A soldiers thoughts on the M9

Well I have only qualified with one a few times, never carried it in combat.

Never had a malfunction and accuracy was fine. Pretty big and heavy but not too bad to be a no-go.

9mm ball ammo is bad, I hear.

Oh did I mention EXPERT EVERY TIME? Hahaha, I only mention it because at the time it was the first and only pistol I had ever shot. Easy peasey...

Not a soldier here, just a question.

Didn't the contract for the new military sidearm explicitly call for a DA/SA? I may be mistaken but it seems like a lot of the complaints revolve around that, which was a requirement, or the 9mm ball round, which is also a requirement (more or less, per the Hague convention, not sure why they bother following it....). So if those are the complaints, it would be an issue regardless of which pistol was chosen.

The complaints about the grip size and safety location I think have more merit, although I have never minded either.

I loved it. I think we can all agree that the actual cartridge that the military is forced to use isn't awesome, and I can't disagree that the grip is on the big side, but aside from that, I really liked it. Honestly, compared to the military issue 1911's, in many ways it's a better pistol. Better sights for sure, the DA/SA thing is better. I like it a lot.

That isn't to say that I don't think there are better 9mm pistols out there, or even that it would be my choice again.

I wouldn't say necessarily the caliber, rather the type, I think they should allow JHP's etc. esp. since technically insurgents are not under any convention

My first rounds fired in anger were with an M9, actually. I wasnt really angry though, truth be told...more scared.

Jammed after the 9th shot. Fortunately, that was enough.

At this point now, I've been using M9's for about 12 years. Over that time I've discovered a lot of things I don't like about the pistol. In Afghanistan, I noticed that the magazines we had, if you loaded them and left them overnight, when you pulled the mags out of your mag carrier loose rounds would fall right out of the feed lips. The springs lost tension really fast and the mag design seemed very vulnerable to dust. I believe this was due to the parkerization on the magazines.
In military EIC competitions, I used the M9 as well. Some personal issues I had were that you had to keep the gun wet all the time in order for it to run well. It as damn accurate once you familiarized yourself with the sights and trigger though. Several guys on the team had broken locking blocks during practices and even during matches. That's a hell of a confidence builder.

Also, if you charge the M9 overhanded on top of the slide, as most everyone does with all other handguns, you're prone to put the weapon on safe accidently. This is a really bad thing when you press the trigger and you get nothing, as you can imagine. I really prefer the G versions with the spring loaded decocker only.

I personally like the M9. Fifteen rounds of 9mm is an impressive package. I work full time on a law enforcement range as well as serving in the Army NG. I have had occasion to shoot numerous Beretta(s) as well as carrying one as an issued weapon.

The Beretta is a full size semi-auto, but, the grip size is manageable. I have found the Beretta(s) to be very accurate and dependable. For a service weapon, it does what it is designed to. The M9 is a go-too gun when your M4 either is not functioning or your out of .223.

As far as ball VS HP rounds. Its a toss up with shot placement trumping the day. A lot of HPs don't do what the manufactures claim and I am not one to count on any hand gun round to be a one shot stopper. Round for round - I like bigger, but the extra ammo capacity is a plus.

My personal favorite is the Browning High Power - but, since we are talking military arms. I'd give the Beretta a thumbs up.

PRM said:

.My personal favorite is the Browning High Power - but, since we are talking military arms. I'd give the Beretta a thumbs up.

Click to expand...

Th Hi-Power is not only a military arm, it's probably still the most common military pistol on the planet.

As former U.S. Marine infantry I always thought the M9 heavy, bulky, and underpowered. But then I'm not fond of any pistol for a soldier. Give me a rifle please, and could you make it a full sized .30 caliber.

I never carried the M9. 1911 was the standard at the time. However, I do like the Berretta 92 series of pistols. I have an older "type" 92f Centurion. Mine happens to be one of the Turk made (MKEK Yavuz 16) Berretta clones.

I really like this firearm. I am much more accurate with this pistol, than I ever was with a G.I. issue 1911. Damn things always seemed to be sloppy and half worn out. (don't get me wrong. I currently do not own a 1911 and would like to pick a nice one up.) I also like the looks of the 92 pistols with the open top slide.

I currently use 20 rd. Mec-Gar mags with mine. Never ever had even one malfunction or any sort of ftf or fte.

Don't know how it is now, but the Army was not always the best about issuing top tier, in nice shape handguns to most folks. I don't know for sure now, but possibly MOS might have something to do with this.

Anyhow, I digress. All in all I think the 92 series is a fine design.

Gunner

I'm not a big M9 fan myself, by a friend of mine, a retired Ranger who served in Panama, 1st, and 2nd Gulf Wars, liked it enough to get a Beretta 92 for his own use.

The Hi-Power is not only a military arm, it's probably still the most common military pistol on the planet. - Certaindeaf

Click to expand...

Yea - but not available to US forces as standard issue. I totally agree that the number of countries using it, and its history dating back to the 30s definitely puts it in a class its own.

I was a little envious in Afghanistan in 09-10 seeing my Canadian counterparts packing the BHPs.

My personal preference for the BHP is more familiarity than anything else. They are a classic design. I've had opportunity to shoot them frequently over the years and have one today as one of my favorite range guns.

All that aside - the Beretta is still a service weapon I give a thumbs up to.

When I was in Iraq, the M9 was the only weapon system that we had issues with.
The only thing that they were good for was cruising around on the FOB (you didnt have to lug your rifle around if you had a M9).

The Iraqi Police were using Glock 19s and I was jealous.

I just purchased my first Beretta 92 (Centurion model) since it I stumbled on a good deal. I own several 1911s, Sigs, CZs, Glocks and a few others, but the only Beretta I’ve owned is a small model 21A.

I’ve been issued M9’s for the past 20+ years and a few deployments. Just returned from Afghanistan where I was issued another M9. They are large pistols for 9mm; however they are accurate (for me), reliable and I’ve never had any issues. I’ve always qualified expert on the standard qualification courses so it works okay for what it is.

The only reason I picked up the Centurion model (other than the price) is that I have several magazine and holsters for the M9 design.

What’s funny about the different countries and issued side arms is that nobody liked their issued pistol. The Canadians didn’t like their BHPs, the majority of special duty Army and law enforcement contractors didn’t care for their Glocks; the Turks and Slovakians didn’t care for their CZ75 copies. I didn’t get too many conversations, but the Iraqi’s we had on our base carried XD 9mm’s and the Romanians had some sort of Jericho 9mm copy or at least that’s what it looked like. I did see several Sig P226s and P228s carried by military investigation personnel and security contractors…no complaints from those guys/gals.

ROCK6

I got so sick of lugging that M9 brick around doing PT or going to the dining facility. Sitting in a vehicle with that huge pistol jammed into your side... Better than the M4 I suppose, but not much. That is a large heavy SOB for a 15 round 9mm...

Considering the competition weighs in 1/3rd as much, it should be a no-brainer.

Despite my previous mentioned misgivings, I don't think the military should switch. Why? Economics. We COULD do it inexpensively but we wouldn't. We'd piss away millions of dollars testing what we already know. There are better pistols.

We'll never move away from 9mm fmj, and that's just the reality. 9x19 is adequate, inexpensive, and logistics just work, and necessary for all the small people in the Army. Pure and simple.

IF the military just had some sense and did a low cost switch to another proven system, like Glock 17 or Glock 19, or Sig 226, etc, then I would say just do it!!!! Heck, certain units like Special Ops get Glocks and others like CID carry Sigs... why not big Army??? And I think a large number of CZ75s are employed in combat roles... that is a better, smaller and higher capacity pistol than the M9

But since any switch costs tens of millions of dollars in unnecessary testing then it's just not worth the cost. Pistols so rarely are game changers or life safers that a M9 or G17... meh they both get the job done. (Note, I did date an ex-Soldier female medic that was treating two injuried Iraqis when one pulled a knife and stabbed her and she shot him dead with her M9 and she got a purple heart - so it does work and get the job done.)

When Capt. Scott O'Grady was shot down over Bosnia, he found that his M-9 rusted while he evaded enemy patrols for a week. Stainless is indicated. He also was disappointed in his issued survival knife, preferring his Swiss Army knife. I think he should have had a Randall or Fallkniven sheath knife.

I recommend his book, "Return With Honor."

Click to expand...

As an aside, I'd take anything O'Grady says with a grain of salt, rather than as a voice of expertise (regardless of experience).

When I went through USAF survival school in the late 90s, O'Grady's actions were used on more than one topic of examples of what not to do.

Well, never had to fire one in the heat of battle, but whenever I shoot one it functions well and hits what I aim at.

What very few people realize is the ridiculous abuse these guns get. I haven't sen one yet that had any kind of finish left on its grip. How many rounds of shooting, how many hours of carrying and how many drops do you think that entails?

These things we shoot are hardly the product of gentle care and stringent maintenance routines. They're beaters that have been mishandled, dropped, shot and generally used to within an inch of serviceability. Not exactly a fair comparison to some guy's G19, CZ, Sig or whatever that he sits in a safe, oils regularly and is actually taken care of.
You know how magazines are stored? In plastic boxes. For months on end. In changing climate conditions. Unlubed and usually uncleaned. And they're not gently placed, they're tossed in while walking by from as far away as the person can kinda hit the box, so they can go home after they toss a patch down the barrel and call it good.

The beretta M-9 is a cheaper 92fs, its a good working 9mm! The company could stop trying to save a buck and only use steel guide rods and not plastic! If yours doesn't work then fix it! if its shooting wild, then get a new barrel! if it stove pipes then clean it and check it ! 3/4 of the worlds forces cant be wrong! We whiched to 9mm from 45acp because most of the world uses a 9mm as its sidearm. I field tested them back in the day! They were up against the ruger p85 they put it to shame, except in one area you dont ram mud down the barrel of a beretta and fire it!!! Otherwise shes a good sidearm! My son is an M.P. serving now, he carries one!!! I was a beretta man the minute I saw what they could do! Back in the early 80s beretta and taurus were the 9mm guns to own! Sigs and hk's were the classy 9's, I got my first pair from a buddy they were a pair of 92sb's I( loved them) ! we had 1911's then, 8 shots, to 16 is a sad count! But it sometimes took more to stop them! More head shots! So thats my two cents, for what its worth!

Hated the M9 liked my 1911.
I found no end of problems with the magazines and thought for the size and weight you could have done much better.
All in all if I had to dismount, I would rather have had an M4, sidearms should not be carried as a primary by anyone in combat.

I have carried and qualified expert with three different M9s over the years, plus I've put ~11,000 rounds through my personal 92FS. I'm a fan.

Wolf, try the decaf.

I never had one with a plastic guide rod.

We are not allowed to just 'fix' bad weapons. Even though I knew a lot more about guns than my supply guy/armorer did. I kept the one I had, instead of insisting that he change it out for me, because all he would have been able to do was take one away from another soldier for me and give him my bad one. At least I knew how to keep it running, the other guy probably wouldn't.

A high number of the world's forces using 9mm fmj doesn't mean that it's good. It means that it's cheap. It also means that the vast majority of the world's forces, (including ours,) really don't care much about sidearms at all. Sidearms are emergency tools for the benefit of the individual soldier, not for the benefit of the force as a whole, they don't affect the outcomes of wars.

I don't want to ram mud down the barrel of ANY firearm and then fire it.

Back in the early 80s, most of the technology that is in modern fighting pistols was either not invented or not fielded. The Beretta is a combination of a few other very OLD pistols. This was also true in the early 80s.

When i was issued my m9 before afghanistan, i hated beretta with a passion. My wife had a 32 cal tomcat, that was a piece of junk. I tried to beat the tar out of my m9. I shot crappy wolf ammo out of it taken from afghan officers. It remained extremely accurate, and reliable. The only issue i had was the magazines seemed to hate the dirt and sand. They seemed "Iffy", but, they would still feed rounds reliably. I have much respect for the M9. I still hate the Tomcat...

The M9 is a good weapon but the Army's current guns are hit and miss. In my experience, it really depends on your armorer. If they're replacing parts on time, the unit's guns seem to run problem free. If not, it can get ugly. I was in a unit at Ft. Benning where it seemed like every other M9 was constantly malfunctioning.

As for the design, the safety on the rail can be an issue when clearing a malfunction and it's sometimes difficult to use with gloves on. That said, if it was up to me I would just keep the safety off since it's a DA/SA gun anyway but we know that'll never fly in the Army...

I would take it in a heartbeat with hollowpoints or in the 96 model just because i can shoot it well and it feels like a extension of my arm

What very few people realize is the ridiculous abuse these guns get. I haven't sen one yet that had any kind of finish left on its grip. How many rounds of shooting, how many hours of carrying and how many drops do you think that entails?

Click to expand...

I agree few really consider this. A beaten and abused gun fed inferior magazines will have problems. Regardless, I do not believe a Glock or any poly gun would stand up to the inherent, sustained abuse and neglect of general issue. However, I believe the P226 would and is a better choice/gun.

I've sold ever Glock I owned and will never part with my Beretta M9. No sexier looking piatol anywhere. Rack the slide and it feels like it's on greased ball bearings. Fits my hand like a glove. Never accidentally enaged the safty, eithr. As for them being "old fashioned", that's a dumb remark. The 1911 is still revered and it's over 100 years old. Glocks and Beretta both fire 9MM rounds with reliability. And MecGar makes 18 round flush fit mags for them if you feel that 15 rounds isn't enough.