George Hill
Member
"George Hill, chill dude..."
Huh? You lost me, dude.
Huh? You lost me, dude.
Open Top Slide Design?
- Thread starter Shane
- Start date
- Status
Hi, George Hill,
I have never seen anyone beaned by an M9 slide breaking off, but I have seen cracked slides, so it sure has happened. Many criticisms of the M9 have not been valid, and others are actually of the cartridge, not the pistol itself. The Beretta is not a bad pistol, and has proven reliable, but it is not perfect and not deserving of blind defense.
I just don't buy that a big heavy pistol is the best for military use. A military pistol (aside from being a symbol) is primarily for last ditch, emergency use, not for shooting enemy soldiers at 500 meters. I think the Russians had the right idea with the Makarov; a light, fast handling pistol for the time when the tent flap opens and some guy in the wrong uniform sticks his head in.
Of course, Americans always think of a military pistol as something that can be "accurized" for use on the range. They have that in the M1911/A1. But range accuracy is not really relevant or necessary in combat, especially if it means reduced reliability and increased weight.
It has been suggested that two pistols be issued. One would be a light Makarov style pistol for high ranking officers as a symbol and emergency weapon; the other would be a light submachine gun, like the MAC 10, for use by troops who have to carry or man other weapons. The latter would be light enough to be carried on a belt or shoulder sling, but would be more effective than any conventional pistol. It is, as they say, an idea. (Of course, it is the old "carbine" concept all over again, so there is nothing new under the sun.)
I will stick by what I said; the M9 is just too big for a medium power pistol cartridge.
Jim
I have never seen anyone beaned by an M9 slide breaking off, but I have seen cracked slides, so it sure has happened. Many criticisms of the M9 have not been valid, and others are actually of the cartridge, not the pistol itself. The Beretta is not a bad pistol, and has proven reliable, but it is not perfect and not deserving of blind defense.
I just don't buy that a big heavy pistol is the best for military use. A military pistol (aside from being a symbol) is primarily for last ditch, emergency use, not for shooting enemy soldiers at 500 meters. I think the Russians had the right idea with the Makarov; a light, fast handling pistol for the time when the tent flap opens and some guy in the wrong uniform sticks his head in.
Of course, Americans always think of a military pistol as something that can be "accurized" for use on the range. They have that in the M1911/A1. But range accuracy is not really relevant or necessary in combat, especially if it means reduced reliability and increased weight.
It has been suggested that two pistols be issued. One would be a light Makarov style pistol for high ranking officers as a symbol and emergency weapon; the other would be a light submachine gun, like the MAC 10, for use by troops who have to carry or man other weapons. The latter would be light enough to be carried on a belt or shoulder sling, but would be more effective than any conventional pistol. It is, as they say, an idea. (Of course, it is the old "carbine" concept all over again, so there is nothing new under the sun.)
I will stick by what I said; the M9 is just too big for a medium power pistol cartridge.
Jim
George Hill
Member
I said 92FS or 96... Which we all know are solid guns.
I have yet to even heard of an FS slide cracking.
I have yet to even heard of an FS slide cracking.
Island Beretta
Member
You know I keep hearing this crap about Berettas being too big and heavy for 9mm.
As I write this post, I have 4 guns in front of me (3 belonging to friends). These were selected due to popularity. A BHP, a Beretta Inox full-size, a Glock 17 and my own Beretta 92 compact L.
Weight (heaviest first):
BHP
Beretta Inox
Beretta 92 compact L
Glock 17
Slide length (Longest first):
BHP
Beretta Inox
Glock 17
92 compact L
Blockiest slide (determined by feel, shape and also inserting in pants waist and seeing resistance and slide retraction):
Glock 17
Beretta Inox
92 compact L
BHP
Trigger Span:
BHP (shortest)
others about the same
Blockiest grip (blockiest grip first)):
Glock 17
Beretta Inox/92 compact L-can be changed by simply changing grip panels.
BHP
The Berettas' slide width at the base is about the same width of the Glock 17 but at the top, the Beretta is a lot narrower. So if the Beretta slide is thick to accomodate the use of under barrel locking blocks, what is the purpose of the Glock's width??
Also some time ago I saw a post on a forum of someone claiming to be a US Marine Armorer and hearing of soldiers having breaking slides. He himself have never seen any though.. one would have thought that such guns would have been sent to the Armory..Do we have a credibility gap here or what??
As I write this post, I have 4 guns in front of me (3 belonging to friends). These were selected due to popularity. A BHP, a Beretta Inox full-size, a Glock 17 and my own Beretta 92 compact L.
Weight (heaviest first):
BHP
Beretta Inox
Beretta 92 compact L
Glock 17
Slide length (Longest first):
BHP
Beretta Inox
Glock 17
92 compact L
Blockiest slide (determined by feel, shape and also inserting in pants waist and seeing resistance and slide retraction):
Glock 17
Beretta Inox
92 compact L
BHP
Trigger Span:
BHP (shortest)
others about the same
Blockiest grip (blockiest grip first)):
Glock 17
Beretta Inox/92 compact L-can be changed by simply changing grip panels.
BHP
The Berettas' slide width at the base is about the same width of the Glock 17 but at the top, the Beretta is a lot narrower. So if the Beretta slide is thick to accomodate the use of under barrel locking blocks, what is the purpose of the Glock's width??
Also some time ago I saw a post on a forum of someone claiming to be a US Marine Armorer and hearing of soldiers having breaking slides. He himself have never seen any though.. one would have thought that such guns would have been sent to the Armory..Do we have a credibility gap here or what??
- Status
