchangeability with the other models.

    • USMC03Vet

      It’s the only modual pistol platform I know of. The trigger group being so easily removed and that being the gun part makes it pefect for high volume military use they could just have replacement frames and barrels on stand by and correct issues in seconds.

  • KestrelBike

    When they say they want a more accurate pistol, they mean “gee maybe we should teach proper pistol marksmanship”.

    The 92fs is just fine for accuracy.

    • Uniform223

      True, the M9 is just as accurate as any service pistol out there in the hands of your “average” soldier or marine. What makes a pistol more accurate by default is the trigger and barrel on it.

      Speaking from experience and personal gripes of myself and fellow soldiers. Its not that the M9 is a terrible pistol, its a decent pistol. Its just that there are some minor things about it that just make look stupid.

      -open slide design
      -sights are considered small
      -safety selector/decocker is in a stupid position
      -mushy trigger
      -never feels “right” in the hand

    • USMC03Vet

      Sadly our military doesn’t get much actual trigger time outside of specific specialities. Usually it’s one week a year to qual. More weapons training is needed not only for better effectiveness but better safety when they are given ammunition and have to carry.

    • Beju

      I don’t care for the Beretta due to my stubby fingers’ incompatibility with the grip, but I certainly can’t fault the accuracy.

  • MountainKelly

    Well there’s a lot of great options on the market. I’d say CZ but they don’t have a snowball’s chance in hell despite how widely adopted they are in Europe haha. As far as defense industry goes, there’s a lot of contenders that can actually meet production goals but chances are this will just turn into another “buy your congressman” acquisitions project.

    • Grindstone50k

      I wonder if Beretta doesn’t win, will they throw a tantrum like Boeing?

      • Uniform223

        what did Boeing throw a tantrum for again? Are you referring to their Super Hornet?

        • Grindstone50k

          I was referring to the Super tanker.

          • MountainKelly

            BUT BUT THE EUROS MADE A BETTER PLANE AND BID WAAAAH.

            Defense contractors are wonderful at whining

          • Grindstone50k

            As a current .ctr, I agree

          • MountainKelly

            Yuo

    • john huscio

      Cz p01/p07/p09 would make great military sidearms…..but their not “modular”

      • MountainKelly

        The whole one size fits all mentality is laughable in this case.

  • Sulaco

    I don’t think the pistol is the problem nor the solution except to in rich some crony of the Pentagon. The problem is the “bullet” without a redesign of the projectile nothing changes. There is not enough difference between .45, 9mm, 10mm etc in a round nose projectile to make any difference on impact, unless you jack the velocity up to the point the weapon becomes uncontrollable in normal hands. Hollow point or some type of FMJEB will have to be approved or they are just jer*&ing off again at our expense. IMHO

    • USMC03Vet

      I think the pistol for military use is obsolete due to armor piercing pdw platforms. Unless space is significantly limited they should just issue a pdw platform instead. The benefits are far greater and the burden on the one carrying isn’t that great.

      • claymore

        Good thinking but look what happened with the Carbine to replace pistols……Same thing would apply to the latest greatest pdw they would get issued and shortly thereafter “somebody” would say “well this isn’t working they need a pistol also.”

        • Kivaari

          I remember when they wanted to tell us the M14 was designed to replace every other class of handheld firearm. When I was 12 years old, I knew they were full of it. Anyone that has to carry a firearm knows packing anything other than a pistol is a real pain. The M4 is a good weapon, but it sure doesn’t make it easier to carry than a pistol.

      • Sulaco

        I tended to agree but after talking with some vets back from the sand box they maintained the pistol was just the thing for fighting in builtup areas and indoors. They felt the PDW or M4 were just to long for room to room. The pistol could easily be made to be armor defeating with the right ammo.

        • n0truscotsman

          I disagree because a handgun takes up the same “distance” while properly gripping it, as say, a P90, MP7, or Mk 18 (in fact, the PDW might be shorter, making it the superior CQB weapon in that respect).
          That and the armor typically worn by military forces, which is supposed to be able to stop rifle bullets, cannot be defeated by even hot pistol cartridges anyways.

          • Kivaari

            Same with pistol gripped shotguns. People buy them because of easier handling in confined spaces. Except hold one at the hip, and it protrudes as much as a shotgun with a stock attached.

  • Dracon1201

    Correct me if I am wrong, but I’m pretty damn sure we never signed that. Even as such, it only applies between armies who signed it in the first place, not hellish, shoeless derkaderka murderers.

    • Grindstone50k

      We didn’t sign it, but most of NATO did and (IIRC) we must abide by the treaties NATO is part of.

  • Seburo

    In before some fanboy suggests the 1911. The Army should consider making a 9mm/10mm/11mm SOST or making a PDW requirement for the LSAT program.
    Yeah I am American but prefer using metric. Imperial requires too many Google searches.

    • Uniform223

      *fanboy* WE SHOULD GO BACK TO THE TRIED AND TRUE ALL MURICAN 1911!!! IT WAS A HUGE UNMURICAN MISTAKE TO EVEN GO TO THE PANSY EUROPEAN ITALIANO OPEN SLIDE DESIGN WEAK-ASS GOOD FOR NOTHIN 9MM MONSTROSITY!! WE DID OUR BOYS AND GIRLS A DISFAVOR BY GOING TO AN UNMURICAN DESIGNED SMALL CALIBER PISTOL. JOHN BROWNING’S 1911 IS THE ONLY PISTOL GOOD ENOUGH FOR OUR BOYS AND GIRLS IN UNIFORM!!!. GOD BLESS MURICA!!

      (( sorry I couldn’t pass that opportunity up 😀 ))

      • Seburo

        Lol! You pretty much paraphrased every argument they use.

      • n0truscotsman

        …bring back the M14!

        😀

        • jdkchem

          Bring back the M1903 Springfield.

          • JumpIf NotZero

            The Kentucy rifle was the finest sniper rifle ever created!!!

          • Paladin

            It’s got nothing on the Brown Bess!

          • LCON

            Bring back the trebuchet! I want to fling Boulders at my neigbors….. again

          • Paladin

            You kids and your new fangled trebuchets, give me a good onager and I’ll be happy.

          • RealitiCzech

            Them autoloaders are just a fad!

        • Tinklebell

          Even as a European, I quite like the M14. I do, however, also understand why it wasn’t suitable for military service…AT THE TIME. These days, however, advances in technology would make it the ultimate service weapon in my opinion. But OK, when I served, our service weapon was from the same era as the M14 so there’s nothing wrong or strange to me about a service rifle that uses a full-power cartridge…

  • Alex Nicolin

    9 mm is adequate, especially +P+ rounds. If they adopt a pistol in this caliber, they should pick one that’t strong enough to handle that amount of pressure w/o excessive wear. I like what the Russians did with their special 9 mm loads – high pressure, light bullet with exposed steel core with body armor penetration capability.

    • USMC03Vet

      A round that can penetrate body armor is a must. Right now all the standard pistol calibers can’t even defeat the most basic of body armor. I hope this would be a consideration for the brass that makes the decisions but I don’t have high hopes.

    • n0truscotsman

      Yes and they didn’t have to reinvent the wheel with “PDW” cartridges.

  • Grindstone50k

    Then I did not recall correctly.

  • billyoblivion

    The only issue with that is that the M9 is aluminum framed, and our Ops Tempo since the 1990 has been a little higher than I think the Pentagon expected.

    Steel, if you keep the stress below a certain level will last for human vales of forever. Aluminum *always* eventually wears out. If you over build enough that “eventually” is a long, but it’s still eventually.

  • billyoblivion

    It needs to be about 2x the cost so they can justify not training with it.

  • Anonymoose

    Just adopt the Desert Eagle! It’s already perfectly modular! .357, .44, and .50AE are all far superior to 9mm, .40, and .45, and there are barrel, optic, and LAM/tac light options! /trolling

    • mechamaster

      Perfect pistol and caliber for Skynet and Cyborg invasion… ( Lol kidding ).

  • Anonymoose

    Maybe a Glock 21, but not a 17.

  • n0truscotsman

    “for something more accurate, lethal, and reliable: “It’s a total system replacement—new gun, new ammo, new holster, everything ”

    WHY!?

    If you want something more “accurate” than a M9, you need to go match. Period. That of course, is not without its usual drawbacks (more complexity, more expense, inherently inferior reliability).

    If you want something more “lethal”, you need something that produces substantially more energy than the big 5. This of course, is not without its usual drawbacks (higher recoil, larger size, etc etc)

    If you want something more reliable, you need to field something that has a higher MRBF than the M9, which is already very high. To achieve even better reliability, can the expense be justified? Furthermore, in order to have something more “accurate” than the M9, which is already very accurate for a factory gun, it needs to be match in my opinion, which is inherently inferior in reliability. Catch 22.

    New ammo? makes sense out of every other delusional piece of nonsense they desire so far. Still. Handguns versus rifles…

    new holster? hopefully something better than those G-codes big army recently bought and the USMC’s serpas. Everybody just ends up buying safariland thumb holsters anyways…

  • GordonTrenchard

    The article says more accurate, lethal, and reliable than the Beretta? The Beretta 92 is an extremely accurate system and reliable as well. The lethality has all to do with the round. Any pistol round will be underpowered for military use compared to a rifle round.

  • claymore

    It also says that “noise moderating devices” will not be used. So those things hanging off the front of our M-4s couldn’t possibly be suppressors…………… or WE would be in violation LOL.

    • RealitiCzech

      Really? Had no idea it banned those as well.

      • claymore

        Yes it does for real.

  • Made in the USA isn’t a factor in this selection. Virtually every company that will compete for the MHS contract has production facilities in the United States.

    And there is no mention of the other major player in the room Sig. Sig came in second to the M9, they have several issued pistols with Mil/Fed LE. So they are familiar enough with the contracting process to navigate it. Sig recently released a pistol that is tailored for the MHS contract.

  • Seburo

    Because you can totally kill enemies with body armor using 9mm while ISIS has Type III body armor. Yeah “experimental soft armors” is a real thing outside of Call of Duty.

  • Tassiebush

    Bring back the gyrojet! :-p

  • Yellow Devil

    Yeah but it’s still the policy of the U.S. to follow the Hague, even if faced off against enemies not covered by it. Chalk it up to politics, logistics or both.

  • JLR84

    I think either the Glock or M&P would be the best choice, but I wouldn’t rule out FN either.

    Whatever you think of the FNX compared to the alternatives, FN is already a major supplier of small arms to the US military and that experience and connections probably counts for a lot. It’s SCAR has been the perpetual front-runner in replacing the M4 so they know the competition process, AND they beat out Colt to be the provider of the M4 so they’ve won either way.

  • john huscio

    Or buffalo bore fmj-fn

  • usmcmailman

    Given a choice, I would always choose the 1911 .45 Colt as my sidearm.

  • usmcmailman

    And you would die !

  • Guido FL

    These trials are a joke like the M 16 trials.

  • T Sheehan

    I want my M9 replaced by a reliable BATTLEFIELD pistol. Not a cowboy gun for 15 feet away. I need a sidearm that can hit, accurately and rapidly, and with capacity, from 50m if my primary weapon is down. My worn out M9 failed to chamber a round almost every mag in country and out. I had a 1911 when I was a young medic, and they won’t cut it either. No more 9mm or .45, thank you. Knock down power isn’t the problem, it’s range, accuracy, reliability, capacity and shot control if you need to have a chance at median MOUT ranges or in the field if your rifle or 249/240 go down.

    • Cheese_McQueen

      If they would replace the current m9 with some fresh ones troops would feel much better about it. The fact that the military issues some beat ass gear is the real problem.

  • Kivaari

    The M9 is quite accurate, at least in a newer gun, they shoot well. The Glock is harder to hit with at range (over 50m), but the Glock is perhaps the most reliable handgun that fits into a persons hand. I dumped several Berettas simply because they do not fit my hand. Why I bought 3 or 4 of them still eludes me. Well, they are the issue pistol. Our Glocks held up extremely well, using +P+ Federal 9BPLE ammo. The locking wedge on the M9 has been known to fail.
    Any firearm subjected to a sandpaper environment will show wear and tear simply by being carried around and rarely fired.

  • Kivaari

    I’d take the G17 as well. It fits my hand and almost no .45 fits my hand, including the M1911. G21 frames are too big, even in the SF version.

  • Kivaari

    Read some of the contemporary books on our current mess. The PDW was used because it was small and light weight and easier to suppress than an M4. SpecOps troops putting a bullet into the head of a sleeping terrorist did not need to be big. Handguns are not used often for good reasons. Weak, harder to shoot, and limited capacity. Except for needing to wrestle with someone the carbine remains the best weapon.

  • They should get a pistol that fires the 5.56x45mm round. The M855A1 is designed to reach higher velocities with a shorter barrel. The magazine should be forward of the pistol grip to permit a smaller hand grip. The magazine well should be compatible with the current 30 round magazine used on the M-4. For the pistol a 10 or 15 round magazine, as used in the more benighted states like California, could be used for routine carry.

    In terminal effects, one can trade velocity for bullet diameter and mass. Generally, you get more effect from light powder than heavy lead, but that is less true for pistols than rifles.

    • Cheese_McQueen

      Worst idea ever.

  • It seemed to be a problem with the Philippine Insurrection, but I will say that the Germans I chatted with were mightily impressed that I had an 11.4mm pistol.

  • Darrell Allen

    Lots of discussion points about armor-piercing and costs and weight and stopping power and treaties and American pride and US military projection of power. How is it that I am the only one on here who notes that NOTHING is more important to the procurement of weapons than what some fat, whiny, rich, lazy, sniveling, POS, pork-addicted, politician can line his pockets with in either kick-backs, favors, influence, votes, jobs to his district, but more likely all the above? That’s a niiiice complex sentence for you grammar geeks! I’m proud of it!
    How did we end up with M9s? How did we end up with M16s? How did we end up with V22 Osprey? How did we end up with Hummers?
    What we are going to get is some POS handgun that the politicians fund with a “make it work at all costs” edict plus a tight “burn any soldier that ever says anything bad about it” policy. It won’t be the best handgun that money can buy. It won’t be the best handgun our soldiers deserve. It will only be the best handgun that votes can buy. It will flood the global market and eventually become one of the easiest handguns to recognize and afford…a popularity contest.
    Don’t kid yourselves in thinking real gun dorks have any influence in this ultimate and probably forgone conclusion.
    Let’s all lower our expectations.
    I’ll be in line to buy one as soon as the price comes down to a price I can afford just like I did with the AR15. By the way, how did we end up with AR15s?

  • Robert Kalani Foxworthy

    The us isnt bond by the genvea convention or the hogue.we are not signatories of either. treaty. We abide by it regaurdless.

  • petru sova

    If the Military had any sense they would keep the M92 as we already have plenty in stock but would adopt a small single column magazine 9mm or 5.7 handgun for women and men with short fingers. I have seen men over 6 foot tall with fingers so short they could barely get them around the grip of a small single column automatic pistol.

  • Hyok Kim

    9mm is easier to hit with, especially on a moving target that is firing back or coming at you, one can carry more 9mm than .45, given everything else equal, 9mm gun is generally smaller and lighter, easier to conceal, easier to carry, given everything else equal, 9mm has flatter trajectory, making it easier to hit with at a longer distance than .45 unless one is shooting through thick vegetation or strong cross wind, also has better penetration than ,45, even Jeff Cooper admitted as much.

    This so-called modular project is nothing more than a gimmick concocted by generals with too much time on their hand trying to make it look like they’re doing something useful for better promotion and/or trying to find quid pro quo consultant gig with firearms industry post-retirement.

  • Hyok Kim

    Nice write off, Nathaniel F.

  • Mazryonh

    Just for the record, how many handgun evaluation programs have the US Armed Forces gone through by now?