User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/18/2015 1:28:01 PM EDT
[#1]
Source?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/18/2015 1:53:49 PM EDT
[#2]
If it's true.... Glock has a spot
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/18/2015 4:15:31 PM EDT
[#3]
I knew this for a while but go to Military.Com and read Matthew Cox's article. The Army plans to have a replacement by 2018. I think that is a little aggressive given how the federal government works. But the Army is the grand puba of infantry weapons procurement. When they speak the other services listen. Personally I give the M9 another 10 years before a replacement is chosen.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/18/2015 4:21:43 PM EDT
[#4]
Colt needs a government contract!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/18/2015 4:22:54 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Colt needs a government contract! No they don't |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/18/2015 4:26:01 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No they don't Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Colt needs a government contract! No they don't 
I see what you did there, but I think the politicians (congresscritters & defense) might disagree with you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/18/2015 4:26:19 PM EDT
[#7]
Not going to happen any time soon. They have been talking about a replacement for a long time and it never happens. More often than not these attempts are just a jobs program for staff officers that need bullet points for promotion.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/18/2015 4:34:02 PM EDT
[#8]
Totally agree with you PackinHeavy. The government is a slow bohimot.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/18/2015 4:38:33 PM EDT
[#9]
Colt 1911
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/18/2015 4:49:37 PM EDT
[#10]
ITALIAN! There is no E in the word!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/18/2015 9:35:15 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I knew this for a while but go to Military.Com and read Matthew Cox's article. The Army plans to have a replacement by 2018. I think that is a little aggressive given how the federal government works. But the Army is the grand puba of infantry weapons procurement. When they speak the other services listen. Personally I give the M9 another 10 years before a replacement is chosen. Military.com is a shit source and about as accurate as Air Force/Army/Navy/Marine Times. The M9 isn't going anywhere for awhile considering how unimportant handguns are to the DoD. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/18/2015 11:21:26 PM EDT
[#12]
SecurityForcesmember,
I live in the NOVA area and through open sources and through firends, the Army has been wanting a replacement for a while. After all the testing in the 80's, the Army didn't put the M9 through an intense desert environment testing. The M9's open top design is no big deal in wooodland environments but the design has problems in the talcum sand evironment of the Iraq desert. Just like CMI M9 Gen 1 mag debacle. It will be interesting to see what pistol manufacturers will submit. Smith and Weeson is planning to submit a version of the M and P pistol. Beretta submitted the M9A3, which was rejected by the Army. Another big question mark is the caliber to be chosen. Will 40 S&W become the new round of choice or will 357 Sig take over? Either way it will be interesting to see the outcome, whenever it may happen. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/19/2015 7:37:09 AM EDT
[#13]
The only option is 9mm. If someone even mentions .40 or .357 Sig you should ignore pretty much anything they say on the subject of an M9 replacement.
Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/19/2015 8:13:48 AM EDT
[#14]
military budget tell me all this bullshit is on hold. Beretta M9 will be around for a while.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/19/2015 3:59:05 PM EDT
[#15]
There is no way in hell .40 cal or .357 Sig is going to be adopted as a pistol caliber for the Army. Never mind the NATO standard is 9mm, do you really think they are going to spend more money on .40 or especially .357 Sig? All that money to spend on a puny pistol with the current budget crisis?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/19/2015 4:13:33 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
SecurityForcesmember, I live in the NOVA area and through open sources and through firends, the Army has been wanting a replacement for a while. After all the testing in the 80's, the Army didn't put the M9 through an intense desert environment testing. The M9's open top design is no big deal in wooodland environments but the design has problems in the talcum sand evironment of the Iraq desert. Just like CMI M9 Gen 1 mag debacle. It will be interesting to see what pistol manufacturers will submit. Smith and Weeson is planning to submit a version of the M and P pistol. Beretta submitted the M9A3, which was rejected by the Army. Another big question mark is the caliber to be chosen. Will 40 S&W become the new round of choice or will 357 Sig take over? Either way it will be interesting to see the outcome, whenever it may happen. The beretta 92 design does just fine in the desert with quality mags. The fact that the slide is open to allow dirt in is true, but the fact it's open also allows dirt out as well. The CMI mag debacle was due to the .gov specified parkerizing which stopped the follower from moving when sand got involved. That's no fault of the pistol, it ran fine with the original beretta mags. A lot of soldiers and marines in the sandbox chose wisely to bring mec gar 18 rd mags with them rather than use the CMI issued mags. The M9A3 was rejected because it was a submission by beretta so that the army would cancel the modular handgun program entirely. They could have adopted the M9A3 and slowly converted M9's over time as the parts wore out to the M9A3 spec to save the taxpayer millions. The army wants a new pistol with a polymer frame so it's a lot cheaper over the long run in maintenance. 40 or 357 sig has not a snowballs chance in hell of being adopted. 9mm is the only option as it is nato approved. I doubt that anything will come from the modular handgun system. There's just not enough of an advantage over the beretta design to justify billions of dollars to adopt a new pistol. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/19/2015 5:49:56 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
SecurityForcesmember, I live in the NOVA area and through open sources and through firends, the Army has been wanting a replacement for a while. After all the testing in the 80's, the Army didn't put the M9 through an intense desert environment testing. The M9's open top design is no big deal in wooodland environments but the design has problems in the talcum sand evironment of the Iraq desert. Just like CMI M9 Gen 1 mag debacle. It will be interesting to see what pistol manufacturers will submit. Smith and Weeson is planning to submit a version of the M and P pistol. Beretta submitted the M9A3, which was rejected by the Army. Another big question mark is the caliber to be chosen. Will 40 S&W become the new round of choice or will 357 Sig take over? Either way it will be interesting to see the outcome, whenever it may happen. Imteresting. Where do these friends work? What is it they do? I remember Iraq very, very well and I know how the M9 performs in that environment. We threw out our shitty CM mags and procured beretta mags, zero problems. Considering the M9's mostly get taken to and from the chow hall and not much else I'll say again the gun isn't going anywhere. It's a read echelon and military police duty weapon, pretty low on the totum pole of war fighting. Some infantry types get them as a back up and the Spec Ops guys already have choices for a sidearm so getting a new pistol is very unlikely. Whoever is feeding you this information is woefully uneducated on this specific topic. The M9 as a general issue weapon is fine, it does what's needed and the caliber thing is nuts. The 9MM is the NATO standard, we will follow that standard until NATO decides as a group to change calibers. Btw, .357 Sig? Really? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/19/2015 9:20:21 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
SecurityForcesmember, I live in the NOVA area and through open sources and through firends, the Army has been wanting a replacement for a while. After all the testing in the 80's, the Army didn't put the M9 through an intense desert environment testing. The M9's open top design is no big deal in wooodland environments but the design has problems in the talcum sand evironment of the Iraq desert. Just like CMI M9 Gen 1 mag debacle. It will be interesting to see what pistol manufacturers will submit. Smith and Weeson is planning to submit a version of the M and P pistol. Beretta submitted the M9A3, which was rejected by the Army. Another big question mark is the caliber to be chosen. Will 40 S&W become the new round of choice or will 357 Sig take over? Either way it will be interesting to see the outcome, whenever it may happen. The M9A3 wasn't a MHS entrant. It was a Beretta end-run to try to get the MHS shelved by modernizing the M9. For MHS Beretta will most likely be entering their APX, which was announced but not released yet. Interesting gun. 
SIG will submit the P320 
HK the VP9 Glck will submit a... well, Glock (most likely with a thumb safety akin to the Cominolli aftermarket safety) 
S&W will partner with General Dynamics to submit the M&P, most likely with some upgrades. As an FYI, the Draft RFP posted on SSD only references an "external safety", but there's no mention about a manual safety. So who knows exactly what they'll be wanting. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/19/2015 9:25:34 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The beretta 92 design does just fine in the desert with quality mags. The fact that the slide is open to allow dirt in is true, but the fact it's open also allows dirt out as well. The CMI mag debacle was due to the .gov specified parkerizing which stopped the follower from moving when sand got involved. That's no fault of the pistol, it ran fine with the original beretta mags. A lot of soldiers and marines in the sandbox chose wisely to bring mec gar 18 rd mags with them rather than use the CMI issued mags. The M9A3 was rejected because it was a submission by beretta so that the army would cancel the modular handgun program entirely. They could have adopted the M9A3 and slowly converted M9's over time as the parts wore out to the M9A3 spec to save the taxpayer millions. The army wants a new pistol with a polymer frame so it's a lot cheaper over the long run in maintenance. 40 or 357 sig has not a snowballs chance in hell of being adopted. 9mm is the only option as it is nato approved. I doubt that anything will come from the modular handgun system. There's just not enough of an advantage over the beretta design to justify billions of dollars to adopt a new pistol. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
SecurityForcesmember, I live in the NOVA area and through open sources and through firends, the Army has been wanting a replacement for a while. After all the testing in the 80's, the Army didn't put the M9 through an intense desert environment testing. The M9's open top design is no big deal in wooodland environments but the design has problems in the talcum sand evironment of the Iraq desert. Just like CMI M9 Gen 1 mag debacle. It will be interesting to see what pistol manufacturers will submit. Smith and Weeson is planning to submit a version of the M and P pistol. Beretta submitted the M9A3, which was rejected by the Army. Another big question mark is the caliber to be chosen. Will 40 S&W become the new round of choice or will 357 Sig take over? Either way it will be interesting to see the outcome, whenever it may happen. The beretta 92 design does just fine in the desert with quality mags. The fact that the slide is open to allow dirt in is true, but the fact it's open also allows dirt out as well. The CMI mag debacle was due to the .gov specified parkerizing which stopped the follower from moving when sand got involved. That's no fault of the pistol, it ran fine with the original beretta mags. A lot of soldiers and marines in the sandbox chose wisely to bring mec gar 18 rd mags with them rather than use the CMI issued mags. The M9A3 was rejected because it was a submission by beretta so that the army would cancel the modular handgun program entirely. They could have adopted the M9A3 and slowly converted M9's over time as the parts wore out to the M9A3 spec to save the taxpayer millions. The army wants a new pistol with a polymer frame so it's a lot cheaper over the long run in maintenance. 40 or 357 sig has not a snowballs chance in hell of being adopted. 9mm is the only option as it is nato approved. I doubt that anything will come from the modular handgun system. There's just not enough of an advantage over the beretta design to justify billions of dollars to adopt a new pistol. While typically I'd agree, from all accounts the M9 fleet is in need of a total overhaul and replacement. It's hardly beyond the realm of possibility that the Army i pushing for the replacement now so they can replace a 30 year old weapon with an entirely new gun for about the same cost. Otherwise in another 30 years they have a 60 year old gun in service instead of a 30 year old gun. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/19/2015 9:26:21 PM EDT
[#20]
I read the same article earlier today. It's no different than what showed up on different blogs or in the news 3-4 months ago. And no different than what pops up once or twice every single year. I'm sure the M9 will be replaced sometime. But it won't be for many years, IMO. The military/Army will either keep the M9 completely. Or supplement the M9 with the M9A3. The M9A3 would be a lot cheaper than an all new system. And it addresses most of the "issues'' brought up with the M9.
As for the caliber debate. All handgun calibers suck. Anything, 9mm (or above just to limit things some). It's all about shot placement. .40 or .45 isn't some magical, one shot kill bullet. But unless NATO goes for some other caliber. No other caliber will be widely adopted. Except for 9mm. Of course the US military (which pays for the vast majority of NATO) could tell all the other members to pound sand and deal with us going with a new handgun caliber. But that's unlikely to happen. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/19/2015 9:28:33 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I read the same article earlier today. It's no different than what showed up on different blogs or in the news 3-4 months ago. And no different than what pops up once or twice every single year. I'm sure the M9 will be replaced sometime. But it won't be for many years, IMO. The military/Army will either keep the M9 completely. Or supplement the M9 with the M9A3. The M9A3 would be a lot cheaper than an all new system. And it addresses most of the "issues'' brought up with the M9. As for the caliber debate. All handgun calibers suck. Anything, 9mm (or above just to limit things some). It's all about shot placement. .40 or .45 isn't some magical, one shot kill bullet. But unless NATO goes for some other caliber. No other caliber will be widely adopted. Except for 9mm. Of course the US military (which pays for the vast majority of NATO) could tell all the other members to pound sand and deal with us going with a new handgun caliber. But that's unlikely to happen. Which article? The military.com one? Or the Soldier Systems Daily article that links a draft RFP? While there's been rumors and announcements for years on and off, this is the first time I've seen an actual RFP with it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/19/2015 9:29:17 PM EDT
[#22]
It must be Friday.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/19/2015 11:11:41 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I read the same article earlier today. It's no different than what showed up on different blogs or in the news 3-4 months ago. And no different than what pops up once or twice every single year. I'm sure the M9 will be replaced sometime. But it won't be for many years, IMO. The military/Army will either keep the M9 completely. Or supplement the M9 with the M9A3. The M9A3 would be a lot cheaper than an all new system. And it addresses most of the "issues'' brought up with the M9. As for the caliber debate. All handgun calibers suck. Anything, 9mm (or above just to limit things some). It's all about shot placement. .40 or .45 isn't some magical, one shot kill bullet. But unless NATO goes for some other caliber. No other caliber will be widely adopted. Except for 9mm. Of course the US military (which pays for the vast majority of NATO) could tell all the other members to pound sand and deal with us going with a new handgun caliber. But that's unlikely to happen. The caliber is going to be 9mm, I don't think that will ever change. It just doesn't make sense to adopt a caliber that cannot be used jointly by our allies. However, I don't think 9mm is the best option. I personally believe when you are limited to FMJ, .45 is the only option for stopping power. A big heavy bullet making a large hole is something I would want way over high capacity. This is another can of worms, so I don't want to get into it, it's just what I feel comfortable with. If our military could carry hollow points (not going to happen), I would want them to keep the 9mm (not going to change). |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/20/2015 12:56:20 PM EDT
[#24]
The new round of trials so far has been a joke. They do this every few years, it gives the generals something to add to their resume when they retire and go to work with contractors who submitted designs.
They aren't replacing the Beretta only to go to another 9mm, there just isn't a need or funds to replace the entire infrastructure that supports it. And if you think they are going to buck the 9mm NATO spec, which the US came up with in the first place, you need to look at a catalog of bridges for sale. Trails that may go somewhere are rifle/MG trials, and the LSAT has already produced a design that appears to be slated for adoption. The pistol is so underutilized that funding a replacement is absurd. If the military actually wanted to address poor pistol performance they would actually train people to use them, which they currently don't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/20/2015 1:30:41 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
SecurityForcesmember, I live in the NOVA area and through open sources and through firends, the Army has been wanting a replacement for a while. After all the testing in the 80's, the Army didn't put the M9 through an intense desert environment testing. The M9's open top design is no big deal in wooodland environments but the design has problems in the talcum sand evironment of the Iraq desert. Just like CMI M9 Gen 1 mag debacle. It will be interesting to see what pistol manufacturers will submit. Smith and Weeson is planning to submit a version of the M and P pistol. Beretta submitted the M9A3, which was rejected by the Army. Another big question mark is the caliber to be chosen. Will 40 S&W become the new round of choice or will 357 Sig take over? Either way it will be interesting to see the outcome, whenever it may happen.   
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/20/2015 5:03:39 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If it's true.... Glock has a spot Not if it doesn't have an external safety besides the trigger they don't. They will never allow guys to walk around with a chambered round with no external safety. You can make pros/cons of going either way but the military is HUGE on safety with guns. I wonder how the Glock frames will do after being beaten to death for years on end. Sure we know Glocks are tough but I wonder how they will be with the military abusing them every single day. You ever seen what some of these Berettas are like? Beaten to death about sums it up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/20/2015 6:09:45 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not if it doesn't have an external safety besides the trigger they don't. They will never allow guys to walk around with a chambered round with no external safety. You can make pros/cons of going either way but the military is HUGE on safety with guns. I wonder how the Glock frames will do after being beaten to death for years on end. Sure we know Glocks are tough but I wonder how they will be with the military abusing them every single day. You ever seen what some of these Berettas are like? Beaten to death about sums it up. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If it's true.... Glock has a spot Not if it doesn't have an external safety besides the trigger they don't. They will never allow guys to walk around with a chambered round with no external safety. You can make pros/cons of going either way but the military is HUGE on safety with guns. I wonder how the Glock frames will do after being beaten to death for years on end. Sure we know Glocks are tough but I wonder how they will be with the military abusing them every single day. You ever seen what some of these Berettas are like? Beaten to death about sums it up. If the US military wants a manual safety, Glock will provide a manual safety. They have multiple styles of manual safeties they've produced for foreign LE/MIL contracts so just because their main product line doesn't have manual thumb safeties doesn't mean it's impossible for them to. Most likely course of action is the 1911 thumb safety similar to the cominolli I posted on the last page. I'm sure the frames will be fine as Glocks have been in heavy use in military circles for decades. They're also basically costless to replace if need be, unlike the milled aluminum and steel frames that competed last time. Additionally, it all the front runners are plastic polymer framed striker fired pistols, so Glock being polymer is not going to be an issue compared to the rest of the field. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/20/2015 11:06:36 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If the US military wants a manual safety, Glock will provide a manual safety. They have multiple styles of manual safeties they've produced for foreign LE/MIL contracts so just because their main product line doesn't have manual thumb safeties doesn't mean it's impossible for them to. Most likely course of action is the 1911 thumb safety similar to the cominolli I posted on the last page. I'm sure the frames will be fine as Glocks have been in heavy use in military circles for decades. They're also basically costless to replace if need be, unlike the milled aluminum and steel frames that competed last time. Additionally, it all the front runners are plastic polymer framed striker fired pistols, so Glock being polymer is not going to be an issue compared to the rest of the field. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If it's true.... Glock has a spot Not if it doesn't have an external safety besides the trigger they don't. They will never allow guys to walk around with a chambered round with no external safety. You can make pros/cons of going either way but the military is HUGE on safety with guns. I wonder how the Glock frames will do after being beaten to death for years on end. Sure we know Glocks are tough but I wonder how they will be with the military abusing them every single day. You ever seen what some of these Berettas are like? Beaten to death about sums it up. If the US military wants a manual safety, Glock will provide a manual safety. They have multiple styles of manual safeties they've produced for foreign LE/MIL contracts so just because their main product line doesn't have manual thumb safeties doesn't mean it's impossible for them to. Most likely course of action is the 1911 thumb safety similar to the cominolli I posted on the last page. I'm sure the frames will be fine as Glocks have been in heavy use in military circles for decades. They're also basically costless to replace if need be, unlike the milled aluminum and steel frames that competed last time. Additionally, it all the front runners are plastic polymer framed striker fired pistols, so Glock being polymer is not going to be an issue compared to the rest of the field. 
Here's a pic of a british glock 17 made with a thumb safety. The article about it is on thefirearmsblog.com. As for polymer framed pistols holding up, I think that some can get chewed up pretty bad. I doubt that will cause much of an effect on the pistol, but Glock frames are dirt cheap for replacement anyways. There is a lot of other military issued polymer stuff that seems to do OK like peq 15's, pvs-7, and furniture for the m4 and m16 which all seems to do fine for the most part. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2015 8:48:14 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/glock_17_thumb_safety-tfb-tm.jpg Here's a pic of a british glock 17 made with a thumb safety. The article about it is on thefirearmsblog.com. As for polymer framed pistols holding up, I think that some can get chewed up pretty bad. I doubt that will cause much of an effect on the pistol, but Glock frames are dirt cheap for replacement anyways. There is a lot of other military issued polymer stuff that seems to do OK like peq 15's, pvs-7, and furniture for the m4 and m16 which all seems to do fine for the most part. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If it's true.... Glock has a spot Not if it doesn't have an external safety besides the trigger they don't. They will never allow guys to walk around with a chambered round with no external safety. You can make pros/cons of going either way but the military is HUGE on safety with guns. I wonder how the Glock frames will do after being beaten to death for years on end. Sure we know Glocks are tough but I wonder how they will be with the military abusing them every single day. You ever seen what some of these Berettas are like? Beaten to death about sums it up. If the US military wants a manual safety, Glock will provide a manual safety. They have multiple styles of manual safeties they've produced for foreign LE/MIL contracts so just because their main product line doesn't have manual thumb safeties doesn't mean it's impossible for them to. Most likely course of action is the 1911 thumb safety similar to the cominolli I posted on the last page. I'm sure the frames will be fine as Glocks have been in heavy use in military circles for decades. They're also basically costless to replace if need be, unlike the milled aluminum and steel frames that competed last time. Additionally, it all the front runners are plastic polymer framed striker fired pistols, so Glock being polymer is not going to be an issue compared to the rest of the field. http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/glock_17_thumb_safety-tfb-tm.jpg Here's a pic of a british glock 17 made with a thumb safety. The article about it is on thefirearmsblog.com. As for polymer framed pistols holding up, I think that some can get chewed up pretty bad. I doubt that will cause much of an effect on the pistol, but Glock frames are dirt cheap for replacement anyways. There is a lot of other military issued polymer stuff that seems to do OK like peq 15's, pvs-7, and furniture for the m4 and m16 which all seems to do fine for the most part. And here's a picture of an original prototype Glock made for the 1982 Austrian trials. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2015 12:09:35 PM EDT
[#30]
Nice pic TCBA Joe! Wouldn't mind having one in my collection!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2015 8:31:54 PM EDT
[#31]
The military will be carrying the M9 well into the next 10 years and the same with an M4 varient.
You can bet on that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2015 8:34:12 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The military will be carrying the M9 well into the next 10 years and the same with an M4 varient. You can bet on that. Since both the Army and Marines have bought tens of thousands of new ones in the last several years, chances are you are right. |
|
|
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.
