U.S. Brings Back the .45

[Greymoor]

I would also have to give a thumbs up to the XD45 w/ 5" barrel. I would just ask for a bit better coating. That alone would make it a great weapon.

For a Military weapon concealment is a non-issue. It takes down like a charm. 13+1 capacity, oh-yea! Safety levers? - nada. Manual of arms is fairly simple. The XD45 has a lot to offer.

I also have to admit that, as much as I love my 1911s, I do not believe an army will ever issue them again in mass to it's personel. The cost, complexity, lack of capacity, etc . . . weigh against it. Specialized units, Sure. Military wide, I do not think so.

 

[kbheiner7]

I've shot deer with both the 9mm and .45 ACP with both hollow point and ball ammo and the .45 was more effective. IIRC, in every case (7 deer) the .45 penetrated deeper and (obviously) left a bigger hole.

I'm not sure how deer compare to humans physiologically, but they're roughly the same weight with similar sized organs.

I would never shoot a .32 ACP at a deer - it would be irrresponsible.

 

[Grunt]

Can I muddy the water a bit more... what about .45 GAP?

.45 GAP? Ain't gonna happen. Never has been a military cartridge and I highly doubt it ever will. Hell, I'd be surprised if it's not as common as .357 Maximum in a few years.

 

[IndianaDean]

OK, Here's a thought. And, I realize this might be over the top, but rather than spend all that money to dump all the M9s and buy new guns in .45, why don't they use that money to train the recruits to move and fire with handguns, and actually teach them how to hit center mass?

 

[CAnnoneer]

why don't they use that money to train the recruits to move and fire with handguns, and actually teach them how to hit center mass?

They got rifles for that. Handguns have very little practical relevance in the modern military.

 

[Longbow]

They got rifles for that. Handguns have very little practical relevance in the modern military.

So why change?

 

[Werewolf]

They got rifles for that. Handguns have very little practical relevance in the modern military.

If one is talking traditional battlefield combat between armies in the field then I'd have to agree.

BUT our Army today is tasked more and more with urban combat, close in stuff and in that environment a handgun has a definite use.

 

[Thain]

The US Coast Guard (military, despite what you may have heard) puts a great deal of emphasis on the M9, from what I understand.
According to some of what I've read, the M16A2 isn't even part of basic training for the USCG.

Is the 11.43x23 mm round really that much different from a 9x19 mm round?

 

[Checkman]

Is the military really going back to the 45acp as a general issue? Or is it just becoming the round of choice for the special ops - which I believe have a fairly generous budget. I've been told that the budget for the snake eaters is seperate from the budget for the "ordinary" troops/sailors/airmen/marines. Of course the goverment budget process is complex and confusing so who can say what is really the truth of the matter.

Is the 45 really coming back? Or is this just a big old rumor.

 

[gunfan]

It is true!

Is the military really going back to the 45acp as a general issue? Or is it just becoming the round of choice for the special ops - which I believe have a fairly generous budget. I've been told that the budget for the snake eaters is seperate from the budget for the "ordinary" troops/sailors/airmen/marines. Of course the goverment budget process is complex and confusing so who can say what is really the truth of the matter.

Is the 45 really coming back? Or is this just a big old rumor.

The 11.4 mm is going to be returned to military service as "an alternative battle pistol cartridge" to the currently inventoried M9.

The only question that remains is... Who will get the DA/SA High-capacity .45 ACP contract?

Scott

 

[MAClarkWA]

Ill take it any way it comes

A return to the .45acp in any form will be an improvement over the M9. It will be a proud day when the US military finally returns to its roots.

 

[ghost squire]

Why does almost everyone assume this is going to be a doublestack pistol?

 

[english kanigit]

The only question that remains is... Who will get the DA/SA High-capacity .45 ACP contract?

Whatever company is owed a political favor.
*cough*H&K*coughcough*

 

[4v50 Gary]

Kee-rist! From a single stack up to 15 rounds? Geez, does SOCOM expect our troops to pistol whip people with those long magazines? A modified 1911 is good enough for gubmint work. OK, make it a double stack Para Ordnance LDA with rails.

 

[355sigfan]

Kee-rist! From a single stack up to 15 rounds? Geez, does SOCOM expect our troops to pistol whip people with those long magazines? A modified 1911 is good enough for gubmint work. OK, make it a double stack Para Ordnance LDA with rails.

No thanks no LDA double stack for me. First the LDA sucks has a spongy trigger with a very very long reset. It ruins the best part of a 1911 the short single action trigger that breaks like a glass rod. With a very short reset. As for double stack mags 1911's don't run that great with them especially in sandy enviroments.
Pat

 

[pcf]

Who's going to pay for all this? XM-8 got canned. I'm pretty sure that Congress isn't going to provide supplemental funding for a new pistol, and that the money doesn't currently exist in the DOD.

Just because Aberdeen is interested in looking at a system or type of system doesn't mean that the DOD as a whole has any interest in it.

Don't forget that when a new pistol is adopted it'll take at least 5 years for it to trickle down to the fighting man. Got to outfit the headshed first.

 

[dm1333]

Some of us are already using .40 S&W

My boarding officers suit up with SIGs every time they go out. And if for some reason when the CG deploys somewhere and the decision to arm us with M9s is made the Navy will cough them up. Please don't think the Coast Guard is just totally on a different course than DOD because we were in DOT and now DHS. The decisions to put us in different branches of the government were based on our missions, our supply system is pretty much the same as the other services.

 

[355sigfan]

My boarding officers suit up with SIGs every time they go out. And if for some reason when the CG deploys somewhere and the decision to arm us with M9s is made the Navy will cough them up. Please don't think the Coast Guard is just totally on a different course than DOD because we were in DOT and now DHS. The decisions to put us in different branches of the government were based on our missions, our supply system is pretty much the same as the other services.

In peace time the Coast Guard is pretty much a national leo force. In time of war I doubt you would be using your .40's. Because there would be no ammo supply.
Pat

 

[Grunt]

No thanks no LDA double stack for me. First the LDA sucks has a spongy trigger with a very very long reset. It ruins the best part of a 1911 the short single action trigger that breaks like a glass rod. With a very short reset. As for double stack mags 1911's don't run that great with them especially in sandy enviroments.
Pat

I said it before, and I'll say it again. SA autos are NOT the way to go with the firearms experience most recruits have these days. Even afterwards, not all MOS's deal with firearms on a day-to-day basis. Here's an example, how about your non-combat orientated folks that don't have their own guns to practice with in their off time (some don't like shooting anyways and wouldn't want to qualify if they didn't have to) and are only sent to the range once every three years. In the Air Force, these are Catagory C shooters...and there's a LOT of them! The course is one morning class about 3-4 hours then they turn them out on the range with one block instructor per seven students. They fire 45 rounds for practice then another 45 rounds to qualify. Afterwards, it's unlikely some of them will touch another firearm for another three years until they have to qualify again. Believe me, we see fingers on triggers, muzzles going places they shouldn't (oh, I should mention that the M9 DOES have a round in the chamber BTW) and all sorts of crazy stunts that leaves me thinking that it's bad enough they are doing this with a long, heavy DA trigger pull but it would be insane to give these people a weapon with a short SA trigger.
I am not 1911 (own several myself) but today being a CATM instructor, I can tell you that this would NOT be the way to go! If everybody that came into the armed forces were gun-savy like most folks on these boards, that would be another matter but the reality is that a lot of them are not and something like the LEM or DAK trigger might be the best compromise between a better trigger than a DA/SA trigger that is easier for new shooters to manage and maintianing a safer trigger pull than a short, crisp SA trigger.

 

[355sigfan]

I said it before, and I'll say it again. SA autos are NOT the way to go with the firearms experience most recruits have these days. Even afterwards, not all MOS's deal with firearms on a day-to-day basis. Here's an example, how about your non-combat orientated folks that don't have their own guns to practice with in their off time (some don't like shooting anyways and wouldn't want to qualify if they didn't have to) and are only sent to the range once every three years. In the Air Force, these are Catagory C shooters...and there's a LOT of them! The course is one morning class about 3-4 hours then they turn them out on the range with one block instructor per seven students. They fire 45 rounds for practice then another 45 rounds to qualify. Afterwards, it's unlikely some of them will touch another firearm for another three years until they have to qualify again. Believe me, we see fingers on triggers, muzzles going places they shouldn't (oh, I should mention that the M9 DOES have a round in the chamber BTW) and all sorts of crazy stunts that leaves me thinking that it's bad enough they are doing this with a long, heavy DA trigger pull but it would be insane to give these people a weapon with a short SA trigger.
I am not 1911 (own several myself) but today being a CATM instructor, I can tell you that this would NOT be the way to go! If everybody that came into the armed forces were gun-savy like most folks on these boards, that would be another matter but the reality is that a lot of them are not and something like the LEM or DAK trigger might be the best compromise between a better trigger than a DA/SA trigger that is easier for new shooters to manage and maintianing a safer trigger pull than a short, crisp SA trigger.

Frankly I disagree if they can handle the M4 (which has a thumsafety) they can handle a 1911 with minimal training. But I know the military does not wish to spend the money on training. I believe the Glock is the best alternative. It has a very simple manual of arms its very easy to shoot with a short trigger reset. Long trigger guns like the dak and lem are handicaps to good fast accurate shooting. Negligent discharges will not be ruduced because this is a training issue not an equipment issue. There were far more ND's with police revolvers for instance than every auto make used by police combined. The reason for the ND's with the revolvers was poor training. (keep your finger off the trigger).

I detest the LEM. We had an officer with one and the trigger was like a windex bottle trigger. Long soft and no predictable break point. ALso it was almost impossible not to short stroke the trigger in rapid fire. I hated the thing the officer did too and later sold it.
Pat

 

[pcf]

I said it before, and I'll say it again. SA autos are NOT the way to go with the firearms experience most recruits have these days. Even afterwards, not all MOS's deal with firearms on a day-to-day basis. Here's an example, how about your non-combat orientated folks that don't have their own guns to practice with in their off time (some don't like shooting anyways and wouldn't want to qualify if they didn't have to) and are only sent to the range once every three years. In the Air Force, these are Catagory C shooters...and there's a LOT of them! The course is one morning class about 3-4 hours then they turn them out on the range with one block instructor per seven students. They fire 45 rounds for practice then another 45 rounds to qualify. Afterwards, it's unlikely some of them will touch another firearm for another three years until they have to qualify again. Believe me, we see fingers on triggers, muzzles going places they shouldn't (oh, I should mention that the M9 DOES have a round in the chamber BTW) and all sorts of crazy stunts that leaves me thinking that it's bad enough they are doing this with a long, heavy DA trigger pull but it would be insane to give these people a weapon with a short SA trigger.
I am not 1911 (own several myself) but today being a CATM instructor, I can tell you that this would NOT be the way to go! If everybody that came into the armed forces were gun-savy like most folks on these boards, that would be another matter but the reality is that a lot of them are not and something like the LEM or DAK trigger might be the best compromise between a better trigger than a DA/SA trigger that is easier for new shooters to manage and maintianing a safer trigger pull than a short, crisp SA trigger.

How did the 1911 survive? How did millions of Soldiers, Marines, Sailors and Airmen not kill each other droves with the super sensitive single action trigger.

WAKE UP, since the Civil War the overwhelming majority of servicemembers have had absolutely no experience with firearms, no firearms experience is nothing new. How did the unsafe 1911 (it has a single action trigger, can't be trusted in the hands of the lowly common person) stay in service so long?

I find it ironic that that a guy with the name "grunt" bases his opinion of what a service pistol should be, on supposed clowns in the Airforce. For 80 some odd years millions of service members, with absolutely no firearms experience trained, and successfully and safely employed a pistol with a single action trigger. In the last 20 years did the common man turn into a dolt when handling a firearm?

 

[TC-TX]

Thank God. Its about time.

 

[Grunt]

How did the 1911 survive? How did millions of Soldiers, Marines, Sailors and Airmen not kill each other droves with the super sensitive single action trigger.

By carrying it with an empty chamber until needed to be fired.

WAKE UP, since the Civil War the overwhelming majority of servicemembers have had absolutely no experience with firearms, no firearms experience is nothing new. How did the unsafe 1911 (it has a single action trigger, can't be trusted in the hands of the lowly common person) stay in service so long?

Got any evidence to back that statement up? What facts are you basing this off of or is this just conjecture? When I did my first tour in '88, quite a few of the Marines I served with grew up with firearms. Sure there were a few from urban areas that didn't have that much experience but these were days before the '94 crime bill, the '89 import ban and other anti-gun laws were in place and gun ownership wasn't looked as being as politically incorrect as it is today. Today, the boy riding down the street on his bicycle with his .22 to go target practice is pretty much a thing of the past in many areas. JrROTC programs in many cases have dropped firearms marksmanship programs especially in the wake of school shootings. People are coming into the military today relying on a one day class for their training. Personally, I think this training comes up short but the wing kings are looking at other programs to spend money on and small arms training is taking a back seat at least in the Air Force.

I find it ironic that that a guy with the name "grunt" bases his opinion of what a service pistol should be, on supposed clowns in the Airforce. For 80 some odd years millions of service members, with absolutely no firearms experience trained, and successfully and safely employed a pistol with a single action trigger. In the last 20 years did the common man turn into a dolt when handling a firearm?

It's called prior service. I originally spent time in the Marines as an 0331 (that's a machine gunner for you non-grunt types) and today I am a combat arms instructor with three other prior Marines for an AFSOC command in the Air Force. I'm out there on the range doing the job watching people come through the class and out onto the line. I see first hand what the average skill level is. How about you? As for the statement of servicemen with no prior firearms training over the past 80 years go, see my last comment. Finally, I would have to say that given experience on the range these days, yes the common man (and woman) has turned into a dolt when it comes to weapons handling. New airmen we have coming in today are notably less profecient with firearms and when you ask for a show of hands of who has had firearms experience outside of our classes, there are far fewer hands going up than there were in the past. The bottom line is that we are getting in people with less and less prior experience yet we are limited in how much training we can give them without taking them away from their primary mission and getting the powers that be to sign off on the funding for more ammo and training time is another obstical that is not easily overcome.
Matter of fact, you seem so comfortable with the idea of these people carrying a 1911, how about coming into the carrear field and spend some time out there with these people and see if you still think a 1911 would be a good choice rather than comment from up there in the peanut gallery. I can tell you right now that I no longer fear getting mugged. What are you going to do, point a loaded handgun at me? Gee, that never happens at work! LOL

 

[dm1333]

Don't bother arguing Grunt

Practical experience and first hand knowledge don't matter I just found out that in peace time my service is just a police force and that if we go to war it won't be with the Sigs we are now being issued because there won't be any ammo for them.

I agree with you, I'm surprised at the number of people we get who have never held a firearm before in their life and that problem won't go away anytime soon. Times change, people change, why not the philosophy behind the weapons system. And no, that IS NOT a knock on the 1911.

 

[dm1333]

The branch that is allegedly getting Sig 229 DAK is....

trueblue1776 said;


You'll excuse me if I don't hold my breath waiting?

What branch of the service is allegedly getting these new Sigs in .40 S&W? Why hasn't Sig announced this obviously very significant sale? Why hasn't there been a request for bids for .40 S&W ammo released?

Jeff

The US Coast Guard. I've held it. I've shot it. I have boarded with it.
The first magazine I picked up off the pile next to my computer was Guns & Weapons for Law Enforcement. The ad is on page 41. "The superior performance of the P226,P229,P239 and the rest of the SIG SAUER pistol line is why the Army, Navy Seals, FBI, Coast Guard, Texas Rangers and many of the largest and most prestigious law enforcement agencies trust their lives to SIGARMS." And yes, we do have ammo for it. Bought it on the open market and it works just great. From a company named "Federal"? I think they're new in the business Sigfan.