What sidearm should replace the U.S. M9?

[icebones]

the p-228/ m-11 handgun are issued to air crews and pilots. where even the full size beretta m9 "supposedly" is a little too bulky.

to tell the truth, i would rather has a m-11 over the m9 anyway.
good idea with the m1911a1, but the military wont accept a m1911 as standard issue because it isnt double action.

if i ever hit iraq i will pursue a 1911soc to the ends of the earth...

 

[Erik]

"Would the US Army/DoD need a new M-11 pistol too?..."

Yes, seeing how 228s aren't made anymore. At the very least, they'll have to redesignate the 229.

 

[bpsig]

I have read the posts and have a few opinions. I agree with the 2 to chest 1 to head solves things. But the seals use a sig not beretta. Sig came in first in trials not beretta. But for political decisions and a last minute drop in $ of 20.00 we have the m9/10. But paid way more to fill orders for a 228 or m11 since production capacity wasn't there for m9 etc. As for replacement I have used all of the suggested posts. The hk is a good weapon but replacement parts are very hard to get sometimes and the newer models have yet to be proven. The 9mm is for target and non nutcases. Sorry seen to many hits to slow someone down unless single to cns. the 40 is a compromise but it has been adopted by most law Enforcment depertments and by the Coasties and ncis. Good round and penetraion. 357 sig is accurate and powerful hence the problem need a good hp to keep from going thru to many objects and people. But mil regs no hp's so back to over powerful speedy hole like 9mm. 45 has mass and with the new 185 +ptmj is great but the weapons suggested don't fit most of the mil regs or have durability issues. xd is okay but has problems with finish and longevity. Glock is great but in 45 large for all to handle easily. M&p well where are the 14 round mags for le& mil at? looked can't find em so passed good trigger but hate original desgin of no mag and sear moves out of play. weak spot supposed to be changed in later models.
An intermediate round like 40sw in a sig 226 x5 or tactical with the 15 rounds will work okay . For mil battles against terrorists aka zealots use a 155 goldot or double tap /hst will be fine but issue at least 7 magazines per pistol. In 45 which has a established record . A Para lda action with high cap ,night sights and amdex saftey would be fine from Springfield even if no more cheap brazilian frames or pot metal used. Call it a 1911 A3-4 whatever just upgrade and issue to all. Rifle changes well thats easy fix op sytem less fouling and larger CAL !!!!!!.

 

[W.E.G.]

There is only one qualified...

 

[R12GS]

I'm not sure most military members (exception to SOCOM) are professional enough for that.....

The M9 lacks durability and mechanical reliability if the pistol is used as anything besides a holster-stuffer. The tendency of locking blocks to fail pretty consistently (as well as various springs breaking as well) is why the pistol has such a dismal reputation in the SOF community

Complete and utter nonesense. Lockblocks were redesigned(new metalurgy) after the initial issue and comonly do not wear until 25K rounds. Trigger return was another weakness that like the lockblocks were corrected 20 years ago.

 

[HorseSoldier]

the main reason the m9 has problems with locking blocks wearing out is the 9mm nato rounds used.

Concur in full.

The other problem is that there is wear and tear on the frame and slide when a locking block breaks, but the fix in the military supply system is to simply throw in another locking block. What people have been finding since the GWOT kicked off is that if a given pistol ever has a locking block fail, that particular weapon will be much, much more prone to locking block failures in the future.

Complete and utter nonesense. Lockblocks were redesigned(new metalurgy) after the initial issue and comonly do not wear until 25K rounds. Trigger return was another weakness that like the lockblocks were corrected 20 years ago.

It would be nice if reality lived up to Beretta's marketing claims. New blocks or old blocks don't make any difference when you're feeding the pistol a steady and exclusive diet of M882 and actually training hard with it. When I was in the Big Army, I never once saw a Beretta locking block fail, ever . . . but we shot our pistols twice a year, maybe a few hundred rounds per year (assuming some guns got hot seated for qual). Now assigned to a SOF unit (as a support guy, not operator), where pistols shoot much higher round counts in one day, I see Beretta locking blocks fail all the time. A basic rule of thumb is approximately one locking block failure per day per fifty shooters.

This is why Big Army decided they'd keep the Beretta, and SOCOM went back to a go-it-alone replacement program for the M9. It's also why, more than nostalgia for big bullets and .45 ACP, that many units have pulled 1911s out of storage, purchased HK USPs at the unit level, requested other alternate pistols from the JOS warehouse, etc. It's also part of the reason why some JSOC units never adopted the M9 at all, even when they largely traded in their 1911s for 9mm pistols, be they Sig 226s or Glock 19s.

 

[RustyShackelford]

NCIS new pistol contract; SIG Sauer P-229 DAK in .40S&W...

Saw an item posted on the main SIG sauer website, www.sigsauer.com , that the US NCIS(Naval Criminal Investigations Service, for those members who do not watch the TV series, ) will get new SIG Sauer .40S&W model P-229 DAKs. I'm sure if it's the Homeland Security type with the rails or the standard DAK P-229 but it will be the .40S&W.

The new P-229s will replace the NCIS special agent issued SIG P-228 9mmNATO.

The SIG sauer P-229 DAKs must be really really good, .

RS

 

[JShirley]

Whoever can't handle shooting these, has no business being in the military to begin with. Enough said.

Let's rephrase. Whoever can't handle a carbine, has no business being in the military to begin with.

The truth is, a Glock 21 was my first centerfire handgun. When I actually, you know, got some training, and began learning what I was doing, I realized it was too fat for my hands.

John

 

[BonCrayon]

Replacement of the M9

I had this option when buying my first 9mm. I shot my brother's 92FS at a North Houston range. I loved its feel and its smooth action. I also liked its weight. When I looked for a good price on this model, I found it was being replaced with a newer edition, the 90-Two. I like simplicity, so I looked into its features. At 13 fewer parts than its predicessor, the 90-Two, side-by-side felt the same. I wanted a rail for home protection attachment, and I liked the 17-round standard option for the magazine. All metal body for weight and stability sold me on the 90-Two. I've been enjoying this firearm on the range immensely!

 

[DanK]

I'd go with a Glock 20.

The two biggest cons that would make it difficult for the gun to pass government bureaucracy are the grip size and lack of external safety. As someone on this thread has already pointed out, Glock would probably be quite happy to add some external safety for a contract of this size. As for the grip size: 1) It takes practice and training, but it is manageable -- I've got modest to medium sized hands for a guy and shoot mine comfortably. 2) Glock's backstrap is large and not necessarily necessary (although it does contribute to the Glock signature grip angle). For a large contract Glock could eliminate this. I've seen & held a G20 with a grip reduction, and its not too large at all.

Other cons:

Due to powerful recoil, there is an increased likelyhood of a round failing to eject cleanly if the shooter limp wrists it.

(This can and should be overcome by training, and is very fast to clear).

Pros:
Light weight
Comes from the factory with accessory rail
Very corrosion resistant
Bigger hole than a 9MM
Reliable in harsh conditions
Simple and instinctive to use
Big, fat sights make aiming easier at longer range
15rd capacity: not bad overall, better than any .45
Good penetration of urban obstacles like wooden fences, glass, car doors, some building material (this could be a pro or con)

Extras for each service:

All reserves:
>60% of police departments either issue or allow officers to choose Glock. Glocks are also common civilian weapons. This improves commonality with war fighter's civilian weapon.

Air Force:
10MM is a great hunting round, add detachable stock & you have a survival rifle.

Special Forces:
Lots of power, used with choice ammo, it can penetrate light armor that might be bought be drug lord lieutenants at military surplus & other venues. Or with armor penetrating ammo or special upgrades like 9X25 Dillon extended barrels it may have some capacity to defeat modern soft armor.

Army/Marines:

A bit lighter than all metal guns of comparable size, power, and capacity.

 

[Fishman777]

Billy Shears...

There is nothing absurd about standardizing ammunition with the other NATO countries. It is actually a really smart idea. It makes more sense logistically and it reduces cost. I'll probably get blasted for saying that, but that is the reality of the situation.

If you are stuck with using a handgun with *non-expanding* ammo vs. someone with a rifle, you are basically screwed regardless of the caliber of the handgun. I am not a huge 9mm fan, but I understand why the US military decided to stick with the NATO 9mm. 9mm ammo is cheap, it is easy to obtain, it is an accurate round, and it has low recoil. Having 15 round magazines is also a plus.

Let's get this straight: handguns are not very effective compared to rifles, period. Handguns are extremely dangerous, but they are only going to quickly stop a threat if you hit someone in a vital area, especially if you are using non-expanding ammo. It seems that some people on this board actually think that any .45 bullet will magically stop any threat. That is not so. The difference in diameter between .45 acp and 9mm is less than 1/10 th of an inch. A .45 acp hole is not that much bigger than a 9mm hole. I doubt that someone would bleed out that much faster if the hole in their thigh is 1/10 of an inch larger. Non-expanding handgun ammunition will most likely punch right through a person and will not deposit that much energy into the target, regardless of how slow and big the bullet is.

 

[danweasel]

Which ever one is manufactured by someone who's profits can be shared by the highest ranking government authority?

 

[Billy Shears]

There is nothing absurd about standardizing ammunition with the other NATO countries. It is actually a really smart idea. It makes more sense logistically and it reduces cost. I'll probably mget blasted for saying that, but that is the reality of the situation.

I didn't say standardizing ammo was absurd, I said saying that not doing so was "not practical" was absurd, and it is. It's practical enough that we've done it before, and we managed quite well thank you very much. Given how very unlikely it is that we would have to beg ammo off of our allies, or they off us, especially pistol ammo of all things, and especially in the post-Cold War world when we are increasingly unlikely to deploy to a combat zone with other NATO forces the ability to share ammo with them is an advantage of highly limited usefulness at best. And nothing comes without cost. If having that, so far as I know, never yet used "advantage" comes at the cost of equipping the the troops with a less effective weapon, then the advantage may not be worth the cost.

If you are stuck with using a handgun with *non-expanding* ammo vs. someone with a rifle, you are basically screwed regardless of the caliber of the handgun. I a not a huge 9mm fan, but I understand why the US military decided to stick with the NATO 9mm. 9mm ammo is cheap, it is easy to obtain, it is an accurate round, and it has low recoil. Having 15 round magazines is also a plus.

Well you can get high capacity .45s these days as well, which still have more than small enough grips. And the cost of the ammo isn't really all that much greater.

Let's get this straight: handguns are not very effective compared to rifles, period. Handguns are extremely dangerous, but they are only going to quickly stop a threat if you hit someone in a vital area, especially if you are using non-expanding ammo. It seems that some people on this board actually think that any .45 bullet will magically stop any threat. That is not so. The difference in diameter between .45 acp and 9mm is less than 1/10 th of an inch. A .45 acp hole is not that much bigger than a 9mm hole. I doubt that someone would bleed out that much faster if the hole in their thigh is 1/10 of an inch larger. Non-expanding handgun ammunition will most likely punch right through a person and will not deposit that much energy into the target, regardless of how slow and big the bullet is.

The issue of stopping power, as you well know (or certainly should) is not so simple as the diameter of the bullet. This is a subject that has been debated and argued ever since before the infamous Thompson-LaGarde tests. Whether or not you agree, a case can be made that larger heavier bullets are better stoppers. That's a debate for another thread, but it suffices to say here that a considerable body of opinion among the troops exists that we would be better off with a .45ACP.

 

[golden]

My experience

The GLOCK 17 and 19, SIG 226, CZ-75, H&K P2000 and BERETTA 92 are all equally reliable. The GLOCK is the least accurate and BERETTA the most. That has been my experience. I would use any of them.

SIG pistols wear out just like the BERETTA. In case some people are not aware, they ALSO HAVE ALUMINUM FRAMES. On the 226, these are known for cracking. Don't take my word, ask the people at the ranges who rent SIG pistols.

All of these companies have large operations in the U.S., so local production is not an issue.

H&K government purchases are MUCH LOWER PRICED THAN CIVILIAN SALES. CBP and BORDER PATROL are buying H&K 2000 pistols. I would be suprised if they paid over $400.00 a gun, even with night sights.

I do not believe it is the locking lugs on the BERETTA 92 causing the problem. It is the peening away at the lug pathway that occurs. The edges of the pathway become rounded and the slide slows down. You can actually watch it function when you shoot. Still reliable though. My last issue 96D was doing this.
If you replace the lugs when this happens, it will reoccur constantly since the peening has already happened.

A model 92 with a steel frame and a Brigadier slide would last decades with constant use.

The ARMY is buying more M9 pistols and the MARINES are buying M9A1 models which have the attachment rail. The gun has not been the problem, cheap mags have been.

The next calibler may be a .45ACP or a .40S&W. It depends who is running things when they have the trials. A high velocity (155 grain or lighter) bullet from a .40S&W may prove to be a better penetrator and stopper. This still has not been settled.

The 9m.m. will be out. The SOCOM and MARINES have both made it clear, the next pistol will not be 9m.m.

H&K, RUGER and SMITH & WESSON have brought out pistols for this market. The SIG 250 may also qualify. It will come down to which ones can pass the test and then who is cheaper. It was the same with the BERETTA 92 and SIG 226.

Just my experience for 16 years of government service.

Jim

 

[DougDubya]

Since the Beretta 90-Two solves many of the issues of the 92FS (better grip frame, slide safety that won't inadvertantly be activated by slingshotting the slide), I'd go with that.

 

[Fishman777]

Billy Shears...

I still think it would be prudent to stick with something common, but I can see your point about the historical precedence.

I definitely am not a 9mm guy, in fact I shoot mostly .38/.357 and .44 special/.44 magnum. I could be wrong, but I can't imagine that there is too much of a difference between handgun cartidges if they don't expand and deposit their energy in the target. Oh well, like you said, it is another argument for another thread, and one that probably has been argued too much already. There are many people that are far more experienced than I on both sides of the argument.

 

[bobn]

The 9mm is certainly capable of good clean kills at close range, but they are talking about test firing @ 50 meters. that little 9 is going to have trouble at that didtance, imo. a 10 would be much better @ that range.

At 50 meters, you're supposed to be using a rifle or carbine.

 

[jakk280rem]

it would be nice of the us gov. to buy an american made pistol regardless of caliber, action. with the collective engeneering know how and manufatureing prowess of that huge remington/cobb/marlin/dpms panther/nef conglomerate, one would think an american replacement would be no sweat.

 

[cluttonfred]

How about American, and inexpensive, and a return to .45 ACP?

Ruger P345

• Slim grip
• Built-in rail
• Good sights
• 8+1
• 29 oz

For a military contract I am sure they could drop the magazine safety and provide extended magazine and maybe night sights. Say issue each gun with two 8-round mags for carry and two 10-round mags for reload.

Rugers aren't the prettiest guns or the most refined, but they are usually reasonably priced and reliable.

 

[makarovnik]

1911a1 or maybe a Para Ordnance LDA. It should be a single stack. Caliber should be .45acp but I might consider .38super. This is a good combination that proved itself back in the .20's. Good platform, capacity and penetration.

.357sig anyone? Cops love 'em.

 

[BrokenArrow]

SIG 226/229 in .40 w rails and DAK.

Foot's already in the door with USCG and NCIS.

If it must be adjustable gripped and/or modular, the P250DC.

 

[ceadermtnboy]

Smith & Wesson M&P 40 or 45 caliber. It is American made, and one heck of a good shooting pistol. Springfield XD is close but I like the slide rails better on the M&P for military use, I think they would hold up better under hard use.

 

[Dilbert]

Get over it, the Beretta is the gun the military picked. Until they come up with a new kind of ammo (caseless maybe, and then only if if won't work in the Beretta) or some sort of directed energy weapon (a "ray gun" in 50 years) the Beretta will be the issue sidearm for most.

 

[MCgunner]

If the M9 were succeeded by another gun?

Something American that meets military requirements. That would likely be Ruger or Smith. The gun will need to be a DA decocker/safety wonder nine type gun I expect. That would leave glocks and XDs and 1911s out of the hunt.

 

[cluttonfred]

Does anybody know why the U.S. military is so enamored of manual safeties?

The DAO auto pistol with no manual safety (whichever of the many variations you like) is proven safe and reliable by millions of police and military users around the world, not to mention double-action revolvers in police and military service for over a century.

Why does the Pentagon think manual safeties are essential?