SIG 226 beats out the Beretta 92 as the US service pistol?
- Thread starter BigWillyG
- Start date
Meh. We'd have a marginally better pistol than the 92FS. What really matters is whether or not the US military decides to buy quality mags from Sig, rather than buying POS 3rd party mags and getting ripped off.
When you really get down to it though, does it really matter? A wondernine is a wondernine.
When you really get down to it though, does it really matter? A wondernine is a wondernine.
Soldiers complain about the "chocolate/cheese/cockoo-clock pistol" instead of the "pizza pistol" not being as good as the M1911. That is all.
When did the US get "ripped off" with M9 magazines? The problem with the Checkpoint magazines was a heavy finish the Army asked be put on the magazines. The only one the Army has to blame is itself on that one.
The problem aint the gun it's the caliber of the bullet.
I'm with Hipsterredneck and ModernKiwi- wondernines have their uses, but needing 2-3 rounds to take out s/b means effectively five kills per 15-round mag.
With a bit more practice, you might be able to get that up to 8 kills per clip.
9mm are easier to fire and keep on target.
Colt Commander firing .45 ACP- you get 6-8 kills per clip w/o a lot of special training.
Of course, that's why US police forces went to the .40 S&W and could get good kill ratios AND plenty of bullets.
However, the US military was trying belatedly, to adopt a NATO standard caliber pistol and simplify the supply situation..
Of course, your infantry doctrine depending on your pistol to be that effective is a little screwy anyway.
I'm with Hipsterredneck and ModernKiwi- wondernines have their uses, but needing 2-3 rounds to take out s/b means effectively five kills per 15-round mag.
With a bit more practice, you might be able to get that up to 8 kills per clip.
9mm are easier to fire and keep on target.
Colt Commander firing .45 ACP- you get 6-8 kills per clip w/o a lot of special training.
Of course, that's why US police forces went to the .40 S&W and could get good kill ratios AND plenty of bullets.
However, the US military was trying belatedly, to adopt a NATO standard caliber pistol and simplify the supply situation..
Of course, your infantry doctrine depending on your pistol to be that effective is a little screwy anyway.
Minimal difference. Pistols are for civilian cops & pilots who have relocated their aircraft behind enemy lines (and even in their case a PDW is better), not soldiers.
Of course, maybe we would have been spared the odd fixation with the 9mm that seems to have finally run its course in both military and police circles. That would have been a good thing.
Of course, maybe we would have been spared the odd fixation with the 9mm that seems to have finally run its course in both military and police circles. That would have been a good thing.
The latter, they had a particular fixation with 9mm?
I thought that was just with lighter cartridges in general for awhile?While I agree this change would make no real difference. I disagree with the rest of your statements.
How is adopting a the NATO standard pistol round a "odd fixation"? I find it funny the US get criticized for forcing the 7.62 NATO on the organization and then again for switching on its own to 5.56 but then again for finally picking something its allies wanted. That's a little damned if you do, damned if you don't.
O
While a pistol is a "last ditch" weapon, and as a medical officer that's all you got until recently when docs in the field (MDs not corpsmen) were issued with M4's if for no other reason than to make them look like everyone else, IF you need to use it you need it to do the job. The .45 ACP round is good for doing the man stopping at pistol range, and the 1911 or mods (I own a Kimber) is accurate if not screwed with &/or having loose barrels with worn grooves/lands. NATO standardization is generally a good thing, but not when you trade a weapon that does its job well, is reliable and solid for a POS that is a big step down.
As I understand it the US military is looking to go to a .40 or .45 replacement for the M9 - and the SEALS, Marine Recon & others never got rid of the .45 round...
As I understand it the US military is looking to go to a .40 or .45 replacement for the M9 - and the SEALS, Marine Recon & others never got rid of the .45 round...
Vests
All pistols are becoming outdated for military since everybody started using protective vests that can stop a 9mm, or a .45, at point blank ranges. The only pistol that recognises that reality is the FN 5.7, that fires high velocity rounds (from their P90 PDW) that can penetrate most vests.
Since its not practical to carry a weapon that requires head shots, we will soon either get pistols with penetrative rounds (I rember some french HV rounds for .357 from the 90s) or drop pistols for military use and get some sort of PDW.
All pistols are becoming outdated for military since everybody started using protective vests that can stop a 9mm, or a .45, at point blank ranges. The only pistol that recognises that reality is the FN 5.7, that fires high velocity rounds (from their P90 PDW) that can penetrate most vests.
Since its not practical to carry a weapon that requires head shots, we will soon either get pistols with penetrative rounds (I rember some french HV rounds for .357 from the 90s) or drop pistols for military use and get some sort of PDW.
The 9mm was, and is, an utter waste of time as a military round, at least in a handgun. As a police round, or maybe even in a SMG it is okay, albeit for different reasons (a law enforcement weapon is not really meant to absolutely kill, but to disable, and the Nine is good at that, while a SMG tends to burn through ammo since it is usually used in a three round burst setting and 9mm is somewhat lighter than .45 or 10mm so you can carry an extra mag).
Handguns are pretty useless in a true military sense, a PDW is far better, but if you are going to carry one, at least carry one that will knock down whatever you hit. Even if the target is wearing a vest, the .45 (or to a degree the 10mm) will have a better chance of knocking the target off his feet than the 9mm.
As far as common rounds, I understand the utility of having the same ammo for all troops in an alliance. The 9mm, unfortunately, was, and is, a POS (rather like the 5.56mm NATO although that is an entirely different discussion).
The Corps has already grasped the nettle and ordered over 4,000 modernized versions of the M1911 from Colt in .45 for issue to senior officers and others who carry handguns as issue.
http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gearscout/2012/07/20/usmc-orders-4036-m45-cqbp-pistols/
BlairWitch749
Banned
wouldn't the proper compromise to use .40 s&w rounds then, the glock 22 chambered in the .40 s&w enjoys a well deserved reputation for knocking down vested targets along with very very high levels of reliability (plus it looks fucking bad ass and shoots underwater)
Nope. Not even close. The new M45 or whatever they finally decide to call it is meant to replace the hand made MEUSOC 1911's already in use by MARSOC and Force Recon. It is not going to replace the Corps stocks of M9s and M9A1 9mm pistols. All this new pistol is doing is fixing a problem the Corps has had for a long while. The Corps .45's have all been hand made first on old WW2 guns, then COTS guns by the same shop on MCB Quantico that makes the Corps sniper rifles and DMRs. There are never enough Marines in the PWS and long backlogs are common because it's got a lot rifle work to do. All this does is move the .45 production to civilian company.
Also pistols are no longer issue weapons for any Marines. A few years ago the HQMC but out a message switching all officers and SNCO to M4 carbines. The battalions were given a choice of turning in their M9s too get them off the armory inventories or keeping them and issuing them as they saw fit.
What data or experience do you have to back these opinions up?
How does a firearm using professional define "POS"?
I read Michael Durant's biography some time ago, the pilot who survived getting shot down over Mogadishu.
He was carrying a PDW when shot down and in his opinion it didn't give enough firepower (although probably a M240 wouldn't be enough when facing hordes of Somali's) and he advocates that a pilot ought to have whatever the troops he's flying around are lugging, as those guys will have a better idea what he would be facing if he was shot down. So it was full-blooded assault rifles for him after Mogadishu.
Just buy a shiny piece of crap for staff officers to carry and forget about sidearms. More people have died from self inflicted sidearm misuse than bad guys have been killed plus sidearm says PLEASE KILL ME in big letters they are bullet magnets.