What caliber is the current US and Nato handgun?

9mmx19

aka 9mm Parabellum
aka 9mm "Luger"

AD

quote:

Originally posted by dogcat:
What caliber is the current US and Nato handgun?

To expand a bit on Allan DeGroot's answer; The standrd NATO military handgun ammunition is the 9mm. The U.S. (and some others, I guess) use one of the Beretta 92? models. Other NATO countries have different handguns as their standard sidearm, but 9mm is the standard chambering. (Might be H&K, might be Sig, whatever)

At least, that's my understanding. As always, only believe half of what you see and one quarter of what you hear. That goes double for what you get from the internet. Even this post. Maybe especially this post.

The current US Army handgun is the Beretta M9, the civilian version being called the Model 92F. I understand that Beretta was just awarded another contract for 450,000 M9s, making it the larget single order for pistols ever made. Or was this just a rumor?

http://www.ereleases.com/pr/be...t-world-war-ii-15281

i have heard rumors(as im sure some of you have too) about the US going back to the 45

Some organizations within the U.S. military never left it.

Lost Sheep

Remember, only believe half of what you see and one quarter of what you hear. That goes double for what you get from the internet. Even this post.

Do your own research when ANYONE gives you new facts on the web.

Lost Sheep

Some US Military units are also carrying 9mm Glocks.

My understanding the elite units never left the .45. Some carry 1911's some Sig's some XD's etc.

Beretta states on their web site that they did indeed secure an order for something over 400,000 more M9 sidearms for our military. On the subject of the M9, I teach Earthmoving Fundamentals, Surveying, Construction/Mining Equip., etc. classes at local Community College and have student who recently returned from two tours in Iraq (Engineers) and he is certainly no fan of the Beretta M9 as a sidearm. Is a sharp lad and not prone to exageration and he tells me that the firearm is not dependable! Maintaineance on the weapon is constant and what really upset him while there, the Iraq Police were all issued new Glocks which he says performs flawlessly. When complaints began filtering up to superiors, they were given back D. Rumsfeld's comment that "you go to war with what you got..." That did not meet with much enthusiasm from the rank and file. I have heard similar tales from other vets. Sometimes people just do not want to be confused with the facts I guess.

It is a fact of life that our equipment is made by the lowest bidder. SIG lost out on the original 9MM contract by somewhere in the neighborhood of $5.00 on the spare parts kits.

the key word there is "new" glocks. the beretta may not be the best. but you can take any battered military sidearm whatever it may be and put it up against a brand new glock and of course the glock is gonna be on top. he didnt say how the m4's were holding up? ive heard mixed opinions on them just like the beretta. you cant please every GI and i think every weapons system the military has employed has been critisized somewhere down the line.

Hello Victor1050,
His opinion and claims many others is that the M4/16 was not a desireable weapon in the type of combat he experienced. One point is that I could not understand was that rust/corrosion was a chronic problem w/ the M4?? Had not heard that one before being used in that part of the world?? Maintenance, cleaning a continuous chore and as many of us have heard from past experiences in S.E.Asia, round not having suffecient knock down power other than ranges less than 200 yards. Mind you, upon inquiring as to his skill in firing his weapon, he made Marksman. That alone will speak volumes as to ability to gain the most potential of his weapon. As to his complaints against the issue sidearm and the M4, perception is often reality and his perception was what counted to him. Question is would the soldier w/ greater skill and knowledge of the potential of the weapons have a more favorable opinion, perception??

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
Some US Military units are also carrying 9mm Glocks.

Who? Didn't think any US .mil carried Glocks. The .mil seems hung up on double strike ability and manual safety.

The SEAL teams carry the Sig 226.

I have seen pics of British soldiers with Browning Hi Powers.

I was told by a retired army officer involved in weapons testing that NATO forced the US to go to a caliber common with NATO since we pushed them into the 5.6MM rifle caliber. He told me Sig had the best performance rating when the US was testing new sidearms but could not meet the order timing requirements. Beretta was a close second and could meet the delivery requirements.

I know this post is somewhat old, but I couldn't help but respond. I've read a lot of criticism for the military's decision to go with the Beretta. I returned from a tour in Iraq earlier this year and was issued a like new M9. I shot 40/40 during my predeployment qualification. There were others there that had difficulty even qualifying. The sad reality is that many of our servicemen (and women) have little to no experience with any type of firearm outside of their military training. In the case of non combat arms MOSs, this training is usually extremely limited. For this reason, I would personally prefer these people to have a weapon with a manual safety. I've seen and heard of too many negligent discharges at the clearing barrel and seen more than a few weapons falling out of holsters. Personally, I would prefer to carry a Glock when in uniform since this is what I typically CCW, but I am more of the exception rather than the rule. The military must make equipment decisions based on the lowest common denominator. I personally feel more comfortable knowing that those around me have external safeties on their sidearms. I've also never felt undergunned with an M9. Would I rather have a Glock or Sig? Perhaps, but I also really like the M9. They are accurate and reliable if maintained (just like all of our other weapons).

Welcome to the Forums, and welcome home. Thanks for the feedback from a current service member.

Back in the day, it was rumoured that the Beretta waa "pushed" for adoption because we wanted a base of some sort in Italy...

Also SIG could not/would not build a US factory in time for the contract deadline.

The Army wanted to keep the 1911, but Congress canceled all funds for spare parts, to force them back into the pistol tests...

A "Certain" Army Spec Ops Unit is carrying Glocks.

"They" are also looking at the S&W plastic 9mm... or maybe even a 40...

I was stationed at APG in 88/89, working in the weapons department. The Italian base rumour seemed to hold the most water. We visited Ackokeek during some destructive testing and they had two women assembling those guns almost as fast as I can assemble a 1911. I'm no slouch either....lol. The Berettas and SIGS did OK. Not as well as the 1911's or the Colt xm10?(ssp)
but definately cheaper!
The M9 is still the official issue weapon with some special units using different sidearms as needed.

I found the picture I was looking for. They should bring this back.

Transition would be nil...money would all go to the US. Colt could get back on the map.

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
Back in the day, it was rumoured that the Beretta waa "pushed" for adoption because we wanted a base of some sort in Italy...

Also SIG could not/would not build a US factory in time for the contract deadline.

The Army wanted to keep the 1911, but Congress canceled all funds for spare parts, to force them back into the pistol tests...

A "Certain" Army Spec Ops Unit is carrying Glocks.

"They" are also looking at the S&W plastic 9mm... or maybe even a 40...

Edgewood had spares to last till the middle of this century, easy. They got demilled for some reason. Go figure

The US had at leat three joint use bases in Italy during the 90's. Don't know if they're still there, but Aviano AFB, Sinonella and Naples Naval Air stations, are the ones I've been into. Aviano was used extensively during the Bosnia thing. Sigonella is in Scicily.

AFAIAW whilst you will still see Browning Hi-Powers (and maybe even the odd Inglis!) with the British Army the new purchased pistols are SIG manufacture. I think the P226 but would stand corrected on that however it is called the L105...just to confuse things!

jetdrvr

If I remember correctly it was a Missile Base...

I wonder why they didn't just go to a 9mm 1911, did they want to go to a double action maybe?

hvy barrel, IMHO the issue is not the caliber but the design and ease of use of the handgun, which, after all, is not the primary weapon despite what Americans might think, but is the weapon of last resort when you are about to be overrun and about to leave Dodge! While I own several 1911's I also own a Glock and a Sig and consider them to be superior in some respects. Having said that, the 9mm gives one a much higher capacity capability which is probably of more use to the military than to the concealed weapon carrier.
Peter.