Army likely to "Dump" 9MM for 40s&w or 45's? - Page 5

Army likely to "Dump" 9MM for 40s&w or 45's?

This is a discussion on Army likely to "Dump" 9MM for 40s&w or 45's? within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by Echo_Four The notion that a Glock isn't reliable enough or doesn't have the sales is laughable... literally. I laughed when I read ...

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 61 to 72 of 72
Like Tree63Likes

Thread: Army likely to "Dump" 9MM for 40s&w or 45's?

  1. #61
    Member Array wsquared's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    371
    Quote Originally Posted by Echo_Four View Post
    The notion that a Glock isn't reliable enough or doesn't have the sales is laughable... literally. I laughed when I read the comments.
    Oh come on now. If the Glock haters and the Glock Fanbois weren't shouting at each other, we'd be forced to discuss the topic that the OP brought up when he started this thread....and who really wants to do that?

    By the way....I agree 100% about the effect of "legacy" ways of thinking on purchasing in the military. I have friends that were serving in Afghanistan all the way up until 2011 (Canadian Army) running 20" barrels on their AR's. These were not in the DMR role...the 20" barrel is the standard on the C7A2 because that's what the senior officers involved in the acquisition process insisted on.


  2. #62
    VIP Member
    Array Echo_Four's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Land of the mostly free
    Posts
    2,839
    I haven't asked any of my friends that are still in the Marines recently, but last I knew they were still running the M16 rather than M4 so they all had 20" barrels. In honesty, it never bothered me too much. If I had to pick either a short barrel or a 20" I'd pick the 20". It is nice to have choices and thankfully since I left the Marine Corps I've made sure I had choices.

    As far as the fanboys/haters... they should have a forum just to argue. I'm in neither camp and the argument between them got old about 10 years ago.
    ironmike86 likes this.
    "The only people I like besides my wife and children are Marines."
    - Lt. Col. Oliver North

  3. #63
    Moderator
    Array Bark'n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    9,916
    Quote Originally Posted by ExaltedOne View Post
    Might as well go to the M&P and keep it American, besides they make M&P's with safeties on them, plus the soldiers can carry a Shield for back up.
    That would be a big win for S&W. The M&P is already designated as a military pistol. As far as I'm concerned, it's every bit as durable as Glock.

    The big plus for the M&P is all the options. You can have a magazine disconnect... or not. You can have an external safety... or not. And they have adjustable backstraps to fit a wide range of hand sizes (excellent for female and smaller statured people). And they have the sear lever which allows field stripping without having to pull the trigger to remove the slide. You don't have to use it, but knowing the military, they will probably teach the troops to use it when field stripping.

    If I know the military, they would order them with the magazine disconnect and the external safety. But hey, that's not a big deal as far as I'm concerned. Not my preferred configuration, but it is what it is. It's Uncle Sam for crying out loud.
    ironmike86 likes this.
    -Bark'n
    Semper Fi


    "The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."

  4. #64
    Senior Member Array ironmike86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    625
    Quote Originally Posted by ExaltedOne View Post
    Might as well go to the M&P and keep it American, besides they make M&P's with safeties on them, plus the soldiers can carry a Shield for back up.
    True. But Glock is being made in Usa now with Usa stamp. Probably so they can get a Military contract. Aren't all Military guns Usa made?? I would rather have an American co make them. They usually do because if shtf you cant have your weapons made overseas if you need them here

  5. #65
    Distinguished Member Array Fitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    So. Central PA
    Posts
    1,847
    The country, and by default the Army, are broke. There is no money to change anything. And if they get some money, I'm pretty sure handguns aren't anyplace near the top of the list.

    Fitch
    Ksgunner, Foo909 and Echo_Four like this.
    “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety), by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” by H. L. Mencken

  6. #66
    Senior Member Array ironmike86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    625
    Quote Originally Posted by Fitch View Post
    The country, and by default the Army, are broke. There is no money to change anything. And if they get some money, I'm pretty sure handguns aren't anyplace near the top of the list.

    Fitch
    Doesn't matter if they are broke. If they want it they will just borrow it. They will pay $2k for a $600 gun
    Foo909 likes this.

  7. #67
    Member Array Backfire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by Rattlehead View Post
    Yep. The rumor that "the Army is dumping [insert whatever system here]" comes up about once a month. I'll believe it when I see it.

    Food for thought: In a time when spending is decreasing, do you really think that they are going to invest in a contract to replace all sidearms across the board and rework the logistics to maintain and supply ammo for them?
    i See your point - but according to the article, the frames of existing M9 are cracking and falling apart. They can change the Springs and internal "guts", but frame corruption is another story.

    If the article is correct and the frames are shot - no pun intended - they will have to replace the firearms. Armies with no side arms would be a political no no. Even the current cast of gutless leadership would not allow that - for it would "look bad". And give the appearance that the are idiots.

  8. #68
    Member Array Coltman 77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    406
    From Defense Industry Daily:

    "In September 2012, Beretta USA Corp. in Accokeek, MD received a 5-year, $64 million firm-fixed-price contract for up to 100,000 of their M9 9mm Pistols. All of the pistols will be manufactured at the Beretta USA facility in Maryland, where an American work force of nearly 300 employees has been making M9 pistols since 1987, and will now continue doing so until Sept 8/17"

    2012-2017: US Army Orders up to 100,000 M9 Pistols

    Looks like the Beretta will be around for awhile.
    ironmike86 likes this.
    "Do your duty in all things. You cannot do more, you should never wish to do less".
    General Robert E. Lee

  9. #69
    Member Array jaynole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Lakeland, Florida
    Posts
    22

    Re: Army likely to "Dump" 9MM for 40s&w or 45's?

    Quote Originally Posted by wsquared View Post
    Personally, I'd pick the HK45. It was designed to fit the US military's requirements from the get-go, has both an external safety and a decocker, has second-strike capacity, and manages to make the .45ACP cartridge as easy to fire as 9mm.
    I tend to agree, I own the HK45c, very soft shooting 45. I believe the Seals already use the compact tactical version in some capacity. I believe it was originally designed for this exact purpose. The US government scrapped the project in 2006 for budgetary reasons. I could have the year wrong.



    "The key to freedom is the ability to defend yourself"

  10. #70
    Member Array maddy345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Pikeville, NC
    Posts
    490
    Quote Originally Posted by NMB View Post
    The logical choice would be .40sw. Capacity is close to 9mm, huge production already in the US with it being the #1 Law Enforcement cartridge.Aside from the .45 will blow a man clean in half argument, why wouldnt they go to .40?
    I didn't read through the entire thread to see if this was already answered but .40 S&W isn't a NATO round. The USCG adopted in for CONUS units with an LE mission but the OUT-CONUS units go back to 9mm when deployed.As others have said if they do switch it will be back to .45ACP


    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  11. #71
    Senior Member Array StripesDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    DFW Texas
    Posts
    519
    Thinking outside the box - forget the 40 and 45, What about the 5.7? Very fast, armor piercing (goes through Kevlar like a knife in warm butter), and very light to transport?

    Does it have enough oomph?

  12. #72
    Senior Member Array ExaltedOne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Cali
    Posts
    524
    Quote Originally Posted by Bark'n View Post
    That would be a big win for S&W. The M&P is already designated as a military pistol. As far as I'm concerned, it's every bit as durable as Glock.

    The big plus for the M&P is all the options. You can have a magazine disconnect... or not. You can have an external safety... or not. And they have adjustable backstraps to fit a wide range of hand sizes (excellent for female and smaller statured people). And they have the sear lever which allows field stripping without having to pull the trigger to remove the slide. You don't have to use it, but knowing the military, they will probably teach the troops to use it when field stripping.

    If I know the military, they would order them with the magazine disconnect and the external safety. But hey, that's not a big deal as far as I'm concerned. Not my preferred configuration, but it is what it is. It's Uncle Sam for crying out loud.
    I guess a magazine disconnect wouldn't be bad depending on how you look at it (gun taken by enemy/suspect) but I wouldn't arm a soldier with one.

    That one bullet in the barrel all by itself with no follow up rounds may save a life. In California all the M&P's for civilians have that feature along with the 10rd magazine limit.

    Considering that the M&P already has all the features the government wants, they should just switch to that gun.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

.40 s&w vs 9mm

,
2013 9mm vs 45
,

40 s&w vs 9mm

,
9mm or 40 s&w
,

9mm vs 45 2013

,
america army looking to dump nato 9mm
,
changing 40s&w for 9mm
,
military changing 9mm to 45
,
possible backfire from 9mm to .40 cal
,
why did the military switch to 9mm
,
why did the us military switch to 9mm
,
why did u. s. a. armed forces change from 45 acp to 9 mm ammunition?
Click on a term to search for related topics.