If the USMC thinks the .45 is better...

Status
Not open for further replies.
I own both a Beretta 92FS and Colt Govt 1911, the latter of which is not a mil-spec but rather an enhanced version of the original. While shooting hundreds of rounds through each of these guns, the Colt .45 proved far more accurate than the Beretta. Beretta 92FS pistols can be accurized with specially designed bushings to make for a tighter barrel to slide fit.
 
Noklue3 said:

Brainwashed fanatics? Boot polishers?
You know it is amazing what people say sometimes about the Marines and yet when there are problems, the Marines are one of the first that are called upon and those same people jump on their bandwagon. All people that serve, Marine, Army, Navy, Air Force and Coast Guard deserve better than comments such as those. Especially from those that have never served.

Unquote

I second Noklue3's comments. Our nation is free thanks to the people who have served, and those currently serving, in the Marines and other branches of the U.S. military.
 
I can't wait for Pat Rogers to see the comments about Marines being boot polisher or brain washed. That'll be fun. :)
 
I looked at the Winchester web site (http://www.winchester.com) and compared my 9mm carry ammo (Winchester 115gr USA JHP) with their various .45ACP offerings. Using fpe and mv as criteria comparisons revealed no significant differences.

I'll stick with the 9mm. I like lots of rounds in a magazine; gives me the warm fuzzies!
 
Unfortunately, pure ballistics doesn't tell the tale. If they did, then we'd all be packing Magsafe or the like.
 
All the data out there suggests, to me, an insignificant difference between .45ACP and 9mm.

Some people like big holes. Fine with me; I like 15 rounds in a magazine. Vive la difference!
 
I'm not arguing. I actually don't care. But the point in contention is whether the USMC (specifically Force Recon) is incorrect in using the .45. And they aren't. A 1911 is a supremely efficient CQB weapon (or secondary in this case) and in FMJ configuration, I believe that the .45 is superior to the 9mm. Having used both a custom 1911 and a Beretta 92, I think the Devil Dogs made the right choice.
 
I agree. The Marines are not incorrect in using the .45ACP. But, they would have been just as well served with 9mm.

I've used many platforms in both .45ACP and 9mm (Beretta, Colt, Kimber, Ruger, S&W, Taurus). I've just never really noticed any real difference in power levels between the 9mm and .45ACP.

It pretty much equates to "6 of one, half-dozen of the other".
 
They would be well served either way. I'd perfer the 1911. So what if they use a .45 they can always pick up a 9mm from the BG. :neener:
 
If I could wear my CCW pistol the same way a Marine wears his sidearm, then I would go for a Colt .45ACP also. However I have to conceal my firearm and that makes a big difference. I would have to drastically change my lifestyle and wardrobe to conceal a .45.


If you really care enough about seriously carrying, changing your wardrobe won't matter.
Besides, a single stack 1911 is thinner than a double stack anything.



Why is this being discussed, anyway? If the Marines want a pistol that fits their hands, they deserve that, right?
 
The initial assertion was that if the Marines like the 1911, it must be the "right" gun. Which some of us found... curious.

Changing your wardrobe and habits to accomodate a big pistol is really unnecessary. If you're in that much trouble, why don't you have a rifle under your scary black trenchcoat?
 
Ya see what I started, jest because I love the 1911 .45acp and thought the Marines finally vindicated me for it...

It was fun watching the back and forth wrangling!

To each his own, just hit what you aim at and you'll be fine.

AFB
 
a 1911 (especially a commander sized example) is not hard to hide at all.

A t-shirt and an unbuttoned button up shirt does quite well, provided you use a proper holster.


Double stack 9mm's are not as concealable because of their width.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top