I spent 24 years in the Army, retired in 1996. I became very familiar with both the M-1911 and M-9. I can tell you both are fine pistols and I wouldn't have any reservations about carrying either. The caliber cotroversy (9mm vs. 45) has been going on for years and will likely continue for many more. Personally I like the heavier .45 but it's hard to overlook the 15 round mags on the Beretta. I like the grip on the 1911 but even with small hands, I had no problem with the M-9. As I said earlier both are fine pistols. If I was going into combat today and had to make a choice, it would have to be the M-9.
ExSoldier and silver dollar,
Thank you so very much for your service to our country!!! I admire you both for that sacrifice.
Your kind words are appreciated. We should all remember to thank our veterans!
Originally Posted by Zigmun
IMHO If I'm required to use hardball, I would chose the 45 ACP and there are several good platforms that use this round.
If hardball is not the only choice, it opens the field.
As I was trained on the 1911 platform, I'll stick with that.
( Yes, I have shot and used/carried Glocks, Sigs, BHP, ETC, including S&W & Colt revolvers)
Familarly breeds results :danceban:
My opinion is there is no one handgun that is right for every single person. The gun must fit the person correctly, the gun must be reliable and finally in the realm of .38 thru .45 caliber.
Back in '03 I would sware up and down the G22 as being the most pro-efficient handgun in the country, but after being introduced to the M&P .40 my views have changed. The trigger gets smoother with ever trip to the range. My next pistol will probably be a M&P 9mm so I may cary in the summer and spring. The 9mm ammo is also less expensive than the .40 which is a big plus. Before I buy though I will rent a 9mm Compact to get the feel.
I would probably agree with you, the G17 is the all around best.
if only can choose one:
SIG P226 in 9mm DA/SA
SA for the precision shot
9MM availability of ammo worldwide - price - able to go with P+ and P++
SIG reliability, accuracy, better grip than Glock (Glock finger grooves and block grip my opinion not near as good as a SIG) (I would like to see Glock offer the older slick as an option again - no finger grooves and round the block corners much more)
the 40 S&W is "snappy" up on recoil
the 357 SIG pushes back on recoil - bottle neck round and is a flat long distance round
if not 9mm then 357 SIG
first choice: 1911A1
second choice: S&Wmodel 10
I like the Browning Hi-power. It a simple effective design, that can take a ton of abuse and is used by militaries all around the world. Second choice would be the 1911 as it too has proven its effectiveness.
I keep the Glock 17 next to my bed, and rely upon it for home security, and carry the Glock 19.
Both are quick and easy to point, and shoot.
And I figure that if I do my part by putting two of those little 9 mm Winchester Talons in a BG chest, the next person the BG will be speaking to is St Peter.
I was originally issued a 1911 way back and it was a tough son of a B****. Clankety as all get out but you could torture it and still pick it up and fire it, desert dirt and all. One day the armory took it away from me and gave me a BRAND new m9. Beautiful weapon........for the streets. It had such an open slide that any dust storm (or convoy dust), much less dropping it in the dirt, affected the performance. So in my opinion it wasn't the best choice for "combat handgun". But as a full size carry peice as a civilian, excellent! But in all reality a pistol wasn't intended as a "combat gun" but a defensive weapon, to protect the patients in my case (corpsman). So all in all, I vote for the 1911. :smiley2: P.S. in reality, we should get an opinion from one of the gents who are currently using "combat handguns" in combat.
I like the G 17 or the G 19....would be my vote