Time to say goodbye to the M9 9mm pistol

[danny76]

But the mach-6 velocity would be cool for a handgun? This 5kg round would probably need to have a super sharp tipped AP to get through the latest armor.

Ridiculous, if it was spiky it would make it too long to fit in ammo pouches

[guncrasher]

Yeah, I wore it for about a year in Bosnia. Mine had ceramic plates front and rear, but they only covered a rather small area of the center mass. Everything else was just level 2. Perhaps level 3 where the layers overlapped. Also, once that ceramic plate takes a hit it shatters (that's how it absorbs the energy) and doesn't offer much resistance to subsequent hits.

(Image removed from quote.)

I knew it, this picture proves that you are the guy in the avatar wearing a nazi uniform .



semp

[nrshida]

Never happened, we targeted the road 5 feet in front of them. That the rounds bounced unpredictably into their knackers was purely coincidental

Hmm hmmmm 

At least, as you said, until the US says screw the convention,

Then what are you fighting for?

[Rich46yo]

Well I say just buy a bunch of new 9mms from a company that employs all Americans and stick with the plan. The needs of the Police are different then the needs of combat soldiers, "besides the difference between the calibers is very small anyways". A soldier is usually with his squad/unit and I cant remember the last time I even worked with a partner.

Besides even we have gone to 5.56mm nowadays anyways. I never leave home without it. A soldier is geared up for very intensive violence and what troop would want to put themselves into a situation where they need to pull a handgun? Even if your rifle stokes up your squad should be covering you while you clear it. I just see this entire thing as a nonexistant problem looking for an answer that doesnt exist.

Want to use that extra money better? Increase 9mm range time and also give these troops more $$ on the 1st and 16th.

[Swoop]

Hence the British Army transition to the L85-A1/2 rather than re-equipping with the FN FNC in 5.56, an almost exact product to the FN SLR 7.62 that the Brits already had ample and successful experience with

See now.....I would say the SLR is a better rifle than an L85Aanything.  Calibre is king.  Same goes for pistols.  I second what Eagl said, .40 is perfectly acceptable for an emergency defensive weapon.

Udie told me a story once about a time he was working in a gun store in Texas, a old fella came in with his son to buy the lad his first pistol.  They looked at a lot of weapons but the son finally whittled it down to a choice between a 92F 9mm and a 1911 .45.....the father solved the dilemma by saying "Son, I never had to shoot a man twice with a .45".

[TheCrazyOrange]

But the mach-6 velocity would be cool for a handgun? This 5kg round would probably need to have a super sharp tipped AP to get through the latest armor.

Once they develop the tech enough to scale it down, rail guns are the future of projectile weapons. Imagine a 31gr 5.7AP round traveling at 6700ft/s.

Right now though, I think the plan is to use them to replace the Mk 110, and a smaller 2kg model with higher velocity as an experimental City. Even just clip an inbound missile with 4lbs going mach 8 or 9, and no more missile.

[smoe]

See now.....I would say the SLR is a better rifle than an L85Aanything.  Calibre is king.  Same goes for pistols.  I second what Eagl said, .40 is perfectly acceptable for an emergency defensive weapon.

Udie told me a story once about a time he was working in a gun store in Texas, a old fella came in with his son to buy the lad his first pistol.  They looked at a lot of weapons but the son finally whittled it down to a choice between a 92F 9mm and a 1911 .45.....the father solved the dilemma by saying "Son, I never had to shoot a man twice with a .45".

Hence why I recommended a .45 ACP short.

[Rich46yo]

See now.....I would say the SLR is a better rifle than an L85Aanything.  Calibre is king.  Same goes for pistols.  I second what Eagl said, .40 is perfectly acceptable for an emergency defensive weapon.

Udie told me a story once about a time he was working in a gun store in Texas, a old fella came in with his son to buy the lad his first pistol.  They looked at a lot of weapons but the son finally whittled it down to a choice between a 92F 9mm and a 1911 .45.....the father solved the dilemma by saying "Son, I never had to shoot a man twice with a .45".

I dont think its a good idea to steer millions of dollars and the safety of hundreds of thousands of troops based on some Texas gun store story that may or may not have actually happened. Let alone the reality "gun store tales"?. They are all "perfectly legitimate" as long as you put the bullet in the boiler room. Caliber isnt King. Bullet placement is both King and Queen because the idea isnt to kill the enemy its to do so before he kills you.

I'd be willing to bet this goes nowhere. Tho if it does the .40 is about the only one that makes any kind of sense. And even that load doesnt make enough sense to turn the super freighter in another direction. Do you have any idea what is involved to change calibers/loads/gun types for such a large Military machine and the costs involved?

[Oldman731]

Because the best way to win a gun fight is to bring a long gun.

Of course.  But that isn't the issue.  If a handgun is all that's available, I'd like it to be the one best able to save me.  Saying that all handguns are less powerful than all rifles is nearly correct, but beside the point.  If someone is in a difficult situation, I would think he/she would rather have a .45 ACP than a .25 ACP.  There are significant differences in between those extremes, as the FBI testing showed.

- oldman

[TheCrazyOrange]

Skyyrr, brags about being American, Flys a European plane.

[GScholz]

I knew it, this picture proves that you are the guy in the avatar wearing a nazi uniform .



semp

 

Yeah, I always had a smirk like that on my face when my squad and I were out flying. Hopping around in helicopters is probably the one thing I miss the most from my army days.

[SmokinLoon]

Discussions and debates such as this constantly make me go     with all the hear-say, assumptions, and armchair commando commentary.

Combat handguns and the FMJ calibers they fire have differences enough that there is no "best" for all situations. 

As most of us know, accuracy is first and foremost the most important thing.  If the user of the X sidearm is unable to get rounds on target than it makes no difference what the gun or caliber is. Likewise, if slider can be too far one way and the caliber becomes too daft to get the job done (think .22 rimfire or .25 ACP), then it is time to start thinking more oomph.

I think the US military should keep the 9mm NATO as their caliber of choice for a sidearm and when the situation calls for it (SPECOPS, etc), issue the sidearm and caliber of choice.  This whole "1 size fits all" theory is for fools. I think there are a number of 9mm sidearms that have **proved** themselves over the years that would qualify for military duty (Sig226, Beretta92FS, HKx, Gluck17/19, FNx, etc).

There are so many factors in the debate that when someone is screaming 1 or 2 points they forget the other 9 that need to be dealt with. 

[GScholz]

A couple of relevant videos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQE0e-9rCjM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZDrgoRprVo

[Slash27]

I wonder if they will come up with a .40 or .45 short, similar to the 9mm & 380.

The .40 S&W already is a "short". 10mm short or 10mm FBI.

The 17 9milly feels horrible to shoot, I am talking from only my experience but from the get go it it felt less workmanlike compared to the nicely hewn hunk of Browning. I could never manage the same results with the 17 as I did with other handguns, always felt it was somehow twisting in my hand between shots and was never quite as intuitive to shoot comfortably.

Understand, thankfully I don't suffer but I know a lot of people that don't care for the feel of them.

[Swoop]

Caliber isnt King.

Yes it is.