User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 9:15:04 AM EDT
[#1]
Not. If anybody does it, it will probably be KIMBER. But I doubt this report altogether. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 9:27:21 AM EDT
[#2]
Not correct. We could use the 9mm, but their 5.56 is underpowered because the SA-80 is a POS. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 9:28:41 AM EDT
[#3]
How about one made here:
 And one made by one of our REAL allies:  Instead of crap from ungrateful, unreliable Germany. I'd take either of those long before any HK. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 9:31:59 AM EDT
[#4]
I was active duty whren the 1911 was still issue. Everybody bitched about those. No matter what is issued, everyone will bitch about it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 9:32:14 AM EDT
[#5]
never gonna happen.....
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 9:33:06 AM EDT
[#6]
I say Para p14-45 LDA.
Only because I want cheaper hicaps damn it!  Realy I would go with HK, Glock, or Springfield (their hi caps fit para right?) |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 9:41:11 AM EDT
[#7]
Yeah, I guess when it comes to weaponry, the U.S. always picks crap. The M9...M16... We need to reverse it and we are half way there with the XM8  All we need now is standard issue USP's or Mk23's and we are set.The M1911 is a bad ass weapon and I'd love to see it replace the M9 9mm!!! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 9:42:07 AM EDT
[#8]
Exactly my thoughts as well. It's part of every soldier's sacred duty to bitch and moan about their equipment. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 9:44:05 AM EDT
[#9]
Wait until it's issued. Then the consensus will be, what the hell are we doing with this short-barreled plastic POS that can't kill anything at any sort of distance? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 9:45:46 AM EDT
[#10]
Thats what everyone said about the M16...plastic POS. Except they had to wait until combat to find that out  EDIT: But I do not want to get into a XM8 vs M16 thread here...again... I say just issue some Kimbers or Wilsons...who can bitch about those? Not me! |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 9:50:13 AM EDT
[#11]
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 9:57:26 AM EDT
[#12]
The AFB (seen below) needs to get some teeth like you can get on some Surefires. That would be cool.  
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 10:01:00 AM EDT
[#13]
Those "experts" also kept calling Leupold scopes "Lee uh pold". That show had a ton of innacuracies. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 10:04:43 AM EDT
[#14]
[Homer] Lee ooo pold, it's pronounced Lee ooo pold [/Homer] |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 10:12:37 AM EDT
[#15]
Doesn't that kinda rule out using a tabletop, etc, to rack the slide with one hand? I'll get by without one, thank you..... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 10:22:57 AM EDT
[#16]
Springfield got the FBI HRT contract and I believe has received several other contracts including some for longarms. While this is not DOD it is a US Govt contract. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 10:25:10 AM EDT
[#17]
The Det-1 unit is not issued MARSOC pistols.
MARSOC pistols are used by Force. Those pistols are built by USMC armorers. Det-1 is using the MCSOCOM pistol, made by Kimber... It's also refered to as the ICQB (Interim CQB pistol.) The USMC's Det-1 needed a 1911, RFN, and Kimber came through with a pistol that fit the bill in the interim. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 10:45:07 AM EDT
[#18]
+1 on the CZ 97, however an HK is a great weapon!!! Many HKs have a proven COMBAT & SERVICE RECORD with police and military and government agencies all over the world. I would and I suspect most would never carry an S&W in combat!!!! The HK is better than or at least equal too CZ, Glock, or Sig. S&W might have a few rural Police contracts in the states, very few in major cities, and to my knowledge has not had a military contract since the mid-to-late 1800's |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 11:21:50 AM EDT
[#19]
8 rounds of .45 ACP ball will do.
It did from WW1 to Vietnam. Cut it with the sissy boy caliber- 9mm LUGER-. CRC |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 11:29:51 AM EDT
[#20]
Why would this guy be making it up? I think you are all misunderstaning him. He is a Ranger, he probably ment that the RANGERS were going to get a M1911 for THEIR issue sidearm, not anyone else in the Army.
That would only be a procurement of about 2000 pieces. Hardly bigger than Springfields FBI contract. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 11:36:06 AM EDT
[#21]
My question is: Is there any more .45 Ball ammo in the .mil inventory?
Because, they won't transition back to a prior weapon system, until ALL of the "on hand" inventory has been surplused out so they can buy all new stuff (M-14 anyone???)
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 11:41:13 AM EDT
[#22]
I know there was still some 1911's in Marine Corps inventory (issue) when deployed..... likely plenty of ammo to boot |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 11:52:07 AM EDT
[#23]
The fact of the matter is, the .mil has always had some .45's on hand. It's just another tool to do a job. If you study into the situation around the whole M9 program, Congress ram-rodded it down the .mil's throat anyways. That's why I celebrate the ARFCOM tradition... ONE OF EACH!! Although not really. I have one Beretta 92, and 3 1911's!!!! |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 11:52:36 AM EDT
[#24]
Its not impossible........go ahead and laugh......but as long as we have a strong leader like Bush in office I think the military will see more needed changes happening. The US Coast Guard ( the fifth and often overlooked branch of the military - yes, deployed in the Gulf now....) is replacing all of its M9's with the Sig Sauer P229RL-DAK - a Sig Sauer .40S&W P229 with the rail interface and the new 6.5 lb DAK trigger from Sig. Thats over 40,000 P229's going to the Coast Guard - plus the rest of Homeland Security which is getting the P229RL-DAK or P226RL-DAK. Change can happen - its getting the Army to remove its head from its ass and dump the Beretta. I was Army before so I can say this - I have seen the bullshit involved with getting new gear through the f##ked up supply/logistics system. Give it time - the Beretta is a POS. It lacks the necessary terminal ballistics and the reliability. You should not wonder at what point your locking block will break - because on a Beretta - its inevitable at some point - sooner then later. I have seen Berettas broken for other reasons as well - to include cracked frames from firing standard military 9mm ball ammo. Not impressed - the Coast Guard got a clue and part of it is thanks to us falling under DHS now - but the rest of the military REALLY needs something more effective then a puny 9mm FMJ round.
http://www.sigarms.com/apps/cmt/img/p229-dak-large.jpg Check out the new guns or other info under links for News regarding recent contracts.......www.sigarms.comwww.sigarms.com/apps/cmt/img/p229-dak-large.jpg No this is NOT an OPSEC issue - this is OLD news on the issue of this gun and its pick by USCG |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 4:37:26 PM EDT
[#25]
Excuse me for my discrepancy, my intent was that only the Force Recon Direct Action Platoon and MARSOC DET 1 use a 1911-type pistol. A very small quantity when compared to the rest of the Marine Expeditionary Force. Semper Fi! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 4:45:52 PM EDT
[#26]
Dave, you arent implying that 9mm ball is better than .45acp are you? I say that because of the "fortunately" comment. I really wish the military would stop catering to the pansies that cant shoot a real pistol, you really can train them if you devote enough to it. Poorly trained small frame troops with a 9mm are no match for a decent shot with a .45 and if my 13 year old son can shoot one accurately I would certainly hope an active duty military man/woman could. Remember you may only get one shot, make it count. Handguns are underpowered in the first place you better have as big a bullet as you can and make it count. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 4:52:15 PM EDT
[#27]
+1
shooting a .45 kimber compact is cake, so easy it even feels good--little recoil try shooting a box of 30.06s in a rem 710 in 5-6mins--THAT hurts |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 4:52:40 PM EDT
[#28]
9mm is half the price of .45 so I'm guessing this may be nothing more than scuttlebutt. The Army wont change to something that costs more to feed, even if it makes more sense to do so.
Professional killers [of the enemy] prefer .45 and that alone says alot. MEU, Delta, LAPD and a few more...... The standard soldier will pick Lethality over weight and Gov pork contracts anyday. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 4:53:35 PM EDT
[#29]
I know the USCG is deployed. However, they ARE NOT DoD. DHLS is doing the right thing, IMO by getting the USCG a LE caliber. That is the main armed USCG function, so it only makes sense. But if the USCG thinks the Navy is going to help them get .40 in the middle of the AG think again. Of course, I was loaning the LEDETs M4s to do their jobs and using my NCEA so they could train with various weapons. It only made sense to me; they might save my life some day. My .45 story. I got to my first ship in 1995. We still had the 1911, and that's what I qualified with. I left the ship in 1996 to go to NROTC. They were issued the M9 shortly thereafter. I went on my first Midshipman cruise in '97 and talked with some middies that were on my old ship. They were shooting the hell out of .45 trying to get rid of what they had left in the magazines(the big mags not the ones in the pistol). Anyway once they were done they actually threw full boxes of .45 ammo into the ocean.  |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 5:03:27 PM EDT
[#30]
Why on earth are they buying a DA handgun again, there is no point to the DA action in a semi automatic handgun, it just adds parts, unless its a sear trigger hammerless like the Glock. The 1911 is simpler and you certainly cannot argue that is less safe. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 5:15:09 PM EDT
[#31]
Finding 5.56 on the limeys that is reliable in '16s is something else again. Does limy 5.56 fragemt?
A 1911 fully loaded and two spare loaded mags should carry you through years of warfare, as far as handguns go. Load up on lots of 5.56, but what's the point of tons of handgun ammo? If having that much ammo around is so important, ditch the handgun and carry several more magazines for the carbine/rifle. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 5:17:51 PM EDT
[#32]
Don't put words in my mouth. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 5:18:28 PM EDT
[#33]
+1 there, the handgun is a backup to the rifle. Only a primary if you've fucked up and somehow stepped away from your rifle or maybe if you have a malfunction you cannot immediately clear or you've really fucked up and run out of ammo.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 5:20:31 PM EDT
[#34]
Contract awards have often little to do with the performance of the weapon. How do you explain the adoption of the Beretta 92? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 5:23:16 PM EDT
[#35]
I heard a rumor that RRA was working on a protptype .45 to show the army, The same person said that the army was looking to go back to .45s.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 5:24:43 PM EDT
[#36]
That is not what the AARs from our initial entry into Iraq said... The Marines in particular specificly asked for more handguns in line units, they found lots of places that even M4s and captured AK underfolders were a hastle getting through. Iraqi houses and apartments are not built for American sized individuals, then there is prisoner handling, much less crawling through storm drains, attics, crawlspaces ect... It seems US troops burnt up a LOT of 9mm ball in the spring and summer of 03'. Admittedly it was because there were a lot of people who only had M9's as their TOE weapon (tank crewmen, gunners, mortarmen) who probably allways should of been issued M4's but weren't. In Afganistan Don's advice might be correct, but it does not seem to hold true in Iraq. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 5:27:23 PM EDT
[#37]
The military has contracted with Springfield armory to buy a bunch (million or so) 1911 .45acp pistols. The are basicly a 1911 with a rail. But, they are not replacing the berreta. They are to be used for special operations etc. This is why sig started making a 1911 with a picatiny rail. I'm sure they wanted to get the contract. I hefted the sig model the other day. It is a heavy beast. This kind of pistol would be a poor choice for the main military pistol. I wish they would smarten up and go with a sig 220 .45.acp for the main handgun for the military. (is it obvious where I stand on the 9mm/45 thing?) Zen "This is my rifle, there are many like it, but this one is mine" |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 6:30:55 PM EDT
[#38]
A million? lol...into what troops hands will a million pisols go, we dont have a million strong let alone just in the SOF community. Why a million? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 6:39:53 PM EDT
[#39]
Agreed. My 2 cents; the Sig P220 with rail would accomodate a large institution like the military because of its simple manual of arms, reliability, size, light weight, & accuracy. Though I am a big fan of Glock and I think an individual Glock pistol would outlive the careers of most members, the P220s DA/SA trigger would satisfy the safety requirements of a large institution with members whose training level is from the expert to the novice who only touches his weapon to be cleaned for inspections. "The military should well train every member!" You say. Yes it should but it wont happen, someone has to cook, type reports and fix trucks. Though I would favor the durability and corrosion resistance of the Glock, the Sig take down is simple and straightforward where as the Glock's striker must be dropped (trigger pulled) in order to initiate take down. During OIF 1, we had more than two incidences of ADs with the M-9 Beretta in my battalion and that thing has three passive and a manual safety! I can imagine the number of AD's to multiply with a Glock (in terms of disassembly). The Glock 21 would functionally be an awesome military pistol if it weren't for its large grip which is even too large for some men not even counting the women who would have to use it. If Glock can make a thinner G21 with a single stack mag than they might be on to something. If another 1911-style pistol is adopted en masse, I would hope they go with a bushingless and plugless variant. Those are two less parts multiplied times the thousands of pistols that would be ordered. Thus the logic behind the Sig P220; .45ACP caliber, lighter than a 1911, slightly smaller than a 1911, comfortable for a wide audience, fewer removable parts than a 1911, simple manual of arms, accurate, reliable, etc. etc. My 2 cents. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 6:45:42 PM EDT
[#40]
Airsoft is just as good, and less money!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 6:52:18 PM EDT
[#41]
Because unless you're talking shooting games, CCW (for those with the taste) or range guns, the 'Good' and '.45ACP' don't mix. Just replace the magazines on the Berettas, and keep one of the best large-frame pistols on the market, in what is probably the best military pistol caliber available... |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 6:55:24 PM EDT
[#42]
I can... I have a 1911 and a M-9 in my personal collection... Let's just say I'll be quite pleased with the M-9 as an issue weapon, it's quite plainly my favorite large-frame pistol... Accurate, perfectly reliable (so long as you use good mags, just like the AR), and I'd rather have 15 rounds of 9mm than 7-10 of .45... |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 6:57:44 PM EDT
[#43]
I should have said military... The Fumbling Bunch of Idiots has been known for stupid firearms procurement decisions anyway, keeping the .38SPC long past it's due, then 10mm, and now 40S&W... |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 7:08:31 PM EDT
[#44]
Why yes, I most certainly am... For MILITARY purposes, where you are likely to face multiple attackers at close range, the 9mm is clearly superior. I find the whole focus on 'only one shot' to be pure ignorant  , as history has shown that one shot in any caliber has a VERY high chance of doing absolutely JACK SHIT to stop an attacker...If men can absorb multiple rounds of 30-06, 8mm Mauser, 12GA 3" SLUGS, 9mm, .45ACP, and almost EVERY GODDAMN CALIBER IN EXISTANCE, then all of this 'bigger = better' stuff is . In any 9mm FTS scenario, .45ACP is just as likely to FTS. Period. You can quote your debunked 1-shot-stop statistics all you want, but when operating under the far more logical assumption that it will take a MINIMUM of 2 shots in any caliber to stop an attacker, 9mm comes out way on top.To illustrate this practically: You are being attacked by 4 badguys, your rifle is out of commission. A 1911 will give you a good chance at stopping 3 of them, and you'll have to roll the dice on #4, 'cause you've only got one shot left (Again, I am NOT comfortable betting my life on 1 shot from any small arms caliber)... A M-9 will allow you to fire 2 rounds at each attacker and still have 7 left in case you need them.... I would rather have more rounds in the mag and a more accurate weapon (which the 92FS is, and we're talking accurate in factory combat-ready condition (eg M-9 vs 1983-spec M1911), not a tweaked & tuned match gun/range queen, with all the reliability issues that those guns exhibit), than a larger caliber. I find the idea of re-issuing .45ACP to anyone who's not using a supressor to be as stupid as returning to a large-caliber issue rifle. So you guys can pine away for the return of a significant but dated gun in a significant but dated caliber... 1911s are great, they're fun to shoot, but I wouldn't bet my life on one if a good modern 9mm, like the M-9, was available... I will gladly take the Beretta in 9mm, with good Beretta mags over any 1911 for combat use, any day... IMHO, the next US Pistol should be either the Beretta Vertec, or the HK USP in 9mm NATO. As much as I hate the XM-8, the USP is a good pistol, and it has one advantage over the Beretta: a choice of SAO or DA/SA based on operator preference. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 7:15:19 PM EDT
[#45]
Why not just go Glock then?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 7:16:37 PM EDT
[#46]
Crappy trigger, poor QA, etc... Plus, the US military REQUIRES a manual safety on all weapons, explicitly disqualifying the 'My Head is My Safety' Glock design... One of the few guns I'd rather see them re-issue the 1911 than adopt |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 7:20:02 PM EDT
[#47]
Sidearms are of ... limited utility. There are some things you absolutely need them for, and some situations in which they are convenient and comfortable to have.
Engaging multiple targets with multiple rounds is not one of those situations. Conventional wisdom suggests that you secure a rifle as soon as possible. The Neutral Observer will go out on a limb and suggest that if you are engaging multiple targets with a handgun, you're already screwed. In 99% of the situations in which you'd find yourself using a sidearm, it would make no difference if you had a Beretta, a 1911, or .38 revolver. That said, there is no real reason to switch back to the 1911 as general issue, at least in The Neutral Observer's point of view, but the Army undoubtedly has it's own point of view and The Neutral Observer is not one to argue with it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 7:25:19 PM EDT
[#48]
The SEALS Admin or who ever picked the Sig 226 (soon to change I've heard), but there's quite a few highly trained groups who've picked the single action .45 over everything else. What does that say: Action or caliber is more important? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 7:32:06 PM EDT
[#49]
With all due respect Dave_A, Stats etc mean nothing when it comes to chosing the right weapon or caliber. Real world events speak volumes: I used to be a confirmed 9mm man. Loved shooting them. Felt comforted that I had 15 rounds in a magazine, all that firepower. I had a good friend of mine who I constantly argued with about which was better, .45 or 9mm. (he was a confirmed .45 man) Then one day I was at the local police supply a friend of mine owned. He had a whole pile of these little dispatches that looked like mini telegrahams. They were published by the FBI. Each one was a short report on actual shooting incidents. I sat down and read them all. Must have been a coupe of hundred of them. A very clear pattern emerged. People shot by 9mm kept shooting back. Wounding or killing their opponents. People shot by .45acp, were unable to return fire. 45acp is a good manstopper, 9mm simply is not. These were real gun fights, not some math on paper about bullet speed etc. Real world information and experience. I am now a confirmed .45 man, because I carry weapons to save my life, not just for sporting fun. To each there own, but you might pay for your decision with your life if your opinion is not based on anything but love for a certain caliber or gun. Zen "This is my rifle, there are many like it, but this one is mine" |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2004 7:33:18 PM EDT
[#50]
Most of the rationale I've seen for SF use of .45 is based on the fact that full-power .45ACP loads are subsonic, and thus more effective out of a supressed gun (a/o having to use a downloaded 9mm round)... That was the reason for the USP/Mk23 contract... |
||
|
|
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.
