The Down Range Forum

Member Section => Handguns => Topic started by: fightingquaker13 on October 25, 2011, 10:33:00 PM

Title: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: fightingquaker13 on October 25, 2011, 10:33:00 PM
Ok,  I don't want this to devolve into caliber wars, or 1911 vs glock or any other topic that has been done to death. Let's just pretend you were in charge of buying a new pistol for the Army, as someone is as we speak. What would your specs be and why?

Me, I would want it to be in .45 ACP or 10mm (.357 in a revolver). I would want it to hold at least ten rounds (If its a pistol, seven in a revolver, and a revolver only with speed loaders or speed strips issued). I would want an under barrel rail. I would want no external safeties. I would want internal safeties to keep it from going bang if you dropped it. I would want it to be able to function with zero maintenance in a highly hostile environment, eg. not so tightly made that sand, mud or salt were a problem. This sounds like a Glock, but there are other's out there that will do the job. Your thoughts? Pistols, revolvers? What would you want to carry in the sand box? A Glock, a Kimber, a Red Hawk? All comers welcome. Remember, you aren't concealing it. Its worn on your thigh and it will get dirty. What do you trust?
FQ13
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: tombogan03884 on October 25, 2011, 10:37:19 PM
  For group issue, Glock .45 or 10mm.
My personal go to choices are .357 revolver or a 1911 in .45.
The reason for the difference is , First, for military purposes I agree with FQ on at least 10 rounds, on the other hand, I'm no longer in the military , I'm not likely to be dealing with "human wave" attacks. Second, between the polymer, and tenifer finish the Glock is very resistant to long term environmental exposure such as Swamp or jungle, again, as a civilian I am unlikely to encounter those conditions.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: Magoo541 on October 25, 2011, 11:50:12 PM
FNP-45 USG with a RMR sight.  If it works in MB's little paws and in others gorilla grips with a red dot sight I think it would be very affective.  For a revolver I'm partial to S&W 686 with a 4" barrel or a Colt Python with a 4" barrel.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: Dakotaranger on October 26, 2011, 12:11:58 AM
 For group issue, Glock .45 or 10mm.
My personal go to choices are .357 revolver or a 1911 in .45.
The reason for the difference is , First, for military purposes I agree with FQ on at least 10 rounds, on the other hand, I'm no longer in the military , I'm not likely to be dealing with "human wave" attacks. Second, between the polymer, and tenifer finish the Glock is very resistant to long term environmental exposure such as Swamp or jungle, again, as a civilian I am unlikely to encounter those conditions.
I wish my XD had that coating.  IF I wasn't a cyclist, it wouldn't be a big deal (it's better than infamous rust issue they had ten years ago) the only issue I'm struggling with rust is around the sights.  I'm not a Glock fan just because it didn't fit me well.  IF I could get a striker fired '1911'.  I prefer a steel pistol.  Night sights, I'm fine with the 13rds.

I don't have any experience with a double action revolver to have a remotely educated opinion
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: kmitch200 on October 26, 2011, 02:26:45 AM
I'll take a SIG 226 in 9mm or a 220 in 45acp. Both calibers are already in the supply chain.
 
Neither has switches, safties or whatnot to deliver the first shot. Just a revolver like first trigger pull. No mag disconnect, and both are VERY accurate.

I would go to war with either one but might lean toward the 226 because of 16 rnds on tap vs 9.   
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: ellis4538 on October 26, 2011, 03:48:11 AM
I don't believe the Glock or most any other new poly pistol is the way to go because the safety is in the trigger and when left to the untrained user will be a problem!  That being said, a DAO is the best bet and I don't have a working knowledge of any of them to choose.  A S&W 686 in poly would be my choice of revo when and if they could make one!  Only to save weight!

FWIW


Richard

PS:  That would be for the military.  For me, I will stick with my Para P14 and pick up a S&W 4" 625 and have it worked over.  Both in .45 don't ya know!
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: Solus on October 26, 2011, 07:54:18 AM
Hmmm...we might also work on  a "Frankenstein" gun.

For instance, a couple of this have been mentioned.

Tennifer treated metal parts.
Striker fired.
Manual safety or heavier DOA only (personally don't agree with this one)
closer to the ergonomics of a 1911
.45ACP or 10mm
10 rounds minimum.
semi-auto (personal preference/recommendation)
Poly frame for weight reduction

For me, a Glock 21 with a grip frame with the angle of a 1911 would work.  Any grip reduction without losing capacity would be a plus

I do wish there was a way to incorporate the 1911's inline trigger pull with the simplicity of parts/functioning of a Glock.

I do believe there was a 3rd party frame for a Glock with the 1911 grip angle.  It was not in the large frame calibers however.  I also recall it could be had in polymer or aluminum and another alloy.

The original question noted that this is not for personal SD, but rather what the troops might use.

So, if you were gonna be a 'troop'  what would you build to carry.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: jnevis on October 26, 2011, 08:12:36 AM
My requirements:
9mm or larger
15 rd min capacity
no external safety
quick acquisition night sights (XS Big Dot like)
under frame rail
minimum number of parts
captive springs (recoil and otherwise)
field strip without tools
ambi mag release (armorer swaps allowed)
Single grip size (multi-size panel allowed-FNP like, not seperate pieces like M&P or Glock Gen 4)


I don't believe the Glock or most any other new poly pistol is the way to go because the safety is in the trigger and when left to the untrained user will be a problem!  

Since no one in the military carries a pistol without a couple days training (and months of "Keep you F-ing trigger finger out of the trigger gaurd until you're shooting!!!!!!"), and requals at LEAST annually; not an issue.

Both Glocks and Sigs are in the supply system, in 9mm and 40.  The 9s have the advantage of higher capacity and more available ammo, globally.  The 40 has a better track record for hitting harder, but recoil is a problem.  The all metal frame of the Sig mitigates that to some extent.  The Glock not having a different trigger pull, shot to shot, is to its advantage.  The basic premise of carrying a pistol is simple; get to a rifle, or OUT of a confined space.  It will NEVER be a primary weapon.  It is/will be used to get enough rounds out to allow getting out of a HumVee/room to employ the rifle to actaully stop the threat.  Rapid deployment without having to worry about a safety is paramount.  M9s are currently on safe only when inside the wire.  
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: Majer on October 26, 2011, 11:40:25 AM
For a revolver I would go with either a S&W or Ruger in .357.While the Python is a beautiful gun they are known for going out of time with hard use and there are few gunsmiths that can fix them properly left.if money were no object I would go for the S&W Performance shop M&P R8,It holds 8 rounds in moon clips,has a light rail and is built for competition so it should hold up.For Autos I'll stick with my 1911 Colt and Browning HiPower,Both proven designs.

Here's a link to the M&P R8
http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product4_750001_750051_765757_-1__757896__ProductDisplayErrorView_Y
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: Ping on October 26, 2011, 12:04:54 PM
Leave the revolvers to the commanders in the rear. I would say the Glock 22 in .40 Smith and Wesson. You have the power and the additional rounds. You would have 15 rounds as opposed to 13 in .45 ACP with the Glock.

I also agree with the 10mm round (Glock 20).  ;) But I do carry a Glock in .45 ACP daily.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: 2HOW on October 26, 2011, 01:25:57 PM
Colt 10mm Delta Elite or similar. But definitely a 10mm    ;D
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: Timothy on October 26, 2011, 01:37:46 PM
For the sake of logistics, the sidearm would need to be 9mm as that stuff is everywhere around the world.  Ignore the Hague Convention and go with a JHP with enough lethality to be effective and pick from any number of reliable auto loading pistols that are already proven.

The Army shoots itself in the foot with all the restrictions they put on the design but I would stand firm on it not only being made here in the USA but also from a company that is incorporated within the USA.

Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: ellis4538 on October 26, 2011, 01:52:21 PM
jnevis, yes and the same can be said for LEO's but they have had a ton of ND since adopting the Glock!

Richard
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: bafsu92 on October 26, 2011, 02:43:48 PM
FNP-45 USG with a RMR sight.  If it works in MB's little paws and in others gorilla grips with a red dot sight I think it would be very affective.  For a revolver I'm partial to S&W 686 with a 4" barrel or a Colt Python with a 4" barrel.

The FNP-45 would be high on my list (right with a Glock 21, the argument is external safety or not)  but the RMR is no where near durable enough for a military issue sidearm primary sight. Maybe if you left the irons on for backup or even better had a qd mount for the RMR. The thing that needs to be remembered is what a pistol is used for in most military applications. Unless your an MP if you've got a pistol in your hand then the bovine excrement has hit the proverbial fan. You have found yourself in a situation you shouldn't be in without a rifle but here you are. At this point having an optic on a pistol is really a novelty. I get the idea of a crossover sight picture since your rifle has a similar optic but the application for a military pistol is going to be within 7 yards so if you can't put rounds on target point shooting you're probably seconds away from being a casualty anyway so the optic is pretty much pointless.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: jnevis on October 26, 2011, 03:04:04 PM
You will NEVER see a revolver, for the reason I stated earlier about what a pistol is for.

10mm is to much of a "novelty" round to be a realistic choice.  Great stopping power, but not enough users therfore enough supply.  Brings you back to the 9 or 45 as far as caliber.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: fightingquaker13 on October 26, 2011, 03:23:33 PM
You will NEVER see a revolver, for the reason I stated earlier about what a pistol is for.

10mm is to much of a "novelty" round to be a realistic choice.  Great stopping power, but not enough users therfore enough supply.  Brings you back to the 9 or 45 as far as caliber.
If the Army adopted it, it would no longer be a novelty. Remember, the thread isn't about what you would  want to buy, its about what you would want to be issued.
FQ13
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: tombogan03884 on October 26, 2011, 03:40:17 PM
If the Army adopted it, it would no longer be a novelty. Remember, the thread isn't about what you would  want to buy, its about what you would want to be issued.
FQ13

FQ beat me to it.
As for revolvers, with the advent of higher capacity mags the revolver is no longer practical for military issue.
Part of the reason for the original switch to the 1911 was higher capacity and much easier to reload.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: warhawke on October 26, 2011, 04:31:46 PM
Common caliber - 9mm/.40S&W/.45acp for autos, .38/.357/.44mag for revolvers
Functional reliability -  goes bang when you want it too
Mechanical reliability - does not break often or require professional repair
Spare parts availability -  if you can't get parts you can't fix it
User repair-ability - if YOU can't fix it it is useless (see again, spare parts)
Accessories - Magazines, holsters, cleaning kits, lights, whatever doesn't come in the box

The reason I like the 1911 is because there is nothing on the weapon I can't fix short of something requiring a welder. Magazine capacity is less important to me because if it is a "Combat" pistol it means it is a back up to my primary weapon (rifle, shotgun, etc.) while if it is a concealment weapon I am more concerned with keeping it hidden. I do like the most BB's I can get, but I won't sacrifice the rest for a few extra rounds. I don't like revolvers simply because they are almost impossible to fix without considerable training and ability, to say nothing about specialized tools.
Also, too many people forget that a gun, 2 mags and a box of ammo does not constitute being armed. Any weapon is a system and you need a complete system if you want to be armed, if you have no holster it is hard to carry, if you have no way to clean it properly it will stop working at some point.
Lastly, too many people think "Tests show that my _______ will work for 100,000 rounds", and it might, but it might not. It might never break, but everything made by humans can and will break at some point, if you want to bet you life on your (YOUR, not the one in the tests) pistol never failing, go ahead, but I won't. Better to have the parts and the skills to use them then end up unarmed because the PR from the people who want to make money turns out to be a tiny bit incorrect.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: kmitch200 on October 26, 2011, 05:17:06 PM
Colt 10mm Delta Elite or similar. But definitely a 10mm    ;D

How do you get the girls and the non-handgun familar men to qualify with them?
Even the FBI wanted it downloaded, giving birth to the 40 S&W. Most soldiers (and most cops) don't shoot handguns worth a darn to begin with.
IMHO the 10mm is just way too much gun for what is needed.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: mauler on October 26, 2011, 05:24:42 PM
I would stick with the 1911 in .45 (is there any other caliber?).  With military hardball it is far superior to a 9mm shooting military hardball.  If we are talking premium hollow points then I think the 9mm would be suitable.  It would have a rail, and tritium/fiber optic sights for day and night sight visibility.  I have had good experience with Kimber.  I think the original single stack version would be fine with an 8 round mag, but for those who must have capacity, go with the Para Ordnance double stacker for 14 round mags.  I suppose there could be more justification for a higher capacity in a combat setting versus the civilized world, but if you are in combat and you are down to fighting with your pistol, you have either torn up your rifle or ran out of ammo.  I would put a durable coating on it, like cerakote.  I realize that it would take a bit more time and intelligence to train troops to run a 1911, but I also believe, as Jeff Cooper said, that the double action semi-auto pistol was a solution to a problem that didn't exist.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: mauler on October 26, 2011, 05:30:07 PM
How do you get the girls and the non-handgun familar men to qualify with them?
Even the FBI wanted it downloaded, giving birth to the 40 S&W. Most soldiers (and most cops) don't shoot handguns worth a darn to begin with.
IMHO the 10mm is just way too much gun for what is needed.

I agree.  If I were going to deer hunt with it, that would be fine, but I think the severity of recoil and report are excessive for the task at hand.  I have never seen any evidence to convince me that the 10mm is more effective at killing people than .45 acp.  I don't see how a .40 caliber bullet going 500 fps out someone's back is any better than a .45 caliber bullet going 300 fps out someone's back.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: jnevis on October 26, 2011, 07:08:05 PM
How do you get the girls and the non-handgun familar men to qualify with them?
Even the FBI wanted it downloaded, giving birth to the 40 S&W. Most soldiers (and most cops) don't shoot handguns worth a darn to begin with.
IMHO the 10mm is just way too much gun for what is needed.

Exactly
It also gets back to ammo availability, in and outside our own supply lines.  Comercial Off the Shelf in LARGE quantities.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: fightingquaker13 on October 26, 2011, 07:33:03 PM
Slightly off topic, but hey its my thread; how many of our troops do you think slip a box or six of JHPs in their duffle bags before deploying, the Hague Convention be damned? I know I would, but only if I could get away with it. The question is can they and do they? Its not like someone is going to do an autopsy on a dead hostile. Just curious.
FQ13
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: mauler on October 26, 2011, 07:39:01 PM
If I was stuck with a 9mm you better believe I would be smuggling in some cor bons.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: twyacht on October 26, 2011, 07:43:57 PM
(http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm182/twyacht/blaster-20110301-091049.jpg)

Since I can't get Han Solo's Blaster (yet),...

M&P .45 or my G21. They have survived every conceivable form of torture, and than some....After trolling a M&P 45, behind a 48'Viking Sportfish in the Gulf Stream all day, rinsing it with beach sand and more salt water, than firing 1000 rds. through it, even the Combat Vet, in the video said, Damn it still works.

Same with the Glock 21. Tied behind a truck and bounced down 10 miles of bad dirt road, frozen, buried in mud, sand, muck, and rinsed in stagnant pond water, than fired until it stopped auto cycling, but would still fire manually cycling.  That's why I bought it. Certainly not because it's "pretty"... ;) but it will eat all .45 ammo out there.
(http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm182/twyacht/G21004.jpg)
Plus the 27 rd. mags are a plus... ::)

Going with Majer on the S&W R8 Revolver. It is the baddest .357 out there. Modern combat doesn't warrant a revolver any longer. :-\ (Except in urban combat, it would be very effective as a zombie slayer.) 8)
(http://i871.photobucket.com/albums/ab279/cgner/DSCN4781.jpg)

Although, a bunch of Gurkha's with R8 revolvers,....well,...they would enjoy the hand to hand combat..
(http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm182/twyacht/gurkhaPA2405_468x591.jpg)



Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: jnevis on October 26, 2011, 08:15:15 PM
Slightly off topic, but hey its my thread; how many of our troops do you think slip a box or six of JHPs in their duffle bags before deploying, the Hague Convention be damned? I know I would, but only if I could get away with it. The question is can they and do they? Its not like someone is going to do an autopsy on a dead hostile. Just curious.
FQ13

Could you? probably
Would it be a good idea if caught? no

All ammo is checked out to the individual and must be accounted for; random inspections, rotating ammo periodically, or turning it in as soon as you step inside the wire or go off-shift, under the supervision of the armorer.  You could take your allotment and not put it in your mags and leave it in your hooch to turn in later.  If you get caught with non-standard ammo, expect a trip to the man.  There are way to many ways to get pinched. 
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: mkm on October 26, 2011, 08:22:24 PM
I've been following for this for a while and trying to figure out what I would want.  I started off liking the 10mm and .45 acp ideas and am still not opposed to them.  I have drank from the cool aid, and it was good.  Therefore, Glock has been my manufacturer since the beginning.

Then, I read this from basfu in the tier thread.

Quote
I wouldn't be surprised if they would use a Glock for certain missions when the handgun was only a backup weapon. The difference is for most regular troops a sidearm is a last resort defensive weapon, right before you go to rock, knife or fist. For an operator the entire mission plan might be based around a handgun as the primary assault option, especially in a cqb setting with a suppressed pistol. The Glock's don't really suppress well from my experience where pistols like the Mk23 are designed from the bench up to be suppressed. Same thing with the custom 1911's they choose, they are bench tuned to a suppressor if that is part of the op. The Glock is probably the very best "jack of all trades, master of none" type pistol. If you could only own one psitol in 99.9% of the cases it should probably be a Glock. If you can own as many as you want you really don't have a need to own even one Glock. If you're somewhere in the middle like most people are then you probably own a couple of them and know you can count on them even when your higher priced toys may fail you.
 

I have now come to the conclusion that, if I was a regular soldier, I would want a 9mm Glock with quality hollowpoints.  Simple, reliable, and effective as a defensive weapon.  Worlwide ammo availablity and more rounds for equal weight give the 9mm a win in my case.  I know larger bullets mean you need less, in theory, but this is pretty much a backup to your long gun.  On the other hand, I would want something with a larger bullet if I was a special ops guy who plans to use his handgun.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: Ping on October 26, 2011, 08:30:33 PM
Right on about the armorer. I was one for several years. Everything is accounted for. Now in the field, it is completely different especially if you are working in a combat zone. You hold on to your weapon at all times unless there is a defect or issue and then it is turned in.

As for the topic of a safety on a handgun and the military, I carried the Smith and Wesson .38 Revolver. There was not a safety on the side. We also did not leave one chamber empty. Negligent discharges are just that: negligent. If you follow all proper firearm safety rules, there should not be an issue. The ones that I did happen to witness at the armory was due to sergeants and airman being in a hurry during shift change and not following the proper procedures. Two were with a .38, one Beretta and one M-60. The report gets your undivided attention and the SP's at the barrel had to make a trip to see the First Sergeant and Commander to explain themselves.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: bafsu92 on October 26, 2011, 09:23:15 PM
The thing everyone who keeps pushing the 10mm here needs to remember is you're limited to ball ammo. I personally would not want a 10mm with ball, it's going to blow right through anybody you shoot. I think it's been proven beyond argument that if you're limited to ball then you want it to be big and slow. The 45 is really the only answer so if you took all the requirements, hi-cap mag, made in the US by US incorporated company etc. you are pretty much left with the M&P 45. If you open up the requirements I'd prefer a Glock 21 or a FNP-45 but any of those 3 would be a good choice.

Now if you want to take into account any major foreign force we may face, not 3rd world countries or taliban, will most likely have body armor or some type of flak jacket then I could see going the complete opposite direction and looking at the FN-5.7. User friendly controls, nearly no recoil, excellent sights, fully ambidextrous and ridiculously high magazine capacity of 20 or even 30rds. I wouldn't necessarily choose it as a civilian defensive sidearm but as a military sidearm it would have a lot of advantages. Additionally you can put more than double the ammo size & weight in the same place as .45acp.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: tombogan03884 on October 26, 2011, 09:24:03 PM
Could you? probably
Would it be a good idea if caught? no

All ammo is checked out to the individual and must be accounted for; random inspections, rotating ammo periodically, or turning it in as soon as you step inside the wire or go off-shift, under the supervision of the armorer.  You could take your allotment and not put it in your mags and leave it in your hooch to turn in later. If you get caught with non-standard ammo, expect a trip to the man. There are way to many ways to get pinched.  

You will be fined and torn a new asshole if caught by our side. If the other side catches you your dead right there, No questions asked.
And that's fighting a civilized foe.
During WWI German machine gunners were issued a saw back bayonet to use cutting logs to build bunkers. Rumors among the allied troops were that they were supposed to make a more painful damaging wound.
German veterans took to making new guys grind the saw off because if they were captured with it they were shot on the spot.

Hey TW, You realize Han Solo's blaster was just a dressed up Mauser 1895 ?

http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Star_Wars
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: mkm on October 26, 2011, 09:35:04 PM
Now if you want to take into account any major foreign force we may face, not 3rd world countries or taliban, will most likely have body armor or some type of flak jacket then I could see going the complete opposite direction and looking at the FN-5.7. User friendly controls, nearly no recoil, excellent sights, fully ambidextrous and ridiculously high magazine capacity of 20 or even 30rds. I wouldn't necessarily choose it as a civilian defensive sidearm but as a military sidearm it would have a lot of advantages. Additionally you can put more than double the ammo size & weight in the same place as .45acp.

I believe the secret service uses submachine guns in that caliber for that exact reason of armor peircing.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: fightingquaker13 on October 26, 2011, 09:38:24 PM
You will be fined and torn a new asshole if caught by our side. If the other side catches you your dead right there, No questions asked.
And that's fighting a civilized foe.

We aren't fighting a civilized foe, and part of having a handgun is making sure you don't get taken alive. In this case the G26 (at least for me) would be ten minus one. :-\ As far as they go? Screw them.
FQ13
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: Big Frank on October 26, 2011, 10:33:25 PM
The Glock 21 or another double-stack .45 would be my pistol of choice. It's a more effective caliber with ball ammo than the 9mm.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: tombogan03884 on October 26, 2011, 11:48:00 PM
Reliable, go bang every time , trustworthy.
Did I mention reliable ?
Everything else is secondary, it has to work.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: Pathfinder on October 27, 2011, 05:08:36 AM
Slightly off topic, but hey its my thread; how many of our troops do you think slip a box or six of JHPs in their duffle bags before deploying, the Hague Convention be damned? I know I would, but only if I could get away with it. The question is can they and do they? Its not like someone is going to do an autopsy on a dead hostile. Just curious.
FQ13

Wrong on all counts there, Perfessor. Ping and jnevis have schooled you on the SOP they've lived, and TB and others on the reality of carrying the wrong ammo.

On that, I remember reading about Winston Churchill in the Boer War with his Blaster Mauser firing homemade dum-dums. When it was clear he was going to be captured, he discarded all of his ammo so as not to be caught with the dum-dums and executed on the spot. This was well over 100 years ago.

As for autopsies, yeah, they do, sort of. Army and Marine units were investigated due to the high percentage of head shots discovered among the BG's corpses. Seemed the .mil brass was concerned the troops were executing the BGs instead of bringing them in for interrogation. Turned out that the high percentage of head shots is an aspect of urban fighting there, but the .mil was looking at the corpses and investigating.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: fightingquaker13 on October 27, 2011, 05:30:06 AM
Nice historical anecdote, and its why I asked the question. No argument, just curiosity.
FQ13
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: billt on October 27, 2011, 06:43:04 AM

(http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm182/twyacht/G21004.jpg)

Plus the 27 rd. mags are a plus...

Hey, TW, how do those things feed? I heard the Hi-Cap Scherer's weren't worth a $h!t, which is why I never bought any. Those look a lot nicer.

http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/2MGSGMTGL2127-1.html

R dees dem?
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: bafsu92 on October 27, 2011, 10:55:23 AM
Hey, TW, how do those things feed? I heard the Hi-Cap Scherer's weren't worth a $h!t, which is why I never bought any. Those look a lot nicer.

http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/2MGSGMTGL2127-1.html

R dees dem?

Not sure on the .45 but I use the factory Glock 33rd 9mm mags in my Kel-Tec Sub2k and they feed flawlessly. I just bought 6 more from Botach, they've got a great sale on them, regular capacity factory Glock mags are $19.99 and the 33rd mags are only $7 more. Free shipping too. I think you can go non-factory in regular length mags and get some that work good but the long one's are finicky. I'd stick to factory Glock for those, just my .02 observation.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: billt on October 27, 2011, 11:56:15 AM
I have a bunch of the Glock 33 round 9 MM mags, but they don't make a .45 Hi-Cap. The Sherer mags are total garbage, and I was wondering if these are any better?
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: twyacht on October 27, 2011, 05:58:38 PM
I went with the Victory mags, and have no issues, I picked up mine right after Rep. Giffords was shot, as the price jumped, they are Korean, but work just fine...Victory also makes stuff for NATO....FWIW.

They are tough to fully load, at first, but I let mine set with about 18 rds. in it for a week, than stripped and lubed it.

http://www.botachtactical.com/vigl2127ma.html

100% Guarantee.



Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: bafsu92 on October 27, 2011, 06:41:32 PM
I never tried the Victory mags but I heard that's who makes the hi-cap mags for Kriss. If that's the case they must be good because those work well.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: justbill on November 01, 2011, 04:00:54 PM

Let's just pretend you were in charge of buying a new pistol for the Army, as someone is as we speak. What would your specs be and why?

(http://www.berettausa.com/assets/item/gunlarge/92A15.jpg)

No good reason to radically change anything. The 92A1 is a refinement of the pistol everyone already knows how to use and maintain. Like any other firearm, it works well with a modicum of maintenance. Existing M9 holsters, magazines and ammo are fully compatible. I would attrition replace the existing stock of 15 rd mags with MDS or Mec Gar 17's. No more low bid junk mags please.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: tombogan03884 on November 01, 2011, 07:00:41 PM
(http://www.berettausa.com/assets/item/gunlarge/92A15.jpg)

No good reason to radically change anything. The 92A1 is a refinement of the pistol everyone already knows how to use and maintain. Like any other firearm, it works well with a modicum of maintenance. Existing M9 holsters, magazines and ammo are fully compatible. I would attrition replace the existing stock of 15 rd mags with MDS or Mec Gar 17's. No more low bid junk mags please.

I would argue that "low bid magazines" may not work for us since we buy a few and reuse them for years.
For the military on the other hand, which buys them by the 10's of thousands, while reliability is important, buying top dollar magazines which will be abused and lost is wasteful.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: bafsu92 on November 02, 2011, 10:00:46 PM
I would argue that "low bid magazines" may not work for us since we buy a few and reuse them for years.
For the military on the other hand, which buys them by the 10's of thousands, while reliability is important, buying top dollar magazines which will be abused and lost is wasteful.

Yes but there is low bid cost and then there's just crap. Some of the mags we're expecting our soldiers to use are just crap. I actually just mailed 5 mec-gar mags to a buddy in Kabul a few weeks ago. Almost everyone I know who has or is deployed take their own personal mags.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: fightingquaker13 on November 02, 2011, 11:24:04 PM
Yes but there is low bid cost and then there's just crap. Some of the mags we're expecting our soldiers to use are just crap. I actually just mailed 5 mec-gar mags to a buddy in Kabul a few weeks ago. Almost everyone I know who has or is deployed take their own personal mags.
Amen! Remember that regardless of the weapon's pros and cons, first and foremost it has to go bang every time. Everything else is just details.
FQ13
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: Magoo541 on November 03, 2011, 12:16:34 AM
Yes but there is low bid cost and then there's just crap. Some of the mags we're expecting our soldiers to use are just crap. I actually just mailed 5 mec-gar mags to a buddy in Kabul a few weeks ago. Almost everyone I know who has or is deployed take their own personal mags.
Like Tom Gresham says, and others too, a semi-auto without a magazine is a cumbersome single shot!
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: jaybet on November 03, 2011, 06:11:48 AM
If Beretta made something like the 92A1 in 45, that would be a nice gun.  Not talking about the new stuff (PX4?)
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: billt on November 03, 2011, 06:47:35 AM
If Beretta made something like the 92A1 in 45, that would be a nice gun.

It's certainly big enough!
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: bafsu92 on November 03, 2011, 07:59:36 AM
I've always wondered why they didn't as well. If you lay an M9 down next to a full sized USP 45 they're about the same size. I'm sure they could build a 10-12 shot 45 in the same sized package. Even though I think long term a Glock 21 or FNP-45 would be a better pick a 45 version of the M9 would be an easy transition with no retraining needed. It shouldn't be about compromise but that would be a decent choice.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: billt on November 03, 2011, 08:49:02 AM
If you lay an M9 down next to a full sized USP 45 they're about the same size.

Mec-Gar makes 20 round 9 MM magazines for the 92/M-9 with a +2 extention, so it would be no trouble to get 13 rounds of .45 ACP in the handle, maybe more.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: tombogan03884 on November 03, 2011, 09:14:16 AM
It may be that they do not trust the slide with .45 ACP after the trouble they had with 9MM causing them to crack.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: billt on November 03, 2011, 09:55:41 AM
It may be that they do not trust the slide with .45 ACP after the trouble they had with 9MM causing them to crack.

I'm thinking that as well. Even though the .45 ACP is loaded to much lower pressure, it has far more recoil, especially in high performance defense loads. Also, Beretta is about the only manufacturer who hasn't done so with their large frame pistols. They make the 92 in .40 S&W, but not .45 ACP. They got the PX -4 "Storm" in .45 ACP. It's got that rotating barrel abortion, and seems to work well in .45, but I'm willing to bet there are prototype .45, 92-FS models lying around their engineering dept...... Perhaps with cracks in the slide.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: fightingquaker13 on November 03, 2011, 10:17:14 AM
I'm thinking that as well. Even though the .45 ACP is loaded to much lower pressure, it has far more recoil, especially in high performance defense loads. Also, Beretta is about the only manufacturer who hasn't done so with their large frame pistols. They make the 92 in .40 S&W, but not .45 ACP. They got the PX -4 "Storm" in .45 ACP. It's got that rotating barrel abortion, and seems to work well in .45, but I'm willing to bet there are prototype .45, 92-FS models lying around their engineering dept...... Perhaps with cracks in the slide.
I have never liked that gun. Obviously the army does, but I don't know why. Frankly, if I were to be issued a 9mm and it couldn't be a Glock (or something like it, a Sig etc.)  because of the safety issue, I'd sure as hell rather carry a Browning hi-power than the Berreta. The Browning is a scaled down 1911 and is pretty much bullet proof. My only complaint is the mag disconnect safety, which would be a DQ in terms of a combat hand gun, but that should be an easy fix.
FQ13
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: billt on November 03, 2011, 10:43:14 AM
I have never liked that gun. Obviously the army does, but I don't know why. Frankly, if I were to be issued a 9mm and it couldn't be a Glock (or something like it, a Sig etc.)  because of the safety issue, I'd sure as hell rather carry a Browning hi-power than the Berreta. The Browning is a scaled down 1911 and is pretty much bullet proof. My only complaint is the mag disconnect safety, which would be a DQ in terms of a combat hand gun, but that should be an easy fix.
FQ13

I was the same way. I thought it was way too big for a 15 shot 9 MM. I've fired them a couple of times, but never really thought about buying one. Until Melanie came home from Cabela's with this one a couple of years ago. They were on sale, and she had a "$50.00 Off" coupon as well, so she ended up getting it for $100.00 off. After I started playing with it I started to like it. Since then we've shot it quite a lot. I picked up a couple of the Mec-Gar 20 round magazines for it, which makes more sense because for the guns size it should hold more than 15. Overall it isn't too bad, but it does need better grips. The plastic ones feel good, they just look cheap.

(http://i812.photobucket.com/albums/zz50/billt460/Beretta92-F.jpg)


Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: fightingquaker13 on November 03, 2011, 10:57:55 AM
My problem is the trigger. It should be consistent, not heavy on the first shot and then light after that. I mean hell, the first shot is probably going to be the one that matters, and so why is it tough to pull? Add to that that the second shot is going to seem light, and as a result I might have an ND or just plain miss. As far as I am concerned, a combat handgun should be either DAO (my preference), or a single action like a 1911 or Hi-Power. Pick one. Just don't give me something where in the heat of the moment I have to worry about trigger pull. Maybe its just me and YMMV, but if I were going to the sand box I would beg, borrow or steal a 1911 if there was any chance that I'd be allowed to carry it over the Berreta. (and if I got the chance for a Glock? I'd make my superior officer a very happy man and cure myself with bottles of mouth wash and a Victoria's Secret catalog). ;D :o The Berreta is a well built pistol, but I just don't like them and I would never carry one for SD if I had the choice.
FQ13
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: billt on November 03, 2011, 11:47:21 AM
The gun has a trigger you either like or you don't. I'm not very "trigger sensitive", so for me it isn't too bad. I've never come across a trigger that was what I would term to be bad enough to get rid of a gun over, or even have it worked on. That said, I prefer a single action as well, over a DA/SA, or DAO. The gun points well, and is easy to shoot. For that reason I can see why the Army chose it. You have to remember few soldiers are gun enthusiasts, and many join without having picked up a gun in their life. I can see where this gun would be easier to train a new shooter on than a 1911. It is also very easy to field strip, and clean. Another priority with the Army.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: fightingquaker13 on November 03, 2011, 12:01:34 PM
I'm not very "trigger sensitive", so for me it isn't too bad. I've never come across a trigger that was what I would term to be bad enough to get rid of a gun over, or even have it worked on.

Try a kel-tec P-11. I took two trips to the range, and now it closely resembles a Glock 26. ;) The trigger was three steps beyond awful. The Beretta is a dream in comparison. I get your point about the Beretta in terms of the "idiot proof" factor which should always be a priority for the Army, but there are a whole lot of better alternatives out there if you ask me.
FQ13
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: tombogan03884 on November 03, 2011, 12:04:41 PM
My problem is the trigger. It should be consistent, not heavy on the first shot and then light after that. I mean hell, the first shot is probably going to be the one that matters, and so why is it tough to pull? Add to that that the second shot is going to seem light, and as a result I might have an ND or just plain miss. As far as I am concerned, a combat handgun should be either DAO (my preference), or a single action like a 1911 or Hi-Power. Pick one. Just don't give me something where in the heat of the moment I have to worry about trigger pull. Maybe its just me and YMMV, but if I were going to the sand box I would beg, borrow or steal a 1911 if there was any chance that I'd be allowed to carry it over the Berreta. (and if I got the chance for a Glock? I'd make my superior officer a very happy man and cure myself with bottles of mouth wash and a Victoria's Secret catalog). ;D :o The Berreta is a well built pistol, but I just don't like them and I would never carry one for SD if I had the choice.
FQ13

It's the nature of the design, you would not like the Walther p-38 either
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: bafsu92 on November 03, 2011, 02:36:24 PM
I'm thinking that as well. Even though the .45 ACP is loaded to much lower pressure, it has far more recoil, especially in high performance defense loads. Also, Beretta is about the only manufacturer who hasn't done so with their large frame pistols. They make the 92 in .40 S&W, but not .45 ACP. They got the PX -4 "Storm" in .45 ACP. It's got that rotating barrel abortion, and seems to work well in .45, but I'm willing to bet there are prototype .45, 92-FS models lying around their engineering dept...... Perhaps with cracks in the slide.

I've thought about that as well but they supposedly fixed all cracking issues with better forgings. I wonder if they could use the version that has the higher sides, I think they call it the Brigadeer or something like that. It's supposedly got a lot more strength.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: tombogan03884 on November 03, 2011, 05:04:55 PM
The Brigadier was the single stack.
They could do like T/C did when it beefed up the original Contender design and add big lumps of steel to the weak area's..
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: Magoo541 on November 03, 2011, 05:44:17 PM
The Brigadier was the single stack.
They could do like T/C did when it beefed up the original Contender design and add big lumps of steel to the weak area's..

As opposed to a proper redesign?
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: bafsu92 on November 03, 2011, 06:00:23 PM
The Brigadier was the single stack.
They could do like T/C did when it beefed up the original Contender design and add big lumps of steel to the weak area's..
Not exactly, the old original Brigadier from the 60's I believe was a single stack but they built a double stack 92 model with beefed up sides called the 92FS-Brigadier. They've got 1/2 round material built up on either side of the chamber. You can google it or search gunbroker, pretty easy to find.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: jnevis on November 03, 2011, 06:30:44 PM
If you don't like the trigger on the M9 you probably won't like the trigger on a Sig either since they are both DA/SA with a fairly stiff DA pull. 
Having trained plenty of non-shooters to qualify with either M9s or M11s (P228) I can say that the DA pull, while it may hit a little low if you haven't practiced it a little, will keep said noobs from putting a round in their foot when they draw it.  It hits about 4-6 feet down the range BTW.

The frame and locking block cracks were effectively operator induced.  The bulk of the cracked frames being reported came from the SpecWar community who, after much arm twisting and dodging the question, admitted that they had been using basically +p+ ammo that the weapon wasn't designed for.  The locking blocks were caused by over zealous armorers grabbing a new one and installing it without properly checking the gaps between the lugs and frame.  If they are not nearly identical the block torques and shears off, requiring ANOTHER block.  That's why for a long time Beretta had a mandate that any barrel or locking block replacement required the entire pistol be send back to the factory for the work to be completed.

As an aside, if you're used to a DAO trigger like a Glock's you REALLY won't like the DAO trigger on a 92/96D or PX4D.  It's got the DA pull of the F models but has a very distinct detent when resetting the trigger where the SA set point is.  I found that out using the PX4D.  I went to pull the trigger again and nothing happened until you let it all the way out.  I haven't shot a 92D to see if it's the ssame but probably is.

The Elite models also had Brigadier slides.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: tombogan03884 on November 03, 2011, 08:01:28 PM
Not exactly, the old original Brigadier from the 60's I believe was a single stack but they built a double stack 92 model with beefed up sides called the 92FS-Brigadier. They've got 1/2 round material built up on either side of the chamber. You can google it or search gunbroker, pretty easy to find.

They added a chunk of metal, just like T/C    ;D

As opposed to a proper redesign?

With assholes like JD Jones shooting African game rounds out them they had to do something to cover their ass.
So they did a complete redesign of the pistol, so it would handle anything up to, and including, .50 BMG, .
It's called the Encore.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: Big Frank on November 03, 2011, 10:38:42 PM
They added metal to the Contender to make the G2 version of it too. It beefs up the top of the frame on both sides.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: tombogan03884 on November 04, 2011, 10:19:32 AM
They added metal to the Contender to make the G2 version of it too. It beefs up the top of the frame on both sides.

Yes, but that came several years after the Encore.
They were just switching to the G-2 when I got done in 04.
Personally I like the old slab side model better with the Cougar etched on the side.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: Big Frank on November 04, 2011, 03:47:53 PM
+1 on the old model. I have one in stainless. I thought it was odd that T/C and Beretta's fixes were to just add more metal.
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: tombogan03884 on November 04, 2011, 05:34:14 PM
+1 on the old model. I have one in stainless. I thought it was odd that T/C and Beretta's fixes were to just add more metal.

There really isn't much else you can do with out scrapping the whole design and starting over.
In the case of the Contender / G - 2 I don't think it actually serves any purpose other than making it look more like a smaller Encore.
With the Encore they actually scaled up the whole frame, making all the dimensions larger .
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: les snyder on November 06, 2011, 05:56:32 PM
Franken Glock....Gen4 rough texture frame... replacable rear grip panel, ambi mag release, lanyard ring compatable, extend beaver tail 1/4 inch..... with Gen 3 G34 (9mm)upper... one piece stainless guide rod...one piece ISMI spring... butt plug...dovetailed front sight....  tritium inserts milled steel sights... no extended mag base pads....147grain bullets for increased accuracy
Title: Re: Combat handgun. What do you want?
Post by: MikeO on November 29, 2011, 12:21:31 PM
The frame and locking block cracks were effectively operator induced.  The bulk of the cracked frames being reported came from the SpecWar community who, after much arm twisting and dodging the question, admitted that they had been using basically +p+ ammo that the weapon wasn't designed for.  The locking blocks were caused by over zealous armorers grabbing a new one and installing it without properly checking the gaps between the lugs and frame.  If they are not nearly identical the block torques and shears off, requiring ANOTHER block.  That's why for a long time Beretta had a mandate that any barrel or locking block replacement required the entire pistol be send back to the factory for the work to be completed.

Not 'zactly...

Too many early M9s cracked frames, blocks , and slides at low round counts having fired nothing but approved mil-spec US M882 ammo (which generates pressures above the SAAMI +P limit BTW). In the late 80s 12 Berettas were tested to slide failure w good M882 ammo and all 12 broke w round counts from just under 5K to just over 30K. By the late 90s M9 slides tested to failure were averaging 75K w a range from 55K - 95K. Somebody fixed sumthin' that wasn't broke: the guns, the ammo, or the testing?

M9s at the local base rarely break anything under 22K, and the most likely thing to go then is the block. Replaced blocks do not last as long if they are not fitted, and most are not fitted they are just dropped in. The contract specified parts would not require fitting and they don't. You can drop them in, so they do; they just don't last as long if you do fit them. The M9s would do better if recoil springs were changed every 5K rounds, but there is no requirement for that, so they don't unless a pistol comes in for something else.. Even so, many training M9s at the local base have over 50K through them, much of it w the Win +P+ frangible ammo.

BTW, the only part w a specified service life in the original M9 contract was the slide, and it was for just 5K rounds. IIRC, the specs for the next service pistol have a min service life of 25K.

The military has conducted numerous market surveys and limted field trials over the last few years to see what is available, what the troops like, and how what they like fits w what the military wants. What's best for a highly trained operator w big hands is rarely best for troops w small hands who shoot once a year... why you see things in the specs like a manual safety and adjustable grips, etc.