Dear U.S. Army: We told you so.

[Rick]

http://www.alloutdoor.com/2014/07/03...kly+Newsletter

[Old GI]

To quote a famous US Marine ---- "Sooprize, Sooprize, Sooprize!!!"

[natertot]

The problem is we can't just change caliber. We have to be onboard with what our allies are using. They are all using 9mm. The whole reason we chose 9mm is cause that is what we had to go with due to our allies using it, otherwise we wouldn't have chosen it at all.

[alaskabushman]

Seems to me, a lot of the "issues" with the 9mm could largely be solved by switching to a good hollow point and abandoning ball ammo.

[Rick]

There is that little thing called the Hague Convention. It's banned by both the Hague and the U.N.

[crashdive123]

Fear not......during the conversion, the Army will screw it up. Nothing wrong with the 1911, but they are determined to reinvent the wheel.

[Wildthang]

I don't know why the allies and all involved wouldn't have chosen the .45, just plain more gooder I think!

[alaskabushman]

There is that little thing called the Hague Convention. It's banned by both the Hague and the U.N.

I understand that, it would just be a cheaper option than all new guns and calibers. Thats all I was sayin'.

[Winter]

Hahaha, this has nothing to do with caliber or wartime experience and everything to do with inventing another reason to spend the American taxpayers money.

[natertot]

Honestly, they could go with the .40 S&W version of the current Beretta. New guns, mags and ammo, but same holsters, accessories and no need to revamp the training manuals except change 9mm to .40S&W. Also, no need to requal everyone cause of a firearm change and everyone would still be familiar with the usability. That would be the cheapest and easiest change, IMO.

[Old GI]

The problem is we can't just change caliber. We have to be onboard with what our allies are using. They are all using 9mm. The whole reason we chose 9mm is cause that is what we had to go with due to our allies using it, otherwise we wouldn't have chosen it at all.

Interchangeability may have been a consideration, but POLITICS was the big driver in all decisions.

[natertot]

Could this make the M9 be the next milsurp firearm? i wouldn't mind getting my hands on a few.....

[kyratshooter]

Fellas they do this once a decade and have since the end of WW2.

I have been the proud owner of four different pistols that were invented for a fictional replacement of the caliber/gun in place at the time.

The sure fire dead ringer that was just what the Army ordered and was cast aside due to budget constraints and NATO treaty requirements.

We can not leave the 9mm by treaty agreement with NATO. That superseds and requirement the Army can dredge up. We simply are not allowed to adopt a pistol caliber other than 9mm except for limited special purpose use.

Honestly, if you check your history there was a round of testing every ten years starting right after WW2 looking for a replacement for the overpowered and excessive recoil of the 1911!!!

From those tests in the 1949s and early 1950s we got the Colt Commander, and became familiarized with the Browning HP.

The tests of the 1960s gave us the S&W model 39, and introduced the Beretta service pistols to the test staff and convinced them the double stack magazine was the thing to have.

After 40 years, after all the 1911 pistols "wore out", they finally adopted the Beretta over the SIG and S&W which were better pistols. S&Ws effort gave us the model 59. Colt had developed a DA/SA pistol for those trials but did not place it on the market.

The next round of trials in the 1980s, when the Parkerizing was not even getting thin on the new Berettas, brought us the famed P-series Ruger pistols as Ruger attempted to recoup their R&D buy selling their rejected pistol to the public; P85/89/95. The P-95 did actually make it into service as a second issue sidearm for vehicle drivers in Iraq and Afghanistan who were found prone to leaving their M4 carbines in the truck while doing roadside maintenance.

The last go around of testing, around 2010, was a doozy with 10 newly developed pistols in consideration, 7 of them poly framed guns, all in .45acp!!!!!

I have to say that round produced some of the greatest service autos I have ever encountered in my life from every major American, European and South American producer!

You are shooting the modified results of that trial as the current S&W MP, Taurus 24/7, FN and SIG offerings. (a guy still has to recover his R&D costs)

The last round of tests, which ended less than 5 years ago, citing the exact same reasons for the trial, was rejected due NATO treaty, budget constraints and the waste involved with a change over.

NATO has not changed its specs, and do you think our military budget is really in better condition than it was 5 years ago?????

[ElevenBravo]

Sig in 45 would be sweet, but HK already has the USP, problem solved with off the shelf weapon..

EB

[Phaedrus]

Fellas they do this once a decade and have since the end of WW2.

I have been the proud owner of four different pistols that were invented for a fictional replacement of the caliber/gun in place at the time.

This. Every few years the rumor mill cranks up to overdrive and nothing ever comes of it. Our money is burning a hole in the Army's wallet and they want a new toy, but they won't get it. Remember the trial to replace the M4? Some windbag congressman wanted a new rifle (probably planning to have it built in his district) but the Army was basically pretty satisfied with the current rifle, so they sabotaged the trials and then cancelled them with no rifle chosen. If I was a gun maker I'd be leery of throwing money at this project since they'll probably get burned.

Also, how important is the sidearm in warfare, really? How many troops actually use them? The M4 is the main weapon (small arms) of the soldier. I'm not even sure what percentage of troops are issued pistols.

And despite the legends and lore of the .45 ACP the reality is that it's not a great fight ender with ball ammo, either. Realistically we aren't going to go back to the .45 ACP any time soon. Our allies don't use it, we have a big stockpile of 9mm and you can carry less of a larger round. We should maybe take a look at Col Coopers suggestions and adopt a truncated-cone/flat-nosed 9mm round with a large meplat. It seems that the flat nosed FMJs crush and tear through tissue where regular 'ball' parts tissue and slips through. The 9mm would be more combat effective with flat nosed ammo but it should still feed just fine, and it complies with all the relevant treaties.

[Sarge47]

http://www.alloutdoor.com/2014/07/03...kly+Newsletter

DER!!! If it ain't broke you don't "fix" it!...

[Highhawk1948]

A fellow told me the other day that his 9mm mushroomed almost up to the size of a .45. I told him that is why I shoot a .45. (Rule #3: Never take a handgun to a gunfight that the caliber doesn't start with a 4)

[alaskabushman]

A fellow told me the other day that his 9mm mushroomed almost up to the size of a .45. I told him that is why I shoot a .45. (Rule #3: Never take a handgun to a gunfight that the caliber doesn't start with a 4)

your friend is correct, mostly. A quality hollow point 9mm will mushroom close to .45, that's assuming it holds together. However, the .45 has the advantage in weight, a typical 9mm being around 115 grains, a .45 is usually more than 200 grains.


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

[natertot]

your friend is correct, mostly. A quality hollow point 9mm will mushroom close to .45, that's assuming it holds together. However, the .45 has the advantage in weight, a typical 9mm being around 115 grains, a .45 is usually more than 200 grains.


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

Yeah, but with twice the ammo capacity one could afford to put in two .45 holes in at around 225 grns. Double tap, always double tap.

Also, .45 tends to travel slower than 9mm which makes the additional weight pointless.

[alaskabushman]

I don't think "pointless" is really the right word, Elmer Kieth would certainly disagree. The extra weight actually makes up for the slower speed in the amount if energy delivered to the target. Both rounds kill people, have been for over 100 years. I prefer the .357 mag so both side are moot to me.


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk