Army to Adopt XM17 MHS by 2018

m9-fires-1200x800

The US Army released its second draft of the request for proposal (RFP) for its Modular Handgun System earlier this week. The draft gives the designation for whichever handgun is selected as “XM17”. From the draft RFP:

The U.S. Army Contracting Command – New Jersey, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ, on behalf of the Program Manager Soldier Weapons, has a requirement for the Modular Handgun System (MHS). For the purposes of this Request for Proposal (RFP) and resulting contract(s), the MHS will consist of the handgun(s), associated ammunition, and supporting accessories to include spare parts. Interested vendors will be required to supply all of the items as described in section B under the resulting contract.

The acquisition strategy is to conduct a full and open competition that will utilize the tradeoff method to evaluate and select the best value system submitted that meets the MHS requirements as described in this RFP and attached purchase descriptions in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 15, Contracting By Negotiations.

The MHS procurement is intended to be an open caliber competition, which means the choice of caliber is left to the discretion of the Offeror. Offerors are permitted to submit up to two (2) proposals configured to the specific caliber it chooses for evaluation. If an Offeror chooses to submit two (2) proposals, their submissions must all be chambered in a different cartridge of the Offeror’s choosing. In addition, each proposal must be submitted independently from each other.

Each proposal will consist of either a two (2) handgun solution (one full size and one compact), or one (1) handgun solution that meets requirements for both a full size and compact weapon, plus the following ammunition: ball, special purpose, dummy drilled inert (DDI) and blank, as well as, accessories as listed in Section L.4.1.5.2.3. Offerors will have 150 days from the issue date of this RFP to submit proposal requirements as described in section L of the RFP.

Each Offeror will be required to conduct a Contractor Product Instruction/Training Demonstration session to the Government on the hardware and the manuals submitted in accordance with section L.5 of this RFP.

The Government intends to award up to three (3) Firm Fixed Price (FFP), Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts based off of the initial evaluation of the proposal submission by following the evaluation procedure contained in section M of this RFP. The Government will then make a final down-selection to a single contractor by following the evaluation procedures contained in section H of this RFP. The period of performance of the base contract(s) will be ten (10) years for the handgun, accessories and spares and five (5) years for the ammunition.

(emphasis mine)

 

Military.com also covered the draft RFP in a recent article:

The U.S. Army has released a draft solicitation that lays out the service’s latest plans to replace the M9 9mm pistol with the Modular Handgun System.

Army weapons officials plan to open the official competition next year with the goal of awarding a contract to a single gun maker for nearly 300,000 new pistols by 2018.

“We expect to release the final solicitation in 2016,” Col. Scott Armstrong, the head of Project Manager for Soldier Weapons, said in a June 17 press release from Program Executive Office Soldier.

“This will be followed by a phased down-select process that will run through 2017. When all is said and done, the XM17 will provide Warfighters with greater accuracy, target acquisition, ergonomic design. The new handgun will also be more reliable, durable and easier to maintain.”

This is the second draft solicitation the Army has released for its effort to replace the M9, a pistol Beretta USA has made for the U.S. military since the mid-1980s.

“Each vendor may provide up to two separate proposals of handguns with different calibers to the Army for evaluation and testing in early 2016,” Armstrong said. “Vendors must submit mature designs that are production ready. They are free to select a caliber that best meets the XM17 requirements.”

One of the major goals of the MHS effort is to adopt a pistol chambered for a more potent round than the current 9mm, weapons officials said. The U.S. military replaced the .45 caliber 1911 pistol with the M9 in 1985 and began using the 9mm NATO round at that time.

Soldiers who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan have complained that the 9mm round is not powerful enough to be effective in combat, Army officials maintain.

But experts from the law-enforcement and competitive shooting worlds have argued that tactical pistol ammunition — no matter the caliber — depends on proper shot placement to be effective at stopping a determined adversary.

The Army began working with the small-arms industry on MHS in early 2013, but the effort has been in the works for more than five years. If successful, it would result in the Defense Department buying about 500,000 new pistols during a period of significant defense-spending reductions.

MHS is set to cost at least $350 million and potentially millions more if it results in the selection of a more potent pistol caliber, sources said.

Current plans call for the Army to purchase more than 280,000 handguns from a single vendor, with full-rate production scheduled for 2018, according to the release. The Army also plans to buy approximately 7,000 compact versions of the handgun. The other military services participating in the XM17 program may order an additional 212,000 systems, Army officials maintain.

Many in the industry, including myself, are doubtful that the Army would select a caliber other than 9mm for the final production handgun, but leaving the ammunition specification open not only gives a chance to non-NATO calibers like .40 S&W or 5.7mm FN, but also new types of 9mm ammunition that could improve effectiveness.

Even if the old M882 9mm Ball round is retained, a new handgun could offer the Army lighter weight, lower cost, and longer lifespan over the very respectable but now dated M9.



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

  • Jared A. Faber

    Oh come on! Haven’t we already been down this path with the old ACR program?
    First, every major gun manufacturer is going to trot out their bleeding edge handguns, and after years of waiting for the US to finish it’s testing- the US is going to decide to keep the M9, because of how expensive it would be to replace.

    • J.J

      Oh and besides the fact that 99% of soldiers never have to use their pistols.

      • Ben

        It would be far better for every soldier to have a handgun, in addition to their rifles. Rifle malfunctions/runs dry? Transition!

        • 2wheels

          There’s a reason every soldier doesn’t carry a handgun already, because they really don’t need one.

          • Manny Fal

            The pistol is actually for the officers who don’t like carrying around m4’s but would feel kind of lame if they didn’t have a gun, so they carry pistols. Now they want a better pistol and are arguing about it. I say they should just get a free blingy duracoat of their current pistol, to make them happy.

          • n0truscotsman

            That is true. If you read some works about old school infantry units in Rhodesia, Angola, Burma, Malaysia, etc, the modern day “idea” of issuing everyone a handgun falls a bit flat on its face. Its a nice idea in theory that is actually stupid in practice, say for a very limited set of circumstances.

        • Grindstone50k

          Real firefights are not like a Magpul DVD or Call of Duty. It’s better to carry more ammo than a near-useless brick.

          • Kivaari

            That’s why packing a very light and compact G19 gives some comfort. Even though they don’t get used much, there’s just something about having a pistol. Officers usually pack a rifle. Since not having one, is a sign to enemy snipers to shoot the guy with binoculars and a pistol.

          • Zebra Dun

            Officers usually pick up and carry a Rifle/Submachine gun as found or needed, Enlisted usually pick up and carry a pistol as found or needed.
            If they are in a fight there will be plenty of Rifles, submachine guns and pistols lying about to pick up and use.

      • Bill

        The majority of the military is in non-combat positions. Arming EVERYONE with a pistol would be cool, and i “like” the idea, but the cost in hardware and training would be cost prohibitive, disregarding the fact that some IT tech in Space Command would be playing quick draw back in the mainframe room and put a round through one of NORAD’s servers…..

    • Bill

      Not improbable. Armorer training, transition training, spare parts, magazines, holsters, all the support side is a considerable aspect to consider when switching weapons

  • Harrison Jones

    They need to adopt the FN P90(or other PDW) for it’s intended purpose. No use having a bunch of handguns when 95% of the people carrying them won’t revive enough training to effectively use them. The people who know what they’re doing seem to do fine with the M9, Glock 19, or M1911. This program is kind of a waste. Though I wouldn’t mind seeing the M9 replaced with a Glock 19, FNS9 or something else striker fired.

    • Seburo

      The Army was never serious about PDWs. If they were they would have invested in the Magpul PDR, or KAC PDW years ago. Instead of letting them die.
      Wonder if the Desert Tech MDR-C could be counted as a PDW.

      • Vitor Roma

        The MDR-C in .300BLK would be the ultimate gun at 300 yards. Extremely compact with good punch.

        • Joshua

          and 10″ of bullet drop for a 25yrd zero and 20″ of bullet drop with a 50yrd zero.

          • Dan

            there’s far more to 300blk than only subsonics.

        • Kivaari

          Except for suppressed use, the .300 Blackout is a weenie of a cartridge. In its hottest loading, it just isn’t impressive. I’d take any 5.56mm round over the .300, especially if you wanted to hit something 300m away. There is no getting around the mortar-like trajectory from all the small .30 caliber rounds. The 7.62×39 is fun to shoot, but it is also a short range round. When the Soviets went to the 5.45 the flat trajectory along with the great muzzle break gave the men a 2.5 times improvement in hits. It is better to hit with a .22 than to miss with a .30.

          • Vitor Roma

            We are talking about a 10.5″ barrel here and in such barrel the BLK smokes the 5.56 in perfomance, also being a SBR, it isnt meant to to be used for long ranges. Now if we are talking about a 16″ or longer barrel, yeah, the BLK isnt that much of a big deal.

          • Kivaari

            Many users or wannabe users apply a great deal of imagined performance to the .30 BLK. It underperforms outside its subsonic uses. Great for quiet under 100m use.

      • milesfortis

        IMO, it’s right at the edge of being too large and too powerful in .5.56mm, or .300 BLK to be a good PDW although the design has interesting possibilities.
        Downsize it a few inches, as long as it’ll still function in 9mm and keep the 10″ barrel.
        Logistic ammo match for the pistol. Use UZI, or Colt 9mm magazines.
        If desired, it could be chambered in 5.7 FN or 4.6 HK

      • ostiariusalpha

        The MDR-C is a short barreled bullpup designed around a .308 short action, it is very compact for that size of cartridge. That it so happens to be convertible to fire intermediate cartridges is just a bonus, but even it would be a bit bulky for PDW applications. There’s no real way around that as long as it’s internally designed to handle .308.

    • DIR911911 .

      in my unit the only ones carrying a handgun were the officers and photographers , neither group was going to do a lot of damage.

      • USMC03Vet

        Yeah handguns are largely a status symbol in the military these days.

        • Uniform223

          They kind of always have been.

    • CommonSense23

      The need of a true PDW went away with the advent of reliable SBRs unless you are part of some high speed PSD element.

  • BattleshipGrey

    The word “modular” is what’s catching me. Aside from the Sig P250 with the swappable internals, what is more modular than the M9A1?

    • Giolli Joker

      The Beretta APX with “swappable internals”.

      • MPWS

        Beretta already showed off its upgraded M92. DOD did not comment. It was shown some time ago on this blog.

        • Giolli Joker

          The APX is a stricker fired, polymer framed, modular pistol, not the upgraded 92.

        • BattleshipGrey

          I thought they did finally comment and it was a resounding “no”.

          • Zebra Dun

            As they did with women in infantry, gay and transgender soldiers and sailors as well as the F-35 and other notable No’s.

    • Dave

      the Detonics offering which the Army are offering a trial run to see if they can meet production requriements.

      • Never happen——

      • Kivaari

        I don’t know what Detonics has for fabrication of guns today. I do remember the old facility in Bellevue, that had the major parts cast at outside facilities.
        They could not at that time produce many guns per month.

    • Bud

      The Sig P320 and if you don’t think Sig isn’t going after this lock, stock and barrel, you would be wrong

  • Seburo

    *Insert 1911 and Beretta fanboys whining about how their outdated pistols are better than just about every other gun released after them*

    Now. Once again time for debunking .45 ACP mythology.

    Relative lethality difference between modern 9mm and .45 ACP rounds is negligible.

    “Stopping Power” is a buzz word that means nothing in the weapons world. It is a phrase that is frequently thrown out by people who like to pretend that they understand how ammunition works. The .45 and the 9mm have very similar wound tracks and associated cavity trauma, when discussing ball ammunition. So the real importance is in the shot placement.

    The military has actually done studies, even going so far as to hire medical experts without DoD affiliations, to determine if there is a discernible difference in ammo type. There is a reason the cry for a 6.8mm rifle disappeared so quickly.

    • Joshua

      I see Glock in our futures.

      • MPWS

        You may be right; it would induce significant cost savings. Also, Glock already serves with several armies.

        • Joshua

          Not to mention the majority of SOCOM use Glock in one form or another.

          • Lance

            On performance I love both the G-17 and M-9 but I don’t see a Glock winning they lack safeties like the brass likes and most military brass preferred a HK or S&W pistol in JCP and the original out lines of MHS. Overall I keep saying this is the same as ICC if we stay with 9mm then it would a be a waste to goto a new pistol. Not worth the money.

          • jwn0001

            Gotta have a safty on a foreign made ripoffs of John Browning’s weapon. Browning claimed that a 1911 .45 ACP with a round oin the chamber didn’t need a safety as it could NOT misfire.

          • Kivaari

            Not so. Browning’s 1910 had a manual safety. The Army didn’t like it, and added the grip safety to make the cavalry units happy. The grip safety was added, since a cocked pistol could dangle on the end of a lanyard, catch on saddlery and fire. That prompted the grip safety, as it was passive.

          • Kivaari

            Remember Browning himself operated in Belgium for over 100 years.
            When you see many of his designs, they came out of Europe, because he couldn’t interest US companies. Like the A5 shotgun, designed here, rejected by Winchester, then built in Belgium. Only then to be licensed to be made by Remington as the M11.

          • Kivaari

            If the DoD wants a manual safety, Glock will install them. I saw a Japanese police SIG P230 in 7.65mm with an added manual safety. SIGs don’t need it but Japan wanted them. They got ’em. Glock can add one for a couple dollars if they wanted. But why would they want one?

        • Kivaari

          Glock is a favorite in the special operations branches.

      • Phillip Cooper

        I don’t. Ever.

        There is a long-established “Not Invented Here” prejudice in Defense Appropriations.

        • Joshua

          Yes because the M9, M249, M240, M320 are all designed and created by American companies…oh wait, they are all foreign designs by companies that opened factories here after acquisition.

          • milesfortis

            and to add that Glock has a U.S. factory already up and running.

          • jwn0001

            So does Honda, Toyota, Mitsubishi, etc and many others of foreign companies. Trouble is the money goes back “home”. allowing foreign companies to manufacture our defense equipment should be treason.

          • dickG

            I thought all those jobs were “outsourced” overseas.

          • Kivaari

            Most of the money goes to the employees working in those factories. Most of the raw material comes from US sources as well.

          • Bill

            Ever hear of the Berry Amendment? It doesn’t apply to all things military, but quite a bit. And which would you rather have – a great piece of equipment made by an ally or an OK piece of equipment made by a company in CONUS?

          • They will have to set up an American manufacturing subsidiary to fulfill the contract. That will be an *American* company, despite the foreign sounding name.

            True, the stock dividends (profits left after all bills are paid, including salaries to the *American* workers, and after all reinvestment in the *American* company) go to the individual stockholders, who may well live overseas. Even a majority (as would be the case here) might live overseas.

            Of course, those same foreigners can buy stock in American companies, now – even controlling shares. You know, like Chrysler. Or, previously, Smith & Wesson. Or like Ford owned Jaguar, Land Rover, and Volvo at one time (did those all become “American” cars at that point?)

            You really don’t understand how corporations work, do you?

          • Kivaari

            Like the Beretta contract. The first years the guns were Italian, The second year Italian parts assembled in the USA and the rest made in the US.

          • jwn0001

            Dam Straight.

          • Kivaari

            Why do Beretta, Glock and FN have factories in the USA?

          • Kivaari

            FNs USA operations were part of a deal, where Denmark bought F16s. If they did we had to put FN in Georgia.

        • jwn0001

          YEP, and one good bribe deserves another.

          • jwn0001

            Problem we have with Rock Island Arsenal is Dicky Durbin who has “pissed off” the military SO BAD it is costing us the business here.

          • dickG

            Surely, Sir, you aren’t referring to the actions of our “honorable” politicians.
            .
            How could you?

        • William Burke

          How to explain the Italian Beretta, other than a Maryland manufacturing branch?

          • As is common with large DoD purchases, the contract requirements (clearly stated in the RFPs) were that whoever won the contract had to build them *here*, in a US corporate owned factory, with a grace period to set up the US plant.

            That’s why FN and Beretta set up plants here. Glock set up here because it was cheaper and easier than supplying the majority of US police pistols AND a large private market though imports.

          • Kivaari

            FN has been making the M240 and M249 for decades. The M16A2 bids beat Colt. jwn isn’t familiar with how we get our small arms built.

          • Nor, really, how publicly traded corporations work. Like people who call a wholly imported car sold with an “American” brand logo slapped on it “domestic”, but consider a car wholly built in the US from US made parts by US workers by a corporation based in the US that happens to have been established by a foreign manufacturer an ” import”. 🙂

          • Bill

            I had two police cars made by two of the Big 3; one was made in Mexico and the other in Canada. They were during the time the most common cop cars in the US.

      • Grindstone50k

        Does Glock have any factories in the US?

      • jwn0001

        Rate we are going now, I’d bet more on clubs and arrows.

        • Zebra Dun

          BB Guns with reduced magazine capacity.

      • Zebra Dun

        This ain’t Star Trek.

    • MPWS

      Good point; 9mm Para served thru all past conflicts, including both world wars with distinction. Fabulous .45ACP is part American folklore, more or less; completely unnecessary for military use.

      • jwn0001

        9mm PARABELLUM (If you want peace, prepare for war), That was the LUGER round, similar to the Spanish LARGO (magnum) round. Whole different story. Not the sub size cartridge 9mm POS that we have now. without +P ammo, it is a POS. Police don’t like it either.
        LUGER to standard 9MM same as comparing .22 LONG rifle to the .22 magnum.

        • Tatman

          Sorry, but your info is way off. I don’t think a post could be more incorrect. 9×19, Luger, and Para are all names for the same cartridge. The grain size of the bullet and the power of the load have nothing to do with the name. If someone 50 years ago loaded a +P, it’s still a Luger, and/or Para, just like it is today. It is not the same as comparing a .22 LR to a .22 Magnum. I have no idea where you got that little morsel from. But you’re also wrong in that the ball ammo of yesteryear pales in comparison to what is offered today.

          As for the Largo, that means “Long” not Magnum. It is no where near a magnum, and has the same velocity as standard 115gr FMJ 9x19s today. It was considered powerful at the time, but no where near a magnum. Just because a case is longer doesn’t mean the cartridge is more powerful — .45 Colt Vs. .45 ACP, case in point.

          Also, your comment that “police don’t like it either,” isn’t correct either, as police departments are starting to trend back to the 9mm from the .40.

          The truth is that the 9×19/Luger/Para has never been more popular, nor has it ever been more effective. The Gel tests I conducted using Federal HST had it expanding to .460 inches — roughly the same size as a .45 ACP FMJ, except with 2-3 times the carry capacity. Many police departments are seeing that as a huge benefit.

          The larger issue is that our military can’t/won’t use the high performance 9mm ammunition that is out there, they use FMJ, which is just not as effective as the other stuff. But that is not the fault of the “POS 9mm” (as you called it), that is the rules that our military fights by.

          • I agree with most of what you said except for one thing…why compare an expanding 9mm round with .45 ball??? The .45 expands as well, some petals actually doubling the overall diameter (with good ammunition).

          • Tatman

            I compared it to ball, to make a point to the “I won’t carry anything that doesn’t start with a “4”” crowd (of which the original post mentioned the 9mm was a POS, which is a de facto statement that something starting with a “4” is better). The point being that modern 9mm ammo leaves a .45-sized hole. Yes, the .45 does expand as well, however the carrying capacity does not expand, so you’re not going to get 17 rounds in a carry gun (I specify carry, because yes you can get long stick magazines for .45 that will hold as many rounds, but they aren’t practical for carry). So, 17 rounds of a bullet that expands to .45, to me, is better than 7-10 rounds of a bullet that starts out as a .45.

            I was just making a point, because I honestly don’t buy into the .45 Vs. 9mm debate. There’s a .1 inch difference in size. 1/10 of an inch. Look at that on a ruler. Does an additional 1/10 of an inch mean the difference between life and death? Sure, one’s also heavier, but then again, the other one is faster. People can debate it until they’re blue in the face, but shot placement is key. If you hit the right place with either round (repeatedly is preferable), you win the day.

          • It would stand to reason that anyone who’d carry a 9 mm hollow point would probably do the same with .45, so a fairer comparison would be the .45″ hole of the 9 mm HP to the .70″ hole of the .45 HP, no?

            I get what you’re saying as far as capacity. What I don’t get is many of the same people who make that argument then go out a buy a Glock 43 for their primary carry gun! I’m not in the “I won’t carry anything that doesn’t start with a “4” crowd. As a matter of fact, I carry a 9 mm more often than I do a .45. If I carry a single stack anything though, it is in .45.

            Both the 9 mm and .45 are relatively week in comparison to rifles. As you stated, shot placement is key!

          • Tatman

            You’re looking too deep in my .45 Vs 9mm comparison — I’m only saying the 9mm makes a .45 hole when it expands, that’s all, nothing more.

            I agree with you on the G43. I only use the G43 when I need to go small due to cloths. Other wise I normally carry a G26 (though I’ll probably be converting to a G27). This is all a mute point because as soon as Glock releases their single-stack 10mm, I’ll be all over that. My woods gun is a G20, and I prefer the 10mm to all cartridges. I discuss this on my youtube channel: 762x51n8o.

          • The Brigadier

            The Europeans love the 10mm cartridge and hate the .40SW. The 10MM is a magnum round and many of the pistols that shoot .40SW cannot handle the increased pressures. I have seen ballistic tests that show that the 10mm cartridge is very close in power, recoil and ballistic gel penetration to the .41 magnum cartridge. Its a good medium between the .357 magnum and the .44 magnum. I have owned and shot all kinds of pistols, but I am going back to wheel guns for their power and accuracy.

          • Tatman

            That’s interesting, I wouldn’t think Europeans would like something as powerful as 10mm, they tend toward weaker cartridges. Where have you seen that they like it? For me carrying a wheel gun would be like trading in my truck for a horse and buggy.

          • The Brigadier

            Many automatics are inherently inaccurate without expensive accurizing. Purchasing accurate automatics will set you back from $1200 – $3500. An accurate revolver will cost you $500 – $750. They never jam and if you use decent ammunition you will never suffer a hangfire. Horse and buggy hah. I can shoot seven 125 grain bullets at 1520 FPS more accurately and only marginally slower than you can shoot a magnum automatic. I depend on that dependability.

          • Kivaari

            Really? I suspect you really have not done much shooting with anything. Revolvers are not failure proof. I’ve seen them stopped with one flake of unburned gun powder under the ejector star. I’ve had a .357 freeze up when a round of Remington ammo suffered a case failure. It took two of us to open the cylinder. One holding the grip and depressing the latch while the left hand holds the barrel. The other person hitting the cylinder. Ammo can fail where gas cutting on aluminum cases (CCI Blazer) cut the cylinder and frame of a S&W M15. Even Colt SAA, when the cylinder pin slips and seizes the action.
            There are many reasons revolver stop working. There are many semiautomatic pistol with great reliability. Yes, most do cost ~$500, which in this day is not that much money. If you want a reliable handgun, buy a Glock or S&W M&P.

          • The Brigadier

            I did say using decent ammo. Cheap crappy ammo always create misfires. I have never had one firing thousands of rounds through well maintained revolvers. I have had hang fires with well maintained automatics and they usually happened at the worst possible times. In battle with people around me, we depended on one another to defend each other. I started keeping an automatic and a revolver with three speed loaders and the revolver became my go to piece when I ran dry for my rifle.

          • Kivaari

            You would be better off packing more rifle ammo than a revolver. A good lightweight Glock is a more reasonable back up. As much as I like K-frame S&W revolvers, they simply can’t compete with a Glock 17. I can have 18 rounds in the 17, without needing to reload twice. Speed loaders are not easy to use while under stress.

          • Kivaari

            I stopped keeping records on my Glock 17 at 22,000 rounds. The MP5s made it to 50,000. One squib round did ring the barrel. At 35,000 the roller retaining plates cracked. The replacement spring fixed that.

          • Tatman

            giddyup.

            You’re dealing with a whole bunch of fallacies there, many of which aren’t based on modern semi-autos. Yes, semi-autos used to be not reliable and they jammed. But they don’t anymore, or at least not reputable ones. And if put in the same conditions that would cause a modern semi-auto to jam, a revolver will lock up sooner. Plus, revolvers can have their timing thrown off, and yes I’ve seen it happen. I’ve fired every model of Glock made, Gen3 & Gen4, without one jam, until I shot the G43, in which I’ve had 2 malfunction in the first 200 rounds, and not another since.

            “inherently inaccurate?” That’s rubbish. I suppose the AR15 is inaccurate, too? If you were to make the argument that they are “less accurate than a revolver” I would hear you out, but “inherently innacurate?” You’ve been reading too many 1980s issues of Guns & Ammo.

          • The Brigadier

            You are making a fallacious argument Tat. I am assuming you are using well maintained weapons that require occasional maintenance. You are introducing factors of disrepair to bolster your argument and that is dishonest.

          • Tatman

            You’re talking about jamming and dependability in a carry gun. i didn’t say disrepair, I’m talking about environmental factors, like being dropped in the mud, pocket debris, etc.

          • Kivaari

            No, he’s talking about many modern semiautomatic handguns giving fine accuracy and superb reliability. Where do you find your “material”?

          • Kivaari

            I’m not sure he got out of the 1960-era G&A. Elmer Keith may have written Six Guns, but he didn’t live in this era.

          • Kivaari

            What?

          • Kivaari

            You don’t live in the real world, do you?

          • Kivaari

            Other than a few European sportsmen what police or military organizations issue the 10mm?

          • Kivaari

            What Europeans love the 10mm?

          • Kivaari

            The G43 is certainly a nice compact pistol. I could see myself buying one. even though I have a G19. I dislike the feel of the G26/27, and find the 43 more interesting. It could be pocket carried without printing like the double stack Glocks. The G26/27/19 are big enough that I view them as holster guns. The 43 is small and flat and would print less than a Centennial. A little soft pocket holster would make it disappear. I couldn’t do that with my 26 or 27.

          • Tatman

            I agree about the G43. I still like the feel of the G26, though. But I use that for OWB carry, which I prefer, for comfort. With that I have to wear a shirt that is conceal carry friendly. With the G43 I can carry it IWB, and can use any old shirt, even a T-shirt. Most of the time I wear concealed carry friendly shirts anyway — I like button down plaids — and I prefer the G26 with the 10 round capacity and ability to have 17 round backup mags. I also like that my G26 holster makes it easy to swap out my G26 for my G19, G17 or G22. Depending on what the environment dictates.

            The G43 is a great little pistol. I’ve fired nearly all the ultra-compact 9mils on the market except Springfield Armory, and up until now the Walther PPS was the best. I think the G43 is right there with the PPS.

          • Kivaari

            I went away from belt carry after I retired. I found that old, ingrained habits can cause problems. I was walking our dogs when a Rhoadesian Ridgeback left its owners yard and grabbed my wife’s cocker spaniel. It was taking off with it, pulling it out of the leash. I went to get the little dog back, and the ridgeback dropped her, turned on me. Usually we trained to put a hand in the mouth, while drawing our service pistol and shooting the attacking dog. When it first bit down, I thought that’s not too bad and I reached for my Glock. Oops, it wasn’t there. My gun hand for the back up Centennial was in my left front pocket, while that hand was in the mouth. Then he bit down. Now that hurt even though I had gloves on. Fortunately, the owner came out and got the dog to stop. It took an ER visit to clean up the wounds. It reminded me that the brain gets conditioned and changing habits can lead to reversals. Now when I am out in the right places, I still have my backup where it has ridden for over 20 years.
            The PPS is an excellent pistol. Underpowered. I had to shoot a black lab, and it took many shots. I no longer make head shots as I have been sprayed. They work better, but create a mess.

          • Kivaari

            Especially when the 9mm (.356) versus the .40 S&W (10mm) are compared. Departments found out the .40 was harder to train with and guns simply wear out faster. In the scheme of things, the 9mm is a better choice. So much of what people learn about handguns and how they perform is pure BS.
            I served in both the Navy and Army. If you want accurate answers to how cartridges work, most “warriors” don’t know.
            When I was a kid in the 50s, I heard all the war stories about the super powerful .45. It turns out none of the war stories were based in fact.

          • The Brigadier

            9mm is .355. That is why I sold my model 29 Sig. Calling it a .357 Sig is fallacious. They should have called it 9mm magnum.

          • Kivaari

            Calling it .357 SIG made perfect sense. The .357 ammo is loaded hot. Unlike 9mm guns having been around for over 100 years, a user can’t use +P+ ammo without risk f destroying the old pistols. The .357 SIG accepts only hot .357 SIG. You get that +P+ performance while not risking the misuse.
            Most agencies using the .357 SIG have complaints about loud, heavy recoil and premature gun wear. It is why there is a rapid return to 9mm over the others. 9x19mm pistols give the needed performance, with ease of training, at less cost and with guns outlasting similar models in .357 or .40.

          • The Brigadier

            You keep coming back to 9mm as though you are Goldilocks. This caliber is too big and loud, this caliber is too powerful and causes the barrel to wear out after only a few thousand rounds. Oh and this caliber is just right. You’d better have a more powerful weapon than 9mm when the three bears come to visit Goldikivaari.

          • Kivaari

            It is too bad you don’t have a working knowledge of firearms. Have you ever been a firearms trainer, department armorer or armorer in a military service (where ignorance runs wild)? Do you know why hundreds of agencies have returned to 9x19mm? Do you think having pistols wearing out too quickly is a bad thing. Where a particular cartridge du jor turns out to cause gun and training issues?
            With agencies having hundreds or thousands of officers, how easing the training time and ammunition costs can run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars saved.
            Picking a particular gun and ammunition combination can make huge differences. That sometimes a companies selling points are all smoke and mirrors. Look at LASO, where their deputies are having negligent discharges, and they are blaming S&W for the poor training. Going from the Beretta 92 without adequate training has resulted in problems, that training fixes. But they can’t fix stupid – simply not playing with the trigger reduces NDs.

          • Tatman

            You traded in your Sig because you didn’t like the naming convention of the cartridge? You do realize that the names of many cartridges are marketing? And that you’re talking about a difference of two-thousandths? A .38 is a .357. Did you know a .357 can have bullets that are .358? Did you also know many of the Soviet 7.62 cartridges aren’t even .308, but range out to .312?

            They shouldn’t have called it a magnum, because it’s not a true magnum, and also, do you know there are over 23 different commercial cartridges called some sort of 9mm? So it would be understandable to not add another 9mm, and call it a .357 Sig.

          • Kivaari

            You are correct. The Brigadier doesn’t seem very well informed. I suspect he has never seriously reloaded anything. I have fired .355 to .358 diameter bullets in 9mms. With the proper powder charge they work fine. Same with 9mm bullets in .38 and .357s, one just has to use a heavier crimp to keep them from backing out of the case.

          • Kivaari

            I have never seen a SIG model 29. Just where did you buy it? When?
            I had many SIGs over the years. Even writing reports for police magazines. SIG had sent me 7 pistols to test. Winchester sent me a few cases of ammo as well. It was a good thing.

          • Kivaari

            0.002 inches. Should it have been the .355 SIG. What about the .38 S&W using 0.362 inch diameter bullets? Or the .38 Short and Long, that used 0.380 inch diameter bullets? Why are .38 Specials, when they use 0.355-0.359 inch bullets? Measure the outside of the casing, and think back why putting a 0.358 diameter bullet sitting inside the case where the lube doesn’t pick up dirt.

          • The Brigadier

            10mm is a magnum round, .40 S&W is much weaker cartridge and S&W came out with it after female agents and male agents with small hands complained about the massive power of the 10MM cartridge. The Bureau asked S&W if they had a weaker cartridge and within a week S&W slapped together the .40 S&W. Half the Bureau adopted it and the rest kept the magnum powered 10mm. S&W marketed the cartridge and the pistol heavily in Europe and since it was cheaper then H&K, Sig Sauer, FN, and all the rest of the Euro automatics it became a big hit. Also for the metric centric Europeans being a 10mm had something to do with it as well. They now had 7,8, 9, and 10mm cartridges.

            Automatics are now being made exclusively for the lower pressured .40 S&W that cannot shoot 10mm safely. The .40 S&W is much less accurate than the 10mm and all the testing and hand wringing after the south Florida bank robber street battle caused the FBI to change weapons in ’86 could have been avoided.

          • Kivaari

            With almost no exceptions .40 caliber pistols will not fire 10mm.
            The 10mm M1076, was not a huge hit with the agents. The gun is very heavy and big making it uncomfortable to carry while wearing a suit. The 10 mm has to be built on a .45 size frame, which is way too big for most shooters. The slightly less powerful .40 became an instant winner with police. The .40 can be built on 9mm sized frames, thus fitting more hands well. It is much easier to train people with, but does wear out guns faster than the 9mm. Now the FBI has returned to using the 9mm. With good ammo, the 9mm performs as well or better than the .40. The reduction in costs is a good thing. Guns that last thousands of rounds more is a good thing.
            In the Miami shootout, agents carried 9mm and .38 special while the agents with the MP5 or other long guns were pretty much out of place. The first thug was disabled by one shot into his right arm, cutting the brachial nerve and artery. He had fired one round from his shotgun, then was disabled. Agents really screwed up. Several had un-holstered their gun and set it on the seat. Upon crashing a couple guns ended up on the car floors. One agent couldn’t see the targets as he lost his glasses in the crash.
            A couple agents were hit in hands or arms, but kept up the fight. Finally one agent without the use of his left arm, was able to disable the active shooter with multiple shots from his M870 12 ga. hitting the suspect in the feet. That suspect had been hit with 9mm and .38 bullets. The agent worked the shotgun one-handed After emptying it, he approached the suspects with his M13 loaded with .38 special rounds. He killed both suspects by getting within arms reach of them. pistols.
            I have the autopsy report, put together by the child molesting medical examiner.
            I suspect you have not read the actual reports, but gained your information from watching the made-for-TV video.
            When it is actually read, the public should be impressed by the fighting will of the agents.
            The only place you will find the FBI M1076 pistols is in the FBI museum. The gun was a terrible choice for issuing to a wide variety of agents. it lasted one year in service. Going to the .40 Glock M22 and M23, lasted longer, but has now been displaced with 9mm

          • The Brigadier

            I read the report you condescending know-it-all and Agent Mirales fired the shotgun one handed having to jack rounds in while his supervisor who was shot in the spine sat on the sidewalk unable to turn enough and shoot the functioning shooter. The supervisor who was nicked in the spine eventually walked again. I watched he movie after reading the report and they got it right.

            Its the after shooting odyssey that I am talking about that took two years and resulted in Smith and Wesson doing a full court press to get the FBI to adopt the cartridge. This was a major selling point when they began selling the gun and cartridge in Europe and they did marvelously well with it.

          • Kivaari

            So from what I wrote JWTF is so condescending? I till have the after action report and the coroners report. With the color plates and narrative. Mirales did a great job considering his left arms was in shreds.
            Now tell me why the FBI stopped using the 10mm over 20 years ago. When I quoted the agent saying the 1076 would only be seen in the FBI museum, where did I go wrong. The FBI liked the .40 caliber bullet, and hated the 10mm round. They did go to .40s, and are now returning to 9mm.
            Because S&W made a gun and cartridge appeal to the FBI, it was the FBI that decided the 10mm was too big, too powerful and too heavy.

          • The Brigadier

            If it superior then why did SoCom request the bid competition in ’07 for a shorter slide .45 only to have the DoD cancel it when Beretta offered them a substantial cut if they renewed it? Their were a lot of very POed bunches of Special Forces in all services who wanted a replacement for the Beretta.

          • Tatman

            Not sure what you’re referencing — what did I say was superior to what?

          • Kivaari

            Some units bought a few thousand .45s. Most were for use with suppressors, like the 9mm Hush Puppy in the Vietnam era. Special use pistols.

        • Odinson

          I have a German Luger Pistol that my dad brought back after the war. It shoots perfect with all 9mm ammo.

          • Kivaari

            The P08 9 mm Luger is the NATO round. Where jwn was coming from remains unknown.

          • Kivaari

            It shoots 9x19mm, not all 9mm. There are a dozen different 9mm rounds, that are not interchangeable. 9×17, 9×18 Ultra, 9×18 PM, 9×19, 9×21, 9×23, 9x29r, 9x33r etc.

        • MichaelZWilliamson

          Largo is no more powerful than 9X19, and all the others you named are the same round.

        • Kivaari

          What? The 9mm, 9mm NATO, is the same round used in pre-WW1 handguns. The 9mm Largo (9x23mm) doesn’t produce much performance over the 9x19mm. Where did you get your information?

        • And “largo” is not “big” or powerful — “largo” is “long” or “protracted”. Music students know, this is one of the tempos =)

      • The Brigadier

        Gee let’s see, the 1911 was used in WW1, WW2, the Korean War, Vietnam and used by Special Forces all over the planet. I don’t think the tens of thousands of people who used them in battle found them unnecessary at all. If cost reductions by Jimmy Carter hadn’t gutted our military necessitating the change to 9mm we’d still be using the 1911, probably refined, in battle. Folklore no, military lore yes.

        • Kivaari

          Blaming Carter for the 9mm to save money is silly. Carter was out of office when the final change was made. It would have been much cheaper to buy .45 ammo to use in existing 1911s, than buying new M9 and all the support gear and training.
          Handguns are very rarely needed in combat. Certainly when one is down to a handgun, it is getting pretty desperate. I like having a pistol, even if its just a 2 inch 5-shot revolver.

          • The Brigadier

            Changes are put in place long before they are finally enacted. Carter gutted our military very deeply. Incredibly not quite as deeply as our current Communist-in-Chief has done.

          • Kivaari

            Except, The US Army rejected the initial study by the Air Force. They re-ran the tests, and found out the AF was right. The M1911s were the baseline to beat. The M1911 was a poor performer from a reliability factor. It lacked the safety features the military wanted, due to ignorant warriors letting off negligent discharges. A bigger capacity, since pistols are poor man stoppers. And a huge saving in weight and cubic cm. Pistols are mostly unimportant weapons on a battlefield. It’s odd that the SEALs and similar troops report they prefer the Glock 17 and SIG P226 in 9mm. They also say they rarely resort to pistols. The most useful place is at base where the green-troops fire on the blue troops. When the red troops are outside the wire, they prefer hitting them with rifle fire.

    • Bill

      Nobody cares. It’s largely personal preference, and as long as our allies are predominately using 9mm, we’ll be using 9mm. Add in 9mm being cheaper, lighter, and more compact/easier to store and transport, it’s a non-issue.

      • jwn0001

        Is not a non-iissue. Frankly indicative of the BIG ISSUE, irresponsibility. The .45 ACP keeps foreigners from using our ammo, Plus the .45 is a far superior weapon in many respects, not the least of which is standoff capability. The ONLY reason this “new” project is on the books is the Money and kickbacks. If the 9mm is so great, then why replace after only 25 years service life?? Reason its a POS giveaway program to the Italians. Next they’ll be saying the .223 is better than a .308…Oops forgot, we are going back to the .308. How many lives has “Kennedy’s peashooter” cost the USA??

        • ILicence

          What is “Standoff capability”?

          • Kivaari

            That is what artillery is for. Or missiles from aircraft and cruise missiles launched from submarines.

          • The Brigadier

            When my father was in the Korean War, he was First Sergeant on a hilltop after the million man army of China crossed over the Yalu River. Pork Chop hill (a movie by that name was made) was only one of a hundred hills we occupied to stop a march of 100 Chinese divisions. We had artillery and air support and it was still a very near thing. Dad’s company was in line in one of the middle hills and when the first divisions hit they fired their Garand’s and M60s killing so many Chinese until their barrels melted and warped. They then resorted to burning the hordes with flamethrowers, and my father and a few others stopped the last of them with grenades and handguns.

            Dad’s handgun was a Webley break open in .38 short he bought from a British officer and he received a commendation for stopping a last Chinese squad for overrunning their company with that primitive revolver. Dad had fought Nazi Death Head battalions at the age of 17 and helped to liberate Dachau so the Chinese Red Army didn’t scare him.

            The fight began with 212 troops in the company and at the end of it there were only 38 survivors with both the Captain and the Lt killed early on. The Chinese lost over two hundred thousand that week attacking all 100 hills before they ran for it. Ants can be defeated and don’t let stories about the invincible Chinese hordes scare any of you. Use whatever backup you can get and if its only a 9mm learn to shoot it accurately.

          • Friend of Tibet

            ” fired their Garand’s and M60s killing so many Chinese ”

            WTF is M60 doing in korean war……whole story sounds fishy

          • The Brigadier

            Sorry I was talking early Vietnam weapons with someone just before writing that. It should have said “and M2s,” and yes they did shoot 50 BMG into the giant mass of advancing Chinese troops to great effect. As to sounding fishy, look it up. The hills were a natural defensive position that the Chinese had to pass to through to get to South Korea. Incidentally they also used BARs and other weapons that were retired or changed after that war.

          • Kivaari

            Odd my unit still had allWW2 weapons while in Vietnam – 1970.
            My other unit had old M60s and M1Ds in 1982-3.

        • Follow Me Boys

          Money being passed across fat stinking lying I moral pedo’s with more dis regulating mental health issues than a wealthy prostitute. Politicians. Hate them

        • Kivaari

          The enemy can’t use our .45 or 9mm. If we look at the cold war era the Soviets used 9x18mm PM. Pistol ammo is not a significant issue regardless of the fight.

          • Chuck Haggard

            Even the Russians are using 9×19 now, and quite a bit of it.

          • Kivaari

            I found the Russians have quite a few older firearms in use. In the support troop units you will still find SKS, AKM and PMs in use. There is no need to replace all the handguns or rifles with modern gear. Like in the US, where older pattern guns are still in use.

          • The Brigadier

            Older pattern guns? I know they were a big hit in the 17th Century, but I have not heard of any pattern guns still in use. What is the model and which units are still using such ancient technology when we have technologically superior machine guns?

          • Kivaari

            In Russia, they still have units armed with SKS carbines. Transportation units and the like. Much of modern armies simply do not need first tier guns. Support troops remain armed with older pattern weapons. I don’t know why you inserted 17th century references, since no one is issuing flintlocks.
            US forces still have M60 (first pattern) and M16A1s. When I was in the navy over 45 years ago, we still used M1 rifles, M1911A1 pistols, BARs, and M1A1 sub machine guns. We envied those ships having M14 rifles and Sea Bee units using M16A1s.
            Support troops get hand me downs.
            This is perfectly normal all over the world. It’s why you can see forces armed with Mausers, Hakims, WW2 era sub machine guns and more. When we invaded Grenada, our fellow soldiers from around the island were still packing No.4 Enfields.
            Handguns in particular that belong in pre-WW2 armies remain on active duty. Pistols are really unimportant to almost every user.

        • Bill

          The “foreigners” using “our” ammo are likely NATO or members of whatever coalition we are partnered with at the time. If you think ISIS or China can’t get 9mm, um, they can. I don’t have dog in the fight, because I carry both, but “far superior?” Seriously, if it can be fired out of a handgun, it can’t be assumed that it’s far superior to anything. Please enlighten me, what is “standoff capability”? I’ve only heard that term used in regards to ballistic and tactical missiles, which I’d prefer to any pistol, but aren’t easily holster.

        • Kivaari

          New pistols can cost less than repairing old M9 frames. Except for very few .45s, the US military has not bought new .45s since 1945. In the 80s, when the search was on for a new pistol, most of the inventory had been through rehab 6 times. There comes a point where it is not cost effective to rebuild the old guns. Our M9s are now getting 30 years old. Some have been acquired recently, but the bulk have seen hard service. There is no doubt that the 9mm handguns are easier to shoot and hit. Ammo is substantially less money and consumes fall less materials. A can of 9mm weighs about half of what.45s weigh. Pistols for the most part play a minor role in military service. Pistols like the Glock 17 are easier to maintain and weigh only 22 ounces compared to either a M1911 or M9.

        • Chuck Haggard

          No one is “going back to the .308”, that comment is as full of derp as the “standoff capability” remark. Seriously, WTF is that?

          I’ll end with this;

          “…there is no appreciable difference in the effectiveness of the 9 mm and the .45 ACP cartridges.”
          Vincent J. M. Di Maio, GUNSHOT WOUNDS: Practical Aspects of Firearms, Ballistics, and Forensic Techniques SECOND EDITION, Page 150.

        • The Brigadier

          You are intent on opening old wounds aren’t you jwn? I too am a .308 guy even though I used both it and the .223 in battle. The .308 has greater stopping power. I prefer the .45 over the 9mm, but I also prefer the .357 magnum over both of the others. One shot anywhere on any person’s body by a .357 magnum is almost always a show stopper.

          • CommonSense23

            You realize science doesn’t support that the .357 magnum is almost always a show stopper.

          • Bill

            Science may not, but a lot of dead and rehabilitated bad guys do.

          • CommonSense23

            And there are a lot of dead and rehabilitated bad guys do to 9mm, 45ACP, 40, 5.56, 7.62 and pretty much any caliber you can think of from one shot. And their are plenty of guys who have survived multiple shots from all those calibers including .357 magnum.

          • Kivaari

            Considering 80% of those shot with a handgun survive, pretty much puts the OSOK myth to rest.

          • Bill

            Thank you for affirming that caliber is largely irrelevant. Interestingly enough, working in an agency that bordered two that carried .357 mags, and then working for one that transitioned from the .357 to the 9mm, all I know is that there were a lot more calls for the coroner when bad guys were center punched with the magnum rounds, and a lot more calls for ambulances when they were shot with 9mms. There may be varying degrees of ineffectiveness.

          • CommonSense23

            Or there may be varying degrees of competency between shooters. And how many of those shooters just put one shot into their target. Also there could be a large discrepancy between quality of rounds used. Lots of factors come into play.

          • The Brigadier

            Not plenty. Most die from one shot, but there are always a few who survive any caliber. Hell there are people who survived close to ground zero at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That does not negate the fact that the overwhelming majority of people hit simply do not survive the more powerful calibers.

          • Kivaari

            80 percent of those shot with handguns survive those wounds.

          • Kivaari

            Very true. 80% of those shot with handguns survive the wounds. Even from .357. We had a deputy engaged in a fight that took two .357 bullets to his thighs, was not knocked over, and returned fire killing the man that shot him.

          • Kivaari

            Oh please!! One shot anywhere on any persons body by a .357 magnum is almost always a show stopper”. Seriously, do you believe that? Why do people shot with 7.62mm NATO or .30-06, or M1891 era rifle bullets absorb them, and remain a threat? There is no bullet fired from a conventional handgun or rifle will assure one shot stops. The old song and dance about getting hit in the pinky finger by a .45 or .357 simply isn’t true.
            Everyone know how silly that remark is.

          • The Brigadier

            Have you ever been in combat Kavaari? You said you were in both the Army and the Navy. Have you ever had to do after battle duty carrying a bucket and wearing thick rubber gloves to pick up the remains of people? Have you ever had to pick up skull pieces with globs of brain still attached? Or scoop up piles of intestines because we honor our dead by bringing them home with as many pieces as we can reasonably find?

            Fortunately I only had to do this twice, but you get to see the effect of certain calibers up close. High caliber hand guns often expand greatly while heavily jacketed rifle bullets don’t, often auguring through like high speed drills. Still, skull shots with .308s and .30-06 usually result in exploded skulls. I don’t have dreams about those experiences anymore, but they are seared into my memory. Big powerful cartridges do big powerful damage much greater than smaller, lesser powerful cartridges and all your arguments don’t affect the reality of it.

          • Kivaari

            No land combat. I have had to do clean up duty where bodies were blasted all over the place. While in Vietnam, I never heard a bullet pass by. I was lucky.
            I was a cop and saw enough ruined bodies.
            I don’t know where you are coming from. Since all CF rifle round will pretty much take the skull cap off. Same with .357 magnum pistols.
            You need to read the entire series of the Wound Ballistic Review.
            Most head hits with rifles commonly used in military confrontations will do considerable damage to any fluid filled organ.
            FMJ pistol bullets typically leave a small wound if no bone is struck. A .45, 9mm or 7.62mm bullet leave small wound tracts. Hit bone and every thing changes. Don’t rely upon war stories.

          • Kivaari

            General, You are clueless about handgun power. Show me a .357 that is so effective that it takes one shot to down someone. Except for CNS hits, it just isn’t going to happen.

        • Kivaari

          So did the 9mm NATO. Since the Russians and Chinese used 9×18 PM rounds. They could not fire 9mm NATO. You need to read some more real training materials. You are simply wrong at every turn.

        • Chris A Carter

          I agree shoot a man in his pinky toe with a 45 and he will drop not so with a 9 mm people have been shot several times with a9 mm and lived th tell the story very very can say the same about the 45 acp

      • Chris A Carter

        I cave to call bull on that the 9mm can not compete with the FN57 in wound cavity damage and speed at longer range or capacity

        • Chris A Carter

          And has no way the stopping power of the 45 cap with hollow points

    • DIR911911 .

      The military has actually done studies . . . documentation ? links? I’m thinking these would be popular

      • Kivaari

        There are tons of official reports out of the US Army Wound Ballistics Laboratory, The Presidio SF, California. Picatinny labs has done work as well. Look up the quarterly Wound Ballistics Review, available through your local library most likely. Using modern testing standards has shown like we all know, is only good hits count. It doesn’t matter if it is a .45 or 9mm when restricted to ball ammo.

        • jwn0001

          Picatinny just wants the business. They are trying to take over small arms manufacture in the US Military. This PCW should be manufacturered at Rock Island Arsenal. Picatinny has plenty of work now. This is just another dog and pony show excuse for more east coast jobs. More expertise in .308 and .45 here in Illinois to frankly serve the entire nations needs. REALY REALYL stupid putting the main manufacturer of munitions on the coast, JUST because it is close to D.C. Need to diversify in case of attack by foreign powers on the coasts.

          • dickG

            Missiles don’t much care whether they land close to salt water or not, and in some scenarios, the center of mass of the North American continent is closer to the launch point than the salty-aired fringes.
            .
            Since munitions factories are secondary strategic targets, a few minutes or so one way or the other, just isn’t important in the grand scheme of things in a global nuclear war.
            .
            This ain’t your grand dad’s 1915.
            .

          • Kivaari

            Even in WW1 the government bought most guns from commercial enterprises. Where jwn gets his information remains a mystery.

          • Kivaari

            Picatinny doesn’t make guns. They study guns and ammo using guns made by commercial makers. Since the US military sold its armories, it no longer makes guns.

          • Bill

            or tanks, or planes, or helicopters, or squad radios, or packs, or uniforms, or trucks, or food, or missiles or cots, or housing units or anything. I think the last thing the military ever made itself might have been biochemical weapons components.

          • Bill

            …but an enemy sub could sneak up the St Lawrence Seaway, cross the Great Lakes, and either launch nukes or send in saboteurs …..Illinois just isn’t safe from a Northern Border attack.

          • Kivaari

            The over the polar cap shots from Russia can hit anywhere.

          • Bill

            You are correct; I’ve seen the targeting maps and my house is in the downwind fall-out zone from one. I just don’t know how many of their land-based weapons survived the break-up of the USSR, though I’m guessing Putin has something cobbled together, that he could ride shirtless, like a Russian Slim Pickens.

            I understand that at one time USSR air force units were selling MIG rides to raise cash so that they could do commie stuff, like eat.

      • jwn0001

        Trouble is the studies don’t support the 9MM. Was a political decision, not a rational one. Figures lie and politicians figure. ?universal truth, most studies only support the desired outcome, the researchers want to please their employers, and continue to find employment.

        • MichaelZWilliamson

          Remember most European police were using the .32 ACP. The 9mm was the big manstopper.

          Whereas the US cavalry and cowboys had been using .45s and .44s

        • Kivaari

          What studies?

        • Kivaari

          jwn, Just where do you come up with your information? There is a lot more to why we issue the guns we issue. A reason why we went to 9mm wasn’t based on knock down power. It entails cost, weight, reliability, ease of training, desire for more rounds before a reload and much more. A serious study of performance in living tissue and gelatin, show the 9mm leave a wound indistinguishable from the .45. It also shows that in using ball ammo, the .45 actually shoves blood vessels and nerves without cutting them. That is why people take multiple shots from all kinds of handgun rounds, and they keep on ticking. It’s like being shot with a .30-40 Krag 220 gr. bullet, and going back to duty in a couple of weeks.

      • Kivaari

        There are many US Army studies out of the Wound Ballistics Laboratory that show the wounds of .45 ball and 9mm ball are so similar that the only way the surgeon could tell the difference is to recover a bullet. The permanent wound channel from either round is a simple hole.

    • nadnerbus

      You’re right on all, but I could see a coherent argument for something like the 5.7 due to the proliferation of level II equivalent armor in places we are likely to fight.

      • Seburo

        The US Army got left behind on the PDW front long ago. Don’t think they care now.

        • jwn0001

          Makes sense really. Standardize on a weapon. the Reason they “supposedly” went with 9mm was weight and foreign compatibility. Not too many allies these days thanks to the regime, so back to John Browning’s design. Pretty much all blowback pistols and carbines weapons are based on this tried and true design anyway.

          • Kivaari

            The 1911 is not a blowback design. It fires from a locked breach. MOST modern 9mm handguns (and .40 and .45) use a locked breach. Cheapy guns like the $150 pot metal pistols are blowback, and junk.

        • Chuck Haggard

          No one uses the MP7 or the FN 5.7 by choice, outside of very, very niche and specific missions, because operational experience tells us that both of those PDW calibers suck.

          • Kivaari

            The only use I have seen is with SEALs. It is mentioned in Mark Owen’s book about killing UBL. It wasn’t on the raid.

      • Bill

        I dunno, maybe in the Cold War/conventional warfare sense, but now that we are primarily fighting asymmetrical conflicts, I don’t know how many insurgents/terrorists wear armor, THOUGH, and if it’s been studied I haven’t seen it, a lot of them wear chest rigs full of AK magazines, and I have no idea of how our rifle and pistol rounds do against those. It’d be some interesting research to do.

        I am surprised by how inexpensive and available rifle-rated plates are getting.

        • Keith Brockmiller

          Great idea. We can line up a bunch of “terrorists”, some with and some without armor. Then shoot at them and see how the magazines work as armor. Then take off the chest rigs from the survivors and do it again.
          That would be a test I would pay to see.

          • jwn0001

            Keith, I agree, difference in the “argument” is how far back the “terrorist” with the armor flies backward versus the 9mm.

          • Bill

            Dude, the only place people fly backwards after being shot with ANYTHING is the movies, where there is always a conveniently located plate glass window for them to crash through.

          • Kivaari

            You do know that “knock down power” doesn’t exist. A man hit squarely in the plate with a 7.62 NATO or Russian, is not knocked down by the hit. It is instinctive to drop when hit or missed.

        • The Brigadier

          Yeah, but those plates are steel and massively heavy. Our military has developed 25mm thick polyethylene armor that is level 4, light as a Kevlar vest and can stop .30″06 and 7.62X54 Rimmed.

          A chemist at UT El Paso just developed a process for making graphene from used oil and the cost is tremendously reduced from around $400 an ounce to around 4 cents an ounce. Graphene forms a hexagonal matrix and is 22.5 times stronger than the strongest tool steel. This matrix should be able to stop up to 20mm rounds, but I don’t think you would survive the impact. Perhaps if lined with a couple inches of Sorbothane you might survive it, but I sure don’t want to find out.

          • Kivaari

            Most plates are ceramic. Steel is old school.

          • The Brigadier

            You are really ignorant aren’t you. Look up steel plate body armor. You might be surprised at what you find.

          • Kivaari

            I am not talking about trauma plates used by cops. They don’t stop rifle bullets, like a ceramic plate. Trauma plates fitted into the pocket on soft body armor are designed to spread the forces of handgun bullets over a larger area. Thus limiting the severity of the bruising. The steel plates are easily punched by rifle fire. I’ve done it. I know in my armor I did not like the things and just added more layers of Kevlar.
            I faced more hazard from pistol bullets. I knew that if someone shot at me with an AK or AR. I was in deep doo.

        • Kivaari

          They work pretty good. Same with M16 loaded magazines.

      • The Brigadier

        There is also the new level 4 body armor. The polyethylene body armor is level 4 and can even stop .30’06 and 7.62 x 54 Rimmed. Older level 3.5 body armor of Saapi plates and Kevlar level II behind it is now old tech. The PE armor is also much lighter, being about the same weight as a cop’s Kevlar vest. I have talked with chemists who tell me that the coming graphene body armor that is 22.5 times harder than the hardest tempered tool steel should make a level 15 body armor. I suspect it will be great skin for battle tanks

    • jwn0001

      Try shooting a 9MM through the bottom of a steel barrel. Just a normal steel barrel. It Dents it. the .45 OWNS it. The .45 is for close up stopping power. 9mm is for range shooting by limp wrist politicians and foreigners.

      • Kivaari

        Not so true. Shoot an old M1 helmet (WW2-Vietnam era) will dent from a .45, and holed with a 9mm. A .45 is easier to stop with body armor than the 9mm.
        We found those armed with 9mm could shoot much tighter and much faster than those armed with the .45s. The department ended up disposing of all the .45s and going with 9mm. Everyone showed improved hitting ability. It is better to get there with a smaller round, than to miss with a bigger one.

        • The Brigadier

          Swaged bullets penetrate, and hollow points and plain lead bullets splatter against hard armor. Swaged ball .45 ACP penetrates, and simple copper plated bullets splatter also. A lot of shooters don’t know the difference. I have seen some lead bullets with 2% antimony that are hard as nails and don’t even deform. These are usually fired with black powder rifles and I’ve seen a few fired through 1911s. It would be interesting to see how they would fare against body armor.

          • Kivaari

            Hardened lead is not a desirable thing in muzzle loaders. Body armor will stop any .45 conventional bullet from a handgun. The larger the diameter, the better the vest works. Put up an old vest from the early 70s (I have) and shoot it with a .45. It ruins one or two layers of Kevlar. Put a 9mm against it, and it usually comes close to going through. I shot one with a .357, and the bullet wrapped in Kevlar, came out the back, wrapped in 4 inches of Kevlar. A surgeon could stand on your chest and remove the bullet by pulling on the vest. It is why I switched to .38-158-LRN for the first two shots out of my own gun. Should I get disarmed by a suspect, I wanted a better chance of surviving and getting to my backup.

          • Kivaari

            Swaged bullet penetrate? Most swaged pistol bullets are closer to plain lead. Therefor they are softer, and easier to defeat by obstacles. .45 lead swaged bullets, like the Speer and Hornady smash upon impact with vests or barrel bottoms. Hard cast bullets will penetrate better, and if hitting real hard materials they will shatter. Where do you find all the information you are passing on? You don’t seem to know much about guns or ammo.

      • OPIE

        Have to call BS on this one. Normal 9×19 rounds downloaded for the civilian market (NATO 115 gr. rounds are hypersonic by a good margin, most U.S. civilian rounds chrony near the sound barrier or even slightly under it) punch through both sides of the steel barrels every single time. The only exception would be a squib round.

        • Not “hypersonic”, ” supersonic”. Hypersonic is 5,500 fps or faster.

          And, just about any factory 9x19mm load *other* than the 147gr loads (which were originally *designed* to be subsonic) will be supersonic from a service pistol length barrel.

          The 124gr “NATO” load that the US military issues is on the warmish side, true. But if you’re getting subsonic performance out of 115gr to 124gr 9x19mm loads, and tou *aren’t* shooting a barrel ported to reduce velocity, something is very, very wrong.

          • OPIE

            Thank you Rick. Supersonic. I was a bit sleepy when I wrote that. BTW, I’ve seen tons of 9mm 124 gr. that claimed 1150+ fps, but only delivered 1100-1115. With sound barrier at 1127 fps, that’s “slightly under it.” Also, Aguila, Blazer, Federal, Hornady, magtech, PMC etc. all have at least one 124 gr. load w a claimed velocity below 1127 fps.

            In my experience, the manufacturers’ claims equate to the BEST case scenario the cartridge can deliver from a 5 inch barrel. What they say on the box, and what they do in the real world are usually two very different things.

          • The Brigadier

            Some people shoot the weak stuff because it is very accurate and they can place shots with almost negligible recoil. Watch Hong Kong movies where 85 lb Chinese girls are shooting at targets and the gun barrels barely move when fired. When I shoot my hot loads through my 6″ barreled revolver, my arm bends at a 90 degree up angle relative to the target. Of course revolvers are inherently more accurate and my 125 grain bullet would have severed the spine of any adversary.

          • Kivaari

            Especially when they are shooting blanks. Blanks cause almost no recoil. I guess if you use kung foo movies as training aids, it makes sense to you.

      • Bill

        Is that so? Funny, we use 55 gal. drums on our range as fire barrels, and if you measure the ventilation holes with a metric ruler, about 90% of them will be 9mm, and through-and-through.

      • Chuck Haggard

        Bullshit. Seriously. 9mm NATO outpenetrates almost any .45acp round you can find in sheet metal, demonstrated fact. You need to just stop blatantly making things up.

        • Kivaari

          We used to have .45 “Highway Masters” with a 185 gr, copper jackets with zinc cores. Now those loads are unlawful for civilian use. The same style of bullet could be had in .357 Magnum and .38 Special.
          Very fast, and light recoiling while going through car doors. Like other bullets, they lost speed faster than the heavier lead bullets.

    • Zebra Dun

      There is no doubt about the power of the .45 acp, and the less powerful but just as effective 9 mm.
      Have you ever shot a horse with a 9 mm?
      It takes a couple to put it down, unlike a .45 acp.

      • Kivaari

        Shoot a horse or cow in the head with a .45, and you might see simple wounds where the 230 pill doesn’t go through the skull. A 9mm will punch a cows skull and down the animal in one shot. Texas DPS had used the .45, and were unhappy with the round. They replaced it with .357 SIGs. High speed with better penetration works better. Since they had larger numbers of shootings in and around automobiles, they found the .45 wouldn’t do the job, like their old .357 revolvers. A .357 SIG performs like a 9mm +P+. My agency issued Glocks with +P+ ammo. It’s a good choice.

        • The Brigadier

          Now I know you are being BS Kivaari. “Like their old .357 revolvers.” I had a Sig model 29 that shot .357 Sig and it is actually a .355. That makes it a 9mm ++P. The cartridge itself has a muzzle velocity of 1350 FPS and Sig warns against using a more powerful cartridge as damage to the pistol can result. I have several .357 revolvers, a Ruger Security Six and and a Model 26 S&W. The Ruger can be loaded with the same 125 grain bullets the Sig .357 uses except to a much faster speed of 1520 FPS. That is significantly faster than the Sig round.

          The FBI did extensive ballistic gel testing of every cartridge they tested to replace their old .38 specials back in 1986. The .357 magnum penetrated the ballistic gel deeper than any other cartridge and that still applies to .357 Sig, 10mm, .40 S&W, .41 Magnum, 44 Magnum, the Tokarev round, and .500 S&W. The .357 still penetrates deeper than all of them.

          When you make a statement such as you made about .357 rounds not being fast is not only wrong, but quite nonsensical. You can even load 115 grain bullets and get them up to over 1700 FPS. .357 magnum is becoming very popular again, and your statement puts doubt on everything else you say. By the way the .357 firing the relatively new copper hollow points create horrific wounds that kill with one shot. Look it up as well as the delimbing ability of .45 ACP.

          • Kivaari

            You might read what I wrote. I said the .357 revolvers were better than the .45 ACP when killing cows. When the train drove through the herd, Bill pulled his .45 out hoping to kill them, to save them suffering. The big slow .45 bullets skidded across the skulls, and did not penetrate.
            So, it was better to use the .357 revolver because the higher velocity and the sharper edge (biting edge) cut into and holed the skulls of the cows. How you got .357s being slower, simply came from your imagination. It is why a higher speed 9mm bullet is better for penetration on skulls and auto glass and sheet metal. .45s in the form of 230 FMJ is a poor performer.
            Well, You might want to consider this. DPS had been happy with thee .357 Magnum using 4 inch barrel revolvers. A .357 is a 9x33mmr caliber. When DPS switched to .45 ACP in SIG P220’s the complaints started coming in from the troopers. The fat slow .45 would not go through auto bodies and glass while retaining enough energy to routinely stop the suspect.
            DPS wanted a handgun that was semiautomatic, having a larger magazine capacity than both the .357 revolver and .45 P220. The .357 SIG (9mm) gave them a round with performance levels rivaling the revolvers. A big win for DPS.
            A 9x19mm using a +P+ load (Federal 9BPLE 115gr ) load gave velocities within 10-20 FPS of the .357 SIG. Both loads were closer to the .357-4″ revolvers.
            The .357 SIG (being .355-356 is not significant) gave them what they wanted. No .45 could do what they wanted.
            Using a .357 magnum revolver with light weight bullets (110-125gr.) shows throat erosion within 2000 rounds, ruining the revolver.
            There are no 4 inch .357 revolvers that deliver 1700 FPS.
            A major issue with .357 revolvers is the horrendous muzzle flash and recoil. Neither is a good thin in a gun fight. It is why in the revolver era so many people stopped using .357 loads and went to .38 Special +P loads. It was better to get there with less power than to miss with more power. Todays powders ARE less brilliant, but few use revolvers anymore.
            My agency used Glock 17s with the +P+ loads. There was no issue with them. Several pistols going over 30,000 rounds each.
            A major issue with the .357 SIG is ammo costs and weapons wear. Texas can afford it.
            You should never think that ONE SHOT STOPS are going to happen. Handguns suitable for police and self defense carry are not very powerful.
            Keep in mind that the ammo in use today differs quite a bit from what we had 15-25 years ago. No one will pack 7.5 inch revolvers just to get the high speed loads you mention.
            Handguns for police are self defense tools. They must be manageable with low flash and modest recoil. Blowing holes in the sky don’t count and losing night vision is critical.

          • The Brigadier

            Actually the speeds I quoted are from Sierra’s reloading manual I use and they are based on 6″ Ruger Security Sixes and Colt 6″ Pythons. Sierra does warn against using these high pressure cartridges all the time and I usually back off 100 FPS when reloading. I keep several hundred rounds of the precision hot stuff in case the bad guys come in bunches. Because of the reliability and higher pressure of revolvers I no longer own any automatics.

            I might buy a Ruger long slide in .45ACP, but this argument regarding .45 versus 9mm is becoming tiresome. 9mm is the predominant cartridge in the world and .45 ACP is second or third most popular. I haven’t looked at the frequency lists in a while, but nothing has changed much. 9mm is accurate, easily handled and moderately powerful. Unless you are shooting a magnum round you want to double tap any target you are shooting with anyway.

          • Kivaari

            You do understand that almost no cops carried 6 inch revolvers, even in the revolver era. The most common revolvers used were S&W K-frame FOUR INCH. Almost every agency I know of stopped issuing .357 and carried .38 Special ammo, The Q-load as it was called was a 110 grain +P.
            You might want to consider that the revolver era is over, except for back up guns, like the Centennial 5-shot .38.
            During Clinton’s second run for president (1996) hundreds of us were used for security. Out of over 300 officers, I saw only one person using a revolver. That was the high sheriff of Yakima county. He was old-school. He looked tough as nails.

          • Kivaari

            Really, from what you write I think you are not a shooter, nor skilled at arms in any fashion. You throw out ancient myths, as if they were fact. Needing to double tap, is a very old approach to handgun use. NO handgun bullet is a sure thing for one shot stops. It is why police and citizens are trained to shoot until the threat is no longer a threat. It is why you see cops firing 8 or more shots, so fast that even gravity isn’t fast enough. Yes, there are one shot stops, a few of them. If the brain or spine is not hit, chances are the suspect will still be standing.
            I recommend you go to the FBI report on police officers killed feloniously. 2013 stats should be complete. A preliminary 2014 report is probably up.
            My department had us qualify monthly, and most of the time we fired ~350 rounds. We did not train to fire one shot and re-evaluate. We were trained to keep shooting until the threat was down and no longer a threat. It is one reason we handcuffed dead men.

          • Kivaari

            Ruger “long slide”. I never heard of them.

          • Kivaari

            The last time I saw an officer with a 6 inch .357 Colt Python was at the funeral of a policeman. The officer wore his going to funerals rig. As the funeral was breaking up, a pair of robbers hit the hospital pharmacy, and just happened to drive in front of the lead patrol car, as the description was broadcast. Tom gave pursuit along with half of the states cops. When the suspects car crashed, the passenger got out with an AR15 he did not know how to use. Tom shot him with his 6″ Python. Hit him in the leg and he went down. Both ended up in prison.

      • Chuck Haggard

        Bullshit.

        and;

        “…there is no appreciable difference in the effectiveness of the 9 mm and the .45 ACP cartridges.”
        Vincent J. M. Di Maio, GUNSHOT WOUNDS: Practical Aspects of Firearms, Ballistics, and Forensic Techniques SECOND EDITION, Page 150.

        • Kivaari

          Di Maio is a leader in the firearms wound ballistics field. He and his fellow scientists/MDs really show how there is no difference under similar conditions. The no longer in print “Wound Ballistics Review” published by the International Wound Ballistics Association (IWBA) reported on all the REAL data. Much of what is read in popular journals is without foundation in the truth. The wound channels created by 9mm, 10mm. 11.25mm and even 7.62x51mm NATO are indistinguishable by looking at the wound. Unless an expanding bullet is used or bone is struck the wounds are just similar to the others.
          IWBA and US Army studies really show what’s up.

        • The Brigadier

          That is not BS. I have seen people shot in the lower leg with both bullets and the .45 literally blows the lower leg off. I have never seen a 9mm do that.

          F=MA. I had an argument with Nate F. about Newton’s grand equation that deals with ballistics and applied force – Force = Mass times Acceleration. Since all firearms only accelerate for the length of the barrel we can compare their force by substituting bullet weight for mass and muzzle velocity for acceleration. Get a reloading chart and use these published figures for any caliber and you can see how much more powerful a .45 ACP is over a 9mm parabellum. Then compare a .357 magnum to a .45 ACP. Both are very powerful rounds in the normal range of handguns.

          • Kivaari

            What bullet was fired? FMJ or super light JHPs?
            If you use that formula you will see that a 9mm, especially the +P or +P+ variants produce more energy than the .45. You should also know that energy doesn’t translate directly to wounding ability. It why there is no such thing as knock down power. It is also critical as to how the bullet is constructed. A good 9mm-.38 JHP bullet can leave a much more significant wound than FMJ bullets in any handgun caliber.

          • The Brigadier

            So you claim to be smarter than Newton whose F+MA was the first grand equation in physics. You challenge everyone you talk to by changing the conditions. That is mental chicanery. That means fraud. I am going to get my Sierra reloading manual out and do the calculations for you. I am sick of your love affair with the 9mm. You should marry her.

          • Kivaari

            General, Why would my acceptance of the 9mm, cause you to get sick? I find the drum beating for a larger caliber pistol and therefor a larger pistol to be short sighted. You cannot deny that guns built on .45-sized frames fit fewer users. You can’t say a .40 or 10mm doesn’t cause increased wear and tear on guns. You did not understand why the FBI dumped the M1076. When the FBI aid they wanted new ammo for the 10mm, because it kicked too hard and wore guns out too fast. When the FBI said, we want a lower powered 10mm cartridge, that gun makers and ammo makers said, well if you (the FBI) want a 10mm with less power, we can make a .40 caliber pistol that will fit more shooters hands. The 10mm guns are too big for issuing to agencies, if you want your officers to have a gun too large and kicking too much, that fewer officers can qualify then I guess the 10mm is what you buy. If you want the FBI-spec 10mm (the .40 S&W) that can be done. The trade off is the .40 still kicks harder, guns fail faster, it is harder to train people and the performance difference in actual shootings, shows the .40 and 9mm are near equals. Given those facts, the shift back to 9mm makes sense. You get equal performance, in a gun size more people are comfortable with, with guns not wearing out as fast and with lower ammunition costs. Just because you like the 10mm and .45 doesn’t mean those guns are the best choice for issuing to thousands of people.
            My last agency was packing Glock M21 .45s. I told the chief I will not be able to effectively use the gun, as it is too large for my hands. When I showed him why, on the range, he ordered a Glock 17 for me. After a year or so of me shooting circles around the .45 shooters, the entire department went with Glocks in 9mm. Everyone shot better. When asked to train individual officers from other departments, on a remedial course, I could see why they could not shoot well. Almost every recruit had a .45 Glock that did not fit their hand. That and milking the gun was the root of most problems.

    • BugaBuga

      I believe you are wrong with your analogy regarding the effectiveness of the 9mm vs .45 when using military round ball. The 9mm has never been an effective round in round ball. With the new personal defense rounds, you may be correct.

      • Kivaari

        Keep in mind the stories of the .45 hitting a pinky finger and causing the enemy to crash, are untrue. There are many cases where people took a magazine load of .45, and kept on fighting. Only good hits count. Being 9mm vs. 11.25mm isn’t a big deal.

      • Chuck Haggard

        The 9mm has been killing people rather effectively for well over 100 years. It’s the world’s leading handgun round for good reasons.

        Oh, and;

        “…there is no appreciable difference in the effectiveness of the 9 mm and the .45 ACP cartridges.”
        Vincent J. M. Di Maio, GUNSHOT WOUNDS: Practical Aspects of Firearms, Ballistics, and Forensic Techniques SECOND EDITION, Page 150.

    • pismopal

      And the 9mm is more penetrative than .45 acp.

      • The Brigadier

        In ballistic gel, but .45 ACP blows a much bigger hole in people than 9mm parabellum.

        • Kivaari

          Wrong again if comparing ball ammo. Look up the ballistic profiles done by the army. You will find that a 9mm(.38) and a .45 (11.25mm) leave wound tracts so similar as to not make a difference. You will also find that the .45 ACP 230 FMJ load shoves blood vessels and nerve out of its path without cutting them. This reduces the incapacitating wounds so desired to stop bad guys. People die from only two forms of injury. Bleeding our or CNS disruption.

    • Follow Me Boys

      Going to a handgun after you hear “out” you know you’re in deep kimpchi anyway. I like the 1911 but my Marine dad had me breaking it down blind folded while yelling at me. Naturally I feel comfortable but short of SOF desires it needs to be durable and easy for the average Joe.

    • maodeedee

      I’m glad there are people out there who know it all and have the final word on everything. And it’s likely people like this who by consensus will make the final decision which will be typical of what is known as ” military intelligence” which always seems to be an oxymoron until you follow the money trail.

      And speaking of logic, if the 9mm is just as good as the 45, then the 380 must be just as good as the nine.

      • Kivaari

        That’s a reach. The 9x17mm uses a lighter and slower bullet than the 9x19mm.

      • OPIE

        C’mon man. Do some math. Mass times velocity squared equals energy. NATO loaded 9mm is 124 gr. going about 1250-1300 fps. (full-length barrel) producing roughly 400-450 ft/lb’s of energy. Standard loads for 230 gr. .45 caliber rounds tend average speeds in the 800’s fps. This yields energies similar to and LOWER ((360-404 ft/lb’s) than the NATO load above. The 9×17 (.380) is typically 95 gr. at only 900-950 fps. Typical energy is in the neighborhood of 200 ft/lb’s.

      • Chuck Haggard

        “…there is no appreciable difference in the effectiveness of the 9 mm and the .45 ACP cartridges.”
        Vincent J. M. Di Maio, GUNSHOT WOUNDS: Practical Aspects of Firearms, Ballistics, and Forensic Techniques SECOND EDITION, Page 150.

        The 9mm is not a .380, and saying so is completely ignorant.

        • Kivaari

          Well the .380 is 9mm like the .38 Special. We tend to get lazy when discussing ammo. 9mm is just assumed to be the NATO round.

    • Chuck Haggard

      Exactly so.

      Reality;

      “…there is no appreciable difference in the effectiveness of the 9 mm and the .45 ACP cartridges.”
      Vincent J. M. Di Maio, GUNSHOT WOUNDS: Practical Aspects of Firearms, Ballistics, and Forensic Techniques SECOND EDITION, Page 150.

  • MPWS

    Is there any mention of requested firing mechanism operation?
    Is Da/Sa the probable one? Would DAO be considered?

  • Nicks87

    “The new handgun will also be more reliable, durable and easier to maintain.”
    It’s going to be tough to beat Glock on that one but I’m sure some General or congressman that has money invested in a particular firearms manufacturer will make the final decision.

    • SIG 320

      • Dan

        MHS competition is the only reason the 320 exists.

      • I have some questions about the 320’s suitability in the hands of PVT Skippy (and CPT Hamhand). The trigger pack looks too likely to shed small springs if handled roughly when outside the frame.

        But, I think the *concept* is great, especially the ability to swap calibers and size, without affecting the serialized componant. I love my 250s.

    • nadnerbus

      The new gun has to have at least fifty parts, so they can all be manufactured in different congressional districts.

      • jwn0001

        51 counting Kenya

    • jwn0001

      Probably go as high as the President….BTW what weapon does Valerie Jaret prefer? That WILL be the standard. and sub Standard to Irans armor.

      • Zebra Dun

        An AK-47 for her security squad, she carries a pen.

  • Will

    Who taught the guy in the photo how to shoot????
    Wait, who FAILED to teach the guy in the photo how to shoot??
    Being from both the military and police firearms training fields I must agree:
    PROJECTILE PLACEMENT will finish the fight!!!
    “Knock Down Power” in a handgun cartridge is an old wives tale.

    • Greg Newton

      His tiny hands make my d*ck look huge!

    • Kivaari

      The M9 is too big for most shooters.

  • Cornelius Carroll

    Maybe a G19 chambered in 6.5×25? That would open up the possibility of a PDW being used for urban combat (and soldiers basically carrying one type of ammo in such an environment) and then transitioning to an intermediate cartridge such as 6.5×39 to replace 5.56×45 and 7.62×51. Should make logistics a bit easier…. plus everything I’ve read about 6.5×25 indicates it’s a hell of a little round.

    • iksnilol

      You mean the CBJ? I have been interested in that one. Easy to convert 9×19 to use it and it has good range.

    • Kivaari

      Why? Why go to 2 new calibers? 6.5x25mm from a pistol doesn’t seem to make any sense. A 6.5×39 in a rifle will improve how much over a 5.56x45mm? I suggest we keep the 9mm and the 5.56mm. Both are proven performers. Even a 600 meters a person hit in the lungs with a 69gr. .22 bullet will be sick enough to lose interest. A slower 6.5mm bullet wont do much better than that.

  • Darkpr0

    Someone throw me a life preserver, I’m drowning in all the “calibre vs calibre” and “gun vs gun” comments 🙁

    In all seriousness, while I applaud the department for being willing to abandon the 9mm train, I think it will be a colossal logistics disaster leading to either a delay or a boondoggle of a procurement. I’m also a bit miffed that they’re testing a new firearm and a new calibre simultaneously. If they want to evaluate calibre options, the best thing to do would seem to place all the contending calibres side by side and evaluate their wounding effects, controllability, capacity, etc in one go and then decide whether there are options that are notably better than others. After that, look at options that currently exist, and give manufacturers a chance to design new firearms around the calibre if need be. They may find out that 5.7 velocity and 45 power is snake oil and that a 9mm +P++ AP round is the way to go like the Grach. Alternatively, they may find out that 45 ACP does indeed have magical knock-down properties and 9mm has been a hilarious failure the whole time. But they’re not gonna know for sure unless they actually have a look at it.

    Also, the only REAL contender for this contract is the Coonan 357 Magnum 1911 🙂

  • Mmmtacos

    I don’t care what anyone says about the 92 platform or what the Army ends up adopting… I just want my own damn M9A3 already.

  • Ben

    Everything else aside, I am hoping that the military adopts a .357 SIG chambered handgun. Just for the cheap surplus ammo, no other reason.

    • DIR911911 .

      wow, now that’s a pipedream

    • Zebra Dun

      I’m holding out for a .38 super.

  • Shoot Comm Everywhere

    I think that far more important than caliber, it’s high time we adopted some “open tip match” pistol ammo in any of the big three defensive calibers.

    The M9 is an easily broken piece of junk, with a flawed initial concept; the integrated decocker/safety was just all wrong. Why couldn’t they just do something more akin to the USP type 1? Plus, the wings on the locking block like to shear off.

    I’m hoping we end up with the P320 out of this, I’m sure Sig will fight the good fight after losing the last one.

    • USMC03Vet

      I’d be shocked if SIG doesn’t get it with the 320. That modular serialized trigger group for logistics crushes the competition.

      • That’s for sure. The first time I got hands on with the 320 at the SIG Academy I was shocked with how good the trigger was not to mention it’s like a lego set that will fit anybody. It’s accurate as well.

    • whskee

      I don’t think we’re going to see anything special in ammo out of this, nor a caliber change. Hollow-points got the OK for CT use but that was pretty limited (no-go for uniform vs uniform conflict). I think a modified ball is the ticket in that arena akin to Lehigh Defense Xtreme Penetrator.

  • JoelC

    I can’t help but wonder if we would be having this discussion if the Sig P226 had been chosen instead of the Berretta 92.

    • CommonSense23

      We would, given how the military treats their weapons, 226s at this point would be experiencing all the reliability problems the M9 would be having at this point.

    • USMC03Vet

      Yes. Handguns have improved over the decades. All metal SA/DA frame beasts are antiquate these days. You can get smaller, lighter, and simpler operation standard today.

    • whskee

      I think we should have phased out the M9 many years ago. SIG’s are and have been issued as M11 and the newer Mk 25. If we would have initiated transitions to the M11 from the M9 after 9/11 when gobs of money were available for new kit I don’t think the situation would be here today. But hey, maybe we can finally get something decent for everyone this time around.

    • Eddie_Baby

      I remember the switch over to the M9. Everybody loved them. Mostly because they had new pistols versus some old beat up 1911s. Now the M9s are the old beat up pistols as would the 226s if they were chosen back in the day.

      • jwn0001

        It was introduced in “non combat” times for the most part late 80’s. would likely had a different reception in 90-91 or 2003-2005 field replacing 1911s.

        • Kivaari

          By 1990 there were many better handguns available to pick from.

      • Funny, everyone I knew hated them when we got them. My unit held a wake for our 1911s…

  • Bart

    They are making this all way too complicated, and I’m tired of hearing about the crap. Just adopt a modern polymer double stack striker fired gun and be done with it. It really doesn’t matter too much. Just adopt the Glock 19/17, or 21/30SF if you want .45acp. If you don’t want a foreign gun, make it the M&P equivalents or something.

  • Eddie_Baby

    So XM17 is what they are calling the next Beretta?

  • Zebra Dun

    It’s going to be a 9 mm and it’s not going to be a Glock, anything else goes.

    • Lance

      It be a M-9A3 after all the waste they will spend they find our like they did with the M-4 staying with the same caliber bear upgrade not a replacement!

      • Zebra Dun

        Money talks and the M-9A3 is calling.
        It’s not the best and the caliber is adequate but barely. The government seeing no real need to change will go with what they got.
        I’m saying the M-9A3 will get the nod and in 9 mm Parabellum.
        I’d prefer something else but who am I?

  • Dale

    A 9x23mm double stack with a 1911 style trigger mechanism/grip angle in SAO, thumb safety and grip safety that is striker fired would be music to my ears.

    I fully understand that this is a total pipe dream, but a man can dream, can’t he?

  • tazman66gt

    given the years that it took for the military to finally change camo designs and the absolute cluster that the rifle program was I see this going no where, The money that they waste with this would be much better suited in firearms training than buying some “newest greatest” piece that has little or no real advantage over what is currently being fielded.

  • IXLR8

    I would like to see a pistol that supports a suppressor. That would be awesome.
    or…
    Why not a .22TCM with an AP round. Familiar 1911 frame, no recoil for fast follow-up shots A pistol suitable for 100 yd shots…. The low recoil should make them last forever.
    or…
    I thought that I would have seen the HK VP9 mentioned by now as well.

    • Kivaari

      Familiar to who? Most soldiers today have never held a 1911.

  • John

    You know, I’d like to make a handheld laser with a pistol grip, then crash this little party and see what the Army says.

  • USMC03Vet

    Seems like SIG’s 320 was designed solely to meet these needs. You can replace every part of the gun without any tools and the trigger group being the serialized part is a wet dream come true for armorers. You could literally just have a box of addition barrels, slides, and frames you could pick at will to quickly repair or reconfigure based upon what size pistol is needed.

    I’d be shocked if SIG doesn’t easily take the competition. Logistically nothing comes close, and the platform isn’t a bad shooter either.

    • whskee

      Speaking as an armorer myself, I’d rather go Glock. Less and simpler parts, and it’s been tested/used extensively since inception. It’s the devil I know. If they’d just make a proper f’ing rail I’d be sold for Glock.

      If SIG wins, I’ll gladly accept the P320. Just be rid of the damned M9 already. Again, speaking as an armorer, the M9 sucks. M9’s are very failure prone under harsh firing schedules (work-ups). Our M11’s and later Mk 25’s (both SIG) hardly ever crapped out like the M9 did. I like that the P320 is modular, but I’d only config it as a compact for issue and never change it. Since the trigger is the receiver, when it breaks something I hope we aren’t screwed. And that striker looks pretty fragile too. Anyway, speculation at this point, I just hope we don’t get stuck with a POS in the end.

    • Lance

      They may but I doubt the military has the funds to replace the M-9 all along/ remember your bet on the SCAR in ICC, that didn’t end well for tacti coolers.

    • Joshua

      Beretta’s striker fired gun uses a similar design principal. It was first used in their Nano.

    • Dan

      the only reason the 320 exists is to compete in MHS.

  • john huscio

    I see the Sig p320 winning the solicitation…

    HK p30/p30sk would be my off the wall-out of left field prediction (its a mature design…or at least more so than the vp9)

    • Lance

      Hope not SiG sucks. If any design wins it be the HK the same one that won JCS ten years ago. I bet too after the pistol wins the military finds out its a waste of time and like ICC cancels it.

      • john huscio

        ….it wouldn’t be a party without the butthurt Beretta lovers…..

        • Lance

          Im saying a Glock HK USP and M&P are alot better than that German junk.

          • john huscio

            If your referring to the p320, its american made….

    • Zebra Dun

      I could live with the Sig P320.

  • Gary True

    #sigsauer #p320 full size 9mm with conversion kits to compact and subcompact will serve the military well. #Glock 19 will be a good choice too, but not as good and more costly if multiple sizes are desired. Surely the military will not select the outdated 1911 design or go back to .45 ACP.

    • Lance

      The Marines disagreed with you hence M-45 MARSOC!

      • CommonSense23

        And Marsoc still prefers the Glock in 9mm.

      • Zebra Dun

        I’m betting that the number of M-45 MARSOC’s are very small.
        I’m betting there are more M-9’s than there are M-45’s.

        • Joshua

          They only purchased like 2,500 M45A1’s.

      • n0truscotsman

        You haven’t followed the M45s acquisition have you?

        Its a controversial goat copulation that caused much debate within the MARSOC circle, because many were opposed to adopting a refined version of a 100+ year old handgun, that is essentially obsolete compared to pretty much everything else.

        It was a certain group’s pet rock that was begrudgingly adopted and will fade away into obscurity. Romanticism and nostalgia fail to overcome practical experience and the realities of facts.

        And this was just to replace the existing M45 frames in service, which had been re-welded and refitted I dont know how many times with an eclectic mix of parts from different companies.

  • idahoguy101

    I wouldn’t make a wager that the MHS is ever procured

  • Zebra Dun

    There are too many magazines, ammunition, parts, load bearing and holster equipment and cleaning supplies as well as training aids and such for the Beretta M-9 for the Military to switch to something else, the money just isn’t there to change.
    Dang I always wanted them to switch to the S&W eight shot .357 Magnum revolver with a ten inch barrel and buttstock.
    Like the man said, I can dream can’t I?
    “Oh Well!”

  • Kivaari

    What I’d like to know is how often has a soldier or sailor used a handgun in combat. It seems that pistols are almost never used. I suspect more American police and private citizens actually use a pistol to lawfully shoot anyone.
    If I were still in the service and overseas, I’d want a pistol. Chances of NEEDING it are remote, I’ve always liked having a handgun on my person. Make mine a Glock in 9mm.

    • Bill

      I think that their primary use is for aircrews and going back and forth to the latrine and commissary,

      • Zebra Dun

        Like a Knife, when all else fails there it is.

        • Kivaari

          Pistols and knives give a person comfort.

    • MrEllis

      MP, aircrews, Officers, some NCOs, some weapons crews, special details, some vehicle crew, medics, and a very few people in the rear. Not many but a lot more turn up in the field. A pistol is either last ditch or literally decoration in the military.

      • Kivaari

        I wasn’t referring to those that carry a pistol. I’d like to know how many are fired in combat. The last time I know of where a military member shot and killed someone was at Fairchild AFB Spokane, WA. There certainly are times when they carry handguns, and few times when they are used.
        When “they” complain about poor performance out of the M9, I wonder how they reached that finding. It has to be a fraction of one-percent of deployed troops that have actually seen a pistol kill or wound an enemy fighter.

        • MrEllis

          Ahh, I see what you mean now, I doubt it’s many and would mostly be MP or special operations.

    • Zebra Dun

      Look up, Sgt John “Manila John” Basilone.
      Had it not been for his M-1911A1 in .45 ACP that night on Guadalcanal he would have died attempting to re-supply and repair his MG sections guns.
      See, Sgt Alvin York.
      Lt George Patton in Mexico.
      The tunnel Rats of Vietnam.
      The list goes on, and pistols have their place in combat, though a small one they are needed.

      • Kivaari

        Zebra, I know the historical uses. I served in both the Army and Navy. We packed guns. What I am interested in is how many of today’s soldiers actually fired the M9 or M11 or other handgun in combat. Being issued a pistol, is a lot different than using it in combat. My point being, people want a bigger pistol, and complain how underpowered the 9mm is, with their desire based on nearly no use. The desire for a larger caliber is mostly manufactured in ones head, since almost no one has actually fired and hit an enemy soldier. Since almost no one actually engages the enemy while armed with a pistol, how can they say the 9mm is not powerful enough. I would suspect that actual use on the enemy over 15 years at war, could be counted on two hands. Just like those saying the M4 is not powerful enough, it is a gut feeling more than a fact.
        Early in the Afghan war one soldier killed over 50 men during a one night battle. I suspect that soldier did not think his M4 was underpowered.

        • Zebra Dun

          kivaari:
          A very good and valid point.

          The Nephew fought in the Marines in both Afghanistan and Iraq as an 0311 rifleman.
          I asked him if they had M-4’s and he stated All I saw as rifles was M-16A2’s and the only handguns were M-9 carried by the LT, crew served weapons and Corpsmen.

          Outside of thump guns and breaching shotguns carried by assaultmen those were the weapons of the issued to Marines.
          He doesn’t go into detail about combat though he did see a lot of it.

          I would imagine guarding an EPW or searching a tunnel, basement or cave perhaps a house and the Lt would hand the searcher his M-9.
          When it’s needed it’s needed badly and then it comes into it’s own space.

          The M-9 in 9 mm Parabellum is powerful enough to kill and seriously wound whom ever is shot, only a CNS shot will drop instantly an enemy and then it doesn’t matter much what he is hit with, he dies.

          Note: The German forces used the 9 mm in their MP-40’s submachine guns and killed and wounded a whole lot of G. I.’s with them.

          The .45 acp, or 9 mm, I would carry either in dire straits and not feel less armed or more armed with either cartridge.

          The pistol in any caliber fills a need, even one as minimal as as it does.

          • Kivaari

            Marines did keep the M16A2 much longer than the army. It is a great rifle, especially when topped with the 4x scope. Marines loved the rifle fitted with the ACOG. The rifle does deliver a little more punch compared to the M4. Probably not enough to really matter. I have both. I like the light weight of the M4, but the HBAR 20″, really makes it easy to hit with. Both mine have Geissele SSA triggers installed. That change gave me ~1MOA smaller groups.

  • Bal256

    The pistol acquisition is easily the most controversial small arm in the U.S. military. The only thing to be sure is that no matter what they pick, It’ll be the “wrong choice”, or “ineffective/outdated” caliber. if it were up to me, I’d adopt the 1911… in 9mm. Just to piss off as many people as possible.

    • jwn0001

      1911 is still the pistol of choice

      • I agree JWN. We should have kept the 1911 in it’s original form to begin with. Just can’t beat this pistol for it’s knock-down power. I have the Kimber 1911 and I’m building my own 1911 with all the bells and whistles.

  • Isa Akhbar

    Yawn…it’ll be decades before DoD gets any more money from Congress for this boondoggle. This XM17 thing will stagger on for a few more years, then get shelved for the same reasons the “new” carbine development blew up, leaving the M-4 right where it’s been for years. The M-4 and M-9 NEED MODERN AMMO DESIGNS…AMMO…NOT A NEW WEAPON TO LAUNCH IT!!! Until the pansy-assed lawyers running the Pentagon’s weapons systems grow a pair and admit that FMJ BALL AMMO IS NOT…NOT…NOT LEGALLY REQUIRED TO BE USED…nothing will change…the 19th-century Hague Convention was never ratified by the U.S., and it is NOT legally binding on our country. We’re just too politically-correct afraid to say so, and give our troops decent, modern ammunition to dispatch the maggots trying to kill them.

    • Kivaari

      That’s so true.

  • Jas

    Seburo, I totally agree with you. The one thing the military needs nowadays is penetration.
    I vote for reintroducing the 7,63 Tokarev round, maybe even with a souped up load.

    • Kivaari

      The 7.62x25mm Tokarev is already 20% faster than the 7.63X25mm Mauser cartridge. The 7.62mm Tok is a weenie compared to the .30 Carbine round that everyone says is too under powered. Keep in mind if you have a nice Mauser pistol, don’t fire 7.62mm Tok in it. Even fired from the PPAh 41, it is not much.
      In George’s “Shots Fired in Anger”, he didn’t bad mouth the .30 carbine. His brother mentioned in an NRA article that Maj. George had killed 35 Japanese most of which were one shot stops, at not more than a few feet.
      The point being, restricting the ammo to ball, limits performance unless the target is x-ringed.

      • Zebra Dun

        The 7.25 x 25 mm Tok is a better penetration round than any .30 carbine.
        I’ve fired both and the Tok is unbelievable at going right through stuff, and as a combat round the .30 carbine ain’t nothing to get shot with either.

        • Kivaari

          The Tokarev can’t do more than a .30 carbine. It simply can’t. It throws a lighter bullet at 400+FPS slower than the carbine.

  • Alex Nicolin

    Boost the 9 mm to 45-48KPSI and it will be much more effective. And build a pistol that can handle the pressure (fully supported chamber, thicker barrel).

  • Ned Weatherby

    Yeah – but that 17 super tornado wildcat caliber sure is a peach – and a hell of a rat stopper….

  • FED

    The financialization of the American economy

    American De-Industrialization
    Continues Unabated

    America’s economic elite has long argued that the country does not need an industrial base. The economies in states such as California and Michigan that have lost their industrial base, however, belie that claim. Without an industrial base, an increase in consumer spending, which pulled the country out of past recessions, will not put Americans back to work. Without an industrial base, the nation’s trade deficit will continue to grow. Without an industrial base, stranded in low-paying service-sector jobs. Without an industrial base, the United States will be increasingly dependent on foreign manufacturers even for its key military technology.

    Deindustrialization led to rising costs for weapons development

    The U.S. is becoming dependent on countries such as UK, Italy,Russia, France and Germany for critical weapons technology

  • Just sayin’

    Maybe this will save Colt……nahhhhh, current management would find a way to screw it up and lose money.

  • idahoguy101

    Probably…. The small irony is the M11 military issue handgun. AKA the Sig P228. If the M9 is phased out, the M11 would be the likely replacement. How’s that for history repeating itself!

  • Dan

    I would love to see a compact 5.7×28…

  • They want battlefield punch from a handgun go with the 10mm, I’m sure the army guys aren’t as big of whimps as the FBI was.

  • CommonSense23

    You realize the Seals didn’t break any frames on the SIG, it was the Beretta that was experiencing the catastrophic malfunctions. And it had nothing to do with shooting subgun ammo out of it.

    • Bill

      The SEALs broke SIG frame rails, as did the US Secret Service and the US Marshal’s Service. At least according to the SEALs, USSS agents and Deputy Marshals I’ve spoken to. And the pistols perked along just fine, because of their interrupted frame rails; if one broke, there were three more that kept the pistol working. Besides, they were more like cracks as opposed to actually shearing the rail off, and the number of pistols actually involved was minuscule. In the case of the SEALs they were using rounds from another country that when the rounds were checked, were well above SAAMI specs for 9mm in the States, the teachable moment being that if the writing on the box of ammo has a lot of squiggles, dots and upside down letters on it, find a translator and make sure it’s suitable for the pistol.

      • CommonSense23

        Curious is any of you info from documented sources or just second or third hand knowledge.

        • Bill

          As I wrote above, some is from guys who were there, some is from agency bulletins, some was picked up during the SIG armorer’s course.

          ANY pistol will break under the right or wrong circumstances. I’ll wager that the mean rounds before failure figures for both pistols is similar. Both the number of Beretta failures and SIG failures are such an infinitesimal number compared to the number of pistols in service it’s essentially a non-issue. In near 20 years of training people on SIGs, the only thing I’ve seen break was springs.

      • Your last sentence made me LOL. Reminds me of the case of some WWII vets who blew up an early S&W 39, shooting some ammo they looted from a German factory. They were running German proof loads…

    • jwn0001

      YEP, first Berettas were POS

      • Kivaari

        Actually, the first M9s did not have the slide retention feature. The 92FS added the large head to the hammer pin, with a matching groove in the rear left hand slide.

      • Kivaari

        Really?

    • Kivaari

      Actually the M9s did break frames as did the SIGs. The difference being the SIG kept functioning. SIG added some mud grooves.

  • Bowserb

    I don’t have the new specs, but the army has also had second strike on a dud as a requirement in the past. As I recall they found 50% of duds fired on the second trigger pull, and 80% by the third. If they still have that requirement, striker guns are out.

    • IIRC, they dropped that requirement, because they realized that we aren’t dealing with 19th Century ammunition manufacturing anymore. By and large, if a centerfire round manufactured in the US didn’t go off the first time, it isn’t going to go off afterwards.

  • Chuck Burns

    Go with the Glock 19 and Glock 22 for full size. Slide and barrel swaps between frames to change caliber. The Glock 26 and Glock 23 for compact. The guns already exist, are reasonably reliable, accurate, and inexpensive. In the end 9mm will be the hand gun caliber.

    • BugaBuga

      More cases of Glock leg. Check out youtube of people shooting themselves including a dea officer. For some reason there is a disconnect between the brain and the finger. Besides, I do not like plastic. But, I support your right to own what ever you want.

      • Chuck Burns

        Yeah Glock leg. Maybe keep finger off the trigger. Glock has striker block which is released only by placing finger on the trigger. Glock leg is pure negligence not accident. See it often with careless shooters. Even Police and trained instructors get careless. So the answer is to keep a manual safety on as a reminder? For those who want to rest finger on trigger I guess that will work. I used to do the same, rest finger on trigger but learned. Fortunately no one got hurt. I own the Beretta 92FS and the Glocks. Rule #1 for any firearm, Do not put finger on the trigger unless you are on target and made conscience decision to shoot.

        • efred1

          I read recently about a State Police Sargant (the range safety officer as well, I believe), who was adjusting his rig as he was entering the ward room, when the safety strap that wraps over the back of the pistol to secure it in the holster, somehow got inside the trigger guard, and when he holstered his weapon, the strap pulled the trigger, shooting himself in the pantleg, inflicting an egregious wound in his ego.

          There was another incident at an elementary school, when an 8-year old boy put his finger through the trigger guard on a tactical holster, and squeezed off a round, shooting the officer in the leg or foot.

          The Glock, and all other pistols that rely solely on the ‘safety’ trigger do not protect against anything that touches both the blade and the trigger, like the strap on a holster, an article of clothing like a shirttail, a twig, etc.

          • BugaBuga

            I carry a Sig Sauer P239 .40, It has a double action first round and single action thereafter. It has a decocker, no safety. I have carried it for about 15 years in a Mitch Rosen Workman holster. I have had zero issues with it while holstering or while holstered. (Finger always off the trigger.)

          • Chuck Burns

            Yes, those are all possibilities. And, with some imagination the possibilities start to become endless. I feel the same about the 1911 style single action and carrying cocked and locked. In actuality cocked and locked is no different than carrying a loaded Glock. There is still the firing pin block and as long as you practice safe trigger technique then no problem. But I can’t get by the idea of that cocked hammer and a round in the chamber. I no longer own any 1911 style hand guns. I traded my Kimber and bought a Beretta PX4 in 45 AC.

            Just keep your finger off the trigger. maintain control of the trigger. Letting straps enter the trigger guard, letting a child’s finger enter the trigger guard are all the responsibility of the shooter and come under the category of negligence and carelessness. Safe gun handling and trigger safety Something we all must practice and strive to achieve myself included.

          • Kivaari

            Improper holster designs. All serious Glock holsters have a covered trigger guard.

      • Kivaari

        Poor training results in NDs.

  • jwn0001

    Picatinny REALLY?? WOW what a “Washington” solution! Making weapons on the coast!! This should be done at Rodman labs (Rock Island Arsenal). PLUS, Army made a mistake choosing foreign company (Beretta) to produce current POS 9MM pistol. Admit the mistake and reintroduce .45 ACP 1911 A1, problem solved and millions of “tax payer dollars” saved!

  • Jamie Clemons

    Maybe they will surplus their old beat up pistols?

    • BugaBuga

      I do not want one. The 1911 has not been around for over 100 years for nothing.

      • Jamie Clemons

        That is what I meant. Maybe when they get the new ones they will surplus the 1911s

        • BugaBuga

          Do you really think that obummer is going to alow that???? They want to take yours and mine away. Check out jade helm 15 on youtube.

          • Jamie Clemons

            Probably not but he can’t run for another term.

        • Kivaari

          They replaced the 1911s 30 years ago. They are sitting in armories, some given to police or used as foreign aid. At one time the CIA shipped 35,000 M1911s to the Congo. There were not that many fighters on both side of the conflict. They came cheap.

  • Guido FL

    Seems to me the .45 is a military weapon meant to have one shot stopping power. Don’t believe me ? Proven by Sgt. York in WW1. Funny how the Seals were trading two 9mm pistols for one .45 in the first Gulf War, I wonder why ?

    • Kivaari

      And now most take a Glock 17.

  • BugaBuga

    Maybe a new term for “Limp wristing” also with a failure to eject or stove piping????

  • Bo Bo

    Was doing some long range competition shooting using my 1911 45. The shooters who shot low and hit the leg of the target stand with their 9’s made little holes. One of my shots went low and when it hit the leg it split it in half and splinters were flying all over the place. People who say the 9s are just as powerful as the 45 are smoking some bad stuff.

    • Kivaari

      The wound tracts are so similar that they can’t be distinguished from each other.

  • scaatylobo

    I see that the debate about “Stopping Power” is based on the fact that the military insists on using ball ammo.
    That being the case,I say we need to go MUCH bigger than the 1911 [ puny .45 ACP ] and see if there is a 60 caliber round that can do better.
    After all,even a fool cannot argue that “for each and ever action,there is a opposite reaction” as that is a law that CANNOT be broken.
    We just had a Deputy shoot a perp with his Glock 21 in ,you guessed it “45 ACP”.
    And the perp had the gall to RUN AWAY with 3 hits.
    SO to garrantee a pistol with stopping power,and understanding that the military will go ball ammo ,we need to step up the caliber.
    OR we could teach REAL ACCURACY with ball ammo in the 9MM, / 40 S&W ?.
    And how about going to a 5.7MM and go for SPEED and penetration.
    The 1911 is a great pistol,in ANY caliber.
    BUT training once a year with a gun that NEEDS more range time to carry LOADED [ condition 1 ] is not going to happen.
    The military will spend TENS OF MILLIONS [ hundreds of millions ? ] to adopt a new gun —- then pennies to train and qual the troops.

  • Peter Factora

    The 1911 in .45 cal is still the best stopper pistol ever. I was in the army during the Vietnam war. They trained you on weapons enough to be able to use it. I was rated an expert on the M16 but I was far from being an EXPERT law enforcement and competitive shooter who spends countless hours on a practice range. Unless the weapons training has changed for all troops to spend that same amount of time training on a pistol then they need all the stopping power that they can have access to in case they miss the Kill zone of the enemy. With a 1911 .45 cal it will and has the stopping power to do just that. I would not trust my life with a 9mm ever!!!

    • Kivaari

      Inly 2 men in my company fired expert with pistols. We were both cops in another life.

  • lomaxima

    Waste of time and money for how little they are used and training given to most. Solicit Glock to add a thumb safety so it’s “Joe” proof. /trial.

    • Kivaari

      Finally a sane response.

  • John

    And, if the gel tests I’ve seen aren’t doctored – and I trust AmmoQuest to shoot the bull, not blow BS up our … – then either 9mm or .45 ACP PolyCase ARX ammo will GREATLY increase shot effectiveness without breaking international law concerning “non-expanding ammunition. That said, using ParaUSA’s Black Ops (5″) and Black Ops Recon (4.25”) would give 18+1 capacity in 0mm as well as 1911 safeties (manual, grip) and a PicRail, all without having to mod the weapon from any of us American Joes can buy.
    Or 14+1 capacity in .45 ACP.
    Or there’s S&W’s M&P in either caliber.
    Neither of which have the M9’s open-top slide that veterans I know have SEEN crack and slam into the shooter’s face on recoil.

  • William Burke

    What is the purpose of a drilled dummy round? As opposed to, say, a plastic round, or no round at all?

    • Kivaari

      Drilled dummy ammo. It’s inert. It can’t be fired in any fashion. It is used to train and test cycling.

      • William Burke

        How does an inert round “cycle”?

        • Kivaari

          Manually. Pull the charging handle or slide back and watch how the rounds feed from a magazine and extract. They come in essentially all calibers currently in use. They are often blackened, with no primer or flash hole and with holes through the side walls and even ribbed. Done so, that to show they are obviously dummy loads.
          You can buy them from Brownells’. Most gunsmiths will have them on hand.

          • William Burke

            [Giant face palm]. Of course! When you said “cycle”, I automatically thought… well, you know.

            I never thought of it as cycling, but it is. Of course, most guns will cycle a piece of gravel in the same fashion.

  • AK™

    Why not use the S&W .500?

  • Eurk Burkell

    They could just use the use the 1911. There was no reason to replace it either.

  • OPIE

    If we used data to drive the argument, I’d predict that CZ would win the contract. They have the most endurance tested pistol on the market so far. Some of our NATO allies have adopted the SP type already. I wonder if CZ could even handle the contract though?

  • T Sheehan

    Neither round is suitable for battlefield distances, target acquisition and recoil control, or capacity. Police work, concealed carry and home defense, sure. Battlefield work, no. 5.7 in a 6.5 inch barrel, 25 round mag w/ micro red dot zeroed for 50 meter engagement would be far more suitable. We’re too hooked on our John Wayne calibers that don’t work against an AK toting fool at 75 meters when your service rifle or crew serve goes down. Or a light grain zippy .357 SIG.

    • Kivaari

      Or more discipline with your M4, even though it is hard to go slow while under threat. We had to develop trigger control on our MP5s. To qualify we had to run the course with the gun on full auto, but only firing single shots. It is hard to train troops to go slow-fast.

      • T Sheehan

        I think you and I already went down the full auto debate lane before. I’m keeping comments germane to the pistol caliber discussion.

        • Kivaari

          Don’t count the 9mm out. There is nothing stopping the Army from using 9mm +P+ ammo, that equals .357 SIG performance. The Russian AP 9mm using a small diameter penetrator would give the user a means to poke holes in older body armor.
          You probably know, no handgun suitable for use on the streets or battlefield, is a big performer. It is why 80% of those shot with a handgun, survive the GSW. Add body armor and likely 90+% will survive the GSW. Regardless of performance, I would still like a handgun, like a Glock 17. A security blanket does give comfort.

  • The Brigadier

    I remember when the government put out a proposal in 2007 for the Special Forces for the reduced size .45. Taurus and three others manufacturers submitted prototypes and then Beretta put on a full court press for their current 9mm pistol and the DoD dropped the procurement process. SOCOM was displeased and so were the participating vendors. Don’t be surprised if this happens again.

    There are those that will tell you that there is little difference in damage from one cartridge size to another and that argument is usually made by people who have never been in combat. .45ACP is slow, but very heavy and the damage is massive compared to the .38/9mm. That’s why SOCOM wanted to replace the 9mm parabellum Beretta with a reduced size .45.

    Taurus manufactured and sold the 24/7 DSS they created for the procurement and it was a very nice pistol. They no longer make it because the civilian market wants a full length slide and the 24/7 DSS was only a 3/4 length in accordance with SOCOM’s desires for compactness. They recently released the Long Slide .45 that is basically the 24/7 with the traditionally longer slide that reduces recoil. With a match grade barrel, enlarged and beveled ejection ports, extensive checkering, Heinie precision sights and double stacked handle that gives you 12 rounds the 24/7 DSS had a lot of expensive features at a reasonable price. I like what Taurus is making these days. I am looking for a sale for the Long Slide if any of you know of one.

    • Kivaari

      A primary reason for getting a .45 for SOF-types, is the .45 firing full power loads is easier to silence than a 9mm. Down loading a 9mm, works. I used IMI blue-tip 158 gr. ammo in a suppressed Uzi. It still made noise. I recently fired a SIG P220 with a modern can. It is amazingly quiet indoors.

  • Greg Tag

    We have the obligatory DiMaio quote, like Zeus thundering from the heavens. No more discussion is necessary. How does he know? Please read what I have written before telling me that DiMaio is the textbook guy – I have the book. Also Fackler’s

    This quote has been abused a good deal. Dr DiMaio was speaking from his experience as an autopsy surgeon – but he cannot be in a position to comment on the projectiles effectiveness because effectiveness is related to nothing other than ” was the target incapacitated in a timely manner”. Not being there at the time of the shooting, he doesn’t know. This ex cathedra pronouncement baldly stated like that is insupportable.

    What he can do is observe the wound track. Due to tissue stretch and a hundred other issues, the wound tracks are similar and are unlikely to be visually distinguishable. That’s when the engineer steps in. The volume of the damage cavity is larger, and measurably so, with the .45 Ball when compared to 9mm ball. How so? Simple math – if a 9mm ball penetrates entirely through an adult male human torso from sternum to scapula, that’s a hole of about 13 inches, give or take a bit.

    This is for NON-EXPANDING MILITARY BALL

    The volume of “hole-punched ” tissue is ( pi x r^2) times depth

    Given 9mm is 0.355 inch , so r = 0.355/2 or 0.1775, r^2 =0.0315

    9mm ball produces a cavity “hole punch” of (3.14 X 0.0315X13)

    = 1.286 cubic inches.

    Given .45 ACP is 0.452 inch, so r = 0.226, r^2= 0.0510

    .45 ball produces a “hole punch” of (3.14 x 0.0510 x 13)

    = 2.085 cubic inches

    The hole volume is 62% greater with the .45 Ball.

    How about the surface area of ripped, bleeding damaged tissue?

    That is simply circumference of the hole times depth, or( pi x D x 13)

    9mm- 3.14 x 0.355 x 13 = 14.49 square inches of damaged tissue

    .45 – 3.14 x 0.452 x 13 = 18.45 square inches of damaged tissue.

    The surface area of damaged tissue is 27% greater with .45 Ball.

    Are these differences RELEVANT?

    Remembering a caveat – namely a HIT in the right place is the most important – given two equally well-placed shots, MORE damage is inflicted by the .45. WITH BALL.

    If MORE DAMAGE equates to greater effectiveness, the difference is relevant. If , after a certain point , the difference is meaningless and swallowed in the other variables such as how oxygenated the target’s blood was, etc, maybe not. What this means is that flat out-bald, unequivocal and un-nuanced comments on the subject are simply hot air.

    With modern magic bullets in 9mm, the performance is greatly enhanced and the round becomes more than adequate for policing or self-defense use. Remember, though, soldiers carry ball.

    Military procurement is driven by many things, and usually the concerns, likes and dislikes and opinions and EXPERIENCES of 11B and 0311 types are way down the list.

  • Jim Griffin

    and a 40 S&W is superior to both, and a glock 23 is better than both, more reliable, easier to maintain g23, and it less expensive, but we know that the govt doesn’t work that way

  • Chris A Carter

    The 9 mm beretta is the worst hand gun the Military has ever invested in the stoping power is worthless. They should have stayed with the 45acp I know this means more weight put one placer round will stop any man alive. How ever the new FN 57×25 is even a lot better in stead of 16 rounds with the 9 mm and 9 rounds with the 57×25 with 20 rounds the fire power and stopping power is much better . Gentleman fire power is wher the butter meets the bread he who has the best fire power on the field wins the day

  • Chris A Carter

    The stopping power comes in the ammo ball ammo is good for penetrations not stopping power that’s were the JHP comes in and getting hit center mass is like getting hit in the chest with a 20 lb sledge hammer swung by a major league ball player

  • Chris A Carter

    And if the case is to carry more ammo then the FN57 is the best and will penetrate standard body armor and ammo is very very light weight compared to the other which equates to more fire power for all of are service members and they are well built easy to maintain and accurate very accurate