US Army looking for new pistol?

[ConserVet]

What galls me in all these discussions about the adoption of the M9 is how everyone will casually state "9mm was adopted to comply with NATO." as if that alone proves the round is worthless...

Call me a whiny peice of Euo-trash if you want, but come on guys! NATO isn't exactly an organization without some military credibility, nor did NATO come to there conclussions without input from all of its members. Including the United States.

I don't believe we in the .45 camp have presented the argument that the 9mm is worthless, just that the .45 is preferable. The 9mm parabellum has a distinguished history as does the 45ACP.

To say that the 9mm should now be preserved as the service round simply because NATO adopted it years ago really doesn't apply today. NATO wanted all of its members to adopt the same service pistol round, and rifle round for that matter, to simplify logistics during the Cold War. Many police departments and law enforcement agencies do the same thing today for the same reason. Since the collapse of the Warsaw Pact that argument really doesn't apply, because aside from the odd peacekeeping mission NATO doesn't work together cohesively anymore. Well, at least not to the extent that common logistics is a consideration.

So you think the 9mm is superior. Okay, fine. I think the .45ACP is preferable for a service round because it leaves larger, nastier sucking chest wounds in bad guys. I only hope that anyone reappraising service pistol rounds, even newer examples like the .40 S&W or .357 Sig, give fair and accurate tests and appraisals. And as long as the Powers That Be decide that the superior properties of the .45ACP outperform other contenders I'll be happy!

 

[Cliff47]

Has anybody considered the CZ97B, it's .45 ACP, highly accurate, high-capacity magazine, and shooter friendly. Except for the modular design of the trigger group and the preference for a polymer frame/subframe, I would like to see how it stacks up against the other candidates. Not saying it's the perfect design, but consider the option.

 

[Thain]

So you think the 9mm is superior. Okay, fine. I think the .45ACP is preferable for a service round because it leaves larger, nastier sucking chest wounds in bad guys. I only hope that anyone reappraising service pistol rounds, even newer examples like the .40 S&W or .357 Sig, give fair and accurate tests and appraisals. And as long as the Powers That Be decide that the superior properties of the .45ACP outperform other contenders I'll be happy!

I don't think it is "superior," per se. Just that it is not as worthless a round as the Cult of .45 would have us beleive. Personally, I think the 5.7 x 28 mm deserves serious consideration, as does the .45, 9mm, .40 and (dare I say it) .45 GAP. I'm rooting for the 5.7mm, but thats just because I have a paranoid fear about a conflict with China (or Chinesse-backed) South America... body armor doesn't seem to be an issue with Arab guerillas, but if we ever need to tackle the People's Liberation Army over Taiwan it could be.

However, I'll be happy if the PTB pick the best round, in the best weapon. So long as they let science and logistics determine the weapon, not politics.

 

[medmo]

"Uh, I'm not sure I would call the design all that good. My AD counterparts in the armory have at least 2 and I think possibly 3 slides that are either completely broken in half or cracked they were sending of to DRMO. IIRC, it was 2 broken and 1 cracked that I seen. Another common problem we have with the M9 is broken locking blocks. Right now we are scheduled to change them out every 5K rounds but even then, we see them happen on the range probably at least every other month we fire them. How many more are going when the active duty folks are firing I'm not sure but if we're having problems with these same pistols, odds are they are having a few break with their classes as well."

Grunt, I'm curious as to why we have two different experiences. I broke the M9's in with the Corps at Quantico with the transition from 1911 to M9. Every pistol had a book with every round recorded daily going into the armory and coming back out the next morning. "Common" problems? Not in the pistols that I saw shoot tens of thousands of rounds in that first year. Breakages were off the radar compared to the Smedley Butler Vintage 1911's that were being replaced.

The slide breakage and locking block problems were fixed fleet wide years ago. The recent problems with failure to feeds that have been found due to contract magazine suppliers other then Beretta. The Corps experienced the same problem about 12 years ago with M16 failure to feeds due to contract magazines that had to be purged from supply.

 

[Grunt]

Yeah, when I went through MCSFBn.Lant at Virginia Beach back in '88, we were the second class to use the M9. These also had the small hammer pin heads (Beretta 92F series rather than the 92FS) and there were stories about Navy SEALs having slide seperation problems back then. These days I'm CATM in the USAFR (yeah, somebodys got to teach them how to shoot ) and it looks like they are still having these same problems. In the M9s defense, these are training weapons that do see a lot of rounds go down range in the form of M882 or the new frangible "green" bullets but no +P or SMG ammo. Our AD counterparts deal with the scheduled maintence so I can't speak for how often they are inspected and guaged. As far as the record of how many rounds a certain weapon has fired, that would be maintained on the 710 forum we use that lists the shooter, unit, rounds fired, weapon serial number, and their score.
As far as the bad mags go, yeah Checkmate mags are the ones that are the big problem, especially the earlier ones. We're not too concerned about that on the range but I make it a point to let the class know about the problems and to get their hands on Beretta mags if they are going downrange. Yeah, I also remember the bad mag problems in the Corps back in the day. I clearly remember Sanchez was one brand that was crap and I think Cooper mags were the other ones that were known to cause a lot of problems. Kind of silly to issue that crap but our cure was to make sure they were "accidently" stepped on then turn them back in for a new mag and hope they weren't another bad mag that just "accidently" gets stepped on again.

 

[gunfan]

It will be the .45 ACP (for the preponderance of the troops).

If I had MY way, however, The 10mm is the obvious answer, because...

a) Versatility: Load it up, load it down, Metal Piercing ammunition, (for defeating body armor). You name it, the 10mm can do it! (What was your first clue)? Loaded down, you have the equivalent of the .40 S&W for suppressed weapons and "less than robust" troops. (Read: recoil is not, nor ever has been, an issue)! GET OVER IT!

b) Capacity: In 1978, the adoption of Beretta M9 aptly illustrated the penchant of the DoD for their "lotsa shots" or "spray and pray" logic. The Glock 20 proved that the 10mm can "play that game" quite well, thank you very much!

What more do you need in a pistol/submachinegun cartridge? You'll "have your cake and will be able to eat it too"!

Incidentally, I carry a Glock Model 20 daily, as an Armed Security Professional. I have outshot two retired Peace Officers and an MP that had just returned fom active duty in Baghdad. They were shooting Compact Glock in both 9mm and .40 S&W. The prosecution rests.

Rant off.

Scott

 

[BrokenArrow]

Several things...

US M882 NATO is loaded to 36,250 psi, which is in the SAAMI +P range (>35,000 - 38,500 psi).

In 1988 the Army fired 12 Beretta pistols to failure, US and Italian made, commercial and military. All the pistols broke the slides w round counts ranging from just under 5,000 rounds to just over 30,000 rounds. By 1998 when I retired the average life of an M9 slide in testing was over 75,000 rounds w a range from 55,000 - 95,000. Somebody fixed something that wasn't broken?

Beretta modified the locking block for longer service life around 1992, but I don't think the military replaced all the older blocks. Avg life for the old blocks was about 17,500 rounds. Newer blocks are supposed to go at least 25,000. The only part w a contract specified service life was the frame, and it was for just 5,000 rounds. If they want tougher guns, they need to specify tougher standards.

I checked w the local base and they have over 30,000 through their training pistols. They have never broken a slide and have never broken a block under 15,000 rounds. Some folks get better pistols, or some are a lot harder on them than others?

I may have mentioned all this before, but judging by the posts that came after, a few missed it the first time.

The Joint Combat Pistol (JCP) has a specified service life of at least 20,000 rounds. Are folks gonna bitch if they fall apart at 20,001 rounds?

 

[355sigfan]

If I had MY way, however, The 10mm is the obvious answer, because...

a) Versatility: Load it up, load it down, Metal Piercing ammunition, (for defeating body armor). You name it, the 10mm can do it! (What was your first clue)? Loaded down, you have the equivalent of the .40 S&W for suppressed weapons and "less than robust" troops. (Read: recoil is not, nor ever has been, an issue)! GET OVER IT!

b) Capacity: In 1978, the adoption of Beretta M9 aptly illustrated the penchant of the DoD for their "lotsa shots" or "spray and pray" logic. The Glock 20 proved that the 10mm can "play that game" quite well, thank you very much!

What more do you need in a pistol/submachinegun cartridge? You'll "have your cake and will be able to eat it too"!

Incidentally, I carry a Glock Model 20 daily, as an Armed Security Professional. I have outshot two retired Peace Officers and an MP that had just returned fom active duty in Baghdad. They were shooting Compact Glock in both 9mm and .40 S&W. The prosecution rests.

Rant off.

Scott

The 10mm is a crappy service round for the masses. Its high recoil reduces qualification scores. Shot placement is king not a few extra footpounds. The 9mm is a good general issue round. Most can shoot it well and it has adiquate power. The 45 has an edge and is a good tool for the professionals in the SPEC OPPS community. Nice sig line though. But outshooting two former officers and an MP is not that special. Go to an IDPA or ISPC match then report back.
Pat

 

[rageofangels]

Every army worth their weight should always be looking for a new and improved pistol.

 

[ziadel]

Georg Luger is typically ranked right up there with John Browning when it comes to skill as a firearms designer.

Come on now, don't you think your reaching a little bit?

Ask anyone to name three Browning designs, then ask someone to name three Luger designs, off the top of my head I can name only one Luger design, probably because it bears his name..

 

[Turk]

Handguns are nice. But if you know you're going to a gun fight take a rifle. I carried a 1911 for 4 months in combat it was a GREAT chow gun but beyond that if my 60 stopped I'd find a 16. If the military goes to another handgun I would think it would one like the Glock or similar and maybe in 10mm. With all the body armor being used today I think a round is needed with a little more butt to it.

I was a hardcore 1911 45 shooter until push came to shove and of the two handguns I had in my bedroom I grabbed a Smith 5904 over the 1911? Today I keep a Browning Hi-Power as my house handgun and a Kel-tec P-11 as my CCW. Concerning 45 being more lethal I would say probably BUT I'll trade you shot for shot from 15 yards I'll take a 9 and I get FIRST SHOT.

Turk

Please remember to pray for our troops.

 

[748]

I would like to see a 1911 style gun if the military (USAF included) was looking for a heavier steel frame gun.
Hopefully they will for get about the old 7 round mags and go with at least 8 rounders.
If they are looking to go light and plastic then I would like to see them go with FN's 5.7x28mm USG.
Having a 1.7lb gun loaded with 20 rounds of AP ammo would be OK.
This would my run down if I got to pick my gun.
M9 < (any)M4/M16A2/M16A1
M9 < 1911
M9 < Glock 20
M9 < FN USG
M9 > bag of rocks/wooden stick(s)

 

[Thain]

FN Five-seveN as a sidearm, FN P-90 as a smg/pdw, FN Minimi as a squad automatic... and some as yet undeveloped FN assault rifle.

Not only would I be happy with the guns, I would also be looking to buy stock in FN Herstal!

 

[mndfusion]

I'm sure the ARMY is working on SABOT rounds for both 9mm and .45 acp to defeat body armor clad thugs.

Plus they have AP AMMO...hahahah

 

[gazpacho]

FWIW (and that might not be a lot) I think the problem with the M9 is that is is too large of a handgun to serve as back-up for a rifleman, and too small of a caliber to serve as a primary weapon.

For soldiers only carrying sidearms, I'd recommend 45 acp from a handgun with a forward magazine well that can double as a vertical grip. A 10 round magazine could be in place when the weapon is carried (slung if a holster isn't feasible) with higher capacity magazines at hand for reloads. Grips would be interchangable to fit the individual soldier. Reasonable use of polymers could keep the weapon weight within the range of a 1911A1.

For the M4 carrying infantryman, I might consider a compact revolver. If we were to remain faithful to the Hague Accords, then perhaps a lowly 38 Special +P LSWC would be a better choice than 9mm FMJ. A 3" S&W Model 10 modified to shoot with or without moonclips, or even a steel J-frame would do. As many argue that the average infantryman doesn't need a sidearm, the added insurance of a small revolver should be welcome. The tiny J-frame would remain with the soldiers even when their rifles weren't, giving them something better than harsh words to fight with.

As with any weapon, training would be paramount.

Don't worry about flaming. I consider constructive criticism as a gift. Everything else can be ignored as the flotsam it is.

 

[Thain]

Gazpacho, what you've described is the PDW concept that has become quite the "rage" among the military contractors of late. The Heckler & Koch MP5K, MP7A1, Steyr TMP, and the FN P90 are some of the early contenders.

 

[355sigfan]

I see no use for the revolver in the military. If a small handgun was wanted a Glock 26 would do far better. The 9mm can also be loaded with AP ammo something the 38 can not. The 9mm hits harder as well. As for the forward magazine why? It makes the gun almost impossible to holster. If your going to do that get a PDW on a sling with more capacity. I believe the average soldier would be well served with a Glock 17 and the spec opps folks would do well with custom 1911's
Pat

 

[IndianaDean]

I'm with you 355Sig. Are there any statistics as to how often our troops have actually had to resort to using a handgun in this current conflict? I wouldn't think they are used too often.

 

[gazpacho]

355sigfan,

Moving the magazine away from the grip alleviates the problem of having to thick of a grip to adequately hold on to. Handguns will be issued to support trooper most often. Because women are not allowed to serve in combat roles, and because wome on average have smaller hands than men, it means our support troops have a significantly larger number of troops with handsizes inadequate for double stack magazine handguns. I, myself, used to own a Glock 26 for CCW purposes, but eventually sold it because the grip size was simply too large for my hands.

On the other hand, a PDW would allow even small handed soldiers to get a good grip on their weapon and allow them to carry a major caliber (not necessarily 45acp) with a sufficently high capacity weapon.

As far as revolvers go, they have the shortest and simplest manual of arms available to any repeating firearm. Since training in the use of sidearms is not a concern for our military, it is arguable that simple is desirable. If the caliber is of concern, then go to 45 colt.

Armor piercing capability of handguns should not even be a criteria for our service sidearm. (Special Ops needs excepted.) If the viability of our fighting troops depends on the ability of their sidearms to defeat body armor, then WE HAVE ALREADY LOST!

A soldier's best friend is his rifle. His sidearm is more akin to a cute girly pre-teen cousin, in comparison.

 

[medmo]

"Beretta modified the locking block for longer service life around 1992, but I don't think the military replaced all the older blocks. Avg life for the old blocks was about 17,500 rounds. Newer blocks are supposed to go at least 25,000. The only part w a contract specified service life was the frame, and it was for just 5,000 rounds. If they want tougher guns, they need to specify tougher standards."

The USMC did. I still have the mark on my left thumb to prove it.....

 

[355sigfan]

As far as revolvers go, they have the shortest and simplest manual of arms available to any repeating firearm. Since training in the use of sidearms is not a concern for our military
END QUOTE

Actually revolvers have a more complicated manual of arms if your using them to their potential. Reloads are more difficult, tactical reloads (topping off) a revolver is very difficult. They have low capacity and a heavy trigger. That added with the fact revolvers can't take abuse very well. Makes them a poor choice.

The Glock 26 was too big for your hands then you must have exceptionally small hands. The 26 is too small for most people. Anyway a Glock 17 in 9mm is a reasonable choice for the average troop. The manual or arms is easy. It has a manadagble trigger. Its hell for stout almost indestructable. It will run with a lot of neglect.

PDW's make sense for support personal that don't usually have to fight. Truck drivers, pilots ext. PDW's should have stocks however and are really mini carbines rather than large handguns.

Pistols will never be replaced. Their needed for concealment for certain covert opps. Their good back ups to your service rifle should it go out of commission.

Custom 1911's are a good choice for those that need a handgun and have the skill to handle a bit more recoil. The 1911 is the ultimate fighting pistol made.
Pat

 

[Jeff White]

gazpacho said;

Handguns will be issued to support trooper most often.

Not in the US Army since the intorduction of the M1 Carbine. If you look at the MTOE of most combat support and combat service support units, you'll find that a company sized unit has 1 pistol and that belongs to the commander.

Pistols are issued to field grade officers (major and above) and people in combat units whose duties have their hands too busy to carry a rifle. Machine gun and mortar gunners and assistant gunners, medics and company commanders. Tank crews get pistols but they also have 2 M4s as BII on their vehicle to use when dismounted.

There is no need for the class of weapon people call PDWs. It's an answer looking for a question. The M4 is compact enough even for most Army aviators to stash one in their aircraft.

Jeff

 

[gazpacho]

Jeff White,

Wouldn't the M4 be a bit cumbersome for a truck driver in the cab while driving? It seems that defending against boarders would be easier with a smaller firearm. An alternative might be a setup like Olympic Arms AR Pistol. At least it would allow commonality of ammo and magazines.

355sigfan,

The shortness of the Glock 26 grip is not the problem, its the circumference. Properly held in my strong hand I can actually use the pinky of my weak hand (with gentle pressure) to rotate the handgun in my grip. The Glock 17 isn't much better. The XD9 is managable. To my defense regarding revolvers, I did mention using moonclips to aid in reloading. They have setups that allow loading with or without the moonclip. A full reload is quicker and easier than a tactical reload when you use moonclips (not to mention a tac-reload is next to impossible with moonclips). I will admit that I don't know the abuse tollerance level of a revolver, however I have never heard of a modern revolver described as not robust. The 1911A1 works well in my hand, but I believe it is just too heavy for current issue.

In my suggestion for the revolver, I was mainly considering the requirement for a Hague Convention friendly cartridge choice. No handgun FMJ cartridge seems to be adequate for the job, so I was considering an old fashioned bare lead bullet instead. A flat front end would be better than a rounded one, so that led me to the revolver.

 

[Jeff White]

gazpacho,

The driver is busy driving. If you look up the task react to ambush unblocked, you'll find that all vehicles are to drive through the kill zone as fast as possible and get out of dodge....To react to a blocked ambush, you dismount and attempt to clear the roadblock with a flank attack. In either case, the carbine or rifle is more suitable then a pistol or a PDW type weapon.

Jeff

 

[gazpacho]

I met a guy who raced a stick in SCCA. He was a double amputee, one arm one leg. Driving with one hand free is not inconceivable. Neither is a bottleneck ambush, where speeds may slow down enough where foot traffic can catch up with you.