US Army handgun

[FL-NC]

Walt- "the lack of data is not data". Like it.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

WAIT A MINUTE! Are you or are you not claiming the slide capture feature of the FS/M9 works as intended

A couple of Marines (they say they're not ex-Marines ) I worked with when they returned to the civilian world after Desert Storm, saw slides break/fracture, and injure the shooters.

The fixes I heard about were modifications to the slide that IF the slide failed, it did so in a way that didn't injure the shooter. But the gun quit running and the shooter wasn't injured, but they were also disarmed if that was all they had! If THAT is a success, it's a bit like a phyrric victory: you win by losing!

If you're talking about a different modification, just ignore this.

 

[FL-NC]

Walt, that was and is my point. I guess I didn't make it sufficiently clear, that the bonus of not being injured by a handgun that breaks doesn't make the handgun not broken.

 

[buckhorn_cortez]

Links to independent verifiable sources that document the current problems the Army is experiencing with Beretta M-9 and the cause of the problems will be enough of a start.

You're setting up a potentially impossible requirement to fulfill. There is a real possibility that an internal report (or reports) exist. They may have been produced by any service branch, or may be a DoD report. There's no way to know if the report exists unless you are allowed access to documents of that type.

A report of the type would, in all probability, be a controlled document and not easily available to anyone outside of a service branch or the DoD with the need to have the data. The information certainly won't be available to civilians - unless they have a need to have that information.

Setting up a personal requirement of an independent report as the only information you'll believe, doesn't make first hand, empirical data null and void.

The way reports get written generally starts with collecting and quantifying empirical, field-generated data. If an armorer, who works on hundreds or thousands of pistols a year, tells you that he regularly replaces a certain part that has broken - you don't need a report to verify the information is valid.

One could take the reverse approach and demand that you provide a report stating that the Beretta has had all of its problems fixed and currently works for a specific number of rounds with no malfunctions.

Can you do that? Why not? I'm not willing to believe anything you've posted so far unless you can produce independent information.

I hope you can see that me setting up a requirement that you can't meet really isn't very helpful in, what is supposed to be, an open information exchange.

 

[FL-NC]

BSA- a google search showed a 18 page government accountability office file 18 pages long addressing the issue, which should be a fun read. There is also an article from Army Times where Gabe de Plano (who I met a few years ago (2010 ish) at Bragg- a great guy BTW) from Beretta expressed his company's frustration that the Army didn't adequately communicate with the company on these issues. I don't know if these "sources" meet your standards or not, but I'm not willing to put any more effort into finding any more. I never before attempted to access this type of information from an external source, my information is based solely on things like observation, personal experiences as a user and instructor, and feedback from other users.

To answer your question about slide capture- yes. To the best of my knowledge, the mod works in that in the broken slides WE experienced, no one was injured from parts of the inoperable weapon. I can't speak for every slide failure in the DOD and elsewhere since the M9 has been in service. Walt's Marine friend says his experiences differ.

Regarding reliability absent cleaning, in my experience the Glock and M&P will run long after any M9 pistol that hasn't been cleaned, based on experiments we conducted in training. I've never heard of Glocks or M&P pistols having issues igniting any primer- least of all the primers used in the US issue M882 9mm ball round (which I believe is made by Winchester), or the Federal 147 grain hydra shock- the 2 rounds with which I have the most experience. It is my understanding the US mil primers are rather hard compared to most- I'm not a reloader, so I don't know. However, I have seen issues with the M9 doing the same. The 2 reasons we identified that may have caused this are unauthorized modifications to the mainspring (cutting coils) to improve DA trigger resistance - replacement with Wolf mainsprings did give better DA performance without a loss of reliability- and excessive amounts of environmental debris, lubricants, and flash retardent from M882 collecting in the mainspring assembly (I believe its called a "cup' or "sleeve"), which is not an area that most users are authorized to access for routine cleaning.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

Walt, that was and is my point. I guess I didn't make it sufficiently clear, that the bonus of not being injured by a handgun that breaks doesn't make the handgun not broken.

I don't have a dog in this fight -- I'm just trying to understand, or get clarification on what's being said, and call out logical errors when I see them.

See post #143. I understood your point, but I don't think BSA1 did. BSA1 did NOT appear to understand that a FIX that kept the shooter from being injured but left him or her disarmed wasn't really a fix.

I've come to realize that while the Beretta fan base isn't as large as Glock's, Beretta lovers can be just as adamant and intense.

In terms of military spending, the effort to develop a new military handgun can be considered almost 'chump change' compared to other weapon systems. The handgun program could be be paid for by not buying several F-35 fighters.

The Air Force version (the F-35A) is supposed to run about $85 million each, while the Navy and Marine versions are a bit more costly. I'm not sure that $$ amount fully includes all development costs, and there's still very long and critical list of things that still aren't working right. (Critical software among them.) I think I read that the government plans to acquire 1,700 of those aircraft over the coming years... and there are other aircraft being developed.​

Think about the costs of a crash during training -- if the pilot ejects safely!

It's not even clear, in the wars of the future, that an air-superiority fighter is really what we will need.

 

[FL-NC]

Walt- I was previously issued MK23 (HK) and the M11 (Sig 228) and I had the opportunity to attend the HK armorer course, where I became much more educated on the MK23 and USP. While I prefer a striker fired pistol, and believe a striker fired pistol to be the best choice for the Army as a whole (not just for me, and not just a Glock)- I found the workmanship and reliability of those 2 pistols to be outstanding. Even though they aren't my favorites.

 

[PabloJ]

Walt- I was previously issued MK23 (HK) and the M11 (Sig 228) and I had the opportunity to attend the HK armorer course, where I became much more educated on the MK23 and USP. While I prefer a striker fired pistol, and believe a striker fired pistol to be the best choice for the Army as a whole (not just for me, and not just a Glock)- I found the workmanship and reliability of those 2 pistols to be outstanding. Even though they aren't my favorites.

The Mk23 .45 was the first pistol I have ever bought. I bought that when I didn't know anything about handguns. It was awful. Very large (because of huge trigger guard it would not fit into Desert Eagle holster). The barrel had stupid "plumbing washer" which they claimed made the gun more accurate. They should have issued small submachine gun to lads instead of that giantificus. If I recall the price per pistol to the government was around $1100. If you ever wonder why our country is broke. Well, stuff like this is why we are where we are.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

The Mk23 .45 was the first pistol I have ever bought. I bought that when I didn't know anything about handguns. It was awful...

As a first pistol, i suspect it would be an awful choice... But your bad choice doesn't make it a bad weapon! You were sort like a rich teenager picking a new top-end Corvette for his first car, when you hadn't even had driving lessons...)

That said, I think a MK23 would be a bad choice for me, too, and I've been shooting for a long while. The MK23 isn't your father's handgun -- in fact, it's probably also not your crazy uncle in the attic's handgun, either.

The barrel had stupid "plumbing washer" which they claimed made the gun more accurate.

What'd you do with that O-ring: say "to hell with that" and throw it away? Do you have a specific reason to call that part of the MK23 design stupid? Or do you just do that with things you don't understand?

That "O" ring works like a barrel bushing (like a NM bushing in a well-fit 1911), and coupled with a well-designed lockup mechanism, it makes the MK23 one of the most accurate .45 service weapons available.

A lot of Special Ops folks think the MK23 (and 24) is a pretty good weapon, and especially effective when used with a silencer/suppressor -- and because it's stoutly made and can handle a heavy can on the front without stressing the gun or it's frame -- more so than nearly any other handgun used by the military.

It is BIG. It is awkward to handle. It is not a candidate for concealed carry. It's not a good first, second, or third weapon. But it has its place. That place wasn't in your hands.

 

[BSA1]

BSA- a google search showed a 18 page government accountability office file 18 pages long addressing the issue, which should be a fun read. There is also an article from Army Times where Gabe de Plano (who I met a few years ago (2010 ish) at Bragg- a great guy BTW) from Beretta expressed his company's frustration that the Army didn't adequately communicate with the company on these issues.

Links?

It is not my responsibility to search the Internet for documentation to support your claims. You did a google search but still will not post links that support your claims.

You have used claims of a long military career to establish your credentials as a expert on the deficiencies of the 92/M-9. Yet I fail to see how that makes your opinion any more valid than that of civilian users of the 92/M-9.

It is clear at this point that without you posting documentation and links to support your claims including the outdated slide breaking incidents that is just a circular and pointless conversation.

 

[PowerG]

GAO Report: Quality and Safety Problems With the Beretta M9 Handgun (early)

http://archive.gao.gov/d16t6/136824.pdf

 

[PowerG]

http://www.defensereview.com/the-true-story-of-the-beretta-m9-pistol/

 

[Walt Sherrill]

The Wikipedia article on the M9 has a lot of info and I'm sure you can find other articles by doing searches. Wiki offers links to various studies, reports, GAO analyses, and offers an Naval analysis of actual events experienced in combat situations. Go to the Controvery section of the Wikipedia article.

(Some of the concerns were magazine related, and that can't be blamed on Beretta -- the government got those from other sources.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beretta_M9

 

[9mmepiphany]

This has become circular and I think it's time to put it to bed