Posted on 04/23/2004 4:21:45 PM PDT by Cannoneer No. 4
April 23, 2004: The U.S. Marine Corps is looking for a new .45 caliber (11.4mm) pistol. While the American military retired the M1911 .45 caliber in 1985, some commando units still prefer it. This is because the 11.4mm (.45 caliber) bullet weighs twice as much as the 9mm one that replaced it and still has an edge in "stopping" someone hit with it. But the 9mm M9 pistol magazine carries 15 rounds, versus seven in the M1911. The commandos (Special Forces, SEALs, Marine Force Recon) counter that their operations are the type where every round counts, and the fewer you have to fire the better. For the regular troops, the M9 has been popular, and successful. The 9mm weapon is lighter, has less recoil and has the extra ammo for users who are not sharpshooters.
The Marines want to buy 1,100 new .45 caliber pistols and are having a competition to determine which of several models available will get the $1.9 million contract. The Marines have been using M1911s rebuilt from the many old ones turned in when everyone switched to the M9. But even this supply is running out, and it is known that there are newer .45 caliber designs out there that are more reliable, lighter, easier to repair and more accurate. Some Marines (and other troops) buy these newer .45 caliber weapons with their own money. Most American combat units tolerate troops bringing in some additional weapons, especially pistols. Some troops have been buying 10mm pistols, seeing this as a nice cross between the lighter weight of the M9 (2.55 pounds versus three for the .45) and the greater stopping power of the 11.4mm M1911 bullet. But there are new .45 models that weigh as much as the M9, carry more bullets (10) and are easier to repair than the M1911.
Afghanistan also raised the issue of stopping power once more, when individual troops went into caves or other tight places, where only a pistol could be used. In these cases, every shot counted, and the guy firing larger (like 11.4mm instead of 9mm) bullets was more likely to win. But most troops agree that any arguments over pistols is minor compared to issues involving all the other more frequently used weapons and bits of equipment. Nevertheless, there's something about pistols…
On what planet? The only thing nominally going for the .45 in this comparison is five hundredths of an inch difference in diameter. The .40 may be "short and weak" compared to the 10mm in terms of ballistics, but then the 10mm left the .45 about three bus stops back. The .45 has nothing on the .40 other than a long history.
That's an interesting sidearm. Do you know that history behind it?
Turned out he had threatened several of the neighbors (it was over a zoning fight). The local police were not amused, I guess they gave him the "Jaws" talk, because he sold his house and left town shortly afterwards.
One of the nicest little towns I ever lived in I was running the local weekly newspaper while its editor-publisher was recovering from a heart attack and triple bypass. The local sheriff was a swell guy and was twisting my arm to become a deputy for him once the editor recovered and took his business back. Only problem outside the usual was a string of minor arson fires, toolsheds and storage buildings at first, then a couple of empty garages, finally a vacant house. An older guy whose mother had recently passed away was the main suspect, it was largely considered that mom had laid down the law and kept him in check, but with her out of the way he was making his dreams come true. A couple of the local volunteer firemen staked him out and had a pretty good idea of when and where the next fire would be, an old former railroad section house on the other side of town where the suspect had been seen hiking and taking photos. Sure enough, on a saturday afternoon, the place burned, and their little buddy was there with a video cam.
When he got home, he found that someone had burned his house to the ground. After he found out that noone wanted to rent to him, he moved away and the place was back to normal again.
Quite a few of the Vietnam-era recon units cut down 40mm M79 grenade launchers into a foot-long or thereabouts *pistol* so it could fit in a rucksack or on-belt buttpack. That left both hands free to use their M16 or CAR15, yet the blooper was relatively convenient when useful or if the Car15 ran empty or jammed. Some cut down both ends, others just the stock. Eventually the XM148 underbarrel mounted grenade launcher came along to fill the same role, then the improved M203 version. The new XM302 for the experimental XM8 carbine looks even better, and can be removed from the rifle and used as a pistol on its own if necessary, looks like.
As for those guys with their cutdown bloops, they're from the 101st Airborne's L Compant LRRP Detatchment. The modifications weren't at all standardized, and there were a soull;e of variations possible.
That's as good a case of poetic justice as I've ever heard. And I used to be an arson investigator.
L
I'm sure there are others, besides those pinged here, who would be interested.
Sure would, but I'd like to do a rifle range, if possible.
You sound just like John Kerry telling anyone who questions him that they aren't "in the know" and how dare they question him.
Personally, if I where in combat, I would want a good rifle as primary personal weapon and a hi-cap 9mm as a backup, although with the military it's usually either-or, not both.
Damn! And here I hoped I sounded funny.
Everything is really ammo dependent of course. For example I have a box of 20 rds of RBCD specialty ammo in .40 that cooks out of my barrel at 2000 fps! BUT it's a 97 gr round. A buddy of mine recommended that brand in the .45 as being the one you want to have loaded when "It's ONE SHOT between you and the END."
So, let's take ammo as a baseline. I think the most common and effective load in the .40 is a 135gr JHP. The most common and effective load for the 45 is the 230gr JHP. Now, let's change the bullet configuration to a baseline HARDBALL load. Which one do you think is going to be more effective as a "one shot stop?" A 135gr or a 230 gr ball load? As you said, the 45 has more history going for it. But the 9mm has almost as much in a ball load and if one could suppose that the 40 is more effective than the anemic 9mm (which reports from the battlefield seem to show requires multiple hits to put the target on his back) then it would seem logical that the 45 would be still another improvement over the 40. I'm sorry about the "short and weak" comment, that was something I read in Guns and Ammo when the 40 first appeared and it just seemed to "fit" in my post. But where the bad guys meet the good guys at close quarters, the 45 is still tops.
45 also beats the 10mm in real life. Ballistics on the 10mm are impressive but the practical aspect is that it's too loud, too much muzzle blast and too much recoil in combat for fast follow up shots. Why isn't the 10mm the choice for FBI Hostage Rescue? Why doesn't it ride on more LEO hips? The FBI did try it and found it wanting for the reasons I mentioned. So the 10mm is too hot and the 40 ain't quite hot enough. Leaving what? That which is only 5/100 bigger and has more folks who idolize it than a pagan on Halloween. Think there's a reason for those fervent feelings? I'll say it again in closing: I myself carry a Glock M27 in 40 cal and I do love it. But when push comes to shove, gimme a 45 anyday.
It is scary to be in the range with some folks.
My gun range put an overhead ventilation system in the indoor range, protected by wooden "baffles." For a few months afterwards, we found many holes in the overhead baffles. Some were accidents, some definitely deliberate -- neat, tight little groups of holes. Before the overhead ventilation and baffles, we had a problem with knuckleheads shooting at the metal plates protecting the lights. Unbelievable.
Believe it or not, I had no problem getting a handgun permit where I live, but it varies from town to town -- as you can imagine, I have heard horror stories of applicants waiting months. I want to buy one, and perhaps two, new handguns -- a S&W 41 (a .22 -- the friend I mentioned loans me his when we are at the range together -- expensive!) and perhaps a Sig Sauer P239, which some of the people on this thread think highly of. The Sig I handled had a surprisingly small grip, which I want. I find that .45's are too much for me.
I don't believe the Strasbourg Tests- supposedly classified, with only some results leaked- went only for torso shots, and I'll admit that I'm a believer in going for the head if I think I can get away with it, especially if I get off the first shot, which is what I was trained to do as a tank gunner. My experiences hardly provide enough basis for a database, but are particularly instructive to me.
But I don't dispute that a good, penetrating hit with 9mm ball can be just as effective as a hit from .45 ball. Whether it's lethal or not isn't necessarily the issue; the idea is for the individual hit to STOP doing whatever mischief led to his being shot in the first place. A nice, messy bleeding head would will generally manage that, as will a through-and-through hit through spine, hip or kidney, with pneumothorax and collapse of a lung the next best hope, one reason multiple hits from 9mm SMG fire are usually effective, if not immediately, as at the Anwar Sadat assassination. But if I can't get that immediate result and have to wait on the critter to bleed out, it's helpful if the leak has both an entrance and exit- I got very shocky when I first dealt with one of my own and is as large as possible; the bigger the better.
The military inclination is to issue the handgun to one who for whatever reason is better not encumbered by a rifle. The big users in my day were tank crews, with medics, who needed both hands at times for their jobs, a close second. M79 gunners usually carried a M1911A1 .45, but that went out with the attachment of the M203 grenade launcher to the M16A1 rifle. MPs are of course another common military handgun user.
The first time I had to depend on a handgun as my primary weapon I was in 1967 when working as a escort/driver for an officer, in a civilian clothes job in which personally owned handguns were authorized...but those with US Military markings were not. A lot of Colt Commanders went on that job, but my choice was for a WWII steel-framed P.38, since I had some two dozen German military P.1 magazines that worked just fine in the old guns at the time. Naturally, I couldn't find the deal I wanted on one, and was about to settle on a aluminum-framed P1, when a kindly British tank NCO took pity on me and made me a kind offer on a Number Two Mark I Para issue Browning Hi-Power with a few extra magazines. The Browning GP and I have been pretty close pals since then and I've never looked back, but I am neither overawed nor unreasonably dismissive of its effectiveness.
And no, you don't know what you're talking about - you're just another one of those know-it-all guys that just didn't happen to have anything to do with the solutions. Bet you didn't even bother to join the service - it's amazing how much you could have actually learned about what it takes to take new capabilities from the drawing board to the test fields to combat.
Well guess what: there are a whole lot of good, honorable people that did in your place - and they're still serving now as they find and prove the goodies that will keep US forces on top, they way they have to be if we're going to survive.
A clue - we're ALL taxpayers, not just you - But some of us have given more than just money (or hot air).
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.