Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Welcome to the Leverguns.Com Forum. This is a high-class place so act respectable. We discuss most anything here ... politely.

Moderators: AmBraCol, Hobie

Forum rules
Welcome to the Leverguns.Com General Discussions Forum. This is a high-class place so act respectable. We discuss most anything here other than politics... politely.

Please post political post in the new Politics forum.
jkbrea
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1163
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2007 6:37 pm
Location: S. of Jackson, Wyoming

Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by jkbrea »

Didn't they go through this way back when. How about something in, oh, let's say .45. :?
Funny how history repeats itself. Someone's going to get rich.

I remember while stationed in Germany in the mid 80's seeing numerous 1911 .45 pistols still packed in grease that had never been issued.

My opinion is a pistol is for very close combat and mainly a defensive weapon. The .45 is hard hitting and fits the bill. .357 Sigs are really expensive but sure do penetrate. .40 cal....why? Some may laugh but a large caliber revolver would get the job done. It's 2-3 less rounds than most .45's but you don't have to worry about jams, stovepipes, mags falling out, etc. These things happen when you fire under heavy stress.

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/07/03/ ... p=trending
Rusty
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 9528
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:37 pm
Location: Central Fla

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Rusty »

What do they think will work, a Howdah?
If you're gonna be stupid ya gotta be tough-
Isiah 55:8&9

It's easier to fool people than it is to convince them they have been fooled.
oregon73
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 107
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 12:26 pm
Location: Oregon, USA

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by oregon73 »

My $0.02....

From everything I have read, the M1911 performed very well in WWII, Korea, and Vietnam. I realize the single-action, cocked-and-locked nature of the weapon makes some people nervous (IMO they should get over it). Are today's soldiers not capable of learning how to use a 1911, when so many who went before them learned it just fine? I own several 1911s in 9mm, 45ACP, and 10mm. It's a very good platform.

The M9 didn't work so well recently in Iraq and Afganistan. I understand that and if the weapon doesn't work well enough then it should be replaced. I do think the Beretta pistol is still adequate for home defense or even police work. It's not a bad gun. I enjoy mine.

For me, the answer would be clear and easy. I realize these are different times and the 1911 may not be the best choice for our armed forces, but 45ACP or 10mm Auto seems the way to go as far as calibers are concerned. I'm sick of hearing that people can't handle the recoil of these calibers. It ain't that bad. Sheesh.
NRA
User avatar
Blackhawk
Levergunner 3.0
Posts: 627
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:18 am
Location: Arkansas

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Blackhawk »

I think they will go with something along the lines of the polymer frames. Hopefully in a 45.
Image

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin
User avatar
Griff
Posting leader...
Posts: 20803
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: OH MY GAWD they installed a STOP light!!!

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Griff »

Hmmm.... I wonder.... a 2011?
Image
Griff,
SASS/CMSA #93
NRA Patron
GUSA #93

There is a fine line between hobby & obsession!
AND... I'm over it!!
No I ain't ready, but let's do it anyway!
User avatar
FWiedner
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8862
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 9:50 pm
Location: North Texas

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by FWiedner »

The only definable problems with either the 1911 platform or the .45 ACP is that folks keep trying to fix something that ain't broke.

:|
Government office attracts the power-mad, yet it's people who just want to be left alone to live life on their own terms who are considered dangerous.

History teaches that it's a small window in which people can fight back before it is too dangerous to fight back.
pwl44m
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 3613
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 7:48 pm
Location: East Linda Caif.

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by pwl44m »

They want something "WE" don't have.
Perry
Perry in Bangor----++++===Calif
User avatar
7.62 Precision
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1836
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 12:34 am
Location: Alaska
Contact:

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by 7.62 Precision »

The problem is more with the pistol than with the caliber.

The M9 failed the trials a couple times before it was chosen for political reasons. The Army and Marines never wanted it - it was forced upon them. One of the arguments that was used to justify it, that the female soldiers needed a pistol the fit their hands, was bogus, since more people seem to find the grip frame on the M9 to be much worse for people with small-to-medium hands than the M1911.

The Design of the M9 is not especially good, being pretty complicated with an overabundance of small or complex springs and parts. The slide decocker/safety is a disaster, and the issue magazines were extremely problematic, except for those built by Beretta. Most soldiers I have known disliked the pistol. It was always real work for me to shoot it well. After shooting an M9 a 1911, Glock, SIG, CZ75, XD, and most other pistols seem amazingly easy to shoot for me. I know many others who have the same experience. I have seen more jams with M9s than any other type of modern, quality pistol I have shot (though I have seen others with some of the more expensive 1911s that had malfunctions very constantly).

As far as a larger caliber goes, I am quite happy with the 9mm. As I am sitting here, I have 72 rounds of 9mm on my body, in four magazines. If I were carrying a .40 S&W, then I would probably have 48 rounds on me now. If I was carrying a double-stack .45, 40 rounds, a 1911, 28 or 32 rounds.

This can be a big deal. A lot of soldiers will carry only two or three magazines for their pistols. This means that a double-stack 9mm could provide double the ammunition that a single-stack .45 provides.

I know from experience that when shooters are faced with a threat, even in training, they shoot fast and until the threat is defeated. Even if a target is dropping, shooters often still fire another couple shots as the target falls, when placed under stress. 1911 shooters tend to shoot as many shots at a target as 9mm Glock shooters do when they are under stress, even when told to conserve ammo in the interest of being able to complete a drill with the magazines that have available.

We also know that there is little difference between the terminal performance of the different pistol calibers, for the most part, so I would never expect a .45 to have a vastly different effect on a target than a 9mm. On the other hand, soldiers are shooting FMJ, so there is likely an advantage in the larger projectile. (Even with HP bullets, we can expect a certain percentage to fail to expand.)

9mm, however, penetrates better than .45 ACP in most cases. This is an important consideration when dealing with targets wearing web gear, magazine pouches, rifle slings, heavy uniforms, flack jackets, etc. No reasonable pistol caliber is going to penetrate some of these things, or combinations of them, but the 9mm will likely penetrate better than .45 ACP, if loaded correctly (some 9mm military ammunition has proven to be on the light side).

So all of the tradeoffs need to be considered, but I think the ineffectiveness of the M9 is more related to problems with the design of the pistol, lousy magazines, and underpowered ammo, than with the 9mm cartridge itself. So the military will have to consider what they are willing to trade off in favor of other advantages:

9mm:
High Capacity
Less Expensive Ammo (only a slight difference due to quantities of metals and powder used, but it adds up)
Easier to Shoot
Good Penetration

357 SIG:
Mid-range Capacity
Very Good Penetration
Seems to have an unexplained advantage in terminal ballistics (I have several ideas about this).
Flat Shooting
Snappier Recoil
Very dependable function - feeds very well.

.40 S&W
Mid-range Capacity
Decent penetration
Slight advantage in bullet diameter
Heavier Recoil

.45 ACP
Lowest Capacity
Less penetration against various barriers
Slight advantage in larger diameter bullet
Heavier recoil (I will argue that most inexperienced shooters are more bothered by .40 S&W recoil than .45 ACP)
Requires larger grip frame

So they will have to consider all of this to determine what advantages they feel are most important. I think it would be interesting to see them decide on the 357 SIG, but realistically, I think they would be served better by 9mm.

Whatever they choose, it needs to have no slide-mounted safety. Price and politics will play a part.
Or, Beretta will negotiate a lower price and they will can the whole program. :D

As far as revolvers, they are not a great option - there are some troops that depend heavily on sidearms; they need modern magazine-fed semi-auto pistols. Revolvers are not as bulletproof as people think, especially in a combat environment. They are as much or more susceptible to sand and dust as a semi-auto and harder to clean and maintain. There are very few jams in a semi-auto that I cannot clear immediately, but almost any malfunction with a revolver takes it out of the fight. Revolvers are more complicated and more delicate in some ways than most semi-autos. (The M9 managed to combine many of the disadvantages of both.) They are often louder due to cylinder gap and make a larger flash pattern. They are slow to reload without a ton of practice, and extra ammo is not protected against dirt and damaged as well as ammo loaded in a semi-auto magazine.

Lest you think I hate revolvers, I carry a Ruger Old Vaquero for bear protection (and shooting the occasional caribou when my rifle jammed).

However, I spent a few long, cold nights under a tarp on a rooftop behind a scope with one or two other guys. Supporting units were far enough away that there was always a chance I might need to hold out or fight my way out and if it came down to my pistol, I'd rather have the M9 and several magazines than a revolver, any day.
User avatar
7.62 Precision
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1836
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 12:34 am
Location: Alaska
Contact:

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by 7.62 Precision »

pwl44m wrote:They want something "WE" don't have.
Perry
Whatever it is, all the video gammers (and everyone else, for that matter) will be lining up to buy it "'cause it's what the Navy SEALs use!"

Even LE Agencies will jump on the bandwagon, like they did with the M9.
Chuck 100 yd
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 6972
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 8:52 pm
Location: Ridgefield WA. USA

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Chuck 100 yd »

What FWiedner said +1 !!! :D
User avatar
Blaine
Posting leader...
Posts: 30495
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 2:22 pm
Location: Still Deciding

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Blaine »

I'll bet The Teams don't use FMJ...
The Rotten Fruit Always Hits The Ground First

Proud Life Member Of:
NRA
Second Amendment Foundation
Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms
DAV
User avatar
CowboyTutt
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 3712
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:27 pm
Location: Mission Viejo, CA

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by CowboyTutt »

Precision, your comments are some of the most intelligent I have read. The adoption of the 9mm was all politics over practicality (and that's stating it very PC!) Thanks for the posts. When I read your commentary of the various "pros and cons" of the cartridges, I keep coming back to what Col. Cooper developed, the 10mm, in full strength. I have a "ten" in a nice 1911 Kimber and with some adjustment to the recoil spring, it seems to work great. A double stack magazine would be even better for extreme field use. Maybe not on a 1911 platform but I'm sure there is something out there that would work. I also really like the CZ's. -Tutt
"It ain't dead! As long as there's ONE COWBOY taking care of ONE COW, it ain't dead!!!" (the Cowboy Way)
-Monte Walsh (Selleck version)

"These battered wings still kick up dust." -Peter Gabriel
User avatar
Griff
Posting leader...
Posts: 20803
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: OH MY GAWD they installed a STOP light!!!

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Griff »

7.62, not to quibble, but ISTR, for both hardball military rounds, the 9mm needs a distance to target of over 25 yards before it out penetrates the 45ACP. While I prefer greater distances in any contact with the enemy, for distances over 25 yards, make mine a rifle!
Griff,
SASS/CMSA #93
NRA Patron
GUSA #93

There is a fine line between hobby & obsession!
AND... I'm over it!!
No I ain't ready, but let's do it anyway!
User avatar
Old Ironsights
Posting leader...
Posts: 15084
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 9:27 am
Location: Waiting for the Collapse
Contact:

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Old Ironsights »

Griff wrote:7.62, not to quibble, but ISTR, for both hardball military rounds, the 9mm needs a distance to target of over 25 yards before it out penetrates the 45ACP. While I prefer greater distances in any contact with the enemy, for distances over 25 yards, make mine a rifle!
This.

I agree 100% with 7.62 - IF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT PREMIUM SD AMMO...

Not so much when it comes to Military Ball.

AFAIC if I had my way the .45 wouldn't even be using FMJ but soft cast/swaged lead...
C2N14... because life is not energetic enough.
מנא, מנא, תקל, ופרסין Daniel 5:25-28... Got 7.62?
Not Depressed enough yet? Go read National Geographic, July 1976
Gott und Gewehr mit uns!
User avatar
7.62 Precision
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1836
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 12:34 am
Location: Alaska
Contact:

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by 7.62 Precision »

The 10mm has some advantages for sure. The thing that would likely kill it for military use is the recoil.

Recoil is a true concern. While we can all say that 10mm is no problem, we are also shooters and gun guys who shoot and train on our own. We have learned that reasonable recoil is not going to hurt us and we have learned to shoot well despite recoil.

All recoil affects the shooter's accuracy. No matter who you are, there will be some effect. For a skilled shooter, the recoil may have no measurable effect, or at least negligible effect. Inexperienced shooters will experience more noticeable problems related to recoil. Increase recoil, and the effects on shooting skills increases as well.

Some soldiers use pistols heavily, like MPs, certain special operations units, investigative units, etc. Some will mention tankers, etc. but a tanker's primary weapon is his tank. (I know an AWACS navigator and always give him a hard time about the "crew-served" M9 they keep on the plane.)

But for most soldiers, if they even carry a pistol, the pistol is an, "OK, here's your pistol, hope you don't ever have to use it," weapon. Training with pistols is considered secondary in importance for most soldiers and there is often little real combat training with them. Many soldiers only shoot pistol during required qualification, and then it is just basically standing on the range and shooting at targets.

So while some soldiers would do fine with a 10mm, many would develop a very bad flinch and shoot very badly. Balance the extra cost of training soldiers to be proficient with a heavy recoiling pistol, and the military is not too likely to mess with it. Now I personally think there should be a lot more training, but that is a separate issue.
User avatar
7.62 Precision
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1836
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 12:34 am
Location: Alaska
Contact:

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by 7.62 Precision »

Griff wrote:7.62, not to quibble, but ISTR, for both hardball military rounds, the 9mm needs a distance to target of over 25 yards before it out penetrates the 45ACP. While I prefer greater distances in any contact with the enemy, for distances over 25 yards, make mine a rifle!
I personally think that the difference between the cartridge's penetration for the average soldier shooting in common combat situations is small enough to make little difference anyway. While a soldier is much more likely to engage with a pistol at ranges 25m or more, you are not going to see a really big difference in penetration in most situations unless you go to 357 SIG or 10mm.

I have seen some .45 ACP Ball stopped by car doors when 9mm ball penetrated (at a slight angle, not at 90º in this case) but this was full-power commercial 9mm loads. In flesh, both will have all the penetration needed at any reasonable range - I was talking hard or soft barriers. I actually never researched whether .45 ACP ball or 9mm ball penetrate better in flesh, so I don't know.

They are all likely to be stopped by body armor or AK mags. Most soldiers won't be shooting cars much with a pistol. For most soldiers, it is something to use to get yourself out of a suddenly bad situation.

357 SIG will really penetrate a car - quite a difference between it and the others - but that is more applicable to LE and self-defense. Soldiers are using rifles to shoot cars.

I had to look up what ISTR meant :D
Pete44ru
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 11242
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 7:26 am

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Pete44ru »

FWiedner wrote:
The only definable problems with either the 1911 platform or the .45 ACP is that folks keep trying to fix something that ain't broke.


Yep - There's plenty of folks out there, who think they're as smart as John Browning, if not smarter ............... :roll:



.
User avatar
OldWin
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8965
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:38 pm

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by OldWin »

I know I'm pretty jaundiced but..........

They are never going to go back to the 1911 on a large scale. The biggest reason being it would be admitting a mistake and would "look bad" for the "political" side of the military. It would bring embarrassing questions on the 6:00 news.

Instead, they will spend billions of our dollars inventing something unproven that doesn't need inventing so they can show how smart "they" are. It wont use anything we already have so no proof can be given of it's inferiority.

The 1911:
WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, and countless other actions in every corner of the globe.
What "controlled test trial" is going to tell them more than that?
"Oh bother", said Pooh, as he chambered another round.
User avatar
Canuck Bob
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1830
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 11:57 am
Location: Calgary, Canada

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Canuck Bob »

I have no position on your military needs and owned a Colt 45 auto once. A fine pistol.

I was mystified when the militaries went to gopher rifles and as a Canadian the politics of having to rearm because of the US' choices is irritating.

There seems to be real tactical advantages to having a large magazine capacity and a double action auto pistol. A revolver would be my choice for self defence but for sustained military engagement possibilities an auto seems best.

In todays US military is it normal for combat troops to carry a pistol. In my experience only officers and military police were issued sidearms? Also given our training the average soldier would be a danger to everyone around him with a pistol! My family carried German pistols during WW2 liberated from German officers.
User avatar
Old Ironsights
Posting leader...
Posts: 15084
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 9:27 am
Location: Waiting for the Collapse
Contact:

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Old Ironsights »

Canuck Bob wrote:I have no position on your military needs and owned a Colt 45 auto once. A fine pistol.

I was mystified when the militaries went to gopher rifles and as a Canadian the politics of having to rearm because of the US' choices is irritating.
HAHA! That's why I carry a G3 MBR and not the AR Poodleshooter... :wink:
Canuck Bob wrote:There seems to be real tactical advantages to having a large magazine capacity and a double action auto pistol. A revolver would be my choice for self defence but for sustained military engagement possibilities an auto seems best.
Ish. Once you learn how to change mags, total capacity isn't a huge issue... Or, if you like Fat Mags, there's always ParaOrdnance. But, FWIW, if you are in a sustained engagement with only a pistol - of ANY type, you are well and truly screwed anyway.
Canuck Bob wrote:In todays US military is it normal for combat troops to carry a pistol.
In the 1980s... no. Though one could usually carry a sidearm in a combat zone without too much Brass Trouble. In the 2000s? not so sure. Unless Doctrine has changed dramatically, the only "Issue" pistolereos were Tunnel Rats, Officers, Tankers/APC drivers, MPs, Medics (ish) and assorted Pogues. (That's who I had to run Pistol Range/Quals for...)

Anyway, IMO the number of rounds is less important than placing them properly and acquiring a Rifle of some sort... (unless you are a Tunnel Rat...)
C2N14... because life is not energetic enough.
מנא, מנא, תקל, ופרסין Daniel 5:25-28... Got 7.62?
Not Depressed enough yet? Go read National Geographic, July 1976
Gott und Gewehr mit uns!
User avatar
CowboyTutt
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 3712
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:27 pm
Location: Mission Viejo, CA

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by CowboyTutt »

Hey Precision, how about this one? :lol: The slow mo in this video is amazing. I may have to get one of these.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULysvxSYfoU

Don't send the military, just send Jerry! 8) :lol:
"It ain't dead! As long as there's ONE COWBOY taking care of ONE COW, it ain't dead!!!" (the Cowboy Way)
-Monte Walsh (Selleck version)

"These battered wings still kick up dust." -Peter Gabriel
User avatar
7.62 Precision
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1836
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 12:34 am
Location: Alaska
Contact:

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by 7.62 Precision »

I just ordered a Desert Eagle for a guy who was going back and forth between it and a .460 S&W.

Definitely not a pocket pistol, but it is surprisingly manageable for the size. I know it is a pistol we all make jokes about, But for the right purpose, it might not be too bad. I like the older Israel-built safety better than the new US-built ones.

In answer to some other questions, most troops do not carry pistols.

As far as the 1911 goes, it was a great weapon, and has a great service record. Same with the 1903/1903A3 rifles. And the Garand. But we don't use those rifles anymore, for good reasons, even though they are great rifles.The 1911 was a great pistol. In fact it is better suited to current military needs than the mentioned rifles are. But there are other pistols out there that are better suited to the needs of the military, in my opinion.

That is not what I want to say, it is what I have to say if I am to be honest.
Emotionally, I would choose the 1911 over all others. Practically, I would have to choose something else.

As far as rifle cartridges go, the 5.56 makes a lot of sense. It is a great combat cartridge. Is it the best choice? I don't think so - I like an intermediate-sized 6.5mm-7mm for that role, but it is a very solid choice with many advantages.

Capacity is an issue, even changing mags. You only carry so many mags, the ratio of time spent shooting to time spent reloading can affect survivability, and because of the role of the pistol for most soldiers, a reload after 7 rounds will often be a reload at the wrong time.
User avatar
CowboyTutt
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 3712
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:27 pm
Location: Mission Viejo, CA

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by CowboyTutt »

My 460 snubbie is my handgun of choice most of the time and only weighs 3.5 lbs instead of 4.5 lbs like the DEagle. I have yet to tame its recoil like Jerry for rapid shooting but I'm going to work on it now. It may bruise your hand the first time in my experience, but after that, everything is AOK. I'm just an average shooter, but this handgun is wonderfully accurate for me. Always has been. -Tutt

http://www.gunblast.com/AndyTuttle_SW460ES.htm
"It ain't dead! As long as there's ONE COWBOY taking care of ONE COW, it ain't dead!!!" (the Cowboy Way)
-Monte Walsh (Selleck version)

"These battered wings still kick up dust." -Peter Gabriel
kaschi
Levergunner 3.0
Posts: 869
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 8:24 pm

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by kaschi »

They should simply have stayed with the Colt 1911 in 45. But since they went to the Beretta 9mm they should now just stick with it for reasons of cost if no other. Keep in mind that not so very long ago (like a couple of years at most) the Army bough many more thousands of the M9. The government sure knows how to take taxpayers for a ride!
No matter how you look at it, handguns in war do not win battles no matter what the caliber.
User avatar
Buck Elliott
Member Emeritus
Posts: 2830
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 12:15 pm
Location: Halfway up Sheep Mountain -- Cody, Wyoming

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Buck Elliott »

I suppose there's always something on the order of the .45 Win Mag (on the Grizzly/1911 platform), or the .475 Wildey, or even the .50 AE, but even they would not solve the 'problem...' A miss with a .500 S&W is still a miss.. Peripheral hits with a pistol-caliber bullet cannot be counted on to disable..

If our military wants to get serious about pistol fighting, it needs to Teach pistol fighting.. Issuing M9s and spending a morning on the range with them does not qualify Anyone as a combat pistol marksman..!! Sadly, it would seem that too many of our remaining top brass have only a perfunctory understanding of firearms and training.. Our "fighting" Generals and Colonels have been "retired" (fired) and their positions have been filled with the new breed of Political officers who ascribe to a very foreign military model.. where is George S. Patton, Jr., when we need him so badly...?!?
Regards

Buck

Life has a way of making the foreseeable that which never happens, and the unforeseeable, that which your life becomes...
BigSky56
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 2356
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:49 pm
Location: NW Montana

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by BigSky56 »

Buck your spot on, all there is above the company level with a few exceptions is perfumed princes as david hackworth calls them. if the military wants to up the knock down level make the fmc bullets with a TC shape the flat spot will work wonders.
My preference in pistols comes from experience the brning P35 is the finest combat pistol made it will handle 9mm subgun ammo, if I had to do another tour I would find a P35 or at least a CZ75. Ive seen colt, S&W 39&59s come apart using 9mm subgun ammo as far as a handgun the caliber doesnt matter when using fmc round nose but 9mm sure does penetrate better than 45 a 45 wont go thru one layer of a flak jacket a 9mm will go T&T. As others have said you hit them right a 22 will work you hit them wrong a 454 wont work teach them to shoot & hit. danny
User avatar
Blaine
Posting leader...
Posts: 30495
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 2:22 pm
Location: Still Deciding

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Blaine »

Warning: Thread Drift.....

It makes me mad that our LEOs can shoot us with the finest SD JHP, but our military enemies are required to receive FMJs.....That's the argument for 45acp, IMO. FMJ in .45acp is a capable round for SD......(I said capable, not great)
The Rotten Fruit Always Hits The Ground First

Proud Life Member Of:
NRA
Second Amendment Foundation
Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms
DAV
User avatar
7.62 Precision
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1836
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 12:34 am
Location: Alaska
Contact:

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by 7.62 Precision »

Buck Elliott wrote: A miss with a .500 S&W is still a miss.. Peripheral hits with a pistol-caliber bullet cannot be counted on to disable..

If our military wants to get serious about pistol fighting, it needs to Teach pistol fighting.. Issuing M9s and spending a morning on the range with them does not qualify Anyone as a combat pistol marksman..!! Sadly, it would seem that too many of our remaining top brass have only a perfunctory understanding of firearms and training.. Our "fighting" Generals and Colonels have been "retired" (fired) and their positions have been filled with the new breed of Political officers who ascribe to a very foreign military model.. where is George S. Patton, Jr., when we need him so badly...?!?
And here we have the answer.
User avatar
7.62 Precision
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1836
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 12:34 am
Location: Alaska
Contact:

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by 7.62 Precision »

BigSky56 wrote: My preference in pistols comes from experience the brning P35 is the finest combat pistol made it will handle 9mm subgun ammo, if I had to do another tour I would find a P35 or at least a CZ75. Ive seen colt, S&W 39&59s come apart using 9mm subgun ammo as far as a handgun the caliber doesnt matter when using fmc round nose but 9mm sure does penetrate better than 45 a 45 wont go thru one layer of a flak jacket a 9mm will go T&T. As others have said you hit them right a 22 will work you hit them wrong a 454 wont work teach them to shoot & hit. danny
I won't even work on the older (metal frame) S&W auto pistols anymore. They never did get the things fully reliable, and they changed design and construction as they went, so within the same model, from one pistol to the next, the stupid things are different internally. Complex shapes made by laminating stamped sheet metal instead of machining or even casting parts make reassembly a nightmare, especially since each one is different from the next.

There are enough 1911s, Glocks, etc. out there that are easy to work on that I don't mess with the older S&W autos any more.
User avatar
FWiedner
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8862
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 9:50 pm
Location: North Texas

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by FWiedner »

This thread and the "Need a mild .45-70 load" thread should come together somewhere...

:wink:
Government office attracts the power-mad, yet it's people who just want to be left alone to live life on their own terms who are considered dangerous.

History teaches that it's a small window in which people can fight back before it is too dangerous to fight back.
Bill in Oregon
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8850
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 10:05 am
Location: Sweetwater, TX

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Bill in Oregon »

Penetration? Hows about a high-cap 7.62X25 Tokarev? May not have much punch, but it'll put a small leak in both sides o' the sojer and the horse he rode in on ...
Kidding!
User avatar
Buck Elliott
Member Emeritus
Posts: 2830
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 12:15 pm
Location: Halfway up Sheep Mountain -- Cody, Wyoming

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Buck Elliott »

Our modern-day version of the old Ordnance Board seems to be in the business of manufacturing conundrums for itself.. The "Perfumed Princes" call for More Power, while decrying Increased Recoil from the other side of their faces.. The laws of Physics have not changed, and mechanical design parameters can only accommodate just so much..

As much as I admire the spirit, dedication and bravery of our Volunteer military forces, I am also compelled to note the lack of physical, mental and emotional toughness found in so many enlistees.. Combat service requires more from them than many have to offer.. Put those in support positions, as they are weeded out during training phases.. Nobody can serve a second or third tour, if they don't survive the first.
Regards

Buck

Life has a way of making the foreseeable that which never happens, and the unforeseeable, that which your life becomes...
User avatar
Paladin
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1853
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:55 am
Location: Not Working (much)

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Paladin »

Buck Elliott wrote:Our modern-day version of the old Ordnance Board seems to be in the business of manufacturing conundrums for itself.. The "Perfumed Princes" call for More Power, while decrying Increased Recoil from the other side of their faces.. The laws of Physics have not changed, and mechanical design parameters can only accommodate just so much..

As much as I admire the spirit, dedication and bravery of our Volunteer military forces, I am also compelled to note the lack of physical, mental and emotional toughness found in so many enlistees.. Combat service requires more from them than many have to offer.. Put those in support positions, as they are weeded out during training phases.. Nobody can serve a second or third tour, if they don't survive the first.
You have no idea how true that is http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,1 ... 36,00.html

I am old and was lucky enough to be allowed to pick the weapons I carried in the last two combat tours.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
It is not the critic who counts
Mike Hunter
Member Emeritus
Posts: 285
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 6:28 pm

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Mike Hunter »

The 1911 was the standard issue service pistol for nearly 80 years for one simple reason, it worked. A very simple design, with few parts to break and loose. I can still completely strip and assemble a service 1911 blindfolded. I can’t say that about any other pistol.

The Thompson – LaGarde tests conducted by the Army in 1904 determined that .45 caliber was the minimum size needed for a defensive handgun, and yes the 9mm was also tested. The funny part of the Thompson-LeGarde tests was that they didn’t use computer modeling, ballistic gelatin, or theoretical models when conducting the testing, they used actual bodies, both human and animal…real flesh and bone.

If you agree that the physical human body hasn’t changed much in the past 110 years, then we should still consider the Thompson – LaGarde tests as valid.

Since Declaration III of the Hague Convention of 1899 prohibits the use of expanding ammunition i.e.. Hollow points, the US Military will continue to use full metal jacket (FMJ) ammunition… and yes that even includes “the Teams”. Having spent 10+ years in SOCOM, we had our choice of ball or ball.

Most pistol engagements are at a ranges of less than 10 feet, so I’m not too worried about a flat shooting round, I have a rifle for that. At less than 10 feet I want something that will make whomever I’m engaging to immediately cease whatever action that caused me to engage; the .45 ACP does that quite well.
User avatar
OldWin
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8965
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:38 pm

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by OldWin »

Buck Elliott wrote:Our modern-day version of the old Ordnance Board seems to be in the business of manufacturing conundrums for itself.. The "Perfumed Princes" call for More Power, while decrying Increased Recoil from the other side of their faces.. The laws of Physics have not changed, and mechanical design parameters can only accommodate just so much..

As much as I admire the spirit, dedication and bravery of our Volunteer military forces, I am also compelled to note the lack of physical, mental and emotional toughness found in so many enlistees.. Combat service requires more from them than many have to offer.. Put those in support positions, as they are weeded out during training phases.. Nobody can serve a second or third tour, if they don't survive the first.
+1




I am old and was lucky enough to be allowed to pick the weapons I carried in the last two combat tours.[/quote]


Nice choices sir.
"Oh bother", said Pooh, as he chambered another round.
BigSky56
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 2356
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:49 pm
Location: NW Montana

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by BigSky56 »

Paladin my preference in frags was the lemon over the round and red spoon impact fuzed, I would guess they have phased them out of inventory by now. danny
User avatar
7.62 Precision
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1836
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 12:34 am
Location: Alaska
Contact:

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by 7.62 Precision »

Buck Elliott wrote:. . . I am also compelled to note the lack of physical, mental and emotional toughness found in so many enlistees.. Combat service requires more from them than many have to offer . . .
Pentagon just announced that 71% of young men in the US, 17-19, was the age range, I think, are unable to qualify to join the military, mostly due to being unfit and unable to pass the physical requirements to join, some due to criminal histories, some because of gang-related, vulgar, or obscene tattoos, and many because they were diagnosed with stuff like ADD etc. and prescribed behavioral altering drugs as children.

I remember being in high school and standing around talking with guys about joining the military. One guy wanted to be a Navy SEAL. Another was trying to decide if he wanted to join the Marines and be Force Recon or go in the Army and be a Ranger. Some kids wanted to be Special Forces. Another guy was going to be a sniper. No one said, "Oh, I want to do something easy." or, "I'm afraid I won't be tough enough."

Later, I used to volunteer to do some recruiting events at fairs, etc. I started talking to these high school kids and what I heard over and over was, "I can't join the military; I could never make it through basic training," or "I could never do something that hard." When I was in high school, no one would have said that, even if they were afraid. We were all tough enough to be the best, we said, and most of us really believed we were. I could not believe the change in just a few years - just four or five years.
User avatar
7.62 Precision
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1836
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 12:34 am
Location: Alaska
Contact:

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by 7.62 Precision »

One problem with militaries, and this is not a new problem, is that they consistently fall into the trap of believing that technology can replace training.

While a reply don't like the M9 and would be glad to see it go, and I know there are some real problems with that pistol for military use, I bet we could take every instance in which it could be claimed the M9 and the 9mm cartridge failed to perform effectively, and we could split the events into the following categories:

Instances in which the pistol failed to perform, or the design of the pistol caused a failure to perform
Instances in which the cartridge did not perform as needed
Instances in which the shooter failed to perform effectively

The first is a real issue - replacing the pistol could potentially fix most of these issues
The second is definitely going to be an issue sometimes, though we can't say how well replacing the cartridge would fix it - it would still be a pistol cartridge.
The third could be affected slightly by changing the pistol. Many people struggle to shoot the M9 well. For the most part, this needs to be fixed with training, and no matter what they choose for pistol and cartridge, it won't change the fact that very few personnel are really trained well to fight with a pistol.

If they want an effective pistol/caliber combination, the easiest way they can make the pistol more effective is with better training.
User avatar
Griff
Posting leader...
Posts: 20803
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: OH MY GAWD they installed a STOP light!!!

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Griff »

7.62 Precision wrote:
Buck Elliott wrote:. . . I am also compelled to note the lack of physical, mental and emotional toughness found in so many enlistees.. Combat service requires more from them than many have to offer . . .
I remember being in high school and standing around talking with guys about joining the military. One guy wanted to be a Navy SEAL. Another was trying to decide if he wanted to join the Marines and be Force Recon or go in the Army and be a Ranger. Some kids wanted to be Special Forces. Another guy was going to be a sniper. No one said, "Oh, I want to do something easy." or, "I'm afraid I won't be tough enough."
Well, it's come full circle, 'cause in my senior year it was all about what deferment they could get, or runnin' off to Canada. Me and a FEW of my friend were not so inclined. 5 of us were all about getting paid college scholarships from the service (Navy) and becoming fighter jocks... Being only 17 at graduation, I couldn't sign myself up... and my parents (read Mom) refused to sign...

I ended up waiting to enlist between getting my draft physical and the subsequent notice... then volunteered for every hazardous duty they thought up! Successfully avoided getting myself killed on 3 occasions, and then got out. I thought after the 1st attempt I was being assigned one of those crème-puff duties! If being on a destroyer in combat is a crème-puff assignment?
Griff,
SASS/CMSA #93
NRA Patron
GUSA #93

There is a fine line between hobby & obsession!
AND... I'm over it!!
No I ain't ready, but let's do it anyway!
Mescalero
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 6180
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 12:21 pm

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Mescalero »

Draft physical.
I have talked to many guys about that, and it seems like I am the only one who remembers that.
Sometimes I ask myself, did that really happen?
Then I tell myself, yes it did; I remember it clearly.
I remember the Sargent with all the hash marks on his sleeve yelling at us like we were a herd of morons.
I guess to him .................. we were.
User avatar
Blaine
Posting leader...
Posts: 30495
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 2:22 pm
Location: Still Deciding

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Blaine »

Some of You People have vastly under-rated today's fighting men AND women. Our Gub'ment might suck, but our volunteers (not draftees) are as good as they ever were..... :evil:
The Rotten Fruit Always Hits The Ground First

Proud Life Member Of:
NRA
Second Amendment Foundation
Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms
DAV
User avatar
Buck Elliott
Member Emeritus
Posts: 2830
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 12:15 pm
Location: Halfway up Sheep Mountain -- Cody, Wyoming

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Buck Elliott »

Yes they are Blaine.. But the number of wash-outs is alarming, to say the least.. Those who actually make it to the fighting units in the field are still the best, the finest and the bravest..!!
Regards

Buck

Life has a way of making the foreseeable that which never happens, and the unforeseeable, that which your life becomes...
BigSky56
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 2356
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:49 pm
Location: NW Montana

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by BigSky56 »

Blaine nothing wrong with draftees they fought and died as well as anyone else theres good & bad in any group of people. danny
User avatar
Old Ironsights
Posting leader...
Posts: 15084
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 9:27 am
Location: Waiting for the Collapse
Contact:

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Old Ironsights »

Buck Elliott wrote:Yes they are Blaine.. But the number of wash-outs is alarming, to say the least.. Those who actually make it to the fighting units in the field are still the best, the finest and the bravest..!!
This.

the current "no-go" rate for Enlistees is around 70%... and a HUGE portion of those is from...

wait for it...

"politically incorrect tattoos". :roll:

The other huge majority is from being a wimpy fat kid...

But that used to be correctable in Basic.

Not any more. The kind of training that turned Buttery Milquetoast into GI-Joe is no longer "acceptable".

The whole Hoover Water Retention System is completely out of touch/PC these days...
C2N14... because life is not energetic enough.
מנא, מנא, תקל, ופרסין Daniel 5:25-28... Got 7.62?
Not Depressed enough yet? Go read National Geographic, July 1976
Gott und Gewehr mit uns!
User avatar
Blaine
Posting leader...
Posts: 30495
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 2:22 pm
Location: Still Deciding

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Blaine »

BigSky56 wrote:Blaine nothing wrong with draftees they fought and died as well as anyone else theres good & bad in any group of people. danny
Never said they were....some just didn't have a choice....American youth can kick butt when they want to....
The Rotten Fruit Always Hits The Ground First

Proud Life Member Of:
NRA
Second Amendment Foundation
Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms
DAV
Mike Hunter
Member Emeritus
Posts: 285
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 6:28 pm

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Mike Hunter »

I believe its two fold; yes America’s children are getting fatter and wimpier, BUT the Military’s standards are changing. Gone are the days of “go in the Army or go to jail”, or dad dragging junior to the recruiter.

So are the days of multiple DUIs and folks getting busted down multiple times.

I spent 23 years in the military, as both an enlisted member and an officer; I watched the change happen, and supported it all the way.

The US Military is a professional organization …period. It’s no longer a dumping ground. If you’ve been doing drugs, they don’t want you… go work at McDonalds; same for arrests, gang membership, DUI, High School dropout, and stupid tattoos. That stuff won’t be tolerated in the military anymore.

Before I retired, an officer had to have a 4 year degree, the unofficial policy is that you really should have a Masters degree by the time you came up for Major.

I foresee in the next 5 years, if you don’t have at least a two year degree, and in excellent physical shape, with no black marks against you, you won’t be able to enlist. Right now I suspect that roughly 30% of the current enlistees have a two year degree, and at least 20% have a 4 year degree. That adds up to half of the current enlisted force having some college, big change from the military of the 60s, 70s, and 80s.

I foresee officers will be required to have a Master’s degree prior to making Field Grade, and a PhD prior to making General.

Now can we get back on subject.... .45 is better than 9mm

v/r

Mike
User avatar
Grizz
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 11808
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:15 pm

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Grizz »

make the fmc bullets with a TC shape the flat spot will work wonders
this


could someone explain the differences between 9mm machine gun ammo specs and pistol ammo specs?
User avatar
7.62 Precision
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1836
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 12:34 am
Location: Alaska
Contact:

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by 7.62 Precision »

BlaineG wrote:Some of You People have vastly under-rated today's fighting men AND women. Our Gub'ment might suck, but our volunteers (not draftees) are as good as they ever were..... :evil:
I am not under-rating, I am speaking from experience. Most who carry a pistol are not well-trained with it. Some are. Give a lot of the same soldiers a carbine, and watch out!
User avatar
Blaine
Posting leader...
Posts: 30495
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 2:22 pm
Location: Still Deciding

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Blaine »

7.62 Precision wrote:
BlaineG wrote:Some of You People have vastly under-rated today's fighting men AND women. Our Gub'ment might suck, but our volunteers (not draftees) are as good as they ever were..... :evil:
I am not under-rating, I am speaking from experience. Most who carry a pistol are not well-trained with it. Some are. Give a lot of the same soldiers a carbine, and watch out!
I agree, but that wasn't the issue I was referring to...Some felt that the quality of soldier has greatly dwindled....
The Rotten Fruit Always Hits The Ground First

Proud Life Member Of:
NRA
Second Amendment Foundation
Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms
DAV
User avatar
Panzercat
Levergunner 3.0
Posts: 965
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2010 1:25 pm
Location: This thread is USELESS without pics!

Re: Army Wants A Harder Hitting Pistol

Post by Panzercat »

Kinda wondering how a micro mag would fare, like 5.7x28 or .22TCM. Military grade stuff is designed to punch through armor like butter and even the civilian stuff has enough oomf behind it to get through light steel. Throw in some nasty hydrostatic shock and it sounds pretty darn effective in theory-land. With the .22TCM specifically, you would also have the added benefit of being able to swap some parts for 9mm frame compatibility and mags.

Less weight, more ammo, minimal recoil and theoretically decent stopping power. Sadly, there's little info on live target usage, though it looks like people have used 5.7x28 for hunting (lets forgo the 'humane hunting' discussion for now). Either way, they've described as 5.56 short.
...Proud owner of the 11.43×23mm automatic using depleted Thorium rounds.
Post Reply