NationStates Jolt Archive

Ok the US military went from the powerfull .45 to the space saveing 9mm in your opinion was the increase in ammo a good trade off for less power? the 9mm also alowed for a longer barrel with the same size gun so it is a little more accurate. but was this a good reason to switch? however the mass behind a .45 would stop even the craziest idiot charging at you. so what are you thoughts?

It's a toss up. The .45 has more stopping power but is a bit less accurate and holds less ammo. Either way you're giving up something with each gun. Only if there was a gun that was a cross between the two.

I always found the .45 a mite uncontrollable. I only wish they'd chosen a GOOD 9mm instead of that crappy Beretta.

It's a toss up. The .45 has more stopping power but is a bit less accurate and holds less ammo. Either way you're giving up something with each gun. Only if there was a gun that was a cross between the two.


heres a Gun (http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg18-e.htm) for ya then

That's a good one.

Too bad they can't use a good +p JHP in the 9mm. It would give much better stopping power and that combined with the extra ammo capacity would make it IMHO better than a .45

I always found the .45 a mite uncontrollable. I only wish they'd chosen a GOOD 9mm instead of that crappy Beretta.


If I had to choose a 9mm it would have to be Browning BDM (http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg109-e.htm)

There's so many other good handguns out there. Why did the U.S. military go with the Beretta?

Too bad they can't use a good +p JHP in the 9mm. It would give much better stopping power and that combined with the extra ammo capacity would make it IMHO better than a .45


the .45 can have the same bullet type as any 9mm and with the new HK MK. 23 you get 12 (13 if you chamber laod) shots of .45

There's so many other good handguns out there. Why did the U.S. military go with the Beretta?

it was cheap and easyer to maintain.

How about the Para Ordnance P14-45. The Canadians use it.

incorrect. the .45 can have the same bullet type as any 9mm and with the new HK MK. 23 you get 12 (13 if you chamber laod) shots of .45
I wouldn't call the Mk.23 'new' as such... more of an update of an older weapon.

If I had to go with a calibre or weapon, it would be the FN Five seveN (which someone has already shown *drools*), or the 10mm Glock. 10mm has more stopping power than 9mm, but it's more accurate than the .45

I wouldn't call the Mk.23 'new' as such... more of an update of an older weapon.

If I had to go with a calibre or weapon, it would be the FN Five seveN (which someone has already shown *drools*), or the 10mm Glock. 10mm has more stopping power than 9mm, but it's more accurate than the .45

new being a relitive term. it is still not quite what you'ed call a seasoned gun. I like 5.7 because it sheads kevlar but sticks to other 'harder' surfaces.

heres a Gun (http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg18-e.htm) for ya then
Um, no. The 5-7 is just a hopped up .22. Good for getting through armor, not good at take downs. As for the beretta being easier to maintain, obviously you haven't field stripped the two guns in question.

How about the Para Ordnance P14-45. The Canadians use it.

Thats a real nice gun but alas the us military goes for cheap, like the M16

Ok the US military went from the powerfull .45 to the space saveing 9mm in your opinion was the increase in ammo a good trade off for less power? the 9mm also alowed for a longer barrel with the same size gun so it is a little more accurate. but was this a good reason to switch? however the mass behind a .45 would stop even the craziest idiot charging at you. so what are you thoughts?
My thoughts?

My thought is that, if you've reached the point where you have to resort to pistols, you need one that's heavy enough to throw at them and knock them out! Pistols are a hairsbredth away from hand-to-hand.

I miss the .45! Sigh. ;)

Um, no. The 5-7 is just a hopped up .22. Good for getting through armor, not good at take downs. As for the beretta being easier to maintain, obviously you haven't field stripped the two guns in question.
That'd be pretty difficult, considering that the 5-7 is fairly rare even in military circles. In any case, it's a good point.

A good mix of bullet velocity, capacity and stopping power would be the .40 S&W or the 10mm Auto.

There are big issues surrounding two pistols brought up earlier. First off, the HK Mk. 23 SOCOM is FUCKING BIG, making it terribly unwieldy, and tests have shown that while the FN Five-SeveN has excellent armor peircing capabilities, it's 5.7mm round doesn't have the "oomph" needed against unarmored targets.

Um, no. The 5-7 is just a hopped up .22. Good for getting through armor, not good at take downs. As for the berreta being easier to maintain, obviously you haven't field stripped the two guns in question.

Bull shit. Ive seen what these things do to people and your comment has no basis of truth in it. and a .22 has a hard time penatrating skin. the berreta is easier to maintain considering the price of the gun .

My experience of firearms is limited to FPS games, but I tend to prefer magazine capacity and accuracy over the stopping power of the first shot. You can put three rounds into an idiot who misses with a .50, that has kept me alive in a game at least.

The Fallen Dead, I think the M16 is a nice assault rifle. Is it the best? No

The Fallen Dead, I think the M16 is a nice assault rifle. Is it the best? No
So, what is? (I know, we're off topic, but hey, it's all about weapons at the end of the day)

A good mix of bullet velocity, capacity and stopping power would be the .40 S&W or the 10mm Auto.

There are big issues surrounding two pistols brought up earlier. First off, the HK Mk. 23 SOCOM is FUCKING BIG, making it terribly unwieldy, and tests have shown that while the FN Five-SeveN has excellent armor peircing capabilities, it's 5.7mm round doesn't have the "oomph" needed against unarmored targets.

ture the 5.7 will not knock you over like a .45 will but it is still a much better choice then a 9mm

I think the Heckler-Koch HK 6-36 is a pretty damn good assault rifle.

My experience of firearms is limited to FPS games, but I tend to prefer magazine capacity and accuracy over the stopping power of the first shot. You can put three rounds into an idiot who misses with a .50, that has kept me alive in a game at least.
One more reason for not relying on computer games to train soldiers, IHMO.

My experience of firearms is limited to FPS games, but I tend to prefer magazine capacity and accuracy over the stopping power of the first shot. You can put three rounds into an idiot who misses with a .50, that has kept me alive in a game at least.

I prefer knowing that when i hit some one with a shot hes going down. the 9mm has a problem with that. I've been pratcing with a colt 1911 and I feel confident that my fist shot will hit the opponent.

The Fallen Dead, I think the M16 is a nice assault rifle. Is it the best? No
Dpends upon what features of an assault rifle you place the most emphasis.

One more reason for not relying on computer games to train soldiers, IHMO.
And yet the military does. ;)

I personally do not like the 9mm round for military use, too much limitation in the ammo they can use. Also, a couple of months ago I read an article from military.com talking about atleast some of the US forces switching handguns away from the M9. The 10mm would be ok, except it is a bit to powerfull for some peoples wrists. A couple of years ago the FBI started issuing them but stopped after some female officers broke their wrist due to the inability to control recoil.

I think the Heckler-Koch HK 6-36 is a pretty damn good assault rifle.
You mean the G-36. It's good, but the basic version is a bit too long... I prefer the C 'COmpact' version.

Yes, I did mean the HK G-36, sorry for the typo.

ture the 5.7 will not knock you over like a .45 will but it is still a much better choice then a 9mm

The 5.7mm necked round indeed has lower recoil than the 9mm, while retaining it's high velocity, but it's small size and the fact that it doesn't tumble through unarmored targets like the 5.56mm makes it's power dubious at best.

That's not to say that the 5.7mm is useless. In close quarters against targets that you know are going to have body armor, the FN P90 can be your best friend.

On the question about the rifle. M1 grand. best rifle ever. only two problems one: magizne capacity. and 2: you could lose your thumb.

I've always preferred .40 or 7.65 (The Tokarev round) to 9x19mm or .45ACP, they seem to be good 'in-between' cartridges. The advantage of the 9mm is accuracy over range and magazine capacity - sure, a single .45ACP is likely to sit someone on his ass, but you've only got what, seven rounds in the magazine (On the M-1911A1, which I believe would have been the issued .45 sidearm), but two nines will set him on his ass and you've got on average, 12-15 rounds in the magazine. That's a lot of double-tapping.

Although handguns are real fast to reload, if you've got your mags accessible, handguns are only really used if you're being overrun or in some similiar situation in which it is better to pull out a secondary weapon than reload your primary. Given that 9x19mm will kill you just as dead as .45ACP, the only real questions here are "How much ammunition do I want to fire off before I need to reload?"

I think a sturdy, old-school 9x19mm would have been a good choice. A Browning, for example, rather than these Goddamn tupperware firearms, like the Glock. The Beretta is a piece of shit, but at least it isn't almost entirely tupperware, to my knowledge.

Bull shit. Ive seen what these things do to people and your comment has no basis of truth in it. and a .22 has a hard time penatrating skin. the berreta is easier to maintain considering the price of the gun .
Heh! Taking a .22 to a gunfight would be equivalent to taking a brick to a knife-fight. I would be very worried that, should I hit someone with a .22 round, all it would accomplish is to piss them off. :D

Yes, I did mean the HK G-36, sorry for the typo.
No worries. Like Eutrusca said, it depends on what you emphasis; for accuracy, it's the L85A2, hands down. Other than that, my fav. of the moment is the HK G416 - it's basically an updated M4 (the design is fourty years old after all.)

Getting back to pistols, a Colt M1911 is a good weapon, but its magazine capacity is a bit small. Recently though, I saw an updated model which used 10mm rounds.

On the question about the rifle. M1 grand. best rifle ever. only two problems one: magizne capacity. and 2: you could lose your thumb.
I disagree. By far the best American-made military rifle was the M-14, especially the later models where they could be either single-shot or full auto.

I think a sturdy, old-school 9x19mm would have been a good choice. A Browning, for example, rather than these Goddamn tupperware firearms, like the Glock. The Beretta is a piece of shit, but at least it isn't almost entirely tupperware, to my knowledge.

Don't knock the Glock man. It's versatile, reliable, light and damn hard to break.

I disagree. By far the best American-made military rifle was the M-14, especially the later models where they could be either single-shot or full auto.

yeah well I like my grand. and I like the sound it makes when it runs empty. you know that nice tining noise. The m14 is a realy nice gun but it was a tad hard to control on full auto. I tryed that once. it wasn't fun.

Bull shit. Ive seen what these things do to people and your comment has no basis of truth in it. and a .22 has a hard time penatrating skin. the berreta is easier to maintain considering the price of the gun .
What part of "hopped up" don't you understand? It's also designed slightly differently. But the fact remains, it's a hopped up .22.

And yet the military does. ;)
But not counterstrike. Besides, if we followed counterstrike in all things, every soldier would be outfitted with either a shotgun, TMP, or AWM.

.45 all the way. You don't need extra ammo if the first round drops the target.

What part of "hopped up" don't you understand? It's also designed slightly differently. But the fact remains, it's a hopped up .22.
I could say that about a 5.56x45 nato(.223 remington.)

I could say that about a 5.56x45 nato(.223 remington.)
Except that's an actual rifle bullet and it tumbles when it hits someone. OTOH, it ain't called the poodleshooter for no reason. In many states it's illegal to hunt deer with because it doesn't have enough stopping power.

What part of "hopped up" don't you understand? It's also designed slightly differently. But the fact remains, it's a hopped up .22.

Why not just use a hollow-point round? That's going to do some serious damage on contact. Sure, they say they are illegal... but hell, so are .50 sniper rifles being used against people, but I've no doubt it happens.

Why not just use a hollow-point round? That's going to do some serious damage on contact. Sure, they say they are illegal... but hell, so are .50 sniper rifles being used against people, but I've no doubt it happens.
Even a hollowpoint .22 doesn't do that much. Especially since it would expand and still be less than the size of a .45. Also, hollowpoints negate the armor piercing factor.

And yet the military does. ;)
Not exclusively, and with proprietary programs designed specifically for the military. :p

Even a hollowpoint .22 doesn't do that much. Especially since it would expand and still be less than the size of a .45. Also, hollowpoints negate the armor piercing factor.

True. I didn't think of that.

Except that's an actual rifle bullet and it tumbles when it hits someone. OTOH, it ain't called the poodleshooter for no reason. In many states it's illegal to hunt deer with because it doesn't have enough stopping power.

I thought you couldn't hunt in any states with it.

yeah well I like my grand. and I like the sound it makes when it runs empty. you know that nice tining noise. The m14 is a realy nice gun but it was a tad hard to control on full auto. I tryed that once. it wasn't fun.
LOL! That sometimes happens when you take a really good sniper rifle and try to make it full-auto. ;)

.45 all the way. You don't need extra ammo if the first round drops the target.
And IF you actually HIT the target! HUGE "if!"

LOL! That sometimes happens when you take a really good sniper rifle and try to make it full-auto. ;)

it wasn't pleasnt....

It's Garand actually. The SEALs use the 9mm Sig Sauer P226, but that's beacause we can put rounds on target. A good .45 is the Sig Sauer P220, it's heavy enough to be controllable. I like my .454 Casulls personaly, but thats just me.

I'd take the 9mm. I'd rather have an extra few clips of ammo then run out when I really need it even if the stopping power is less. The .45 is also heavier and that doesn't make it easy to be accurate at all.

I have a suggestion as to why they may have changed pistols. Perhaps the average size of hands has decreased in the armed forces, or there is at least more variation nowadays. I know some police forces give you a choice of firearm based on your size, but I don't think armies are fond of doing things like that.

Also, I understand they are often very strict on the weight of equipment.

I think armies should learn to solve their problems peacefully. To that end, I suggest switching to this sidearm.

http://i2.tinypic.com/vi3eas.gif

The .357 Sig is a good compramise. It is basically a .45 shell casing necked down to a 9mm. Very acurate.

Here is a basic run down of several Pistol rounds :

Link (http://www.iccammo.com/images/SpecialPurposeGreenline.jpg)

It is just a basic image though.

It's Garand actually. The SEALs use the 9mm Sig Sauer P226, but that's beacause we can put rounds on target. A good .45 is the Sig Sauer P220, it's heavy enough to be controllable. I like my .454 Casulls personaly, but thats just me.

shut up perry.

I think armies should learn to solve their problems peacefully. To that end, I suggest switching to this sidearm.

http://i2.tinypic.com/vi3eas.gif

I like this weapon. I expertly blends impracticality with hilarity.

.454 Casull.

Link (http://www.pistolwhipvideo.com/images/wallpaper.jpg)

.454 Casull.

Link (http://www.pistolwhipvideo.com/images/wallpaper.jpg)

New the .500 magnum. break an arm today!

New the .500 magnum. break an arm today!

Only if you don't know how to shoot it. I can fire a .454 one handed but it is still not a good idea.

Only if you don't know how to shoot it. I can fire a .454 one handed but it is still not a good idea.

bull shit you won't even shoot the deagle one handed.

bull shit you won't even shoot the deagle one handed.

'Cause the owner of the aforementioned Deagle doesn't want me to, but I have.
Tobin can back me up on both accounts.

So do any gun experts think the size of soldiers has anything to do with it? There are more women in the armed forces nowadays, and I guess a lot of hispanics and asians are a bit smaller than the average American fifty years ago.

So do any gun experts think the size of soldiers has anything to do with it? There are more women in the armed forces nowadays, and I guess a lot of hispanics and asians are a bit smaller than the average American fifty years ago.

I'm a six foot tall chine man and i resent the fact that you went with a rather incorect stereotype.

So do any gun experts think the size of soldiers has anything to do with it? There are more women in the armed forces nowadays, and I guess a lot of hispanics and asians are a bit smaller than the average American fifty years ago.

I think it's mental. There are people at my range that are bigger than me that won't even look at my Magnums.

I think it's mental. There are people at my range that are bigger than me that won't even look at my Magnums.

like me.

I need a .500 real bad.

I'm a six foot tall chine man and i resent the fact that you went with a rather incorect stereotype.

I'm sorry. I honestly thought that asians and hispanics in the U.S. would be slightly smaller on average than the average American in the armed forces fifty years ago. I admit I don't have any statistics on this but it is an impression I got from TVs and movies and when I went to the U.S.

I need a .500 real bad.


that hurt...... my elbows still twinge from that.

I'm sorry. I honestly thought that asians and hispanics in the U.S. would be slightly smaller on average than the average American in the armed forces fifty years ago. I admit I don't have any statistics on this but it is an impression I got from TVs and movies and when I went to the U.S.

its funny cause the modern asin is now about 5'11 with a rather moderate build.

I'm sorry. I honestly thought that asians and hispanics in the U.S. would be slightly smaller on average than the average American in the armed forces fifty years ago. I admit I don't have any statistics on this but it is an impression I got from TVs and movies and when I went to the U.S.

Genetically Ukrainian/Russian

its funny cause the modern asin is now about 5'11 with a rather moderate build.
That's tall. That's very tall. Taller than the average Australian male.

Maybe we should make a Genology thread.

That's tall. That's very tall. Taller than the average Australian male.

yeah well I'm actualy the shortes in the group of asians I hang out with at my college campus. and Im 6'

The hight is also affected by diet. American food is very nutritions, disgustingly so.

its funny cause the modern asin is now about 5'11 with a rather moderate build.


That's interesting because average male height in the US is 5'8". That's for all males regardless of race.

yeah well I'm actualy the shortes in the group of asians I hang out with at my college campus. and Im 6'

Sorry to double post, but I'm also gonna throw it out there that you and your friends are not a representative sampling of all asian males in the US.

Sorry to double post, but I'm also gonna throw it out there that you and your friends are not a representative sampling of all asian males in the US.

True. The whole needs to be present.

Gents, you need to debate _which_ .45 the U.S. should adopt. It's a done deal that we're going to trash the 9 mm in favor of a real pistol.

Back to the 1911, or something else? I'm a believer in the Colt 1911. A hundred years of testing can't be all bad.

Gents, you need to debate _which_ .45 the U.S. should adopt. It's a done deal that we're going to trash the 9 mm in favor of a real pistol.

Back to the 1911, or something else? I'm a believer in the Colt 1911. A hundred years of testing can't be all bad.

well the marines ar handing their surplus 1911s out to thier soldiers.

well the marines ar handing their surplus 1911s out to thier soldiers.
When I went to Desert Storm, there weren't enough 9 mms to go around. My choice was either a .38 or a .45. I figured if I ever was shot down, a .45 might make a better present than the .38.

But the Joint Combat Pistol program is supposed to select an off-the-shelf .45 for common use.

Gents, you need to debate _which_ .45 the U.S. should adopt. It's a done deal that we're going to trash the 9 mm in favor of a real pistol.

Back to the 1911, or something else? I'm a believer in the Colt 1911. A hundred years of testing can't be all bad.

Glock 21, a .45 with a 13 round magazine.

Mk. 23 maybe?

Glock 21, a .45 with a 13 round magazine.
I don't like holding a Glock. The grip feels awkward. Sig makes a real good .45, though.

Mk. 23 maybe?

H&K......

I don't like holding a Glock. The grip feels awkward. Sig makes a real good .45, though.

The P220?

Gents, you need to debate _which_ .45 the U.S. should adopt. It's a done deal that we're going to trash the 9 mm in favor of a real pistol.

Back to the 1911, or something else? I'm a believer in the Colt 1911. A hundred years of testing can't be all bad.

I love the M1911A1, and with today's engineering skills we can make the already reliable Colt .45 even better, with high-capasity magazines, accurised barrels, accessory rails and other improvements. Many SWAT teams, including the elite FBI Hostage Rescue Team use Springfield Custom M1911A1.

Aside from the improved M1911A1, the HK USP or the Glock would be a good choice.

The P220?
Probably. I was fooling with them at a gun show and that's probably it. They break down for cleaning a lot easier and more neatly than the 1911, too.

Here's the best of both worlds. Springfield Armory GI .45 5", High Capacity

http://www.springfield-armory.com/images/pistols/PW9701LLarge.jpg

Probably. I was fooling with them at a gun show and that's probably it. They break down for cleaning a lot easier and more neatly than the 1911, too.

Has a heavy frame to reduce recoil. I have one and enjoy it. Cleaning it is a sinch.

Here's the best of both worlds. Springfield Armory GI .45 5", High Capacity

http://www.springfield-armory.com/images/pistols/PW9701LLarge.jpg

That's a 1911.

Has a heavy frame to reduce recoil. I have one and enjoy it. Cleaning it is a sinch.
I liked it too. I'd have bought it, but I'm flush with guns. I know that's not a good excuse, but it'll have to do.

I'd have bought it, but I'm flush with guns.

Same, safe's full.

Never been in the military, so obviously never been in combat. How often does one really need to use their sidearm?

Never been in the military, so obviously never been in combat. How often does one really need to use their sidearm?
In USMC fixed wing aviation, it was once a year when we went to the range to qualify.

I like the crossing breeds idea, I own a .40 berreta and I absolutley love it. I dont understand the people in here that say berreta sucks, I've had not a single problem with it and the 40. cal round is awesome. But if i had to choose between 9mm and 45. I would have to choose the .45, GETSOME!

That's a 1911.

I know. It's a double stack mag though, which means 13+1 capacity.

It's a toss up. The .45 has more stopping power but is a bit less accurate and holds less ammo. Either way you're giving up something with each gun. Only if there was a gun that was a cross between the two.

That is completely 100% false. There is no difference in accuracy. Accuracy is dependant on a number of factors. First and foremost is the shooter. Second is the weapon, and third is the quality of the ammo. Mil-spec ammo is meant to reliably cycle and give reasonable accuracy for the intended range. It's safe to say that the actual "quality" of a military 9mm vs a .45 cartridge will be the same. The Beretta 92FS (aka M9) is a little tighter than a typical 1911, this is generally why it appears that 9mm is "better". In terms of lethallity a .45 is much more devastating, and I've seen what both can do. However, in the hands of a professional, each can be effective.

The real problems started when the military and law enforcement stopped teaching marksmanship. The average police officer or soldier can't shoot for shit. There was a case here in the US a few years back where two FBI agents got greased in an attempt to stop some badguys. The FBI agents had standard issue "high capacity" 9mm pistols. After emptying their magazines and getting killed, it was found that they hit one of the bad guys twice but didn't kill him. That was something like 30-32 rounds for 2 hits. So the FBI does an investigation and decides to change to the slightly larger .40 caliber. :rolleyes:

Except that's an actual rifle bullet and it tumbles when it hits someone.

Uh, Ravenshrike, ALL bullets tumble when they hit something, even something as insubstantial as a leaf or piece of paper. It's part of the nature of the device.

Uh, Ravenshrike, ALL bullets tumble when they hit something, even something as insubstantial as a leaf or piece of paper. It's part of the nature of the device.
Before load was worked out on the M9, there was a big problem with the supersonic to sonic transition. That started the bullet tumbling, too. That was solved when the right load was worked out for the gun.

I don't like holding a Glock. The grip feels awkward. Sig makes a real good .45, though.

If God were to make a pistol, I suspect that it would be a lot like a SiG Sauer. :cool: