.40??? never happen... it'd be the only gun in the military world using it and another type of ammo to stock for no real performance gain
Posted on 01/27/2017 11:58:11 AM PST by C19fan
The Army today confirmed the caliber for its new Modular Handgun System will be 9mm, one week after the service announced it selected a version of Sig Sauer’s P320 to replace the M9 service pistol.
Army officials sent out a press release with additional details on the MHS but did not explain why the service chose 9mm, a decision that Military.com asked the Army to explain its reasoning behind.
(Excerpt) Read more at kitup.military.com ...
I have a tokarev with hollowpoints. The ballistics are phenomenal.
CC
Well, you’re full of yourself, aren’t you? I have served in combat.
I don’t have to ask you if you have, do I?
And you don’t know your history. Look up how the 1900 Luger was tested both in Germany and the US initially to outfit the Calvary. The tests required that the then-new automatic pistols had to be able to kill a horse. The 7,65 mm failed, hence the effort to ramp it up to 9mm.
The US test pistols in 9mm still didn’t please the US Army, so DWM sent .45 caliber Lugers for further tests but by that time the Colt was looking more robust.
Read more.
Already faced fire, Buddy. Got hit really good by an AK about 17 months into my tour with the infantry.
How super are you?
.
Your arguments are pathetic, and rely on misdirection.
The 9mm Luger has failed absolutely nothing.
If you think you need a hand held Howitzer, you first should be able to prove you can reliably hit a target.
The .45 fails in that respect constantly.
It takes way too much time to develop the skill set for the .45, so it is a reasonable decision to go with the gun that most can master in a day or two.
.
Tell us how the AK hit didn’t slow you down.
You have no idea how to present a coherent argument.
(but thanx for your service!)
.
Double-horsehocky. The .45 doesn’t require any more than average skills to master. I have trained with literally thousands of Marines, soldiers and sailors and almost all of them qualified.
I have even trained a group of navy wives and every single one of them shot very well with the .45 after one day’s training ( actually better than their husbands).
The .45 1911A1 is accurate, dependable, and that first shot works pretty well every time.
This discussion would be a lot better if you had a lot more experience and less a tendency to send an emotional response.
“but did not explain why the service chose 9mm,”
Most likely because they have several billion rounds in stock.
L
Oh, it slowed me down! I spent 7 months in traction and nearly a year in a steel brace. Dang bullet almost completely severed my leg.
I ain’t super at all...
I have no problem with the .45 auto. It is a good round and if tortured I probably would admit the 1911 is my favorite pistol.
Still beside my bed right now are two Browning Hi-Powers and I don’t feel in the least bit undergunned. If I could choose it would be a Glock 10mm but like I said, nothing at all wrong with the 9mm. I believe one is loaded with Golden Sabres and the other with Silvetips.
Anyone who has taken a bullet for the U.S. has my respect. My Father was in combat veteran, and a couple of times, in heavy combat. He got a purple heart but it was from an 88, not a rifle.
He was one of the best shots I have ever seen and I have seen a lot. I am a certified instructor or I should say was one as I have not kept my certificate up to date.
Daddy brought home a Luger, a P-38 and a Hungarian .32. When I was around 5, I saw him kill a 5 foot gator with that Luger. It was around 50 feet away or maybe just a little further.
He loved the Garand and liked guns but you know what? He knew almost nothing about ballistics. He had strong opinions and I would not argue with him because he had been there and done that but I know he was not always right despite that.
.
I didn’t say they didn’t qualify.
They just took more time to do so than a more appropriate side arm would require.
The side arm is not intended to take on mass infantry, the rifle is. Its purpose is to save your life in close quarters. The 9mm Luger will do that dependably.
.
.40??? never happen... it'd be the only gun in the military world using it and another type of ammo to stock for no real performance gain
Do you always comment on subjects of which you have absolutely no practical knowledge?
Chainmail,
I concur with you on the accuracy of the M-1911A1. If the shooter is trained it is quit accurate. If the shooter is NOT trained, it is inaccurate. An old platoon sergeant trained me in how to accurately shoot the M-1911A1 in about 15 minutes back in the summer of 1976 at Grafenwoehr, Germany when I was attached to his tank platoon as the tank company’s Forward Observer. I shot expert with it that day and have done so ever since. Just a two handed grip and look down my right arm through the sites to the center of mass of the target. With an M-16 I was lucky to make sharpshooter, though never failed as marksman.
The .40 is a fine round. I think the industry screwed up in pushing the fact you can shoot the .40 (rather unpleasantly) out of a 9mm frame.
When you shoot it out of a dedicated .40 or over engineered frame, as the 320 seems to be, it is very pleasant and recovers nicely.
And remember Bill Mauldin’s cartoon where the old cavalry sergeant putting his damaged jeep out its misery with a .45 bullet through the radiator.
:) 3d Squadron, 12th Cavalry, 3d Armored Divsion
I read that they are going to spend $500,000,000 - half a bil on new P320s. I have to wonder what the benefits are compared to replacing the Berettas when they wear out and using the money saved for more training and practice ammo?
Let me assure you, from expensive experience, there will be NO mistaking a 10mm Glock for ANYTHING in .45.
I used to own two Colt Delta Elites in 10mm and an Auto Ordinance also in 10mm.
The only ammo available locally was Norma which was at least good ammo.
I honestly could barely tell the difference between the .45 auto and the 10mm.
Your long experience tipped the scales. Not to say mopped the floor.
The line that sat me up was: I dated his daughter under his ferocious glare many years later.
I bet that was a damned interesting situation. I've tangled with you here, and have watched others have a go at it---which of course, in a different sense, was what the girl's daddy was worried about.
Wonder whatever became of him and her.
Again, thanks for the lesson, your personal stories, and your service.
FW
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.