Gun Hub Forums banner

1 - 20 of 40 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,116 Posts
Yeah, Bob Owens at BearingArms seems to think the only pistol that checks all the Army's boxes is that new STI-derived Detonics.

My only problem with it would be the grip angle... the classic 1911 grip is almost PERFECT for me, M9 and Glock are each too far out of my workable range and even an S&W Sigma "isn't quite right".
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
7,758 Posts
Gee, all the "deficiencies" listed for the M9 they pretty much knew when then adopted it. :confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,116 Posts
Yeah, but we needed Italian basing rights for those Gryphon (land-based Tomahawk) GLCM's and it was a quid pro quo...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,882 Posts
Captain Gyro,

Personally, I like the M11 (It's issued to all CID agents, persons with smaller hands & "certain special operatives".) & see NO real need to replace it. - Getting SIG to build it in the USA shouldn't be a big problem.
(I'd prefer a USA-built handgun.)

Otoh, I really don't like the M9.

yours, sw
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,200 Posts
Call me crazy, I like the M9.

Also, for all the expense of replacing it vs. what a pistol is actually used for these days, it might be a big cost for a small benefit.

Finally, the article said the M9 could not be suppressed. Couldn't a threading of the barrel change that problem? The exposed bit of barrel is there for it at the muzzle.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,055 Posts
I spent quite a bit of time with the M&P and agree with "they got it right" statement.

During development there were widespread rumors of a coming "RFP" for a new service pistol that seemed to have been a blueprint for it or it was designed to meet the RFP.

If they want a bigger permanent wound channel how can it be anything but a .45? They are limited to FMJ bullets and last I checked .45 was bigger than .40.

I was also around in the early days of the .40 S&W and like it. The .40 has been a big hit with law enforcement and many Federal agencies use it but there is also noise about some LE going back to the 9mm due to improvements in ammo and lower ammo cost.

Is there any current military use of the .40? Since .45 ACP is still in the system I'm not sure it would be very cost effective to add a new cartridge. It would probably be a logistic nightmare.

But rumors are almost as common as flag officers at the puzzle palace...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,882 Posts
Charlie Petty,

I fully agree with the .45ACP. for STOPPING POWER.

BUT every "Pentagon big-shot" that I know of wants a capacity that would require a "double-stack" magazine & that requirement makes the grip WAY too big for many soldiers.
(Fwiw, the BEST MP "street supervisor" & NCO that I ever had in one of my units wears a size 3-4 in a dress & she had "some trouble" mastering even the M11, due to her MUCH smaller than average hands.) = In 2014, soldiers/marines/sailors/airmen/coasties come in a variety of physical sizes.

yours, satx
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,499 Posts
I still hold and maintain the position that a pistol is not an offensive weapon. If you want high capacity, put a 40 round magazine in an M4 or other AR variant.
I can go rent an M9 with a suppressor. Heck I did!
A pistol should be small, easily carried and not add much to the walking overload we saddle on our soldiers.
My vote for the SWaMPy Shield, but in .40 it becomes a bit recoil heavy.
This sounds more like another Charlie Foxtrot.
Geoff
Who is old grey and cynical.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,627 Posts
I hardly see the sense in changing caliber from 9mm hardball to .40 S&W hardball...either ballistically or logistically The only logical move would be to a .45 ACP.

I think the M&P, with a 10+1 capacity, would fit the bill. I suppose it wouldn't be too hard to extend the mag to a 12 round with a different floorplate, maybe a different spring. Just guessing, I sure ain't an engineer.

I've handled them (haven't shot the .45), and as a guy with small hands I can tell you they feel a heckuva lot better than a Glock. Much less blocky and cumbersome feeling to my hands anyway.

As far "...having to shoot'em a lot with a pistol"? Well, yeah...sometimes. Handguns aren't rifles, and have nowhere near the power. I have seen a man shot 6 times with 9mm 147 grain Hydra Shok, and wasn't stopped until he caught one in the brain pan. The rest of the shots were all periphreal, though. Didn't hit anything even close to vital.

I have also seen a man (it was caught on the shooters home security video) shot once with a .32 S&W from an old, rickety RG revolver turn, run about 10 yards and drop dead. First time the man ever shot the gun, and he ten ringed him in the heart.

It really ain't what you shoot them with...it's where you shoot them.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,055 Posts
The interchangeable backstraps of the M&P really can fit just about anyone and it the most comfortable wide body of all IMO.

I have all four calibers and only the 357 SIG is truly obnoxious.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,940 Posts
I've handled them (haven't shot the .45), and as a guy with small hands I can tell you they feel a heckuva lot better than a Glock. Much less blocky and cumbersome feeling to my hands anyway.
I think you're going to like my 45C... a lot.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,727 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
I predict they'll choose the forty. They'll get NATO to go along by adopting country-specific nomenclature:

For the Germans: 10mm Kurz
For the Brits: 10mm x 22
For the Italians: 10mm Countach
For the Spaniards: 10mm ChaCha
For the French: 10mm Cession
For the Czechs: 10mm Lager
For the Poles: 10mm Polka
For the Canadians 10mm, .40, whatever, eh?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,627 Posts
I predict they'll choose the forty. They'll get NATO to go along by adopting country-specific nomenclature:

For the Germans: 10mm Kurz
For the Brits: 10mm x 22
For the Italians: 10mm Countach
For the Spaniards: 10mm ChaCha
For the French: 10mm Cession
For the Czechs: 10mm Lager
For the Poles: 10mm Polka
For the Canadians 10mm, .40, whatever, eh?
Now that right there was funny, Cap'n. Don't care who you are. :eek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,200 Posts
Have to admit I loved that. (Yeah, getting NATO to change will be big.)

If they want .40 type round diameter and more stopping power, why not go to the full on 10mm cartridge?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,055 Posts
It's simply too hot for the average grunt and is very hard on guns. I'm sure the service life would be even worse than the M-9
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,543 Posts
Pardon me if I yawn. RFPs for new service pistols have been floated about several times since the M9 was adopted. None have been formally released, nor do I expect another to be now. The service pistol simply isn't that big a deal in the larger scheme of military things and there's just so much money to go around. I will conceed that the M9 barely skirts the boundry of crew served weapon in terms of sizeand trigger reach.

Now, one way to upgrade the performance of the 9mm is different ammunition. There were/are rounds out there that could significantly improve the effectiveness of current 9mm ball. The bureaucratic battle to get them accepted and type classified and then adopted and issued would be monumental. I can't see Federals EFMJ (or the Geco Action Safety) managing to sneak past the Hague Accords, but the French & Germans used to have some really innovative stuff that at least on paper, met them. [Thinking Arcane and TVH AP.] Don't really see this happening either.

As Charlie noted, one of the RFPs that floated some time back (I read a copy of what was claimed to be the RFP), kind of served as a developmental standard for the S&W M&P. I'll also echo the "they done good". When we were asked to T&E it, the initial reaction was that it was just another plastic pistol. That changed profoundly when we got our mitts on it.

BTW, we were issued 10mms for about 15 years, much of it with custom loaded full house 10mm velocities. I'm not a fan as a general issue self defense round. It could, however, serve as an indirect fire weapon. Should someone seek cover near (preferably right in front or beside) a concrete structure, simply pounding the structure would produce enough shrapnel and spall to convince them to give up. The military has other means to do this.
 
1 - 20 of 40 Posts
Top