Army Chief Wants Power to Select New Pistol

One Lung Wonder said:
Errrrr...really...? Not tryin' to be a dink - I actually prefer metal guns too - but much as I despise Glocks...they are probably just the ticket for the squaddies. I would think the Glock's legendary durability would put them right up the military's alley. But nobody heard me say that! I hate Glocks myself!!!!
Click to expand...

I own and shoot both metal and plastic pistols e.g., Glock 17, Beretta 92FS, SIG P320, 1911 45acp etc…
Don't have anything against plastic pistols, when built well they are accurate and serve a purpose.
I'm a fan of well made plastic pistoles.
However for Military use the metal pistole weapon system is the way to go e.g., Beretta, SIG etc.
 
Last edited:
What the General fails to see is these decisions have more to do with Political pork barreling than exact needs as described by the military much like here in Canada.
 
silverfoxdj said:
What the General fails to see is these decisions have more to do with Political pork barreling than exact needs as described by the military much like here in Canada.
Click to expand...

Bingo.

I dunno why they just don't say to hell with it and go back to the way it was in the 1800's. You got your issue rifle but it was wide open for pistols and sabres and the aristocratic officers often purchased their own. The best gun for you is the one you can hit with. If it breaks - you're on your own.
 
ESP said:

Military History tends to support this position.
Click to expand...

Considering the fact that polymer handguns aren't that old in the grand scheme of things, military history doesn't mean sh!t. If your type of thinking were more prevalent then humanity would still be hitting each other with big rocks.
 
If you have only one side-arm on the battle field, one that you can trust your life, for the rest of your life.
Only one side-arm you know has to be reliable in any situation, one you can pick up and shoot well immediately,
because if it fails or breaks you're done… only one side-arm.

In the event you have only one, what will you choose?
Polymer or Metal?

--------

"Considering the fact that polymer handguns aren't that old in the grand scheme of things, military history doesn't mean sh!t. If your type of thinking were more prevalent then humanity would still be hitting each other with big rocks."

"Simply because polymer technology wasn't developed until later. I really don't see any downsides or to better say it, lack of qualities that would make a polymer sidearm less effective than a full metal one."


 
Last edited:
ESP said:
If you have only one side-arm on the battle field, one that you can trust your life, for the rest of your life.
Only one side-arm you know has to be reliable in any situation, one that anyone can pick up and shoot well immediately,
because if it fails or breaks you're done… only one side-arm.

In the event you have only one, what will you choose?
Polymer or Metal?

--------

"Considering the fact that polymer handguns aren't that old in the grand scheme of things, military history doesn't mean sh!t. If your type of thinking were more prevalent then humanity would still be hitting each other with big rocks."

"Simply because polymer technology wasn't developed until later. I really don't see any downsides or to better say it, lack of qualities that would make a polymer sidearm less effective than a full metal one."
Click to expand...

Polymer. I'd choose polymer.
 
If they are sticking with 9mm then why a new sidearm, just pick a new round and move on, I am a .45 fan but if I had to run10 miles with 10 mags full and the gun besides everything else, maybe I would pick the 9mm, ( although when the bad guy is in front of me, I might want 230 grains heading for him instead of 124!!) depending on what the soldier is tasked with may make a difference too! As has been said before, the sidearm is a last resort, it is something to help get you back to your rifle that you shouldn't have left in the first place.
Oh yea, then there is the 7.62x 25, how many of those quick little puppies can you fit in a Glock??
 
Last edited:
Couldn't go wrong with a new pistol in the old contemptible .45ACP,..however if it's going to be totally new, it would start with this and then go down from there,...........

Glock 20 chambered in the finest defensive pistol round ever the 10mm. I know, I know,..little orphan Annie won't like the muzzle flip, muzzle flash, better used to "shoot" infantry unto an objective......

Glock 22 chambered in the time proven balance king the grammy award winning .40S&W(my favorite), shoot a Glawk40 well and you got your's and ya buddies azz covered........oh wait still too much muzzle flip and that big swelling, brusing and cutting in those tender palms,....

Glock 17,.....9mmNATO,..there you go, not much to improve on here now is there, no Research and Development required here unless you were dropped on your head at birth, and being uber reliable , easily accessible, easily trainable on, delectable, phenomenal and cheap. GD it,.. this one has it all......Hoorah! I don't need no Teenage Queen,..I just want my Glock 17.......

1911, .45ACP. Build them loose and lot's of rattle, put 230gr FMJ's in them, they will do the trick too, but this one's getting long in the slide.......
 
I like 10mm auto for the army. It is the most versatile round. It can be downloaded to a weak 40 S&W for women and accountants as well as full power for trained operators or soldiers in combat. It has enough power band to contain most imaginable bullets and velocity combinations. Plus, it weighs not all that much more than 9mm, especially if lighter bullet weights are used.

It would be easy enough to make the cartridges in 3 or 4 colour codes power levels. Even the handguns could be issued in a variety of sizes and capacities. At least the 10mm is one of the most adaptable auto calibers.
 
Everyone, including the General mentioned in the article, is over-thinking the problem.

The 1911's worked, and kept working, until the army got to the point where they weren't refreshing the inventory efficiently enough, and there were a ton of old rattle traps being the bad apples in the barrel giving the bunch a bad name.

So....

Time to go for one of them new fancy-schmancy wonder-9's, with lots of capacity. More lead downrange = much more better. Just like replacing the M-14 with the M-16. And so entered the M-9 (partly thanks to some backroom political mucky-mucking to appease the NATO allies).

And you know what? It worked. The M-9 has had a good service life, done its job. Has there been a jam and a failure now and then? Heck yah, with hundreds of thousands of them in the system, running millions of rounds in training an in the field, of course there's going to be some failures.

But now its suffering from the 1911 problem. So many of them in inventory, poorly tracked for usage, that more and more of them are coming up as rattle traps. So time for a refresh. And the M-9 (92FS) isn't the cool new kid on the block anymore. And everyone likes a shiny new toy, so its time to throw the baby out with the bathwater again and go with something new and spiffy.

And it's all a lot of hogwash.

Either the 1911 or the M-9, new out of the box, would serve the needs just fine. So much hot air has been blown on the advantages of one over the other, and in the end, both are serviceable for the need, each with its own strengths and weaknesses.

The biggest thing that will come of this is that there will be a brand new set of fanboys for whatever it is they end up choosing. So instead of just 1911 fanboys, and 92FS fanboys, there will be the "ShinyNewWonderGun" fanboys to add to the mix.

Also, a whole different generation of politicians and generals and procurement officers down to the rank of Major will line their pockets with kickbacks and graft.

In the meantime, if everyone is lucky, the grunt will get a pistol that is no worse than the last one. But it probably won't be significantly better, either.

(p.s. I have a 1911, and a 92fs, and if my life depended on it, I would grab the one that was closest).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom