« “This could be about information considered embarrassing to Saudi Arabia” | Main | Have it our way at Burger King. Or else! »

July 5, 2014

Army Wants a More Potent Sidearm


The sidearm they need has already been invented.
One of the major goals of the MHS effort is to adopt a pistol chambered for a more potent round than the current 9mm, weapons officials said. The U.S. military replaced the .45 caliber 1911 pistol with the M9 in 1985 and began using the 9mm NATO round at that time.
- - Never Yet Melted サ

Posted by gerardvanderleun at July 5, 2014 7:50 AM. This is an entry on the sideblog of American Digest: Check it out.

Your Say

The nine has decent stopping power. Makes no difference what you use however, if you don't hit your target. Preferably with your first round.

Posted by: Vermont Woodchuck [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 5, 2014 8:26 AM

Good point VW. As far as that goes, the plain jane 38 Special is good enough for me; I carry one most all the time.

I am tending more to my S&W revolvers.
The chemo and general aging make it harder to rack a slide on a 1911. Jeez, if I had a misfire I'd be dead before I could rack n clear.

It was Col Cooper, or maybe Clint Smith said "if you want to scare someone, carry an auto. If you want to kill somebody carry a revolver.

Posted by: chasmatic [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 5, 2014 9:34 AM

Have to disagree. I carried the M1911A1 for many years on active duty, right up until they took it away and gave me the Beretta.

I do not defend the Beretta, but it would be a bad mistake to revert to the 1911. The magazine capacity is far too small and its design is antiquated. Incomparably better to got with a higher-capacity .45 model that’s more ergonomic, of which there are several examples.

Posted by: plus.google.com/104841162830331053592 [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 5, 2014 11:01 AM

In 1974 I was 1 of 8 people out of 175 to qualify as expert with the 1911 and that was in spite of the fact that it feels like a rounded over 2x4 in your hand.

I've had my Beretta 92FS for almost 15 years now and have put over 10,000 rds through it, most of them on target.

It ain't the tool, it's the handler.

Truth is, most soldiers can't shoot worth a damn.
Neither can most civilians.
Cops are even worse.

(In Iraq and Afghanistan they fired 7,000 rds for every enemy killed.)

I used to think I was a good shooter, then I took a tactical defense shooting course and found out what good shooting was really like.

The gov't always chooses the most expensive path, so my bet is they get all new 45's and everything will be worse off for it.

Posted by: ghostsniper [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 5, 2014 6:26 PM

I also shot expert with the 1911 and you're right - it ain't easy. But recoil effects on accuracy are much more a result of weapon design than caliber.

The 1911 is inherently accurate but it takes a lot of practice and unfortunately, almost no military outside SOF gets enough. I worked once with a West Point grad who was 1st team All American in pistol and he could easily put down half-size silhouettes at 75 meters with the 1911. But almost no one on active duty will attain that level.

Posted by: plus.google.com/104841162830331053592 [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 5, 2014 6:51 PM

Hi capacity striker fired.45 with an external ambidextrous safety.

I would carry a 1911 in any environment as a secondary weapon. The beancounters are leery of accidental discharges with a safe action pistol (a lack of training issue, just like lousy accuracy) and still don't think they were wrong going to nine.

These are the same people who sustain the 5.56mm as a rifle cartridge.

Next question?

Posted by: Andy Jones [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 5, 2014 9:13 PM

When I went through training there were 1911s all over the place. I qualified on an M14, was issued an M16, used other weapons on my assignments.
The arguments can go on all night long and most of the points both pro and con are valid: handling, stopping power (terminal energy), capacity, ergonomics, &c. I think we might be missing the nostalgia, the iconic nature, the legend behind Browning's 1911 and Garand's M1.
I own and operate several of each (along with some other rifles and pistols) and I tell you, there is nothing like the feeling of letting off some '06 or 45acp rounds through the pistol and rifle that won WWII. To me they are manly weapons. I am 67 (old fart) and that's just me saying. No disrespect meant to any of you guys that prefer other weapons.

Posted by: chasmatic [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 5, 2014 10:03 PM

There is a huge difference twixt putting rounds on metal or paper versus on flesh. I've done the latter after coming back from the Nam. Not happy about that but it's a fact. The stress factor is enormous which is why practice is a must. If the action happens indoors, count on going deaf. Keep your SA, avoid tunnel vision. focus on center of mass, not the weapon, otherwise you will be shooting at the weapon.

Let me ask all of you how well you shoot weak side? You might have to: some peckerwood may get lucky, only takes once. Rounds out are the only sure method of being ready, both hands.

I'm now 71 chasing 72 and surgery and chemo does a job on one's abilities.

Chas, hope all goes well.

Posted by: Vermont Woodchuck [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 6, 2014 10:30 AM

Vermont, I have similar past and experiences that you do. What you say is absolutely correct. My handlers let me carry whatever I wanted. Most times a 1911 or a snubbie 38. The 38 has more notches than the 1911, go figure.

Yeah, chemo can be an ass-kicker. But ... consider the alternative. What my condition does for me, I say "I'm prepared to die for my beliefs" and I mean it.

Posted by: chasmatic [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 6, 2014 6:14 PM

I formed my opinion at nine years old after reading Lord Hornblower, the purpose of a pistol is to place it against the ribs of your foe and pull the trigger.

Rule Britannia!

Posted by: Onthenorthriver [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 7, 2014 5:07 PM

Post a comment

Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)