Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Army wants a harder hitting handgun

Coming full circle....actually considering the 45 ACP again. My opinion is they should have never dropped it.

Handgun article

The U.S. Army is moving forward to replace the Cold War-era M9 9mm pistol with a more powerful handgun that also meets the needs of the other services.

As the lead agent for small arms, the Army will hold an industry day July 29 to talk to gun makers about the joint, Modular Handgun System or MHS.

The MHS would replace the Army's inventory of more than 200,000 outdated M9 pistols and several thousand M11 9mm pistols with one that has greater accuracy, lethality, reliability and durability, according to Daryl Easlick, a project officer with the Army's Maneuver Center of Excellence at Fort Benning, Georgia.

"It's a total system replacement -- new gun, new ammo, new holster, everything," Easlick said.

The Army began working with the small arms industry on MHS in early 2013, but the effort has been in the works for more than five years. If successful, it would result in the Defense Department buying more than 400,000 new pistols during a period of significant defense-spending reductions.

Army weapons officials maintain that combat troops need a more effective pistol and ammunition. But experts from the law-enforcement and competitive shooting worlds argue that tactical pistol ammunition -- no matter the caliber -- is incapable of stopping a determined adversary without multiple shots in most cases.

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.

Soldiers who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan have complained that the 9mm round is not powerful enough to be effective in combat.

"The 9mm doesn't score high with soldier feedback," said Easlick, explaining that the Army, and the other services, want a round that will have better terminal effects -- or cause more damage -- when it hits enemy combatants. "We have to do better than our current 9mm."

The MHS will be an open-caliber competition that will evaluate larger rounds such as .357 Sig, .40 S&W and .45 ACP.

The FBI and several major police departments recently decided to return to using the 9mm round after finding that .40 caliber ammunition was causing excessive wear on its service pistols. The heavier bullet and greater recoil over time resulted in frame damage to well respected makes such as Glock and Beretta, according to Ernest Langdon, a shooting instructor and respected competitive pistol shooter who has worked for gun makers such as Beretta, Smith & Wesson, and Sig Sauer.

"Most of the guns in .40 caliber on the market right now were actually designed to be 9mm originally and then turned into .40 calibers later," Langdon told Military.com.

Langdon served 12 years in the Marine Corps where he was the chief instructor of the Second Marine Division Scout Sniper School and the High Risk Personnel Course. He's been a competitive pistol shooter for 15 years where he has won competitions in the International Defensive Pistol Association and two World Speed Shooting titles.

Larger calibers, such as .40 S&W, have significantly more recoil than the 9mm making them much harder for the average shooter to shoot accurately, he said.

"I don't think anybody would argue that shot placement is the most important for terminal ballistics," Langdon said. "Even though you say a .45 is better than a 9mm, it's still a pistol caliber. Chances are if it is a determined adversary, they are going to have to be shot multiple times regardless of the caliber."

Many law-enforcement shooting incidents have shown this to be reality, he said.

"I talked to a Chicago cop that shot a guy eight times with a .45 to kill him and that was a 230 grain Hydra-Shok," Langdon said. "And that guy now carries a 9mm �he realized that handgun bullets suck. "You have to shoot people a lot with a handgun."

Langdon has trained numerous personnel from all branches of the U.S. military, FBI, Secret Service and other federal agencies as well as state and local law enforcement.

As part of the joint requirement process for MHS, Army weapons officials did a "very thorough cost-benefit analysis" that showed supported the effort, Easlick said.

"We have got an old fleet of M9s right now; it's costing us more to replace and repair M9s than it would cost to go get a new handgun," he said.

The Army spent years on an effort to search for a replacement for its M4 carbine, but ended up adopting the improved M4A1 version used by special operations forces.

Beretta officials maintain that the company has offered to upgrade M9 many times.

"We have submitted numerous changes or product improvements that really address a lot of the shortcomings that are either perceived or real," said Gabe Bailey, Business development manager for Beretta's military division.

The Marine Corps adopted the M9A1 in 2006 that features a rail for attaching lights or lasers, checkering on the front and back of the grip and a beveled magazine well for smoother magazine changes.

Some of the improvements Beretta offered included an enhanced sight system, changing the angle of the slide-mounted safety to avoid inadvertent safety activation and a threaded barrel, Bailey said.

Army officials, however, say the M9 does not meet the MHS requirement.

"The M9 doesn't meet it for a multitude of reasons," Easlick said. "It's got reliability issues; the open slide design allows contaminates in. The slide-mounted safety doesn't do well when you are trying to clear a stoppage -- you inadvertently de-cock and safe the weapon system."

Just read this on Fox

Sounds good

They need one

Snake

Well the 1911 in .45 ACP is still the best weapon and caliber in FMJ but it'll take the Army bean counters many decades to come to that conclusion.

I suppose they could consider a machine pistol something along the lines of an MP 38 or MP 40. Maybe even a Sten type gun.

"I talked to a Chicago cop that shot a guy eight times with a .45 to kill him and that was a 230 grain Hydra-Shok," Langdon said. "And that guy now carries a 9mm �he realized that handgun bullets suck. "You have to shoot people a lot with a handgun."

Atta Baby,..8 shots with a .45 and moves to a 9mm for more ammo...

I wonder how many servicable 1911's the army still has on hand. I'll bet they have enough to arm everyone who carries a handgun.

Would be nice to see them back with the .45, but I see them going with a .40. No real reason other than they will use the excuse that they could use LEO's ammo, which around here seems to be predominantly .40 cal.

some of the article is right on, some is just not credible. There is a video floating around I think on youtube of a guy taking three or four rounds of .40s&w in mesa, and then walking himself to the gutwagon. 8 rounds as above, ah, lets see that again.
The beretta m9 dates itself back to the 30's as i remember as to the basic system, and that open top does allow for debri collection, not to mention the safety/decocker mechanism. Friend of mine was a doorknocker in iraq, said they would remove the ball ammo and replace it with winchester jacketed hollowpoints they could buy in the village bazaars, then it worked a lot better. Against the rules tho, you know.
I would suspect there are few, if any, traditional 1911's still around, given they were last produced during WWII.

Sometimes even big, powerful guns aren't instant. Some years ago, we had a drug bust go bad in the next county over. The perp's live-in girlfriend let the cops in. The guy came out of the bedroom with a 44 mag and shooting. The 1st cop in took one to the chest. Even with that, he managed to get off no less than 28 rounds from his 9mm carbine before he died.

Especially when they miss, as cops seem prone to doing when shooting at something other than a dog.

I don't buy the Chicago cop shooting a guy 8 times with a 45 and Hyda-Shok, more like 7 misses and one hit. The 45 has a long track record of ending a fight right quick, the only thing is that you have to be able to shoot in the first place. An updated 1911 would be what I would look at. But this gets very very political, the last time they Adopted the Beretta, and from what I understood at the time, the Europeans bought more F-16's or said they would. It this current war, the rules really don't apply since the enemy is a stateless combatant, the last thing I would worry about is offending The guys in Geneva or The Hague! The object is to kill the enemy and not die ourselves.

If only such a thing existed...

If they go 45 it'll need to be double stack.

They went to the nine because the 1911 .45 was too big for all the new female soldiers to hold or shoot well. They picked a pistol that was STILL too big for most females to hold properly, but did hurt less - on both ends.

Now they claim they want a cartridge that does more damage - and my bet is that they'll pick a pistol to fire it that is once again too fat for small hands.

If they pick a .40 S&W, the conspiracy crowd will bellow that the real reason is because every other goobermint agent from the FBI to FDA meat inspectors are armed to the teeth with .40s and a bazillion rounds of ammo. "One more step to a police state!"

(They may be right, you understand.)

SF CIF companies went to Glocks, both 9mm and 40 S&W, quite a while back. They can access Army inventory 9mm for training and carry the 40's for combat.

As you stated, the gun NEEDS to be a double stack. A Glock 21 is too big for many.

Going back to a 1911 would be like going back to Cocoran Jump Boots and cotton shelter-halves. They both sucked way back when, and they would suck even harder today. The Quantico-built 1911's the MARSOC guys had broke constantly. Their new guns cost over two-grand each, and the one MARSOC guy I talked to recently said he'd swap it for a Glock in a heartbeat.

THE answer, IMO, is a Glock 37 in 45 GAP. That by-passes the large frame issue (G19/17 frame size), has adequate capacity (ten rounds) is cheap, and most importantly, won't break. The Army doesn't have much 45acp ammo left, or 9mm for that matter. Current ammo stores could be quickly depleted by current service guns as the new guns/ammo were brought on line.

And that makes for a lot of steel to carry around, with everything else they are already carrying.

one of the interesting things about my friend that was in iraq, among other things, he was a registered gunsmith. Which led into all kinds of fascinating things. There were a LOT of .45acp devices floating around for testing purposes among the higher brass, some of them pretty cool. They have started procuring for special ops units some versions of .45's.
I do remember a conversation about handguns with a special forces type just back from the stans. He said he started with a m9, ditched it not because so much he disliked the weapon, but reliability issues in the talcum like dust, went to a hi power, and spent half his tour with a glock 17. His comment was it worked all the time, that was more important than anything else.
course he also did not have ball ammo in it either.

45 GAP would make a lot of sense, I just wouldn't do it in a Glock.

I would not do a 45 GAP no way Jose. The 45 ACP is the logical choice in a +P loading.

I'm sure the armorers would be thrilled.



Travis

I don't know what the answer is, but do know the M9 is a large, heavy beast for what it is, with a safety that flipped itself off in my holster often not to mention placed too high, with a grip too large for me and many. More important than the round, IMO, is the ergo's. I sincerely hated that POS. Something like the cz sp-01 makes more sense to me as a service pistol design. Nor do I care if it's 9mm or 45acp, as either are well-handled when housed in an appropriate design; the .40 and others, not so much, if they are to be used by "the masses".

I have reviewed a lot of officer involved shootings in the course of the last 10 years or so. 45 ACP, 40 SW, 9mm, 10mm, 38 Special, 44 Special, 44 Magnum, 357 Magnum. Every one of those calibers has failed to stop armed felons before the felons could do more harm. I've debriefed a bunch of cops and military personnel who have given me their stories freely, and the common denominator is shot placement.

Unless you put your handgun bullets into vital anatomy, they won't do any good. Police departments that train their officers in anatomically correct shot placement have found caliber isn't as important as they thought it was.

45 ACP is not the answer, nor is the 1911. I think the 45 is a great cartridge and it would be my choice if I were the guy choosing it. A modernized update of the 1911 single stack concept such as the SIG P220 would be a good choice, but so would others.

The answer lies in training, not in hardware. Our SF guys know this, as do a lot of the better PD's in America.

I don't know about the small hands thing in a 1911. We had a lady on the pistol team and she was no giant. She shot as well as any man maybe better sometimes.

I have homunculus hands and the handgun that fits my hands the best is the 1911. If I can shoot a 1911 with my hands anybody can shoot a 1911.

A handgun is for self defense, a battle rifle is for fighting, and a machine pistol is for close in fighting. A handgun is not for fighting as such.

I recall reading the article about the LEO that was in this gunfight......he did land eight hits on the bad guy, not sure how many were "incapacitating" or not.

The gist of the article was that he was down to a couple of rounds in his last mag when he finally stopped the BG.....he ended up switching to a Glock 17 I believe and carries over 100 rounds for it now. He wanted more ROH for extended confrontations.......

If a soldier can't carry a rifle for some reason, then I suppose he would want a harder hitting handgun.

7 shot .357 Magnum S&W 686

I'm sure General Patton would agree....

I would want a machine pistol instead or at least a M-1 carbine.

The story was posted in detail here a couple months ago. The fight was finally stopped by a head shot.

It will be:

Polymer, with a tactical rail, tritium sights, double-stack magazine, and .40S&W.

Frankly, it probably will be the Glock and should have been the Glock back in the '80s. If it had been then, the change-over to another caliber would be child's play and cheap now.

Hey, I got an idea!!

With a thumb safety and a magazine disconnect.

I say just issue everyone SIG P220's and call it done.

There....saved millions of taxpayer dollars.

Jim;

I've heard more than once that those little carbines killed mo-better than they should have.

It was a great idea especially the M-2 model. I used the M-1 version and it was great for what it was designed for.

+1

They�re probably looking for any excuse to go to Glock�s because:

1. They�re on all the fashionable tv shows.
2. They�re taticool.
3. They will give the medics and corpsmen practice putting tourniquets on legs with bleeding femoral arteries that were shot on the firing line.

I know I�d be nervous standing next to Bubba/Snuffy Smith/gangbanger raw recruit on each side of me side-holding a pistol without a safety. I�ll believe the military really believes that�s a good idea when they remove the safety off the M4.

I agree it's still handgun ammo. Shoot 8 times and still have 8 more in the mag. Works for me. There is no miracle bullet. Maybe they need to use HP's. I think that would help a lot.

I was going to comment on this as well. The most ignorant sentence in that entire piece. Who has ever argued a pistol round has more than marginal lethality. It is the weapon of last resort. The Browning 1911 is #1 for a reason.

We don't agree on much but you are dead on on this one. I get nervous every time I see someone pull a Glock out of their range bag at the range.

While I carried a .45 caliber 1911A1 when I was in the Army, I'd recommend the Army opt for a double-action semi-auto shooting a .45 ACP cartridge to replace their M-9 9x19s.

While the .45 ACP does have a heavier recoil which makes it slower t bring down for a 2nd. shot at the same target, it's also a one-shot-stopper, so you don't always need a 2nd. shot.

Just my 2�.........


Strength & Honor...

Ron T.

I am thinking that there will be no change in caliber. The girls and nancy boys that are filling the service rosters now can't shoot anything with power, and as was mentioned, NO handgun cartridge is really a stopper.
I'm betting that they have been hoarding all the .22 LR ammo, with plans in mind to switch to that caliber.

You may have a point Sam.

On the lethality of handgun ammo, obviously an article or two has been written on that, but back around 1913 or so the Germans figured out that if they put a small flat point on their 9mm Parabellum it gave the bullet a far greater shocking effect than a round nose. IIRC the picture accompanying that article showed a truncated cone with a tiny flat point by today's standards, but even that produces a greater trauma than a round nose that pushes aside tissue.

Be that as it may, a lot of handgunners over the years have proven the worth of a flat point SWC style bullet on game of all types. As long as the military has to stay with a FMJ, is there any convention or treaty that says it has to be a round nose?





On the other issue, as much as I like the old 1911 it's probably time to go to a Glock since they definitely keep on shooting. Probably need to have a frame mounted ambi-safety ala the 1911. Maybe add a cocking indicator. And a grip safety. Hmm, anybody ever looked at a Springfield XD?

This quote, taken from the aforementioned article, reveals the illusion of a man stopper handgun cartridge, except, of course, for Rancho_Loco. He teaches the experts all about the great myth of mangun stoppers.

"I don't think anybody would argue that shot placement is the most important for terminal ballistics," Langdon said. "Even though you say a .45 is better than a 9mm, it's still a pistol caliber. Chances are if it is a determined adversary, they are going to have to be shot multiple times regardless of the caliber."

That with the greatest probability of of ending a gunfight is a CNS hit, and that's not 100%, exclusive of the cerebellum. A bad guy with his heart no longer pumping can live 8 seconds, long enough to make a good guy room temperature.

The only sure way of surviving a gunfight is to not get in one. That's my primary rule of gunfighting. I'll avoid and walk away.

One of my rules for 98.6 degrees -it's way up there in terms of importance but I'm not sure of its numerical rank- is that in defensive handguns, bigger is better. The more blood out & the more air in and the faster they occur the better.

Back on topic: I'm with you here, Mink. Army should have never abandoned its loyal, tried, and true friend. The 1911A1 in .45 ACP is the king of battle handguns, except, of course, for Rancho_Loco.

Didn't the Marine Corps already answer this question?

http://blogs.militarytimes.com/gearscout/2012/07/20/usmc-orders-4036-m45-cqbp-pistols/

Probably a good idea. The thumb safety already exists.

That's what they're paid to do. If they don't like it, they can apply for a transfer. Isn't that what we hear on 24hr every day?

Mink: I knew the transition (bribery?) to the 9mm was not going to be successful back when it happened.
Shame so much tax dollars will be wasted.
The 1911 45 is hard to beat for combat/self defense.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

No, they didn't. Heavy as [bleep], 8rd capacity. It's time has passed. Model A trucks are cool too.

This is the Obama administration. I'd be careful they don't give the military some of these in .38 Long Colt.




Oh, well, as long as we don't fight any Moros it should be okay...

Yes, and just like Sigs, they don't hold up, yet. The XD is a new platform, and might just be the one to beat. Nothing Sig makes will hold up, and they are an armorer's nightmare.

Yep.

My son is in an outfit with the Navy and he uses the 45 acp in what ever pistol/suppressor he likes at the moment.
But they are chambered in 45.
Seems that the Marines were going back to that caliber a while back.

I figured this out the first 15 minutes I had one of these in hand.

I don't ever see anything replacing my 1911 45.

Does this mean that parts have to be hand fitted?

On shot placement:

Of course, excellent shot placement is desired. But it has to be good guy shot placement. Bad guy shot placement must be avoided if a good guy wants to go home. Therefore, it is better to not hit the bad guy (tactical movement) if the bad guy doesn't hit the good guy. Hence, a good guy trading his life for a bad guy's ain't a wise gunfight rule.

If you're in a gunfight, it's because a bad guy wants to kill you. It's a pretty wise idea to not help him accomplish his goal. Therefore, never be a good target. Weaver stance, target acquisition, sight alignment, squeeze trigger is old school that should've never made it to class.

Another good gunfight rule that seems to predominate is O'Reilly's Postulate: Murphy was an optimist!

I ain't sure, but I think guys were gun slingers of practical gunfightin' knowledge of the 70's:

Recommendation direct from the Oval Office.

Duhh! This has ALWAYS been a requirement for a 1911. That is why that gun costs over two grand

Whichever they go with, stock up on ammo and components NOW.

You really believe your own line of schit. You are a complete idiot

Spot on Doc..

Here's what I posted on a similar thread, in the Handgun forum:

No way it will be a 1911, even though it's a better choice than the M9. My bet will be either the HK45, or the P227.

Much as we all normal people like the 1911, it's going to be hard for any military officer to walk up to a Congresscritter or bureaucrat and say, "we want a 103 year old design" even if they say it's "reimagined" or whatever

If I were Colt, think I'd borrow a page from Sig, and build a 1911 Rail Gun with a slightly wider and longer grip, to allow 10+1 rounds, then pitch that to the military. And I'd call it the Model of 2014.

I forgot, the 1911/45 ACP didn't work in WWI, WWII, Korea or Vietnam.

Model A trucks, shelter halves,and brown Cocoran boots worked back then too, well, sort of.

220's grip is too big. The Beretta also suffers from a fat grip and long trigger reach. I would also bet against the .40 due to recoil. My guess is a 9 or 45 on a polymer frame with interchangeable backstraps and a rail.

The S&W M&P .45 with a thumb safety would be a great candidate.

I haven't shot 1911s that much probably not more than 5000 rounds a year or so at one point. And most of that through our AL framed Kimber 3 inch ones. Of course that was only for a couple of years that we played with IDPA and IPSC, the wife and I.

But I was worried about the AL frame possibly.

Never saw an issue.

But again it might take more than 20K rounds or so for them to break etc...

Glock... well yeah I got a use for them in certain instances, but just cant' warm up to them all that much.

IF we are not going to 45 acp, and why the hell wouldn't we?, then I wonder 357 Sig might not be the best of all worlds? Not impressed with 40 S/W.

Of course anyone that shoots, should have no issues with a 10mm , that the 40 still wants to be. They simply have to shoot and learn to shoot well, like anyone that risks their life, at the end of any kind of firearm.

What all my 100 pound 4 foot sometihing wife has learned to shoot over the years proves its in the head, and no where else if you can't get used to whatever is provided. Though she/I have never shot any of the nitro express rounds....

The problem is that outside of selected outfits, most people in the military don't shoot much. When I was in the regular Army we did rifle qual once a year (maybe 200 rounds) and if you were issued a pistol it was considerably less ammo then that.

The only mistake there was that they started with the .32WSL when they should have started with the .351WSL or even the .401WSL as their inspiration. That woulda made the little carbine a real wonder.

It's time has passed but I always thought an M1 Carbine chambered for a rimless .357 magnum cartridge would be a neat idea. Keep the pressure at 40,000 psi and you could get some real whomp out of a 158 grain bullet. Of course that almost duplicates the .351 WSL but that one is just a tad long for the carbine receiver (I think), whereas the .357 OAL is about the same as the .30 Carbine. Plus you could use all of the .357 diameter bullets available instead of an oddball .352" bullet.

Sure, mention items no one uses anymore. How about the M2 or M16, both over 50 years old and still in use.

The USMC did extensive testing and came back to the 1911/45ACP as a proven battle weapon. The army, well, they'll probably [bleep] it up again, just like they did with its camo decisions.

I wonder, how applicable the preferences of a bunch of lifelong shooting enthusiasts are to a handgun to be used mostly by people that are not shooters?

Once upon a time our military benefited from a pool of personnel that had a much higher proportion of shooters. Now much of it will have never fired a round until their military training.

A 1911 with an extra capacity magazine chambered in 45 Colt loaded with a 250 grain cast Keith flatnosed bullet at 950 fps would knock just about anything on its azz.

They have more money than to know how to wisely spend.

And that's sure the truth. They change camo patterns once a year, it seems.

The USMC didn't test a damn thing. Some one cooked up the idea of taking mothballed 1911's and reworking them at Quantico. Those guys can build a rifle that'll shoot but the didn't/don't know schidt from shinola about 1911's, and when the guys started shooting the hell out of them, the hardest working SOB in the unit was the armorer. He didn't get much sleep when a bunch of them were on the range all day.

Same today with most police departments, Federal, State, and local.

L.W.

If they opt for a smaller grip that Private Benjamin can hold, it'll need milder ammo for her to be able to shoot it without a lot of pain.

The titanium-frame .38 and .357 revolvers are a dream to tote, torture to shoot.

There's just no way to make shooting bland on the hand and devastating on Ahmed's and Mahmoud's chests. The immutable facts of physics get in the way.

Good point

Snake

We'll now that just isn't PC at all now is it?

Whack his PP!

I was a Huey crewchief from 82-84. NEVER saw an M16 after basic training. Was issued a Ruger Security Six 38 Spcl.
Had to qualify once a year. 25 rounds for practice and 25 rounds for score .

I was a unit armorer back in the day (late '70s, early '80s) and the 20 1911A1s in our armsroom were worn-out beyond repair, in all reality.

35-40 years of "training" with them, and some usage, and they were all but historical relics. I only had FIVE of the twenty, that we could qualify with, the others weren't functional. I tried to get them fixed "No parts available" was the tired old refrain back then.

The only parts I could get from upper echelon depots were magazines and the brown plastic grips. That was IT.

As I was supposed to be issued one, "if the balloon went up", I bought myself a LWT Commander and learned to shoot it.

Maybe the Army could rebuild a passel of them, but those I had weren't going to be rebuilt, they were good for scrap only.

I did 24 years in the military. Shot both the M1911A1 and the M9. Here's my two cents... There's no sense in issuing new pistol of any caliber unless and until the military properly trains the troops to use them. Small arms training is minimal, short, and poor. The pistol is only a tool.

I'd like to meet the man who took seven 230grain hydroshocks and wouldn't go down..I want him ony zone dodge team!

Right on!

It may be only a drop per gallon, but the upper echelons of American politico-military psyche are severely tainted with distrust of handguns in the hands of individuals.

Can't have 'em in the barracks.

Can't cultivate familiarity with 'em (let alone interest or [gasp!] hobby-level enjoyment).

It'd make more sense, IMHO, to encourage every boot to become a dedicated and skillful pistolero.

Troops who need a handgun should be issued a machine pistol. A machine pistol would be easier to learn how to shoot with limited training they get. Just make sure the machine pistol has a burst control device.

Everytime an SF team goes through SFAUC, which is typically every other year, he'll shoot at least 2500 rds through his pistol. The quality of the training varies, as the instructors come and go. Some guys get to go to Bill Rodger's course in Elijay GA. That is a 3K rd course. So, SOME guys are getting decent handgun training.

I always recall Dad's comments on his guns in WWII. He had a Springfield, shot it Expert and liked it. After the AAC realized he was a skilled mechanic he was sent to England to keep B17's flying. At some point they requisitioned his 03 and gave him an M1 Carbine, which he hated. In his words, "I pulled rank (he was a Master Sergeant and line chief by then) went to the armorers and traded it for a Thompson" He liked the Tommy Gun He also had a 1911 at one point, and always liked them, as well.

One thing glaringly missing from the story was any real discussion of bullets vs. caliber. As long as our troops are mandated to use ball ammo instead of modern LEO JHP ammo, common sense dictates... The bigger the hole, the better. Another vote for .45 ACP here, regardless of platform.

While the 1911 in 45 ACP is a proven combination, unless it is going to be just a stop-gap measure, they'll come up with an entirely new weapon and round.... just my opinion!

Phil

Anything to spend stupid amounts of money, without gaining anything at all.

Not necessarily, as far as I know the 1911 has never been used against troops wearing body armor such as our own troops wear.

Phil

The body armor our troops are issued will stop any service caliber handgun round. Hell, they'll stop 7.62x39 and 5.56 (non- armor piercing rounds).

They want low recoil for women troops and/or non-experienced males, penetration of body armor (although maybe not the solid plate armor which even a rifle won't penetrate), high capacity magazines, etc. Lightweight ammo wouldn't hurt either.

I'll make a broad statement and say that for the USA, the 20th Century belonged to the .45 ACP - an auto pistol version of the "big, slow and heavy" .45 Colt. Perhaps in the 21st Century it might be time to look at the 5.7x28.

I don't know a whole lot about the round other than its metric designation but just throwing it out there to get out of the 9mm-40-45 box.

That was exactly my point, the 1911 hasn't been up against body armor, and unless up close, it's too sloppy for an accurate head shot or even accurate placement for a disabling shot in the arm or leg area!

And maybe the army figures in the future we might be going up against better equipped aggressors!

Phil

Glock; Are you listening?

.45 ACP with 9 or 10 round (slightly staggered) magazine capacity and grip circumference similar to the 1911 so that average hands could handle the weapon easier and have better control. Overall size of the weapon would be similar to the commander sized pistols.

Barrel length should be between 4 1/2 and 5 inches and threaded muzzles should be standard or at least options. Tennifer treatment should be standard. Maybe offer a semi-accurized package that would still be reliable under field conditions.

You could have options available-grip adaptors, night sights, IR lasers. Use your basic, proven, striker fired system. Caliber options might include--let your imagination work here. Yahoo!!!!