User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 11:28:07 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Best post in this whole thread Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: This is idiotic. Its clear that the F-35 can be modified to fufill this mission. It will require only a slight redesign and a small increase in funding. Best post in this whole thread /thread.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 12:11:19 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think the point that should be taken away; is any weapon selected will elicited calls that the other gun should have won. If in the round of JSAAPs SIG won, today we would hear stories of how troops wished the Beretta should have won. And if Glock is fielded in the future, there would be talk of how we should buy M&P. You could substitute any weapon in the above sentences Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
why reinvent the wheel? just buy the Glock 17 or 19 This. Worked for the Brits. They wanted more 226s, according to the Forces guys. I think the point that should be taken away; is any weapon selected will elicited calls that the other gun should have won. If in the round of JSAAPs SIG won, today we would hear stories of how troops wished the Beretta should have won. And if Glock is fielded in the future, there would be talk of how we should buy M&P. You could substitute any weapon in the above sentences The problem isn't troops bitching...it's culture of incompetence, unaccountability, flag officer corruption, undue political influence and disconnection from the operational force of the generating forces of the US and to what extent they even have them anymore, that of our allies. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 12:13:25 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I truly hope that they adopt an American brand this time. Our troops should not have foreign rifles or pistols. Then they should adopt the Colt M1911-A1! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 12:20:29 PM EDT
[#4]
If this program results in a Glock 19 sized M&P, I fully support the expenditure. DAMN THE COST!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 12:41:53 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You probably won't. I'm just telling you what multiple Yorkshire, Anglican, Mercian and Ghurka Regiment guys told me, some of whom were either going to or back from UKSF. Most wanted the 226 if they voiced a preference. Prices were comparable from their reports and testing supported the 226, and Lo and behold, out comes the Glock. Considering the large number of 226s among deployed personnel, they were even more sure of malfeasance than I. I told them to be happy it wasn't a Beretta. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Yet to read anything about it not-wanted. Not that it matters, since its well known that the G17 is a fine service pistol. They can learn to want to it. And they paid like $590 a pop, which is taking into account holsters, mags, etc. Not bad, and certainly not a fandango. You probably won't. I'm just telling you what multiple Yorkshire, Anglican, Mercian and Ghurka Regiment guys told me, some of whom were either going to or back from UKSF. Most wanted the 226 if they voiced a preference. Prices were comparable from their reports and testing supported the 226, and Lo and behold, out comes the Glock. Considering the large number of 226s among deployed personnel, they were even more sure of malfeasance than I. I told them to be happy it wasn't a Beretta. What 'some soldiers wanted' doesn't count. In the case of the UK G17 procurement, it wasn't a matter of simply wanting something different for whatever silly reason. The Hi-Powers were simply wearing out. The replacement went down exactly how a sidearm replacement should go: You need a 9mm pistol, here is a reputable 9mm pistol, done. No stupid studies, games, and chances to pad the pockets of various politicians. COTS it and done. In the US, our reasoning for replacing the M9 is a lot shakier. We just want something different, because. Or maybe in a different caliber. Or maybe both. Or maybe some SIG250-ish abortion, cause Modular Murica! Instead of just buying decent magazines and realizing that 9mm is still gonna be 9mm, no matter it gets shot out of. Just look at how stupid the uniform saga has been over the past decade for proof of meandering and wasteful procurement here, when its not really needed in the first place. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 12:45:00 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If this program results in a Glock 19 sized M&P, I fully support the expenditure. DAMN THE COST! Americans traditionally fielded a full size handgun, because the role of the pistol was seen as a "Fighting Handgun." Europeans typically fielded a badge of office handgun, for shooting conscripts who disobeyed orders. I'd prefer to retain the full size handgun. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 12:54:20 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's going to be a manual safety and decock I can imagine army heads exploding with something like a cocked and locked 1911 now adays ...omgggdathammerisback!!!!! No way a glock for ground troops... No way. Omgeeeerd no safety ! I'm a real big fan of the p8 and I think it would be an excellent sidearm for the us army , already got us troops that are shooting it http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/03/32/3c/03323c52b6935e645365525af2a5b4f3.jpg http://www.defense.gov/DODCMSShare/NewsStoryPhoto/2010-08/scr_100730-A-5816L-152.jpg http://usarmy.vo.llnwd.net/e2/c/images/2011/09/14/219803/size0.jpg http://usarmy.vo.llnwd.net/e2/-images/2011/01/13/96576/size0-army.mil-96576-2011-01-14-070114.jpg So much Weaver.... it's hurt my eyes |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 12:58:59 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Or they could quit dickin' around, and buy a bunch of M11/ P229, Which are already NSN numbered, in production, and the manuals and and armory infrastructure is already in place. But if they don't spend the development money then it will get cut from next year's budget. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 1:03:35 PM EDT
[#9]
FN will likely 'win' the next big DOD contract. Meh.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 1:03:42 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So much Weaver.... it's hurt my eyes Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It's going to be a manual safety and decock I can imagine army heads exploding with something like a cocked and locked 1911 now adays ...omgggdathammerisback!!!!! No way a glock for ground troops... No way. Omgeeeerd no safety ! I'm a real big fan of the p8 and I think it would be an excellent sidearm for the us army , already got us troops that are shooting it http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/03/32/3c/03323c52b6935e645365525af2a5b4f3.jpg http://www.defense.gov/DODCMSShare/NewsStoryPhoto/2010-08/scr_100730-A-5816L-152.jpg http://usarmy.vo.llnwd.net/e2/c/images/2011/09/14/219803/size0.jpg http://usarmy.vo.llnwd.net/e2/-images/2011/01/13/96576/size0-army.mil-96576-2011-01-14-070114.jpg So much Weaver.... it's hurt my eyes Conventional Army institutional knowledge of pistolcraft would fit in a single stack mag. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 1:04:24 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Conventional Army institutional knowledge of pistolcraft would fit in a single stack mag. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's going to be a manual safety and decock I can imagine army heads exploding with something like a cocked and locked 1911 now adays ...omgggdathammerisback!!!!! No way a glock for ground troops... No way. Omgeeeerd no safety ! I'm a real big fan of the p8 and I think it would be an excellent sidearm for the us army , already got us troops that are shooting it http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/03/32/3c/03323c52b6935e645365525af2a5b4f3.jpg http://www.defense.gov/DODCMSShare/NewsStoryPhoto/2010-08/scr_100730-A-5816L-152.jpg http://usarmy.vo.llnwd.net/e2/c/images/2011/09/14/219803/size0.jpg http://usarmy.vo.llnwd.net/e2/-images/2011/01/13/96576/size0-army.mil-96576-2011-01-14-070114.jpg So much Weaver.... it's hurt my eyes Conventional Army institutional knowledge of pistolcraft would fit in a single stack mag. lol. You got that right. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 1:04:33 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Which of course is supported by history... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
They phased out the best handgun of the last hundred years the 1911, it worked then and still works, 45 ball is still better than 9mm ball, just like the adoption of the m16 in the 60s the Beretta was adopted because somebody at Beretta greased some palms. The 1911 is a poor handgun for mass issue. Regardless of how much I love it.
Which of course is supported by history... http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=6631 Left cold. Hilton Yam has seen a considerable number of them fielded with LEOs. I would choose a 1911 for personal defense use, or even a go-to-war gun. But not general issue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 1:05:00 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Americans traditionally fielded a full size handgun, because the role of the pistol was seen as a "Fighting Handgun." South Europeans typically fielded a badge of office handgun, for shooting conscripts who disobeyed orders. I'd prefer to retain the full size handgun. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If this program results in a Glock 19 sized M&P, I fully support the expenditure. DAMN THE COST! Americans traditionally fielded a full size handgun, because the role of the pistol was seen as a "Fighting Handgun." South Europeans typically fielded a badge of office handgun, for shooting conscripts who disobeyed orders. I'd prefer to retain the full size handgun. Fixed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 1:06:44 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Americans traditionally fielded a full size handgun, because the role of the pistol was seen as a "Fighting Handgun." Europeans typically fielded a badge of office handgun, for shooting conscripts who disobeyed orders. I'd prefer to retain the full size handgun. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If this program results in a Glock 19 sized M&P, I fully support the expenditure. DAMN THE COST! Americans traditionally fielded a full size handgun, because the role of the pistol was seen as a "Fighting Handgun." Europeans typically fielded a badge of office handgun, for shooting conscripts who disobeyed orders. I'd prefer to retain the full size handgun. Maybe the Europellet shooters have something right? A mid-size handgun, like the M11 or my much lusted after G19 sized M&P shaves a few ounces off of the load while not sacrificing too much in the way of capacity or accuracy. Particularly given how pistols are used in the .mil, i.e. carried a lot, shot for blood very rarely. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 1:09:21 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Fixed. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If this program results in a Glock 19 sized M&P, I fully support the expenditure. DAMN THE COST! Americans traditionally fielded a full size handgun, because the role of the pistol was seen as a "Fighting Handgun." South Europeans typically fielded a badge of office handgun, for shooting conscripts who disobeyed orders. I'd prefer to retain the full size handgun. Fixed. Yes, and thank you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 1:17:27 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Maybe the Europellet shooters have something right? A mid-size handgun, like the M11 or my much lusted after G19 sized M&P shaves a few ounces off of the load while not sacrificing too much in the way of capacity or accuracy. Particularly given how pistols are used in the .mil, i.e. carried a lot, shot for blood very rarely. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If this program results in a Glock 19 sized M&P, I fully support the expenditure. DAMN THE COST! Americans traditionally fielded a full size handgun, because the role of the pistol was seen as a "Fighting Handgun." Europeans typically fielded a badge of office handgun, for shooting conscripts who disobeyed orders. I'd prefer to retain the full size handgun. Maybe the Europellet shooters have something right? A mid-size handgun, like the M11 or my much lusted after G19 sized M&P shaves a few ounces off of the load while not sacrificing too much in the way of capacity or accuracy. Particularly given how pistols are used in the .mil, i.e. carried a lot, shot for blood very rarely. No. You misunderstand me. The countries that issued smaller pistols didn't do so to fight the enemy. An insolent conscript is likely to be at arms length. And from what we've seen, you sacrifice a lot more than most people think. Sight radius matters when you are injured, soaring on adrenaline, and fighting for your life. Conventional Army is one thing, but for those of us that rely on pistols, the pistol matters very much. For those that don't, they don't shoot enough to be effective anyway. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 1:33:08 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No. You misunderstand me. The countries that issued smaller pistols didn't do so to fight the enemy. An insolent conscript is likely to be at arms length. And from what we've seen, you sacrifice a lot more than most people think. Sight radius matters when you are injured, soaring on adrenaline, and fighting for your life. Conventional Army is one thing, but for those of us that rely on pistols, the pistol matters very much. For those that don't, they don't shoot enough to be effective anyway. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If this program results in a Glock 19 sized M&P, I fully support the expenditure. DAMN THE COST! Americans traditionally fielded a full size handgun, because the role of the pistol was seen as a "Fighting Handgun." Europeans typically fielded a badge of office handgun, for shooting conscripts who disobeyed orders. I'd prefer to retain the full size handgun. Maybe the Europellet shooters have something right? A mid-size handgun, like the M11 or my much lusted after G19 sized M&P shaves a few ounces off of the load while not sacrificing too much in the way of capacity or accuracy. Particularly given how pistols are used in the .mil, i.e. carried a lot, shot for blood very rarely. No. You misunderstand me. The countries that issued smaller pistols didn't do so to fight the enemy. An insolent conscript is likely to be at arms length. And from what we've seen, you sacrifice a lot more than most people think. Sight radius matters when you are injured, soaring on adrenaline, and fighting for your life. Conventional Army is one thing, but for those of us that rely on pistols, the pistol matters very much. For those that don't, they don't shoot enough to be effective anyway. To be sure, I am arguing the requirement for a general issue side arm, not as a primary weapon or even a back up for special people doing special things. I am unfamiliar with your application. My understanding of the pistol in war comes from my limited service in Somalia and a chapter entitled "The pistol in war" in McBride's "A Rifleman Went to War". He was a big advocate of the .45, and stated that during all of his time in the trenches he shot a lot of ammunition at cans and rats, but only three times for blood, and the distances involved were across a room/bunker/trench. So, my calculus revolves around "carried a lot, used in close quarters when my rifle goes down/runs dry/or I'm tangled" scenarios. EDIT: But what I really want is an infusion of R&D money into S&W to downsize the M&P a bit.
EDIT AGAIN: GODDAMIT! I must've lent my copy to someone. Now I can't find it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 1:44:08 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No. You misunderstand me. The countries that issued smaller pistols didn't do so to fight the enemy. An insolent conscript is likely to be at arms length. And from what we've seen, you sacrifice a lot more than most people think. Sight radius matters when you are injured, soaring on adrenaline, and fighting for your life. Conventional Army is one thing, but for those of us that rely on pistols, the pistol matters very much. For those that don't, they don't shoot enough to be effective anyway. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If this program results in a Glock 19 sized M&P, I fully support the expenditure. DAMN THE COST! Americans traditionally fielded a full size handgun, because the role of the pistol was seen as a "Fighting Handgun." Europeans typically fielded a badge of office handgun, for shooting conscripts who disobeyed orders. I'd prefer to retain the full size handgun. Maybe the Europellet shooters have something right? A mid-size handgun, like the M11 or my much lusted after G19 sized M&P shaves a few ounces off of the load while not sacrificing too much in the way of capacity or accuracy. Particularly given how pistols are used in the .mil, i.e. carried a lot, shot for blood very rarely. No. You misunderstand me. The countries that issued smaller pistols didn't do so to fight the enemy. An insolent conscript is likely to be at arms length. And from what we've seen, you sacrifice a lot more than most people think. Sight radius matters when you are injured, soaring on adrenaline, and fighting for your life. Conventional Army is one thing, but for those of us that rely on pistols, the pistol matters very much. For those that don't, they don't shoot enough to be effective anyway. And therein lies the problem with selecting a single service pistol. Unfortunately the general issue pistol requires a different set of priorities, "don't accidentaly kill yourself/others with this thing" and "get everyone qualified" being well above combat effectiveness. Where the military has been the last few years, with conventional forces getting M9's, while many others have SIG's and Glocks, is likely the solution, but one I doubt will ever become official policy lest anyone get their feelings hurt. ETA: It does lend credence to adopting a platform with multiple safety/control options, such as the H&K. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 1:46:00 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
To be sure, I am arguing the requirement for a general issue side arm, not as a primary weapon or even a back up for special people doing special things. I am unfamiliar with your application. My understanding of the pistol in war comes from my limited service in Somalia and a chapter entitled "The pistol in war" in McBride's "A Rifleman Went to War". He was a big advocate of the .45, and stated that during all of his time in the trenches he shot a lot of ammunition at cans and rats, but only three times for blood, and the distances involved were across a room/bunker/trench. So, my calculus revolves around "carried a lot, used in close quarters when my rifle goes down/runs dry/or I'm tangled" scenarios. EDIT: But what I really want is an infusion of R&D money into S&W to downsize the M&P a bit.
EDIT AGAIN: GODDAMIT! I must've lent my copy to someone. Now I can't find it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If this program results in a Glock 19 sized M&P, I fully support the expenditure. DAMN THE COST! Americans traditionally fielded a full size handgun, because the role of the pistol was seen as a "Fighting Handgun." Europeans typically fielded a badge of office handgun, for shooting conscripts who disobeyed orders. I'd prefer to retain the full size handgun. Maybe the Europellet shooters have something right? A mid-size handgun, like the M11 or my much lusted after G19 sized M&P shaves a few ounces off of the load while not sacrificing too much in the way of capacity or accuracy. Particularly given how pistols are used in the .mil, i.e. carried a lot, shot for blood very rarely. No. You misunderstand me. The countries that issued smaller pistols didn't do so to fight the enemy. An insolent conscript is likely to be at arms length. And from what we've seen, you sacrifice a lot more than most people think. Sight radius matters when you are injured, soaring on adrenaline, and fighting for your life. Conventional Army is one thing, but for those of us that rely on pistols, the pistol matters very much. For those that don't, they don't shoot enough to be effective anyway. To be sure, I am arguing the requirement for a general issue side arm, not as a primary weapon or even a back up for special people doing special things. I am unfamiliar with your application. My understanding of the pistol in war comes from my limited service in Somalia and a chapter entitled "The pistol in war" in McBride's "A Rifleman Went to War". He was a big advocate of the .45, and stated that during all of his time in the trenches he shot a lot of ammunition at cans and rats, but only three times for blood, and the distances involved were across a room/bunker/trench. So, my calculus revolves around "carried a lot, used in close quarters when my rifle goes down/runs dry/or I'm tangled" scenarios. EDIT: But what I really want is an infusion of R&D money into S&W to downsize the M&P a bit.
EDIT AGAIN: GODDAMIT! I must've lent my copy to someone. Now I can't find it. Pistols aren't issued widely, they're only issued to people with some seniority or "special" types. There isn't really such a thing as a general issue sidearm, as in a sidearm to be issued to everyone. Lots of service members have never even qualed on a pistol. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 2:29:25 PM EDT
[#20]
I think framing the story as "M9 replacement" is only pay if the story.
Really, this program is looking to consolidate and replace the mishmash of pistols currently fielded across the Army. M9s, M9a1s, M11s, P226s, 1911s, G19s, and G17s are currently in service, and I'm sure there are some I missed. This was the same goal that led to the adoption of the M16; replacement and consolidation of the M1, M1 carbine, M1, M3, and the thompson. With the M9 aging and needing wholesale replacement/overhaul along with consolidation of the various issue sidearms it makes sense to just field something new and more capable. We've been making an effort to strip down every ounce from every piece of gear it makes sense to do so with our sidearms as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 4:24:57 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I guess not being in the military I don't understand, but how often does one use the M9 to shoot terrorist in the face? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
why is this not seen as a waste of money? combat rifle, sure spend dat money. Side arm?  The Army just decided last year to keep the M4. The competition wasn't a good enough of improvement to justify the cost of switching. 40 years of spare parts and maintenance depot personnel trained in the fine details of the M16 series is a hell of an advantage to throw away for an incremental improvement. The M9 has been underwhelming since day one. The original RFP was flawed and it went downhill from there. I guess not being in the military I don't understand, but how often does one use the M9 to shoot terrorist in the face? The problem isn't the frequency, it's the immediacy of those few times a soldier needs to use it. The grip, trigger reach and decocker are too far away for most people to operate comfortably. The open top slide does the user no favors in field conditions either. The gun is just too damn big for a 15rd 9mm. Which was odd in 1985 and is poor in 2014. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 4:39:32 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The problem isn't the frequency, it's the immediacy of those few times a soldier needs to use it. The grip, trigger reach and decocker are too far away for most people to operate comfortably. The open top slide does the user no favors in field conditions either. The gun is just too damn big for a 15rd 9mm. Which was odd in 1985 and is poor in 2014. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
why is this not seen as a waste of money? combat rifle, sure spend dat money. Side arm? The Army just decided last year to keep the M4. The competition wasn't a good enough of improvement to justify the cost of switching. 40 years of spare parts and maintenance depot personnel trained in the fine details of the M16 series is a hell of an advantage to throw away for an incremental improvement. The M9 has been underwhelming since day one. The original RFP was flawed and it went downhill from there. I guess not being in the military I don't understand, but how often does one use the M9 to shoot terrorist in the face? The problem isn't the frequency, it's the immediacy of those few times a soldier needs to use it. The grip, trigger reach and decocker are too far away for most people to operate comfortably. The open top slide does the user no favors in field conditions either. The gun is just too damn big for a 15rd 9mm. Which was odd in 1985 and is poor in 2014. I wear a size medium glove and have zero issues running an M9, and have had no reliability issues at all. As with the SAW and its reputed problems, it's usually an issue of poor maintenence, not poor design. And of course the shooters, I knew people who latched onto the "too big" argument to explain why they didn't qual expert. Not saying that's you but it's a crutch argument I've seen bad pistol shooters use to explain why they shoot like crap. It's easier to blame the pistol than it is to learn how to shoot, and they'd have sucked with anything you handed them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 4:43:55 PM EDT
[#23]
Just give these to everybody. Fuck it. Throw in some uncle mikes drop leg holsters with them.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 5:00:59 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I wear a size medium glove and have zero issues running an M9, and have had no reliability issues at all. As with the SAW and its reputed issues, it's usually an issue of poor maintenence, not poor design. I'm a medium-regular sized uniform user with small-medium hands. I was originally issued a 1911 and taught how to how a pistol properly. I couldn't reach the M9 trigger without shifting my grip and the safety is a joke. The only positive soldiers commented on was that the M9 was new. Everyone was amazed at how chunky it was compared to the 1911. I was also issued a brand new M249 in 1987. No more trying to use a frigging M16A1 as a SAW!  The Marines really fucked up going with the ridiculous IAR recently.
The 249 ran like a clock and everyone loved to shoot them, a lot. This is why they are wore out. The Army shoots them far more then was originally planned when the 249 was adopted. There was nothing wrong with the SAW that replacing it when it wore out wouldn't fix. There is no comparison between the M9 and the M249. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 5:02:57 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just give these to everybody. Fuck it. Throw in some uncle mikes drop leg holsters with them. http://www.ebairsoft.com/images/big/AABB%20HR%20style%20GLOCK%20Carbine%20Conversion%20Kit%20%20DE.jpg Gee-rose. Just give everyone a mk18. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 5:11:41 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm a medium-regular sized uniform user with small-medium hands. I was originally issued a 1911 and taught how to how a pistol properly. I couldn't reach the M9 trigger without shifting my grip and the safety is a joke. The only positive soldiers commented on was that the M9 was new. Everyone was amazed at how chunky it was compared to the 1911. I was also issued a brand new M249 in 1987. No more trying to use a frigging M16A1 as a SAW! The Marines really fucked up going with the ridiculous IAR recently.
The 249 ran like a clock and everyone loved to shoot them, a lot. This is why they are wore out. The Army shoots them far more then was originally planned when the 249 was adopted. There was nothing wrong with the SAW that replacing it when it wore out wouldn't fix. There is no comparison between the M9 and the M249. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I wear a size medium glove and have zero issues running an M9, and have had no reliability issues at all. As with the SAW and its reputed issues, it's usually an issue of poor maintenence, not poor design. I'm a medium-regular sized uniform user with small-medium hands. I was originally issued a 1911 and taught how to how a pistol properly. I couldn't reach the M9 trigger without shifting my grip and the safety is a joke. The only positive soldiers commented on was that the M9 was new. Everyone was amazed at how chunky it was compared to the 1911. I was also issued a brand new M249 in 1987. No more trying to use a frigging M16A1 as a SAW! The Marines really fucked up going with the ridiculous IAR recently.
The 249 ran like a clock and everyone loved to shoot them, a lot. This is why they are wore out. The Army shoots them far more then was originally planned when the 249 was adopted. There was nothing wrong with the SAW that replacing it when it wore out wouldn't fix. There is no comparison between the M9 and the M249. How do you deactivate the safety? I've observed people try to turn it off like they're flicking marbles and it doesn't work, if you push with the pad of your thumb it flips off easily. I can't relate to the trigger reach problem you relate, I noticed no such problem. Easy reach with the pad of the distal bone/joint, where/how do you try to lay your finger on the trigger? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 5:20:50 PM EDT
[#27]
S&W should bring back the 3rd gen semiautomatics, new and improved.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 5:23:51 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How do you deactivate the safety? I've observed people try to turn it off like they're flicking marbles and it doesn't work, if you push with the pad of your thumb it flips off easily. I can't relate to the trigger reach problem you relate, I noticed no such problem. Easy reach with the pad of the distal bone/joint, where/how do you try to lay your finger on the trigger? My thumb simply wouldn't reach up to the safety without shifting my grip. Decocking was a two handed affair. In regards to the trigger. Correctly putting the backstrap of the M9 in the center of the web of my hand meant that the trigger was just barely pullable by the last 1/2 of my finger. This did nothing good for proper, accurate shooting of the first DA shot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 5:24:40 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Americans traditionally fielded a full size handgun, because the role of the pistol was seen as a "Fighting Handgun." Europeans typically fielded a badge of office handgun, for shooting conscripts who disobeyed orders. I'd prefer to retain the full size handgun. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If this program results in a Glock 19 sized M&P, I fully support the expenditure. DAMN THE COST! Americans traditionally fielded a full size handgun, because the role of the pistol was seen as a "Fighting Handgun." Europeans typically fielded a badge of office handgun, for shooting conscripts who disobeyed orders. I'd prefer to retain the full size handgun. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 5:26:27 PM EDT
[#30]
But Smith and Wessons are so.....ugly. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 5:28:38 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But Smith and Wessons are so.....ugly. Compared to what? All the polymer guns lack beauty. That's not what they're for. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 5:29:43 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Compared to what? All the polymer guns lack beauty. That's not what they're for. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
But Smith and Wessons are so.....ugly. Compared to what? All the polymer guns lack beauty. That's not what they're for. A gun's beauty is a function of utility. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 5:31:11 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Americans traditionally fielded a full size handgun, because the role of the pistol was seen as a "Fighting Handgun." Europeans typically fielded a badge of office handgun, for shooting conscripts who disobeyed orders. I'd prefer to retain the full size handgun. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If this program results in a Glock 19 sized M&P, I fully support the expenditure. DAMN THE COST! Americans traditionally fielded a full size handgun, because the role of the pistol was seen as a "Fighting Handgun." Europeans typically fielded a badge of office handgun, for shooting conscripts who disobeyed orders. I'd prefer to retain the full size handgun. For what you're getting in a 9mm, anything bigger than a Glock 19 is an oversized, overweight travesty. And, I'd submit that your idea of a "Fighting Handgun" is fundamentally flawed; the last time we had or really needed one of those, it was the Colt M1911, which you'll remember, was designed with use by the cavalry in mind. We haven't had a need for a primary-arm pistol since the days of the mounted charge went away, and I'll submit to you that designing with that intent for general issue is a mistake. The handgun is more of a backup, and is carried in addition to things like the M4 or other weapon. In that role, you can't justify the size/mass of something like a Beretta M9, but you can damn sure make room for something like a Glock 19. Thus, if all you're going to issue is a 9mm, go with the Glock 19- size range of pistol. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 5:43:11 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For what you're getting in a 9mm, anything bigger than a Glock 19 is an oversized, overweight travesty. And, I'd submit that your idea of a "Fighting Handgun" is fundamentally flawed; the last time we had or really needed one of those, it was the Colt M1911, which you'll remember, was designed with use by the cavalry in mind. We haven't had a need for a primary-arm pistol since the days of the mounted charge went away, and I'll submit to you that designing with that intent for general issue is a mistake. The handgun is more of a backup, and is carried in addition to things like the M4 or other weapon. In that role, you can't justify the size/mass of something like a Beretta M9, but you can damn sure make room for something like a Glock 19. Thus, if all you're going to issue is a 9mm, go with the Glock 19- size range of pistol. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If this program results in a Glock 19 sized M&P, I fully support the expenditure. DAMN THE COST! Americans traditionally fielded a full size handgun, because the role of the pistol was seen as a "Fighting Handgun." Europeans typically fielded a badge of office handgun, for shooting conscripts who disobeyed orders. I'd prefer to retain the full size handgun. For what you're getting in a 9mm, anything bigger than a Glock 19 is an oversized, overweight travesty. And, I'd submit that your idea of a "Fighting Handgun" is fundamentally flawed; the last time we had or really needed one of those, it was the Colt M1911, which you'll remember, was designed with use by the cavalry in mind. We haven't had a need for a primary-arm pistol since the days of the mounted charge went away, and I'll submit to you that designing with that intent for general issue is a mistake. The handgun is more of a backup, and is carried in addition to things like the M4 or other weapon. In that role, you can't justify the size/mass of something like a Beretta M9, but you can damn sure make room for something like a Glock 19. Thus, if all you're going to issue is a 9mm, go with the Glock 19- size range of pistol. I have to differ that a g19 sized gun is the best solution. Like I said earlier, we've come to understand that under stress, every advantage counts. I've fought with a handgun, I'm interested in how my thinking is flawed. People do indeed rely on them still. They are not a "primary arm pistol", they are a back up. For people who are tasked and trained with working up close in small units, the pistol is of some importance. I'd be interested in seeing if you even understand why we train pistol transition vs mag change, and when it should be applied. We do carry a full size pistol. The g19 is available, but was intended to be used primarily by those who require concealment. There are 6 19s available on my ODA at this time, yet only three people carry one, instead opting for a full size handgun as a back up, mostly for the reasons I spoke of earlier. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 5:52:41 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berry_Amendment We shouldn't have foreign equipment unless there is no other option. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I truly hope that they adopt an American brand this time. Our troops should not have foreign rifles or pistols. what? snip prolly more i cant remember.... ALL FOREIGN!!!!!! FOR FUCK'S SAKE, WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE???? We shouldn't have foreign equipment unless there is no other option. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 6:00:26 PM EDT
[#36]
The Army is always looking for a "better" sidearm and never does shit.
They will stick with the Beretta. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 6:05:44 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Army is always looking for a "better" sidearm and never does shit. They will stick with the Beretta. Probably. I can see an Army wide official switch to the M9a1 with rail. They aren't going to "consolidate" anything. People that use anything different are going to keep using what they want, and it may be something different next week. The wild card? A former tanker who has never seen combat will usher in a Hi-point .45 in mint green, and in 5 years or so we'll push through a hurried trial and switch it to something, anything. Oh, and new sideburn and tattoo regs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 6:06:26 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
 Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Or they could quit dickin' around, and buy a bunch of M11/ P229 G19, Which are already NSN numbered, in production, and the manuals and and armory infrastructure is already in place. Funny guy !!! the SIG is SUPERIOR to the glock !!!!!!!! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 6:13:01 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But if they don't spend the development money then it will get cut from next year's budget. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Or they could quit dickin' around, and buy a bunch of M11/ P229, Which are already NSN numbered, in production, and the manuals and and armory infrastructure is already in place. But if they don't spend the development money then it will get cut from next year's budget. Next-level spend-ex. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 6:13:27 PM EDT
[#40]
Why are they fucking around with useless shit all the time? It's a damn pistol. Eenie meenie miny moe go with that fucker. Same shit with the uniform derp.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 6:18:11 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why are they fucking around with useless shit all the time? It's a damn pistol. Eenie meenie miny moe go with that fucker. Same shit with the uniform derp. Why do we have more than double the general officers than we did in WW2, when the army is less than half the size? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 6:28:08 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why do we have more than double the general officers than we did in WW2, when the army is less than half the size? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Why are they fucking around with useless shit all the time? It's a damn pistol. Eenie meenie miny moe go with that fucker. Same shit with the uniform derp. Why do we have more than double the general officers than we did in WW2, when the army is less than half the size? Because America's military has become an avenue for social experimentation and wealth redistribution. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 6:30:03 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Because America's military has become an avenue for social experimentation and wealth redistribution. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why are they fucking around with useless shit all the time? It's a damn pistol. Eenie meenie miny moe go with that fucker. Same shit with the uniform derp. Why do we have more than double the general officers than we did in WW2, when the army is less than half the size? Because America's military has become an avenue for social experimentation and wealth redistribution. Then where the fuck is my cut? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 6:31:13 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Then where the fuck is my cut? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why are they fucking around with useless shit all the time? It's a damn pistol. Eenie meenie miny moe go with that fucker. Same shit with the uniform derp. Why do we have more than double the general officers than we did in WW2, when the army is less than half the size? Because America's military has become an avenue for social experimentation and wealth redistribution. Then where the fuck is my cut? No, no, no, you don't get any, you actually do your job, they don't need to pay you off. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 6:41:59 PM EDT
[#45]
Hah
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 6:43:17 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, no, no, you don't get any, you actually do your job, they don't need to pay you off. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why are they fucking around with useless shit all the time? It's a damn pistol. Eenie meenie miny moe go with that fucker. Same shit with the uniform derp. Why do we have more than double the general officers than we did in WW2, when the army is less than half the size? Because America's military has become an avenue for social experimentation and wealth redistribution. Then where the fuck is my cut? No, no, no, you don't get any, you actually do your job, they don't need to pay you off. I was doing it wrong. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 6:45:19 PM EDT
[#47]
PPQ trigger in an M&P would be tits.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 6:46:08 PM EDT
[#48]
Military guys, tell me, you think Powerpoint will be involved with the decision making process?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 6:47:19 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
PPQ trigger in an M&P would be tits. Whatever it is will probably get a stock trigger the likes of which would make most pistol shooters puke, and if unauthorized personnel swap it or modify it, they'll go to jail if caught. ETA: Look up the acceptable upper and lower pull weights of the SA/DA modes on the M9. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2014 6:53:57 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Military guys, tell me, you think Powerpoint will be involved with the decision making process? They'll just be issued MS Office and a toughbook and be expected to use that to kill the enemy. Good military men will try to make power points to explain why the enemy is bad and should surrender and the pipe hitters will beat the enemy to death with the toughbooks. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
