The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Semi-automatic Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 1, 2012, 08:59 PM   #101
AARguy
Junior Member
 
Join Date: August 7, 2009
Location: San Diego
Posts: 13
Another Opinion

I wasn't Special Forces, HRT, or DELTA. I was just an ordinary Field Artillery Officer who was issued a sidearm only... a 45 at the time. We used to joke that its "max effective range" was as far as you could throw it. I always made sure that my Senior NCO made sure I could reach down under my seat and find an M16 or an M4.

I always thought that if the bad guys got close enough for me to use my sidearm, we were in such deep kim chee that the fight was really over anyway.
AARguy is offline  
Old January 1, 2012, 10:48 PM   #102
Famas
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 5, 2009
Location: French, currently living in US
Posts: 122
I wonder if it's worth re-studying the older necked down pistol cartridges, like the 7.62x25 Tokarev cartridge? Anything particularly bad about that concept that would prevent it's reconsideration, or something similar?

As for NATO, I beg to disagree. The 5.56 and 7.62 NATO was forced onto the smaller countries. I've always like the 7.62 NATO, but hated the 5.56. NATO is like the UN, outdated and in serious need for reform or scrapping. NATO was not designed for any one country to use it as an extension of it's own foreign policy. If some people feel that it should be, then it's time for NATO to go by way of the UN, i.e. into the bin.

It is worth mentioning however that insofar as rifle calibers are concerned, I've noticed more and more discussion on various military threads (mostly non-US), about the need for an intermediate cartridge. In the UK there is renewed interest in their old .280 cartridge which they felt was unjustly shelved, and I can say that in France our defense ministry announced last Spring that a study would be made in this field as well, since there are some credible rumors that our beloved FAMAS would be retired by 2020.
Famas is offline  
Old January 1, 2012, 11:35 PM   #103
Muad' Dib
Junior member
 
Join Date: August 18, 2011
Posts: 106
Quote:
IMHO - the 9x19 was a mistake that should never have come into being in the first place.
The tapered case keeps the round from living up to it's full accuracy potential without a lot of high dollar work done on the gun.
I routinely shoot 2.5" groups at 25 meters with a G26 9mm(3.46" barrel)and I have gone under 1" at the same distance with a $480.00 CZ75PO1(3.8" barrel)! Further, a stock Beretta 92FS is capable of turning in sub 2" groups at 25 meters in either the right hands, or a machine rest. I could go on and on, I see absolutely nothing in your post supported by a single fact....
Muad' Dib is offline  
Old January 1, 2012, 11:41 PM   #104
481
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 18, 2011
Posts: 468
Quote:
Originally Posted by C0untZer0:
I like talking about guns and I have nothing better to talk about until SHOT Show 2012. But you're right this is just speculation because as far as I know NATO hasn't initiated an effort to replace the 9mm.

This thread is becoming less of a 9mm vs caliber x, and more about how the U.S. should dictate to the British, French and Germans what caliber their troops should use in their handguns and sub-machine guns.

We're the big dog and they're the tail...
Agreed and understood and this is kinda entertaining.
481 is offline  
Old January 2, 2012, 12:33 AM   #105
Dashunde
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 22, 2004
Posts: 1,685
I'd say 10mm running thru the right pistol would be a great choice...
If I have to resort to the pistol, I'd want the power and round count of 10mm.
How about a "HK10", or maybe a good ol G29 perhaps.
Dashunde is offline  
Old January 2, 2012, 06:43 AM   #106
Hal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 1998
Location: Ohio USA
Posts: 7,383
Quote:
I could go on and on, I see absolutely nothing in your post supported by a single fact....
I've heard it quite often over the years from handloades/reloaders.
My own frustration trying to develop an accurate 124 gr 9x19 load convinced me they were right.

Had the 9x19 begun life from the ground up, instead of using a blown out 7.65 case, then .38 Super Auto potential could have been built into the round from the getgo.
Hal is offline  
Old January 2, 2012, 07:27 AM   #107
BlueTrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 5,809
One fact that works against the pistol as a self-defense weapon in military service is that users will not receive much training or practice, enough to make they particularly proficient. That was the reason the carbine was developed and widely issued, much wider, in fact, than pistols were to begin with. And likewise, it is one reason FN developed its new personal defense weapon.

My son was a tanker in the army and served in Iraq, being station in Tal Afar and Ramadi, where his platoon was attached to a Marine battalion. A tanker's personal weapon is a pistol, yet they actually turned in their weapons and used M4s and M16s instead. So in some cases, the question is moot. He also stated, by the way, that they had some British manufactured 7.62 linked ammunition. He said it had a higher proportion of tracer rounds.
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.
BlueTrain is offline  
Old January 2, 2012, 11:53 AM   #108
hogwiley
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 10, 2011
Posts: 206
No real reason to change from the 9mm. Handguns are almost irrelevant in combat. The number of enemy KIA they account for is miniscule, so changing calibers now would be expensive and a logistical headache with little to no gain.

Having said that, the .45 is the best round for most of the rare circumstances you would need to use a handgun in, but the 9mm has a few things going for it. Increased capacity, range and penetration for instance.

I dont think .40 would be the best round for widespread military use because of the increased wear and tear it puts on guns and the fact its harder for some people to shoot well.
hogwiley is offline  
Old January 2, 2012, 12:36 PM   #109
Boncrayon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 24, 2008
Posts: 444
What pistol caliber should NATO go to?

.40 for sure! Hard knock down, high capacity, versitile.
Boncrayon is offline  
Old January 2, 2012, 02:41 PM   #110
hardhat harry
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 27, 2010
Location: I've moved...
Posts: 232
.500 S&W
__________________
"Let me live in my house by the side of the road and be a friend to man."
hardhat harry is offline  
Old January 3, 2012, 09:29 AM   #111
AndABeer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 9, 2000
Location: Lakeland, TN
Posts: 1,622
That Tokarev 25mm mentioned yesterday on a syndicated NCIS episode sounded promising. Most people would only shoot it once though.
__________________
"The key is to not pull the trigger but to squeeze it." Evil Emporer Zurg

"You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts." Unknown
AndABeer is offline  
Old January 3, 2012, 02:18 PM   #112
ChrisJ715
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 3, 2011
Location: Small town in eastern KY
Posts: 155
is there any answer here but .45 ACP?
ChrisJ715 is offline  
Old January 3, 2012, 02:33 PM   #113
Seven High
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 11, 2004
Posts: 461
If the handgun is almost irrelevent in combat, why is the DoD purchasing up to an additional 450,000 Beretta M9s? At a cost of 220 million dollars. Something big is going to happen shortly.
Seven High is offline  
Old January 3, 2012, 02:37 PM   #114
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,120
The Secretary of D is issuing reports of how we are to reduce expenditures. Things like the F-35 and size of the Army will take drastic cuts.

So, we are really going to redo a tertiary weapons system? I fear the OP posted baloney. Hasn't been back to this one.

We will let in run but we've moved from reality into whether the Enterprise can beat a Star Destroyer or the Hulk can beat Superman, IMHO.

Fun discussion but started on a mythical premise.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old January 3, 2012, 02:48 PM   #115
BlueTrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 5,809
Beretta themselves (proudly) announced last September that it had a contract for another 15,778 pistols for DOD, to be delivered at a rate of 2000 per month. They also claimed to have delivered already 600,000 pistols. That is about enough for one in five to have a pistol in the armed forces, which is actually pretty high. But on the other hand, we have had active military operations underway for most of that period and maybe a few get lost here and there. I've heard they never wear out, however.

Where did your get that number of 450,000? That works out to $488.89 per pistol but I think you get a free cleaning kit with each one. The cost of spare magazines can really run up the cost, though.
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.
BlueTrain is offline  
Old January 3, 2012, 02:52 PM   #116
jimbob86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: All the way to NEBRASKA
Posts: 6,494
Quote:
That is about enough for one in five to have a pistol in the armed forces,
With the cuts they will be making soon, it'll be closer to 1 in 4 .....
__________________
TheGolden Rule of Tool Use: "If you don't know what you are doing, DON'T."

http://nefirearm.com/
jimbob86 is offline  
Old January 3, 2012, 03:33 PM   #117
johnwilliamson062
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 6,636
just as an aside, US forces participated in an old school cav charge in Afghanistan around 2002.

Given the amount of training given by the US government and the amount of experience brought to the table by most recruits, I don't know why we are talking about more powerful, especially "snappier," rounds like the 40 and 10mm.

I guess I keep seeing videos on youtube of petite girls who have obviously never shot a gun before(as the stock is resting on top of their shoulder) being handed a 12 gauge with a scope they put their eye right up against as some buffoon giggles in the background, so I shouldn't be surprised.

Could you do a drop-in barrel swap on the 92s and switch them to any other worthwhile calibers, even if said barrels aren't currently manufactured. Just wondering.
__________________
$0 of an NRA membership goes to legislative action or court battles. Not a dime. Only money contributed to the NRA-ILA or NRA-PVF. You could just donate to the Second Amendment Foundation
First Shotgun Thread First Rifle Thread First Pistol Thread
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old January 3, 2012, 04:43 PM   #118
trex1310
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 14, 2009
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 389
.357 Sig. and the 7mm-08.
__________________
NRA Life Member
Certified in laziness
Certified in watching TV
Certified in BBQ on the Green Egg
trex1310 is offline  
Reply

Tags
caliber , gun , nato , pistol

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2013 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10814 seconds with 10 queries