Troubling.

http://www.alloutdoor.com/2018...gn=Weekly+Newsletter

The adoption of a service sidearm, in this case, a pistol, is highly contentious and of course, everyone has their favorite. I remember in the 1980’s when the Beretta was adopted, and how the 1911 fan boys howled, and that one of the losing bidders, S&W, took the Government to court.

The greatest reliability problem the Beretta came from low bid aftermarket magazines. The Government buys from the lowest bidder, finds out only after repeated failures in the field that they bought poor quality hardware, purges the system, and then buys more garbage from the next low bidder. As I saw on a Defense University coffee cup: “Nothing is too good for our troops, that is why we buy from the low bid contractor”

I have a Beretta 92 as a target pistol, it is not a bad design, there are features I like, it is a bit big for my hand, Soldiers who carried in Iraq told me theirs worked as long as they used Beretta factory magazines. I don’t care for the 9mm round, but none of this is my choice. I do know the Army is not going to adopt the M1911 again, it will never adopt another single action semi auto pistol ever, nor will it go back to the Colt Single Action revolver. I do have a SIG P220, which looks to be the basis for the current pistol, that has been around for decades, so I don’t know why the Army is having problems with their variant.

As to the current procurement, I was not involved; don’t know anyone who was involved. I don’t know why they decided they had to replace the Beretta, I don’t know if the reasons were real or spurious. I have not found nor read the solicitation for bid nor the Prime Development or Prime Item Specification. I would like to read those, it would be interesting.

If the DoD does not select your favorite thumb buster as the next service pistol, well too bad, suck it up. You can run for President, win the job, and tell them what to do. Other than that, baying at the moon is not going to make it move.

A prejudice against former Warsaw Pact countries meant the US, I guess, at the time, didn't even consider the excellent CZ75.

Times have moved on and the CZ75 has been eclipsed by the CZ85 and that, now, too. But it was, and is, a better belt gun than any Beretta 92.

Bill-

That piece is clearly mostly opinion, with a smidge of data thrown in in an attempt to legitimize it.

Time will tell, but IMO, Sig can and will make the 320 the best service pistol for our troops.

Doug, I sure hope you are right. Our guys and gals in uniform deserve the best.

I'm not a big fan of the Beretta, but that piece is clearly written with a slanted view of the Sig.

AFA "our guys and gals in uniform deserve the best", then we should prohibit elected officials from running military actions from their seats on their comfortable asses in Washington. Those "decisions" have probably killed more troops than anything else; certainly thousands more than the choice of a handgun, which is used very seldom in battle situations.

See what happens when you start making plastic Sigs in New Hampshire. The P220 is rolling in it's grave.

I have worn out half a dozen Beretta pistols, I did not like them when I tried one for the first time, I would still bet my life on one.

The problem with the 1911 was that females soldiers couldn't shoot them in their tiny little hands because of recoil and large grips, hence the Army went to the limpwristed, 9 mm.

BH63

quote:

Originally posted by BuffHunter63:
The problem with the 1911 was that females soldiers couldn't shoot them in their tiny little hands because of recoil and large grips, hence the Army went to the limpwristed, 9 mm.

BH63

I do not believe this myth or excuse. Any double stack 9mm especially the Beretta 92 M-9 grip is larger than the 1911.Not only is it larger but the round butt and reach to the trigger forces a wider grip and more leverage or force is needed to fire the double action shot.

As for recoil an all steel 1911is a pissy at. Low pressure, slower round. A group of old women shot Les Bear 1911s at Camo Perry and have won at Camp Perry.

My hands are very thin and yeah small. Give me a 1911any day.

Also, nato spec 9mm is Plus p. More pressure, more velocity, more noise, more wear and tear.

Heym is correct. European NATO 9mm Ball grew out of British military 9mm Parabellum 9mm MkIIz ammunition which was SMG ammunition. Thus why all of the Smith & Wesson 9mm Light Rifle of 1940 literally was shaken to bits within a few magazines worth of shooting.

I agree. Along with the fact that the .45 is a better stopping cartridge,I prefer the 1911 because after a lifetime of use I don't have to think about it when I use it.Training + habit;besides as well as the Sigs are made,they are totally right handed. I got rid of a 220 that I only had a month just for that reason. I'm left handed + there are NO left handed Germans. I know,when I was a kid in Germany,I was made to sit on my left hand so as not to use it.(did'nt take)

I call bullsh*t on this article. Who in hell has ever heard of a “double ejection” - a spent case and a live round being ejected at the same time?

That would not only defy logic, but physics.

If live rounds are falling out of the pistol’s ejection port upon firing, it would have to be the result of god-awfully faulty magazines and perfect timing.

Makes no sense.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Robinson:
I call bullsh*t on this article. Who in hell has ever heard of a “double ejection” - a spent case and a live round being ejected at the same time?

That would not only defy logic, but physics.

If live rounds are falling out of the pistol’s ejection port upon firing, it would have to be the result of god-awfully faulty magazines and perfect timing.

Makes no sense.

I had this happen with a friends 380. When finished with a magazine, there are live rounds on the ground. They didn't come out the bottom!

No jamming?

quote:

Originally posted by BuffHunter63:
The problem with the 1911 was that females soldiers couldn't shoot them in their tiny little hands because of recoil and large grips, hence the Army went to the limpwristed, 9 mm.

BH63

A wicked load of crap. By that logic, the Beretta 92 was made for women, which it was not. That thing was miserable for women with smaller hands. The trigger was a huge reach even for most men. The myth of the 45 and the 1911 priesthood continues. Plenty of research to disprove the vaunted "stopping power" of the 1911 .45. It's a great gun and a great cartridge. But it isn't a death ray.

quote:

Originally posted by A7Dave:

quote:

Originally posted by BuffHunter63:
The problem with the 1911 was that females soldiers couldn't shoot them in their tiny little hands because of recoil and large grips, hence the Army went to the limpwristed, 9 mm.

BH63

A wicked load of crap. By that logic, the Beretta 92 was made for women, which it was not. That thing was miserable for women with smaller hands. The trigger was a huge reach even for most men. The myth of the 45 and the 1911 priesthood continues. Plenty of research to disprove the vaunted "stopping power" of the 1911 .45. It's a great gun and a great cartridge. But it isn't a death ray.

With Plus P hollow point loads I agree. The tissue disruption between the 9mm (modern hollow point) and 45 (solid/fmj) I agree, but when comparing fmj 9 to fmj 45. The 230grain 45 is more tissue disruption. I believe strongly in the Pig Carcus test performed by the Army when it decided it needed a new 45.

These test are detailed in the book Rifleman. It is a history of military smalll arms development climaxing with the failure of Springfield Armory to deliver the modern rifle for the US Army. He is very explicit when the Army did or did not cook the books.

Also, the 1911s the Government replaced with the M-9 were long in the tooth. Those guns dated as far back as WWII.

It is a 9mm world, and our government wanted to get in line. The 45 is not coming back I know that. The 1911is not coming back. But as we have pointed out the shootablity of the M-9 and NATO 9mm is a farce. The increased life of a 9mm gun over a 45 is a farce when comparing plus p or nato ammo to standard 45.

I actually like the M-9A3 for a double action/single action pistol due to its slimmer/straighter grip.

I do not have much use for any polymer pistol. I like cleaning my guns. The striker fired pistol I do find an improvement, in all honesty, to a double action trigger.

The polymer-striker fires pistol is easier/cheaper to service and fix from an armour our stand point. That is a consideration that has merit. Not to mention the marines were paying over 1,500for there last Colt 1911s per unit. The polymer-striker fired pistol is just plane cheaper. Govs like that. Nothing will change that.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by A7Dave:
The myth of the 45 and the 1911 priesthood continues. Plenty of research to disprove the vaunted "stopping power" of the 1911 .45. It's a great gun and a great cartridge. But it isn't a death ray.

With Plus P hollow point loads I agree. The tissue disruption between the 9mm (modern hollow point) and 45 (solid/fmj) I agree, but when comparing fmj 9 to fmj 45. The 230grain 45 is more tissue disruption.

Yes - with FMJs, I would rather have a .45 because of its greater (non-expanding) frontal area when compared with the lesser (non-expanding) frontal area of the 9mm. But it does seem that the U.S. military (except for Special Ops) have moved on to the almost universal 9mm, and are unlikely ever to go back to the .45.

As Dulltool said, the article was short on fact and long on opinion (thank you to Bill for passing it along though).

When my armor unit turned in our 1911s in the 1980s they were really beat up and seldom shot to point of aim. The new Beretta M9s seemed like a great replacement, accurate and easy to shoot, once you adapted to the DA-SA trigger. Over time, though we discovered that they rusted quickly and various parts could get lost, especially the trigger bar spring. And that's not mentioning the magazine issue or the slide breakage deal which was not really common that I knew of. But it was our issue pistol and I just put up with it for the next twenty years of service. I'm glad to see it gone, if its successor shakes out.