Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 1/27/2006 11:00:06 AM EST
After when the U.S Military adopted the Beretta 92FS (M9) as their standard sidearm, what did they do with the old Colt M1911A1 .45ACPs?

Word about is that the U.S Military will replace the M9s with a new .45ACP pistol. If that happens, what will happen to the M9s?
Link Posted: 1/27/2006 11:23:04 AM EST
chopped them up or gave them away. nice way to spend our tax money isnt it?
Link Posted: 1/27/2006 11:24:36 AM EST
If they ever released those guns to the public at surplus cost.... who knows the kind of mayhem that may ensue!
Link Posted: 1/28/2006 5:40:04 AM EST
Old guns, like Old Soldiers, never die. They just fade away....Charles the Old Retired Marine.
Link Posted: 1/28/2006 10:47:06 AM EST
Fielding any weapons system takes years for several reasons. Usually there's a production number per year, so that's the max you'll field in that time frame. Also you have to field all the other stuff along with it, like spare parts, support training, support equipment (mags, hosters, etc). Then you have to qualify all troops with the new weapon within 60 days, and there's usually only a couple pistol qual ranges on any post. So fielding isn't as fast as most people think it is.

The Army bought the M9 in 1984. I saw one a couple times here and there, but we didn't turn in our .38 specials for M9s until 1992 and that was in the 101st, which certainly wasn't the last unit to get them. During that time everyone kept using what they had, but the supply system would start to taper off support. So as other units turned in .45s/.38s (remember ALL divisions had both because there weren't enough .45's to go around), those became the parts source and weapon supply for the rest. The newset M1911A1 that the Army had bought was in 1946, so they were pretty wore out. The .38's weren't as bad off as they were off-the-shelf recent buys in blocks over time. Once everything is replaced by the new system, what's left goes to depot and storage.

Some of it gets scrapped. Usually the unserviceable stuff first. Some usable stuff as well due to politics, but it really doesn't cost that much to keep them in storage, so much still sits there. We replaced the M1 Garand in the 1950's and CMP is still selling them out of depot storage. So really much of it gets scrapped or stored.

In past times, we used to give that stuff away. That doesn't happen much anymore. First of all, there's no "red menece" that requires that we give it away, and in doing so that market is closed to us and allied manufacturers. Usually aid today is given in the form of new production stuff. That stuff is new, which is good, and it's also made by a US or allied company which aids our own or our allies' economy and maintains an industrial base. That's why you see new M4's or new Romainian AKs given away, rather than using older stuff. It helps get aid packages through Congress when someone in their state is making a buck off it.

This is pretty much the same reason you won't see "CMP" sales, like the old "DCM" was able to do with pistols. Pistol manufacturers would loose market share to "cheap surplus" and by law the US government isn't supposed to compete with private business. This is actually a real reason if you think about it. Sure, you already bought it with your tax dollars, but if the govt sold all it's surplus weapons, there wouldn't be much in the way of a gun industry left that could provide an industrial base for weapons productions. If you could buy an M14, M16, M9, M11, etc. at less than half the cost of a new SA, inc., Colt, Beretta, Sig, etc. then those companies would be hurting pretty bad when it comes to selling on the civillian market.

If the government would sell surplus pistols, then manufacurers would start to see military contracts as not as lucrative either. The Army, and therefore the taxpayer, may have to pay more. An example is the M9. Beretta sold them to the Army for $178.50 knowing full well that they didn't need to make a penny off of any of them because the shear publicity of being the "M9" would make up for that in sales to the public for $450 each (more now). If they knew they would be facing the competition of a million or so of their own pistols at less than half the price, then the value of that contract is far less than it was to them. So they would charge more to the Army, since they know they need to make money on them up front. There's other negative economic impacts to companies as well.

The industrial manufacturing base is pretty important. If there's no money to be made in defense, then industry goes to where the money is. You don't get gee-whiz stuff if no one can make a buck off it. Dollar signs are what make things happen.

So in the end, the guns aren't in all that great shape by the time they get retired. The Army will keep things forever "just in case". The Army shouldn't compete with private business when the private sector can provide the same product (you can buy an M9 from Beretta). The Army supports the industrial base by not competing for aid contracts.

So there's alot of reasons, some of them valid, as to why you won't see surplus handguns sold anymore.
Link Posted: 1/28/2006 4:11:23 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/28/2006 4:12:28 PM EST by AR15fan]

Originally Posted By Fglocker_Plz:
After when the U.S Military adopted the Beretta 92FS (M9) as their standard sidearm, what did they do with the old Colt M1911A1 .45ACPs?

The USMC used the frames to build the MEU-SOC pistol. Also when regular armynwent to the M9 the 1911A1 trickled down to National Guard units in some cases.
Link Posted: 1/29/2006 6:25:40 AM EST
Bill Clinton had 100s of thousands of 1911s chopped up, along with Garands, 1903s, and carbines. I had the list of the numbers destroyed in a 10 month period somewhere, but it was quite large. It was a big deal at the time and I believe the Garands or at least some of them ended up being spared. Remember, the CMP was not on the list of "Bill likes" and I believe it was underfunded by the admin for quite some time.

Wonder why all of a sudden Garands are much "bigger" news under Bush then Clinton? Lot of it had to do with politics.
Link Posted: 1/29/2006 6:42:21 AM EST
Those that are still servicable are overhauled, rebuilt and then stored away. At the start of OIF my unit drew out M1911A1 cause we believe .45 beats 9mm. Still using them today. Same goes for the M14s that have been reissued to units.

Top Top