|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
December 25, 2018, 11:41 AM | #26 |
Staff
Join Date: November 2, 1998
Location: Colorado
Posts: 21,824
|
Concur. We should have stayed with the 1911.
__________________
Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt. Molon Labe! |
December 25, 2018, 01:18 PM | #27 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 22, 2008
Location: SW Washington state
Posts: 1,996
|
I'm with you!
I just bought my first 1911, a Govt. model seemed appropos for my first.
Wow what a superb design, I've only put a box through it and I am in love. I bought the cheapo Tisas's from Bud's and I am impressed. I paid about 330 bucks. Had 3 jams on the fist box of ammo. The pistol is super tight. By the end of the box of 50 I was getting through a full magazine w/o a jam. The trigger is darn good. It's the tactical trigger model and is about 4-5 pounds, there is some takeup so I would not call it crisp, but it is decent and I can hit with it. I've been on the fence for .45 caliber for years. I can see I am going to need some dies, and maybe start casting after I retire. This appears to be the perfect pistol to cast for, big chunks of Lead moving slow. Love the 1911. Am now anxious to shoot a nice one.
__________________
ricklin Freedom is not free |
December 25, 2018, 09:49 PM | #28 | |
Junior member
Join Date: July 26, 2001
Location: midwest
Posts: 2,374
|
Quote:
It's the 'peak' of evolution for the 1911-breed - as opposed to cheapo knock-off clones - and is further 'tacticalized' with night sights, an improved recoil assembly, and by the engineering of a rail on the frame for mounting your weapon-light of choice. Cool beans. |
|
December 26, 2018, 07:38 AM | #29 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 23, 2018
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 1,475
|
Modern times means modern weapons. For the same reason the US military went away from the M14 to the M16(lighter, shorter, more ammo carried, etc), I think the military was smart to look for a lighter, more simple, higher capacity handgun. Not a fan of thechoice of SIG, but I think that 'type' fills a lot more modern 'squares' than a 1911/.45/8 or so round capacity handgun. Plus like it or don't(not a huge fan)..a LOT of today's military have smaller hands.
__________________
PhormerPhantomPhlyer "Tools not Trophies” |
December 26, 2018, 08:38 PM | #30 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 15, 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,566
|
The handgun in the military, except to make officers look pretty, is for those who can't carry a rifle. As a topcat on a track, I was issued a pistol. The pistol was a last resort firearm. Way better than a knife but that's about it. I would have liked the Glock or copy if it had a safety, It's a lot lighter than the 1911 I carried. The Lightweight Commander would be even better than the Glock, the 1911 is much easier to shoot. As for special applications, they should carry whatever is best for the job at hand, snubnose .38, Glock 19 or 1911, whatever. It ain't rocket science. With the government it is usually lowest bidder, plastic guns are a lot cheaper than metal guns. I don't see where the SIG is any better than a Beretta, I have to think the SIG is cheaper.
|
January 17, 2019, 01:52 AM | #31 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 20, 2009
Posts: 390
|
As someone said the SIG, Glock, or M&P will all do the job. Have all of them except the SIG. Shot the SIG. Didn't find it any better than the G19 GEN4 or S&W 2.0 Compact.
Pretty much since I got the S&W 2.0 Compact it's been my constant companion. Like the ergo's the best. Built like a tank. Totally reliable, accurate. Think any of them would be fine for military use. Like the M9. But it's big, heavy, and DA/SA not as easy to learn to shoot. SIG has a lot of room for optics and so on. |
January 17, 2019, 06:53 AM | #32 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 10, 2018
Posts: 150
|
Let's see. Was Glock approved by NATO? No, they were not. SIG? No. The ONLY handgun made with an NSN, NATO Service Number, is the CZ P-01.
If 29 Countries agree that the CZ is reliable enough for its military, but Glock IS NOT, that is probably a good hint. |
January 17, 2019, 09:10 AM | #33 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 23, 2018
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 1,475
|
Quote:
Germany, as an example, uses the H&K P8.....France uses a Sig and Glock 17.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_pistol
__________________
PhormerPhantomPhlyer "Tools not Trophies” |
|
January 17, 2019, 09:11 AM | #34 | ||
Junior member
Join Date: July 26, 2001
Location: midwest
Posts: 2,374
|
Quote:
Quote:
Colt M45A1, all day. 8-rds of .45acp high-n-hard. Repeat as needed. 'Nuff said. |
||
January 17, 2019, 09:49 AM | #35 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 2, 2015
Posts: 777
|
Quote:
The whole change out was simply payback to Sig after decades of butthurt losing out to Beretta decades ago, a complete waste of money. The entire inventory of Berettas should have been surplussed out long ago (they were not taken care of properly) and partially replaced with new ones for the very limited roles the serve in, then standardize a PCC PDW. Staying with Beretta and procuring the PX4 / MX4 combo would have made even more sense, same caliber, same magazines, existing pipeline of existing PROVEN products. But when the military burocrats get involved the taxpayer looses and the fighter almost always gets shortchanged. |
|
January 17, 2019, 10:42 AM | #36 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 11,061
|
I'm gonna go way out on a limb here and catch lots of flack but this is based on my experience as a grunt, riflemen and machine gunner in the jungles of SE Asia.
The handgun of choice if I were to get a vote (which I dont) would be the J-Frame Smith with enclosed hammer. Silly you say...think about it. I was infantry, grunt. We had to be armed 24-7. In the bush I wouldnt be without my hands on my assigned weapon (which was a M16a1 or M60). Now there were times when we came to rear. Pretty much secure. Had chow halls, the works. Yet no matter what, we had to be armed. It wasnt assigned but I did pick up and carry a M1911A1, and it worked but the J-Frame would have been better. I could stick it in my pocket and be armed. Trust me, a small revolver in the pocket is a lot easier to get through the chow line then a M-60. If push came to shove I could use the revolver to fight my way to the back of the chow hall tent to get to my '60 hanging on a peg. It doesnt weigh much and even in the field it wouldnt be in the way tucked into my pants pocket. But like I said, like the rest of us in these forums, we dont get a vote. You carry what uncle sam says you carry, and the lobbyist tell uncle same what we need based on which ever lobbyist cuts loose the most money to sell their product to congress.
__________________
Kraig Stuart CPT USAR Ret USAMU Sniper School Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071 |
January 17, 2019, 09:54 PM | #37 |
Junior member
Join Date: August 11, 2018
Posts: 198
|
Wouldn't be my first thought to arm myself with any kind of weapon to fight my way to the front of any chow line I remember from back in the Corps. Maybe to get away from the stink maybe.
|
January 18, 2019, 01:02 PM | #38 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 15, 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,566
|
Wasn't in a mess hall in Vietnam more than a dozen times. Mostly C's. Once in a while hot food brought in by chopper. .50 on the track, 1911 in my holster. Pulled the .45 once, never shot it except at tin cans. B Troop, 1/1 Cav, 67/68.
|
January 25, 2019, 11:14 PM | #39 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 6, 2004
Location: Georgia/Afghanistan
Posts: 314
|
Quote:
Quote:
ROCK6 |
||
January 28, 2019, 11:30 AM | #40 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 23, 2010
Posts: 4,862
|
Quote:
Considering that there are equally effective options today that cost far less, offer more firepower, and are much lighter (Colt definitely took MARSOC for a ride with the M45A1), it is simply foolish for the taxpayer to keep buying overpriced and out-dated combat pistols. This is not to say the M17 should have replaced the M9, unless its procurement offers a real cost-savings overall. Sorry if this steps on some toes, but it's a rational evaluation, and economics and rationality should trump nostalgia when providing warfighters with the best and most economically responsible option. Quote:
To use an example you brought up, if drones are more cost-effective than a wall why shouldn't that option be studied? Just because a politician threw out the wall idea to get elected and it sounded appealing to those who didn't really think about it much? You may not agree with the Euros' politics (I typically don't), but good on them for looking at other options for border security. We know walls provide almost zero effectiveness in this situation, since the majority of illegal aliens cross borders via aircraft/airports anyway, and walls without constant surveillance are easily defeated (climbed, tunneled under, or simply walked or boated around). If you have to provide surveillance anyway for a wall to be effective, why not just spend the money on better surveillance and interdiction? Never mind the physical impossibility of running a non-stop wall along an arbitrary (i.e. non-natural) border. Google "watershed" if you don't understand. Anyway - not to get so far off topic, but you provided a good lens though which to look at the issue of government procurement, and why it is failing so hard currently. . Last edited by Fishbed77; January 28, 2019 at 11:38 AM. |
||
January 28, 2019, 01:29 PM | #41 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 11, 2006
Posts: 626
|
The Sig is a good choice for a mass issued sidearm.
It's a striker fired gun, which is easier to train on compared to the M9, and while I've never served in the military, my experience with military trained shooters tells me they dont spend much time training with pistols. The barrel is easily swapped for a threaded barrel for suppressed use, which is more difficult with the M9. The entire grip module is replaceable, both to change grip diameter for people with larger or smaller hands than average, and from full sized to compact and subcompact to accommodate concealment priorities. Also entirely different grip profiles are available with more to come. This is an advantage over the Glock and S&W, where only backstraps are replaceable, and on par with the new beretta pistol. The big caveat to this is the fact that the DOD bureaucracy will probably hinder the issue of particular grip modules to the troops. It's as cheap, accurate, and reliable as the competitors entries. Truthfully, the only question I have is whether the new procurement is important enough to justify the financial output, but that is something for the bean counters to figure out, and they decided it was. |
January 29, 2019, 07:42 AM | #42 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 23, 2018
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 1,475
|
Quote:
__________________
PhormerPhantomPhlyer "Tools not Trophies” |
|
January 29, 2019, 01:45 PM | #43 | |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,677
|
Quote:
If you think walls don't work (or are "not effective), go talk to any of the millions of people still living that were stopped by the Iron Curtain. During its existence, only a relative handful of people managed to get past it, and the "majority" of them didn't do via commercial air travel. Back on topic, I don't really see what the point in discussing military handgun choice, other than as something to pass the time. The military cares nothing for our opinions, and are not overly concerned with either the handgun's combat effectiveness, or its personal defensive ability. Since, at present, and for the near future, the military round is a FMJ 9mm Luger, it really makes little difference which 9mm pistol they choose. None of them can perform better than the ammo they shoot.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
|
January 29, 2019, 02:41 PM | #44 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 13, 2005
Posts: 4,700
|
In my 4 years in the Army 1967-1971 I received NO training on the M1911A1 and NEVER went to the range. And I carried it twice. And I knew very few gun guys. Probably more crack shots in the Army in the days of the 45-70 and 30-40 Krag.
|
January 29, 2019, 06:23 PM | #45 | ||||||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 2, 2015
Posts: 777
|
Not sure how this topic got here, but.....
Quote:
Further, the 'wall' has simply been a broad brush term to cover a multitude of physical barriers as well as electronic surveillance. Quote:
As far as 'not thinking about it much', I would look in the mirror as you seem to be repeating talking points almost verbatim. Quote:
Crossings where walls have been built are ALWAYS reduced I live in a border state, our family ranch is right in the bath of illegals Every single place walls have been erected in our state the crossings drop over 90% And I'll let you in on a little secret.....shhh....I've worked the border.....don't tell anyone.... Quote:
You are referring to visa overstays, which account for about 40% Quote:
Further, if physical barriers are 'so easily defeated', why have they worked so well when/where erected? At no point, and at no time, has anyone suggested physical barriers cannot be defeated, people have escaped some of the most secure prisons ever built. But to keep repeating BS talking points says a lot about you and your capacity for critical thought. Quote:
Physical barriers are huge force multipliers, especially when COMBINED with electronic walls Which AGAIN, have always been part of the equation Last edited by TBM900; January 29, 2019 at 06:30 PM. |
||||||
January 30, 2019, 11:20 AM | #46 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 23, 2010
Posts: 4,862
|
Quote:
Visa Overstays account for 44% by the most recent count, but that is only the number that can be confirmed, with many more unconfirmed, likely putting this number over 50%. Also understand also that large numbers of otherwise temporary illegal aliens get "trapped" with an increase in physical barriers, further inflating the number of illegals who would not otherwise be in the US. This has been widely studied and you can research yourself, since it is outside the scope of a firearms discussion. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Your tone, however, indicates a certain close-mindedness on this subject. So there is no point in further debate on this subject, and I will refrain from such. This thread need to be swung back into the direction of military service weapon adoption and the economics/politics/priorities associated with it. |
||||
January 30, 2019, 04:26 PM | #47 |
Junior member
Join Date: July 26, 2001
Location: midwest
Posts: 2,374
|
Okay, let's review.
1) Build the wall, Snowflakes. 2) Colt M45A1 for the real shooters. 3) 9mm whatevers that 'look-real-purty-on-yer-hip' for everyone else. |
January 30, 2019, 09:47 PM | #48 |
Junior member
Join Date: August 11, 2018
Posts: 198
|
I love the Colt M45A1 but I'd feel like I was willing to cut off my nose to spite my face if I were willing to send our folks into battle with anything less than a hi-cap nine. I mean, we're talking combat with a lot of targets.
|
January 31, 2019, 08:34 AM | #49 | ||||||||||||||||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 2, 2015
Posts: 777
|
Quote:
Quote:
The data you are referring to is NOT 'confirmed', it is only an estimate, and a very generous estimate at that Quote:
Quote:
You assert that physically barriers are essentially useless at keeping people out.... Then go on to assert that they 'trap' people in.......? LoLoLoLoLoL I can tell you've never set foot on or even near our southern border. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
b) The 'wall' as you keep referring to it also includes multiple levels of electronic surveillance. Quote:
b) The 'wall' as you keep referring to it also includes multiple levels of electronic surveillance. You keep feigning ignorance on this aspect but doing so only keeps digging yourself deeper. Quote:
Quote:
Your alluding has been in terms of 'Trump wall bad because it doesn't have surveillance'. Even though it has included such since day one. You painted yourself into a corner. Quote:
You know, the ones you keep pretending don't exist? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
PS...sorry your girl lost |
||||||||||||||||
January 31, 2019, 08:39 AM | #50 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 31, 2002
Location: Deep in the Heart of the Lone Star State (TX)
Posts: 2,169
|
Until the military gets away from FMJ, any talk on caliber or pistol is pointless.
Now, can we dump the wall talk and stay on topic? Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|