If the Army were to pick a new sidearm... [Archive]

Dylan889

01-31-2005, 10:24

1911A1 in .45ACP.

Hmm Deja Vu

AGREED!!!!

caliber
#1 45!!!!
#2 10mm
#3 maybe 40

GUN
#1 SIG in DAK P220 or P226

since the Army likes their safties....
I like the controls on the berreta, so I woud say the S&W 4563 or 4063. In a blued finish of course.
If glock had an external safty, it wouldn't be bad.
Maybe the H&K with a button mag release and ambi safty.
I for got the H&K P2000 pistol, it is DAO

Lupey

01-31-2005, 10:38

Another vote for the 1911a1 in .45!!!! It has all the safeties anyone could need! Plus is is so dang simple to tear down for cleaning if need be.

Eaglearm

01-31-2005, 11:20

1911 Again. OR larger caliber of the Berretta.

OK, I'll jump in. Do you think Glock could handle the harsh combat environment of constant beating, and usage???????

kennethm3

01-31-2005, 11:38

1911? My Gawd, our troops deserve better than a 100 year old, seven plus one shot, single action, all steel gun shooting 230grains 800fps at best. It has lots of small parts, it doesn't like to be dirty, it rusts, it weighs as much as two modern pistols, and it is inaccurate as hell (in M1911A1 issue trim). I know, I carried one. A nice brown Remington-Rand manufactured during ol' dubya, dubya-two. What a POS! You could aim it down range and roll it side to side in your hands and feel the barrel slap against the bushing. Scoring expert on the USMC pistol qual had more to do with divine intervention than shooting well. You think shiney new privates have ADs on the range now with M9s wait till you put "ol' rusty" in their hands. I hated that gun and was so happy when the armorer boxed them up for shipment to whatever museum they ended up in..

Personally I would recommend SIGs new P250 in .40S&W. P250? Yes, about the size of the P229, DAK trigger group, plastic frame, stainless steel slide. No external safety, no de-cocker, user configurable grips like the HK P2000. Small, simple, and potent; the perfect military sidearm.

bkc2a

01-31-2005, 12:00

I like the DA/SA Sig 226 in 40cal for your regular troops. Hi cap mags and good power. I like the Sig 220 in 45ACP but in today’s hi cap world it is hard to beat 15 rounds of 40 vs. 7 rounds of 45ACP; especially in a combat situation wear you may have multiple targets at once. I would on the other hand vote for Special Forces to use a custom 1911. SF get a lot of rang time and the added accuracy would be a plus.

Lupey

01-31-2005, 12:04

1911? My Gawd, our troops deserve better than a 100 year old, seven plus one shot, single action, all steel gun shooting 230grains 800fps at best. It has lots of small parts, it doesn't like to be dirty, it rusts, it weighs as much as two modern pistols, and it is inaccurate as hell (in M1911A1 issue trim). I know, I carried one. A nice brown Remington-Rand manufactured during ol' dubya, dubya-two. What a POS! You could aim it down range and roll it side to side in your hands and feel the barrel slap against the bushing. Scoring expect on the USMC pistol qual had more to do with divine intervention than shooting well. You think shiney new privates have ADs on the range now with M9s wait till you put "ol' rusty" in their hands. I hated that gun and was so happy when the armorer boxed them up for shipment to whatever museum they ended up in..

Guess someone forgot to tell the Marine Expeditionary Unit Special Operations Capable.

kennethm3

01-31-2005, 12:13

Lupey,

In the '90s Quantico built up a couple hundred match pistols for the MEUs. Those pistols have been gone and out of the inventory for a long time. Ten years ago they were something like a grand a piece, not exactly a general issue pistol for the masses.

Ken

Group 9

01-31-2005, 12:37

Guess someone forgot to tell the Marine Expeditionary Unit Special Operations Capable.

You really thing the average joe is going to be carrying a pistol that is built and maintained to the standards of the MEU's?

My dad was in World War 2 and was worried when I started carrying an automatic pistol in law enforcement because the only automatic pistol he had ever used was a 1911 Colt and they were the worst jamming things he had ever seen.

FedRich

01-31-2005, 12:53

Lupey,

Our alma mater (USCG) is going to .40 cal. Sig P229R DAKs. Just imagine how many ADs there would be if they had gone to Glock :D

gaboy

01-31-2005, 13:02

wilsoni91

01-31-2005, 13:09

1911? My Gawd, our troops deserve better than a 100 year old, seven plus one shot, single action, all steel gun shooting 230grains 800fps at best. It has lots of small parts, it doesn't like to be dirty, it rusts, it weighs as much as two modern pistols, and it is inaccurate as hell (in M1911A1 issue trim). I know, I carried one. A nice brown Remington-Rand manufactured during ol' dubya, dubya-two. What a POS! You could aim it down range and roll it side to side in your hands and feel the barrel slap against the bushing. Scoring expect on the USMC pistol qual had more to do with divine intervention than shooting well. You think shiney new privates have ADs on the range now with M9s wait till you put "ol' rusty" in their hands. I hated that gun and was so happy when the armorer boxed them up for shipment to whatever museum they ended up in..

Personally I would recommend SIGs new P250 in .40S&W. P250? Yes, about the size of the P229, DAK trigger group, plastic frame, stainless steel slide. No external safety, no de-cocker, user configurable grips like the HK P2000. Small, simple, and potent; the perfect military sidearm.

If it hung around for a 100 years and went through how many wars I guess it was doing something right.

Dolemite

01-31-2005, 13:43

If it hung around for a 100 years and went through how many wars I guess it was doing something right.

I will probably leave alot out, but here is how I understand it...

Indian Wars saw the 6 shooter (.35 or .38 or .44, I think).

Six-shooter fell from grace when battling the Moros in the Phillipines (1870's, I think), who chewed some sort of leaf to get high and then were impossible to bring down with a six-shooter. Same kind of substance I hear the Somalis are known to use. Finally got the 1911 .45 in, strangely enough, 1911. Funny how that works. :p

Beretta got the job in 1984 after some trials. 9mm ammo same as NATO, blah, blah, blah...

Not that I think it's a bad weapon. As a daily carry I am sure its great. But something special happens when lowest bidders get contracts with the GOV...

Would not be suprised to see a new contract come out after the dust settles on the current operations.

Anyone please correct me or expound as necessary.

FPS/SFI

01-31-2005, 13:51

1911A1 in .45ACP.

Ditto.

DFrost

01-31-2005, 13:54

357 Sig, it's a hot round, high capacity mags and if a Trooper can't ruin it, not much can.

DFrost

wilsoni91

01-31-2005, 14:26

I just remember when I was in Basic Training I had a Drill Sergeant tell me to always remember that the .45 will always take body parts off.

As for the 9mm I seen people take a shot in the chest from a 9mm and keep coming. At least with the .45 you know if you hit something with it that it will go down. I am only saying this because I seen it first hand while in Somalia

Eaglearm

01-31-2005, 14:55

Some one mentioned American made pistols for US Troops. When the President of the United States flys on a foriegn made aircraft, then that old laundry does not wash.

Frank_Pembleton

01-31-2005, 15:30

Simple facts as to why the military won't issue a DAO, or DAK type pistol.

There are simply too many dumba$$es in the military. I have personally seen too many jarheads stick loaded M9 down their pants, pockets, crotches, seats of their pants, etc. I chewed some rear back in the day for stupid stuff like this. Just imagine what happens the first time Pvt. Smith sticks a locked and loaded Glock down the front of his trousers in classic "G style" and ends up putting a round through "Mr Winky"

Negative on the Glocks, Sig DAKs, etc. Military pistols need to have manual safties, and decockers; however, this is not without exception, since some special units can carry whatever they need to accomplish the mission.

So to get back on topic my vote goes to the HK USP .45 V1.

FedRich

01-31-2005, 15:42

There are simply too many dumba$$es in the military....
Negative on the Glocks, Sig DAKs, etc. Military pistols need to have manual safties, and decockers;

Frank,

Exactly why I was surprised the Coast Guard went to the Sig. If I was a clearing barrel, I would be scared right about now :eek:

Geronimo509

01-31-2005, 15:45

Military pistols need to have manual safties, and decockers; however, this is not without exception, since some special units can carry whatever they need to accomplish the mission.

So to get back on topic my vote goes to the HK USP .45 V1.

Frank I agree with your choice.

the USP .45 V1 with a short supply of V2's for lefties.

JSavage

01-31-2005, 17:43

problem is, as has already been mentioned, NATO. Every weapon in "issue" uses a standard NATO round. This was adopted to ease logistics when operating under NATO, when another country has primary command. We don't have to set up a sepperate supply channel for our troops.

That having been said, old rusty can stay in it's coffin, as far as I'm concerned. There is a reason a good 1911 copy costs so much, it's because G issue 1911's were a great design, but impossible to produce to the tolerances required to make it reliable, without spending alot of coin.

If I could wave a magic wand and make a fine combat weapon appear in the hands of a capable soldier, it would be an HK USP in .40 or .45.

REAL reliability in that piece!

Jim

Lupey

01-31-2005, 18:23

That having been said, old rusty can stay in it's coffin, as far as I'm concerned. There is a reason a good 1911 copy costs so much, it's because G issue 1911's were a great design, but impossible to produce to the tolerances required to make it reliable, without spending alot of coin.
Jim

I respectfully disagree here. Look at the Norincos. Yes they are roughly made but the steel is far superior to just about any pistol out there. Plus they go BANG everytime you pull the trigger with accuracy. Bonus is you can get them for around 300 bucs brand spanking new. Unless things have changed since I seperated you only need to reliably feed ball ammo as that is all the Military uses in its sidearms.

You can also get a SA mil spec for around 400 brand new that will rip thru ball ammo. Colt 1991a1 is around the same price.

The Marines do have a contract with KIMBER (http://www.defensereview.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=374) and you can view a more info here (http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/history/meusoc.htm)

There is a reason that Swat Teams and Spec ops select it - it's the greatest combat pistol every made (but im bias :D)

FedRich I read that. I remember when I was in they were tooling around with the idea of switching from the 870 to some bullpup looking shottie. Never happened that I know off. Wouldn't ya know that after I get out they get all kinds of cool things.

FedRich

01-31-2005, 18:33

FedRich I read that. I remember when I was in they were tooling around with the idea of switching from the 870 to some bullpup looking shottie. Never happened that I know off. Wouldn't ya know that after I get out they get all kinds of cool things.

Well, no bullpups but they did get shorter barrels and composite, pistol grip stocks. They also have M-4s, machine guns on station smallboats, and let airedales shoot outboards with a .50 cal rifle from the back of a helicopter. Seems like someone at Buzzards Point in DC finally figured out what the GUARD in Coast Guard meant.

Lupey

01-31-2005, 18:54

Seems like someone at Buzzards Point in DC finally figured out what the GUARD in Coast Guard meant.

Now thats damn funny!!!! Good buddy of mine is the BMC down at that new unit they created & he is at Boston. What they called? They like a water SWAT team.

FedRich

01-31-2005, 19:13

Lupey,

Check your PMs, I don't want to fully hijack this thread :D

TheGreatGonzo

01-31-2005, 19:20

At least with the .45 you know if you hit something with it that it will go down.

Simply not true. Sometimes yes, sometimes no, just like a 9mm. I have personally seen one individual take 4 hits, 3 in the torso, with 230-grain HP and he stayed on his feet and returned fire. Back in my patrol days, I arrived on a scene where a subject took a .45 ACP to the head and chased his wife (the shooter) around the house for several minutes before he fell unconscious. He survived. On the other hand, I have also seen "one stop shots" (although not always fatal) with 9mm rounds, .38 Special rounds, and even a .32ACP. NO...repeat...NO handgun round is going to qualify under the above statement. None. Not the .45 ACP, not the .357Sig, not the .357 Magnum, ad nauseum. The old story about a .45 ACP "blowing body parts off" is hogwash. The same thing was said about the .357 Magnum, the .44 Magnum, and the 10mm. I suppose it is true in the sense that you could blow a finger or two off, but you could do the same with a 9mm (or smaller caliber).

Now, having said that, my handgun caliber of choice is the .45 ACP. Off duty, I generally carry either a Sig P220 or Sig P245. I prefer the .45 ACP for a variety of reason, although I don't care for the 1911 platform. But believing that there is some magic handgun caliber that will make someone "go down" just because you hit them with it...well, it just ain't so. On the other hand, I believe when it comes to bullets, bigger is better. If I could find one that would fire frying pans, I would carry it. But the .45ACP is not a magic bullet. Don't fool yourself.

I also believe the .357Sig is an EXCELLENT round, and is my second choice behind the .45ACP. However, I do not feel the least bit "under armed" carrying a 9mm P229, P225, or H&K P7. Shot placement beats bullet size EVERY SINGLE TIME. If you miss the target with a .45ACP, it is unlikely they will die from fright. If you put a 147-grain 9mm round through the eyemask into the brain, they are most likely going to expire quickly.

My humble opinion,
Gonzo

TheGreatGonzo

01-31-2005, 19:34

If it hung around for a 100 years and went through how many wars I guess it was doing something right.

Both the horse and the sword have been around for over 100 years and gone through many wars with great success. Both are still in the inventory of the US Army. So, I'm sending you to Iraq. Do you prefer the good ol' tried and true horse and saber (after all...it has been used with great success for many wars) or would you rather I give you an M1 Abrahms tank? :)
Gonzo

PS - As for the original question, I would probably choose the Glock 21 and whatever the smaller, single stack version of the Glock .45 ACP is called. Personally, I can't stand Glocks. Never fit my hand right. But, they have acceptable combat accuracy, they are easy to maintain, and operate well under very harsh conditions. Much like a revolver, they would probably be the easiest weapon to train large numbers of troops with. That being said, give an American fighting man a toothpick and a rubber band, and he will emerge victorious.

JSavage

01-31-2005, 19:41

Lupey,

Though I respect your position on 1911 model .45's, I have had personal experience servicing Norinco's and trust me, you don't want to abuse them. The biggest problem with the less expensive 1911 clones are the recoil springs and the barrel bushings. I owned a Norinco in 1994. I dressed it up with an extended safety and some Pach. grips. After about 1.5 years and about 750 rounds, the bushing was all but gone and the recoil spring had gotten so weak that the gun was showing signs of stress failure and failed to feed right.

I junked it and bought a Colt Ser. 80 Officers Model. I paid more than twice what the Norinco cost but, I never looked back. The overall quality of the Colt was FAR superior and I have never had a reliability problem.

Don't get me wrong, I like the 1911 frame weapons. I just don't think you can get into a good one for less than $650, bare bones.

At any rate, Gonzo, I do like your Sig choice. I've been looking to get me one but haven't got the wife convinced. SHe doesn't think I need another firearm.B B B B B B B BUT HONEY!!!!

Jim

little_cyclone

01-31-2005, 20:37

Shot placement beats bullet size EVERY SINGLE TIME.

AMEN!

In my opinion, i'd have to toss in my lot with the HK crowd...

BuMan

01-31-2005, 21:27

If the Army were to select a new sidearm I would want them to pick an something from an American company. However looking at the American made products out there, I would say go with a glock. At least they are put together here. Can't beat them for reliability or shootability. Also all of their parts are interchangeable.

Sure do love my sig, but I don't think anything can hold up as well as a glock would in the field.

Glocks are assembled here. So are SIGs (SIGArms, Exeter, NH), Berettas (Accokeek, MD), and H&K (Sterling, VA). All, except Glock, to comply with military contracting regulations (SIG - M11/P228; Beretta - M9/M92; H&K - Mk23 SOCOM). Glock to comply with government contracting regulations at various levels.

noknock

01-31-2005, 22:42

One thing that we may have over looked on this thread . . . Bullet construction. Without getting into a long diatribe about how bullets have evolved immensely over the past 10-15 years and how that with this evolution we now have .45 bullets that will actually expand and 9mm bullets that will expand and PENETRATE . . .
We must consider a big reason the military ended up with a big bore sidearm. Not to oversimplify things, but we are a "civilized" ;) country, meaning that we amongst other countries do not utilize SP, HP, etc. FMJ'S only. There will be those that argue that we use FMJ'S because of reliability in feeding, others believe that the Germans developed the 9mm Parabellum ("FOR WAR") specifically not to kill soldiers but to only wound them. The reason being that if one soldier is shot, then 2 other soldiers will help the wounded one, thereby effectively taking 3 soldiers out of the fight with one hit.

No matter what we believe about the aforementioned, if we are talking about following Geneva Conv. rules, meaning the military sidearm is loaded with shiny, copper, solid looking things with no holes, then it needs to be .45 caliber. Of course, the SOCOM figured this out years ago, hence the HK SOCOM pistol and a multitude of other .45's in use by operators in CQB situations. If I remember correctly the SOCOM 45 is something like 12+1, not to shabby.

How I love these topics, I'm going to hit the hay now and dream about terminal ballistics. AHHHHH! :sleepy:

gaboy

02-01-2005, 07:29

Glocks are assembled here. So are SIGs (SIGArms, Exeter, NH), Berettas (Accokeek, MD), and H&K (Sterling, VA). All, except Glock, to comply with military contracting regulations (SIG - M11/P228; Beretta - M9/M92; H&K - Mk23 SOCOM). Glock to comply with government contracting regulations at various levels.

Glocks are Austrian, Sigs and HK's are German and Berettas are Italian. I know where they are assembled.

Toyota's are assembled in the US also but they are still Japanees. Not to many Gov contracts with toyotas or hondas.

My point is it would be nice if us company's would step up and make a decent gun.

kennethm3

02-01-2005, 11:08

Some congressman from Michigan got some wording placed in a bill rider about a dozen years ago to specifically exclude the domestically produced "impor brands" from the GSA purchase program, at the same time the legislation says that cars and trucks from the "Big Three" built in Canada and Mexico are "domestic". Go figure. I think it was the same jackass elected official who deemed it appropriate that the State Department had to "buy American" for their vehicles overseas, nothing paints a target on your head like driving around Lebanon or the Sudan in a fricken Suburban or Caprice. Nothing harder to get in Botswana than an alternator for a 97 Chevy Impala.
Back in 1958 the army had a competition for a new medium weight belt fed machine gun. In a wave of mis-quided patriotism we ended up with the M60, a tempermental POS. 30 years later the military did it again and ended up buying the MG240, coincidentally the "loser" 30 (thirty, 3 fricken 0) years earlier. Maybe our troops would've ended up with the better weapon three decades earlier.
Me, I don't give a rat's ass where a weapon was designed, built, or where the profits go as long as it is the best possible weapon available for our guys. Leave this lowest bidder and "buy American" crap for the toilet paper vendor.

Crxster21

02-02-2005, 21:46

Me, I don't give a rat's ass where a weapon was designed, built, or where the profits go as long as it is the best possible weapon available for our guys. Leave this lowest bidder and "buy American" crap for the toilet paper vendor.

I totally agree with you on this one. I am in the military and I get to see the effects of the "Lowest Bidder" and "American Only". It is not always in the best interest of the troops. In recent years, they have started to get more and more from the local area (overseas of course). At the same time there is nothing better than having a Brand New Ford F150-250-350 with 4 wheel drive and large enough to fit 6 (In gear) with an A/C that works.