Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 2/20/2006 10:55:29 AM EDT
If you were arming a bunch of guys who are going to operate extensively in the sandy parts of the mid east or north africa, what pistol would be the best? Let's assume it's going to see some seriously rough duty, environment wise. Sandstorms, being dropped, and othewise abused in this nightmare terrain.

Which contemporary pistol would be most reliable, excluding revolvers? I've heard conflicting reports about Glocks and sand, some saying it does very well, others saying it doesn't hold up as well as the competition when put into that environment. What's the verdict?
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 11:01:21 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/20/2006 11:02:23 AM EDT by glock23carry]
Read Bigbore's Glock Torture Test, dude.

Buy a Glock and leave it stock

G
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 11:03:10 AM EDT

Originally Posted By glock23carry:
Read Bigbore's Glock Torture Test, dude.

Buy a Glock and leave it stock

G


+1
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 11:03:18 AM EDT
glock

HK would be my second choice or if i wanted the double strike capability that bad
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 11:04:55 AM EDT
glock
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 11:05:04 AM EDT
sig and hk both carried by the Seals. Seals spend alot of time in the water and sand and have done extensive testing on their weapons.
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 11:11:38 AM EDT
Didn't the BHP and Enfield revolvers do quite well in the north africa campaign of WWII? What about the Walther P38 etc.?
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 11:13:10 AM EDT
USP Tactical.

If we must get back to siting firearms tests...take a look at the Vickers test.

USP Tactical swamped the 1911 and the Glock 21.

If you want an even better pistol for reliability, look at the MK23
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 11:13:11 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/20/2006 11:13:51 AM EDT by glock23carry]

Didn't the BHP and Enfield revolvers do quite well in the north africa campaign of WWII? What about the Walther P38 etc.?


Just think of all the display cases at museums you'd have to break before you found one of those relics with a firing pin!

G
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 11:16:38 AM EDT
Ruger p89
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 11:20:42 AM EDT

Originally Posted By GaryM:
Didn't the BHP and Enfield revolvers do quite well in the north africa campaign of WWII? What about the Walther P38 etc.?


lets get back to the 20th century, better metallurgy and high capacity mags
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 12:40:45 PM EDT
Glock.
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 12:44:19 PM EDT

Originally Posted By glock23carry:
Read Bigbore's Glock Torture Test, dude.

Buy a Glock and leave it stock

G



I'm familiar with that test and it's incredible, but prior to seeing that I had also read an article (which I can't find now) that claimed a Glock and 1911 binded up in sand while a USP kept trucking. The author then went on to claim that the USP had looser tolerances and more space for the sand to go.

I think I'll just have to buy a Glock myself and beat the hell out of it to be absolutely sure.
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 1:08:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Marksman14:
If you want an even better pistol for reliability, look at the MK23



30,000-round endurance firing test with +P ammunition
Tests at extreme temperatures +163,4—F/-58—F
96-h salt spray test mist test
Sand, dust, sludge test
96-h salt spray test
Harshest drop test
Maximum accuracy and precision

The Mark 23 works for me!
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 5:00:28 PM EDT
Great topic! I had the opportunity to listen to a gentleman(former SEAL, yes I use the term gentleman loosely) that was involved in the DOD testing of pistols trying to answer this same question. The testing was very comprehensive, and done under some extreme conditions. Now, I love Glocks, and I figured that they would come out heads and tails above all the others tested. The actual answer blew me away. A 1911 with a steel magazine, and a steel follower actually smoked all the other pistols tested by a good margin, includint the Glock and USP.

The key seemed to lie in the metal follower in the magazine for a large part, and the fact that it is single stacked. The Glock mags did poorly in sand because they are double stack, and the plastic followers get scratched up by the fine sand enough to make spaces for the sand to collect eventually causing a failure. Another issue with the Glock mags was the metal liner in the mags. In the heat it would expand, and make more room for sand, and swell the magazine causing other issues, among them getting stuck in the magwell was one.

I would have never guessed in a 20 minutes that the 1911 would have performed so well. Shows what I know.
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 5:11:08 PM EDT
GLOCK for me. I don't argue with the effectivenes of the MARK23, but it's as big as a truck.
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 5:14:23 PM EDT
Someone post the Glock torture tests. I only have the USP saved. USP TORTURE TEST
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 5:26:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/20/2006 5:27:09 PM EDT by Soljah46]

Originally Posted By MrMurphy:
Someone post the Glock torture tests. I only have the USP saved. USP TORTURE TEST




isn't the link in the second post of this thread the link to the glock tortute tests?


eta


Originally Posted By glock23carry:
Read Bigbore's Glock Torture Test, dude.

Buy a Glock and leave it stock

G

Link Posted: 2/20/2006 5:34:36 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 2IDdoc:
Great topic! I had the opportunity to listen to a gentleman(former SEAL, yes I use the term gentleman loosely) that was involved in the DOD testing of pistols trying to answer this same question. The testing was very comprehensive, and done under some extreme conditions. Now, I love Glocks, and I figured that they would come out heads and tails above all the others tested. The actual answer blew me away. A 1911 with a steel magazine, and a steel follower actually smoked all the other pistols tested by a good margin, includint the Glock and USP.

The key seemed to lie in the metal follower in the magazine for a large part, and the fact that it is single stacked. The Glock mags did poorly in sand because they are double stack, and the plastic followers get scratched up by the fine sand enough to make spaces for the sand to collect eventually causing a failure. Another issue with the Glock mags was the metal liner in the mags. In the heat it would expand, and make more room for sand, and swell the magazine causing other issues, among them getting stuck in the magwell was one.

I would have never guessed in a 20 minutes that the 1911 would have performed so well. Shows what I know.



What 1911 variant ? The problem with 1911's, especially for civilian use, is there are pistols and parts made by a ton of different manufacturers, with differing levels of quality. USP's and Glocks on the other hand are only made by one manufacturer, so there's more consistency in parts and performance. I've heard, generally speaking, that OEM parts/accessories are best for pistols as a rule. With all the combinations of parts a civilian is likely to get (especially with how people modify the hell out of their 1911's), you really never know how a particular pistol will perform unless you actually test that specific pistol.
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 5:49:20 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Soljah46:

Originally Posted By MrMurphy:
Someone post the Glock torture tests. I only have the USP saved. USP TORTURE TEST




isn't the link in the second post of this thread the link to the glock tortute tests?


eta


Originally Posted By glock23carry:
Read Bigbore's Glock Torture Test, dude.

Buy a Glock and leave it stock

G




I wouldn't know I dont have a GLOCK so I dont click on any links about GLOCKS. Glocks feel like crap in my hand ergo I dont like them. Im not saying theyre a bad gun. But even the Glock lovers must admit that the first time they picked one up they didnt feel good or great and they take some getting used to.
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 5:56:49 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/20/2006 5:59:05 PM EDT by Glockin_It]
Ide go with the Glock. Ide doubt that the USP has more play than the Glock. Im not saying that the glock is a sloppy gun, but the tolerances arent as tight as Sig and HK's as Ive read many times. Glock has had many many guns run through the torture test, and all pass w/o a hiccup. Chuck Taylor has over 168k rounds through his glock and its going strong!
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 6:03:08 PM EDT

Originally Posted By MrMurphy:

I wouldn't know I dont have a GLOCK so I dont click on any links about GLOCKS. Glocks feel like crap in my hand ergo I dont like them. Im not saying theyre a bad gun. But even the Glock lovers must admit that the first time they picked one up they didnt feel good or great and they take some getting used to.



Actually for my large hands it was one of the most comfortabe guns Ive held.
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 8:28:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Glockin_It:

Originally Posted By MrMurphy:

I wouldn't know I dont have a GLOCK so I dont click on any links about GLOCKS. Glocks feel like crap in my hand ergo I dont like them. Im not saying theyre a bad gun. But even the Glock lovers must admit that the first time they picked one up they didnt feel good or great and they take some getting used to.



Actually for my large hands it was one of the most comfortabe guns Ive held.



My G19 has a good angle/shape to it, except part of the backstrap being just slightly too thick, which raises my natural point of aim a little bit (I don't really mind shooting high, better than shooting low) and the #1 thing I don't like is the feel of hard plastic in my hands. It is one less thing that can go wrong, though. My preference is for hard rubber grips, particularly Pachmayr, without the finger grooves, but Hogues are decent, too. I really like the standard Pachmayr combat grips for the 1911. On the other hand, I've never tried one of those slip-on rubber grips and I suspect that would be a solution. It's not a real problem for me, just a matter of preference. The overall most comfortable pistol I've ever held would be the Beretta 92FS with a set of aftermarket Pachmayr grips that didn't have finger grooves and didn't have the backstrap covered. Next in line is the 1911, followed by the Glock. The SW Sigma feels ok in my hand (the older versions) but are too slippery due to a lack of checkering. USP's don't work well for my hands at all, the checkering is too rough (particularly the front and back of the grip, tears up my hands if I try to hold hard) and the angle just feels "off". A lot of guys say the G17 feels better than the G19, but I haven't had the opportunity to try it.
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 8:44:03 PM EDT
what ever happened to the government model 1911 A1?!?!?! You'll forget about that one???????
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 8:53:07 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Gravitas1:
what ever happened to the government model 1911 A1?!?!?! You'll forget about that one???????



Yep, I would figure a new M1911A1 made to milspec with a barrel identical to GI, but with a more modern feedramp design would be one hell of a reliable weapon. I'm not sure if any current 1911's on the market are actually made to the old milspecs for the weapon. Modern commercial weapons have tighter tolerances for accuracy at the expense of reliability, especially reliability in sandy conditions. Glocks tend to do well because they're loose, same reason a true lightly used (just broken in) GI M1911A1 would do well. HK's and Kimbers are known for having tolerances that are too tight, and that has caused malfunctions before. It's also why both weapons (HK's and Kimbers) tend to be pretty accurate. Either way, there's a tradeoff somewhere. If you want to really "get both", you'd probably have to go with something like a MK23 .
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 9:07:28 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 2IDdoc:
Great topic! I had the opportunity to listen to a gentleman(former SEAL, yes I use the term gentleman loosely) that was involved in the DOD testing of pistols trying to answer this same question. The testing was very comprehensive, and done under some extreme conditions. Now, I love Glocks, and I figured that they would come out heads and tails above all the others tested. The actual answer blew me away. A 1911 with a steel magazine, and a steel follower actually smoked all the other pistols tested by a good margin, includint the Glock and USP.

The key seemed to lie in the metal follower in the magazine for a large part, and the fact that it is single stacked. The Glock mags did poorly in sand because they are double stack, and the plastic followers get scratched up by the fine sand enough to make spaces for the sand to collect eventually causing a failure. Another issue with the Glock mags was the metal liner in the mags. In the heat it would expand, and make more room for sand, and swell the magazine causing other issues, among them getting stuck in the magwell was one.


I would have never guessed in a 20 minutes that the 1911 would have performed so well. Shows what I know.



thanks for the good info doc. i was in 2ID at camp hovey, ROK.
Link Posted: 2/21/2006 12:15:48 AM EDT
IMHO
1st USPf .45
2nd G21
3rd 1911
Link Posted: 2/21/2006 4:04:29 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/21/2006 4:06:43 AM EDT by Young-Kiwi]
If you pick any Pistol that that has been adopted by a Military, if should be reliable and able stand up to the abuse any 'normal' person would give a gun.

Some samples....

Glock 17
Browning GP35 (HP)
Bretta 92
CZ 75/85
HK USP
Sig P226 (or any of 22x series)
M1911


Everyone has personal calibre and Pistol preferences. They all do the same job in the same way, to a simalr standard.
Link Posted: 2/21/2006 4:11:13 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/21/2006 4:11:41 AM EDT by GenghisKhan]

Originally Posted By twonami:

Originally Posted By GaryM:
Didn't the BHP and Enfield revolvers do quite well in the north africa campaign of WWII? What about the Walther P38 etc.?


lets get back to the 20th century, better metallurgy and high capacity mags




The last I knew BHPs took Hi-Capacity mags and new ones were made with modern metallurgy. Not to rain on your parade because it is not what I would pick either. Personaly I would take my Glock or CZs with my CZs as first choice. However I am sure there is more than one brand that would work. LOL
Link Posted: 2/21/2006 4:16:42 AM EDT
Does anyone have any other informative torture tests of a USP, and diff. 1911s. Ive already readthis one. Ive searched yahoo, but all i can come up with is the glock tourture test and the one mentioned above.

Thanks
PJ
Link Posted: 2/21/2006 4:30:41 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bob1984:
Glocks tend to do well because they're loose, same reason a true lightly used (just broken in) GI M1911A1 would do well.



WTF are you talking about? What Glock have you had that was "loose"? Which parts are loose?



Link Posted: 2/21/2006 6:45:51 AM EDT

Originally Posted By GenghisKhan:

Originally Posted By twonami:

Originally Posted By GaryM:
Didn't the BHP and Enfield revolvers do quite well in the north africa campaign of WWII? What about the Walther P38 etc.?


lets get back to the 21st century, better metallurgy and high capacity mags




The last I knew BHPs took Hi-Capacity mags and new ones were made with modern metallurgy. Not to rain on your parade because it is not what I would pick either. Personaly I would take my Glock or CZs with my CZs as first choice. However I am sure there is more than one brand that would work. LOL


Link Posted: 2/21/2006 9:50:58 AM EDT
Glock for any conditions that involve shooting. Why compromise with something else.
Link Posted: 2/25/2006 12:31:25 AM EDT
My best guess would be the 1911. They are incredibly reliable when stock and using ball ammo. They have proven their ablities from jungles to deserts and everything in between. Part of the reason is the looseness of the parts fitting in the stock pistols.
Havent carried the Glock- cant speak for the rest but the 1911A1 does the job. It isnt everyone's favorite pistol but it is tried and true..... just dont bugger it up with a bunch of aftermarket gew-gaws.
Link Posted: 2/25/2006 3:34:04 AM EDT
Mil Spec 1911 or a Glock. Either will do the job.
Top Top