|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
January 19, 2017, 01:09 PM | #51 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 13, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 12,453
|
"...inability to stop a determined enemy with one shot..." Nonsense. No pistol cartridge will do any such thing. The ACP included. The ACP's fabled 'one shot stop' ability is a myth. Physics doesn't allow it.
The M9 was adopted, like the M-14 and M-16, for political reasons. Military didn't get a say in any of it. The M9 was adopted because other NATO countries were complaining about the balance of trade in military kit. The M-14because of NIH and the 16 because McNamara ordered it. Kind of doubt the U.S. Congress will allow the adoption of a foreign made pistol for general issue unless, like the M9, it gets made in the U.S. Anyway, military pistols are primarily status symbols. They're far more expensive and difficult for a new troopie(be he/she an officer or not) to learn how to use(Hence, the M1 Carbine) and are last ditch "I've made a serious tactical error getting this far from my rifle." firearm. They're not anybody's primary weapon except maybe an MP. And by far most current troopies have never seen a 1911A1. The entire argument is moot. "...the CORPS..." Gets what the Navy Dept. says it can have. Their Special forces types are carrying 9mm Glocks if they want to as well. "...clapped-out BHP's..." 1967 is new. Our Inglis High Powers were all made in 1944 and 45. Still being used('Stored' is a better word. Pistols are rarely out of the armoury or fired. Other than the assorted base gun clubs, CF members rarely shoot anything.) with no fuss. "...perfection was attained in the year of 1911..." That's just the year of adoption. Really nothing to do with anything. Oh and the 1911A1 is heavy, has a relative small magazine and is chambered in an excessively large calibre. The number of countries that adopted it can be counted on one hand.
__________________
Spelling and grammar count! |
January 19, 2017, 01:14 PM | #52 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 16, 2014
Location: Bout as south as it gets
Posts: 1,238
|
I apologize and stand corrected on S&W "the Army is still evaluating striker-fired pistols from Glock, Sig Sauer, Beretta and FN Herstal, according to a source familiar with the competition."
It will be interesting to find out why Smith & Wesson didn’t make it to the next round of MHS. Doc
__________________
Shoot well and be Accurate, Doc |
January 19, 2017, 01:15 PM | #53 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 1, 2005
Location: Tampa Bay
Posts: 1,804
|
Made in the USA
Fabrique National in Columbia SC makes arms for the US military now, they also make a very nice pistol.
|
January 19, 2017, 03:13 PM | #54 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: October 23, 2005
Location: US
Posts: 3,657
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
January 19, 2017, 03:21 PM | #55 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 13, 2013
Location: N. Georgia
Posts: 1,150
|
I think Model12Win is having way too much fun in this thread.
|
January 19, 2017, 06:14 PM | #56 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 23, 2008
Location: Indiana
Posts: 697
|
|
January 19, 2017, 06:34 PM | #57 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
January 19, 2017, 06:58 PM | #58 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 13, 2012
Location: Oconomowoc, WI
Posts: 345
|
Looks like Glock will not be the next US military sidearm.
|
January 19, 2017, 08:11 PM | #59 |
Junior member
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 9,995
|
A better choice than I expected.
|
January 19, 2017, 08:28 PM | #60 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 5, 2001
Location: NH
Posts: 343
|
Looks like the two gun store guys and the range owner were wrong. LOL. SIG is the winner...
__________________
"Quid Clarius Astris" |
January 19, 2017, 08:31 PM | #61 |
Junior member
Join Date: October 20, 2012
Posts: 5,854
|
Oh but!! BUT BUT BUT I HEARD BUT BUT!!!
It's SIG boys. Not 'ol Glocky McGlockface, that wins the competition. "BUT I HEARD!!!" Just goes to show... gun shop "gurus" aren't always that!! |
January 19, 2017, 10:41 PM | #62 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 13, 2013
Location: N. Georgia
Posts: 1,150
|
Well, I'm always reading on gun forums how the media always get things wrong and/or lies.
So, IT'S GLOCK!!! |
January 19, 2017, 10:47 PM | #63 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 16, 2014
Location: Bout as south as it gets
Posts: 1,238
|
Just read that the Army chose Sig Sauer.
__________________
Shoot well and be Accurate, Doc |
January 19, 2017, 10:48 PM | #64 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 29, 2010
Location: Shoshoni Wyoming
Posts: 2,713
|
|
January 19, 2017, 10:50 PM | #65 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 23, 2005
Location: US
Posts: 3,657
|
Quote:
|
|
January 20, 2017, 05:02 AM | #66 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 6, 2012
Location: Lakewood, CO
Posts: 1,057
|
My 2 points would be the Army gets the pistol they want, and they be built in the USA with American labor, and I suspect it will be. Seems to me, Sig has much of their manufacturing in the USA.
I guess I don't understand why there would be fanboys that care what brand/model pistol they use, sounds like ego to me. They wanted a new handgun, set the criteria and picked a model. I can tell you the fanboys are definitely out there though. I bought a new Beretta M9A3, and people went out of their way to tell me that model was rejected by the Army, I guess assuming my like of Beretta pistols is based on it being adopted as the M9? I don't really want an old worn Beretta, but hopefully the M9s won't just be scrapped as they are replaced, but it would not surprise if they are, probably some executive order from a former elected jerk won't allow them to be sold.
__________________
NRA Lifetime Member Since 1999 "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials." George Mason Last edited by iraiam; January 20, 2017 at 05:11 AM. |
January 20, 2017, 06:50 AM | #67 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 11, 2016
Posts: 1,089
|
Well, I guess this settles it. Sig won the competition, unless the Russians hacked Beretta's computers to influence the decision!
I've never shot a P320 before, but it's already a hit with a lot of shooters, and I can't see it being a bad decision. Probably, none of the other contenders would have been bad decisions either. One article in a military blog said "Given the size of the contract, Glock is widely expected to protest the decision." I wonder what THAT is based on? Other than the fact that losing companies frequently protest government contract decisions. That delays things even more, costs tons more, and usually does nothing to change the outcome. Hopefully that isn't the case. Guessing the Army could've bought a lot of Sigs or Glocks or Berettas for the money they've spent on this already! |
January 20, 2017, 09:12 AM | #68 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 18, 2015
Location: PA
Posts: 1,835
|
The SIG P320 was the only truly "modular" gun in the MHS trials, I think these are excellent service pistols and a quantum leap improvement over the Beretta M9 that it replaces, considering the mission intended for a military service pistol.
__________________
Words to Live By: Before You Pray - Believe; Before You Speak - Listen; Before You Spend - Earn; Before You Write - Think; Before You Quit - Try; Before You Die - Live |
January 20, 2017, 09:34 AM | #69 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 22, 2006
Posts: 3,077
|
Quote:
|
|
January 20, 2017, 05:35 PM | #70 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 19, 2001
Posts: 1,603
|
Quote:
Two excellent references help shed light on US military experiences with US small arms during WW2 and Korea: US Infantry Weapons in Combat - Personal Experiences from World War II and Korea, by Mark G. Goodwin, and Battlefield Analysis of Infantry Weapons (Korean War) by SLA Marshall. The consensus was that the only ones who disliked the .45 were those who simply carried one around all the time and never had to fire it, and who complained about the weight and the recoil. Those who actually had to rely on one to stop an enemy soldier hell-bent on killing them had nothing but praise for it. The main issue the US government had with it was its replacement cost and the difficulty of manufacture, for the writing was on the wall when it came to small arms made entirely out of raw forgings and machined-steel parts. By the time it became absolutely necessary to replace the M1911A1 in the 1970s everybody wanted something lighter, easier to manufacture, and better-suited for small or female users. And so they were given that fat pig of a 9mm called the Beretta 92F. Last edited by dsk; January 21, 2017 at 02:47 PM. |
|
January 21, 2017, 09:24 AM | #71 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 18, 2011
Posts: 1,246
|
As a glock owner, Glock does not deserve the contract for the amount of doodoo they've come out since the debacle of gen 4. To sum up everything that has introduced since gen 4..."late to the game, poor execution"
|
January 21, 2017, 10:33 AM | #72 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 1, 2008
Location: TN
Posts: 526
|
Quote:" Sorry, but I have to call BS on that."
Well.....you know the saying about opinions......I will offer a contrasting one. My dad was a paratrooper in WWII (509th PIB) and was issued a 1911 which he carried all of the time. Being a paratrooper it was his primary defense during a jump until he could unpack his rifle. BTW, he made 6 combat jumps and one amphibious landing. He said most of the guys in his company looked for a dropped sidearm as soon as possible to use instead of their issued 1911. He said they were not reliable nor accurate and sensitive to dirt. His rationale was that during the war, they were being produced at such a high rate that quality control was sacrificed for meeting shipment quota. He had both a P38 and a P08. P38s were valued for their relative reliability and accuracy. P08s were valued for collector reasons. His P38 was stolen by a fellow paratrooper, he brought the P08 home. So, the debate will continue. I do not hate the 1911, I have 2. The military has their reasons for their choices. Lets hope they make the best one to protect our service men and women. |
January 21, 2017, 10:36 AM | #73 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
|
Quote:
That statement is used by 9mm and 38 Special fanboys all the time in order to prove relevance. That should be a hint.
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement U. S. Army Veteran Armorer My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon. |
|
January 21, 2017, 04:00 PM | #74 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 19, 2001
Posts: 1,603
|
Quote:
Plenty of other US small arms have had similar stories associated with them. The M1 Carbine was liked by a few, but loathed by most. I had an exchange with a Vietnam vet on another forum who is convinced that every M16A1 rifle is an absolute piece of garbage, even those made long after the war was over. His early one jammed on him in combat, and now he hates all of them. My modern-day repro works perfectly fine, but I'm not going to argue with him as I've never had to use it with bullets snapping past my ear. I guess it remains to be seen what soldiers will think of the new P320/M17 pistol, and whether it proves to be the best sidearm ever issued or just another piece of crap nobody likes. |
|
|
|