Posted on 07/13/2014 2:21:40 AM PDT by WhiskeyX
The Army wants to retire its supply of 9mm handguns and replace it with a more accurate and user-friendly model that also will provide soldiers with more “knock-down” power.
Army officials say their inventory of more than 200,000 semi-automatic Beretta M9 and Sig Sauer M11 pistols has become outdated, worn out and needs to be replaced with an updated model that also offers more reliability and durability.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Never heard of the double tap with the .45.
I love the 1911 but I had an occasion to shoot a Sig 220. Really nice.
IMO the Beretta 92 is too big for the caliber. Kinda a ‘60s era Cadillac with a V6 engine.
One of the reasons for going 9 mm was commonality with allies.
Well, Zer0 has seen to that, no more allies.
Go with the 10mm Auto. ;^)
“I’ll take the Sig’s if they don’t want them.....”
Better stil re-barrel them to shoot .357 SIG or .40 S&W. Or replace them with .40 S&W capable SIGS . My 229 will shoot all three. All you need are the barrels ( and in the case of 9mm, a new mag.
Same problem drug-crazed individuals the cops had to deal with here in the US. Those individuals could take 5 or 6 hits of 9mm ammo and keep on going.
460 Rowland. It’s what the 45 wanted to be when it grew up.
People were much smaller back then, and the bullets seemed larger.
Added bonus...its made in the United States.
The M1911 .45 was used forever and did the trick
“Never heard of the double tap with the .45.”
Well, I re-read my post. Guess I didn’t make my statement very clearly. Intent was; 45acp only requires one shot while 9mm requires double tap to do the same results. Sorry, guess I shoulda “double tapped” :)
Btw, in addition to owing a couple of 45acp’s, actually LH Randall’s, decided to make them shooters vs collectables laying in my gun safe, I own the Beretta 92F. I agree that the grip is fatter than it needs to be. Having said though it’s my wife gun of choice we we re-qualify for our CHL’s. Just a side note, she usually shoots max score while I usually have a few flyers. It’s the gun’s fault of course :)
More government stupidity. Nothing wrong with the 9mm. Instead of guns, how about ammo for training. Oh, and a single gun simply won’t work for everyone either given the fit in the hand etc. a handgun should be the last resort.
If we toss the Geneva Convention bit which prohibits hollow points, the .357 Sig might be a good choice. More power and heavier bullet than 9mm+P+, not as bulky as .45 ACP.
If I am not mistaken, hollow points are not allowed per Geneva Convention. Which makes the gov’s purchase of billions of hp rounds more interesting.
If I am not mistaken, hollow points are not allowed per Geneva Convention. Which makes the gov’s purchase of billions of hp rounds more interesting.
The problem is the Hague Convention of 1899, Declaration III, which prohibits the use in international warfare of bullets which easily expand or flatten when making contact with the target. There are many excellent 9mm hollow point loads that perform as well as a .45 in most situations.
I wondered how long it would take for someone to post the historical reason for using the 45. Good for you.
I reload for both. Energy level for 9mm and .45 are about the same and an order of magnitude less than a battle rifle.
FMJ ammo really limits what a pistol can do anyway. You are a little better off with the .45 but the difference in one shot stops is only about 10%.
If you must use a FMJ round, there are some more current cartridges that would offer improvement over both the 9mm and .45.
“The problem is women. They are too small on average to effectively yield anything larger or more powerful than a 9mm service pistol.”
The MOLLE and MOLLE II gear is impressive in that it can fit either an Anglo male soldier or an Anglo female/Latino male; very versatile. I prefer the older ALICE stuff myself (don’t like Velcro), but the whole modular concept that was improved with MOLLE is exceptional.
how in the world are you comparing a rifle as a replacement to a pistol??
The .45 was created because the .38 was not powerful to knock down Moros in the PI
The Springfield A3.03 was the weapon of choice from WWI to WWII, being used effectively by the Marines in the first 2 years of the war
Claiming that a carbine was a replacement for a pistol??
Then why did tankers carry pistols and why did officers carry pistols??
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.