Army is replacing M9, what will it be?

[in625shooter]

We need to keep our military supplies made in the USA for obvious reasons. I personally would like to see us tell the world we'll use what the hell we want to fight to win. Heck with this political good guy hug a tree crap war stuff.
OUR enemies don't seem to abide by rules and such. We're gonna let them tie our hands behind our backs and fight a war? Screw that!
JHPs and the most destructive rounds we can use. Bingo!

The fact most foreign companies also make their products here in the USA as well as their home country to include SIG, Glock and FN with the Global economy we have now vs 30-40 years ago where a product is made matters less and less.

 

[actaeon277]

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/army-handgun-weapon-criminals-162100885.html

Trying to outdo stupid.

"When that happens, America's emergency rooms better be prepared for the carnage that's likely to follow."

 

[Thor]

That article (and author) is looking up at stupid wishing it was just plan stupid instead of being fully buried in the BS below it.

 

[1988-4551]

double stack 1911?

 

[searpinski]

double stack 1911?

If someone ever makes a good one, I'll buy it.

 

[cbhausen]

Wow, the author is getting hammered in the comments following the article (and rightfully so). She doesn't know her ass from a hole in the ground.

 

[Expat]

I hope they hurry and decide so that I will know what I need to buy next.

 

[semiautosniper]

Hk45c

 

[in625shooter]

Without meaning this disrespectful at the good members of the Military and even though that's probably not what the author meant if you have seen what is coming into the armed forces lately (Thugs with some records) The criminal remark isn't that far off base for some.

 

[Paul30]

What would be the point of going to a Sig p226? At this point it's essentially the same gun as the M9. If you've already got the infrastructure to support one handgun, why would you want to spend a ton of money building up a new infrastructure to support a gun that gives you no real advantage?

One reason they want to move from the M9 is the exposed barrel action. Here in the civilian world where we wear one in a holster it does fine, in the desert where sand and dirt can get into the action is another story. This was a main concern voiced in other articles on the same topic. As far as the 40 cal and .357 sig they are probably candidates. I can't see them going to the 45 due to capacity reductions but who knows. There are 14 round .45 out there. HK Tactical holds 12 and would be a nice one too. It would be nice if it were a pistol we make here in the states so we can control parts and service. Although not a lot of limp wristing in the military, a polymer gun being a bit lighter seems to be more prone to stove piping if you don't have a firm grip. I know one should always use a firm grip, but the heavier frames seem to work even when you don't.

As mentioned elsewhere in the thread, military ammo used in war cannot be designed to cause extra damage by law, that is why the comparison of what gun the military uses is not really relevant to civilian carry. A modern expanding bullet design changes the game but is not legal for use in war.

My choice would be the Sig 226. Good reliable pistol, sealed well for harsh environments, and has been a choice of seals for a while so it has been well tested. It should be an interesting contest.

 

[in625shooter]

One reason they want to move from the M9 is the exposed barrel action. Here in the civilian world where we wear one in a holster it does fine, in the desert where sand and dirt can get into the action is another story. This was a main concern voiced in other articles on the same topic. As far as the 40 cal and .357 sig they are probably candidates. I can't see them going to the 45 due to capacity reductions but who knows. There are 14 round .45 out there. HK Tactical holds 12 and would be a nice one too. It would be nice if it were a pistol we make here in the states so we can control parts and service. Although not a lot of limp wristing in the military, a polymer gun being a bit lighter seems to be more prone to stove piping if you don't have a firm grip. I know one should always use a firm grip, but the heavier frames seem to work even when you don't.

As mentioned elsewhere in the thread, military ammo used in war cannot be designed to cause extra damage by law, that is why the comparison of what gun the military uses is not really relevant to civilian carry. A modern expanding bullet design changes the game but is not legal for use in war.

My choice would be the Sig 226. Good reliable pistol, sealed well for harsh environments, and has been a choice of seals for a while so it has been well tested. It should be an interesting contest.

The concern by some on the Beretta open barrel design being somehow prone to elements causing malfunction is an over exaggeration. In any desert be it the middle east or here the fine talcum powder sand will get into everything whether you have a Beretta, SIG or Glock. I had it working it's way out of my gear for 6 months after getting back.

 

[ryknoll3]

We need to keep our military supplies made in the USA for obvious reasons. I personally would like to see us tell the world we'll use what the hell we want to fight to win. Heck with this political good guy hug a tree crap war stuff.
OUR enemies don't seem to abide by rules and such. We're gonna let them tie our hands behind our backs and fight a war? Screw that!
JHPs and the most destructive rounds we can use. Bingo!

I guarantee you that if the US goes with a foreign company for new sidearms, that foreign company will be building those guns here. That will be a stipulation of the contract, and they'll be happy to do it.

 

[arthrimus]

The concern by some on the Beretta open barrel design being somehow prone to elements causing malfunction is an over exaggeration. In any desert be it the middle east or here the fine talcum powder sand will get into everything whether you have a Beretta, SIG or Glock. I had it working it's way out of my gear for 6 months after getting back.

In fact I'd go one farther and theorize that the locking block action of the beretta would be less affected by sand than a Browning style lockup. There's alway somewhere for dirt and debris to go rather than being sealed up inside the action. Some stress testing I've seen of the M9 supports the theory as well.

 

[Destro]

Army is buying more M9's

http://kitup.military.com/2014/07/army-buys-more-m9-pistols.html

 

[in625shooter]

I guarantee you that if the US goes with a foreign company for new sidearms, that foreign company will be building those guns here. That will be a stipulation of the contract, and they'll be happy to do it.

About any major contender already has manufacturing set up in the USA. With todays Global economy thats what happens. You have foreign cars and guns and etc built here as you have foreign car companies (not sure about the guns other than what is now Colt Canada and the like) building their products there..

In fact I'd go one farther and theorize that the locking block action of the beretta would be less affected by sand than a Browning style lockup. There's alway somewhere for dirt and debris to go rather than being sealed up inside the action. Some stress testing I've seen of the M9 supports the theory as well.

Having worked on Beretta M9's in the Military the locking block is the weakest part. That was probably the thing most prone to breakage, and they broke somewhat regularly.

Army is buying more M9's

http://kitup.military.com/2014/07/army-buys-more-m9-pistols.html

The M9 will be in service for a while. They will still be using it for years. Remember these evaluations take years. Even is everything goes right and they do their T&E and say as soon as next year they pick brand C handgun it will be several years (like 4-7) down the road from that before they find their way into a holster and thats if their are no involvement by Congress, or slow down with appropriations or diverting of this projects monies for that.