# Army dumps the 9mm



## Chipper

Copied this article from Allsports website. Thought it may be of interest.. Army is dumping the 9mm. Too weak and underpowered. Well DUH. 




When 38 bullets (actually .357 caliber, which is pretty much 9mm) failed to stop its enemies, the U.S. Army went in search of a bigger, better cartridge. The result was John Browning’s M1911 semi-automatic pistol and the 45 ACP (Automatic Colt Pistol) cartridge for which it was designed.

As you can guess from the M1911 designation, the 45 ACP was adopted into military service 103 years ago.

In 1985, the U.S. Army took a huge step backwards when it summarily dumped the 45 ACP in favor of the underpowered 9mm Luger cartridge (a.k.a. 9mm Parabellum). Irony: The 9mm is not quite as powerful as the cartridge which the 45 ACP replaced about 75 years earlier.

Now, things have apparently come full circle. Citing combat experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, authorities are once again recognizing the advantage of using a more powerful cartridge.

True to form, the government won’t look back at what once worked well and embrace it. Instead they plan to spend billions of our dollars creating and adopting something they’re calling a Modular Handgun System (MHS). And they’re not just tossing out the 9mm ammo and firearms. They’re ditching whole heaps of gear, holsters included, and starting over.

They haven’t yet settled on a caliber, and are looking just about anything better than a nine. This would include a faster same-caliber round (357 Sig) as well as larger-caliber cartridges like the 40 S&W, 10mm Auto, and 45 ACP.

Devotees of the diminutive 9mm Luger cartridge are going to have a hard time swallowing the fact that their Precious has been found to be a bit, er, weak. And there are those who assert that no matter what handgun cartridge you choose, it will take several rounds to stop a combatant–and therefore they love the 9mm because it allows more ammo to be packed into a pistol.

Let me say here that I do not hate the 9mm, but neither do I believe it to be a very good combat cartridge. I carry a 9mm as a compromise that allows a small, convenient carry gun with a better cartridge than, say, a 380 (but I would rather have something more powerful). It would seem that soldiers agree. At any rate, that’s where the Army seems to be headed.

The MHS project has been in the works for some time now, but it’s gaining steam in recent months. Later this month (July 29, 2014), the Army will “hold an industry day” to talk to gun manufacturers about what they’re looking for.


----------



## jbrooks19

I actually carry a glock 22, i like the .40S&W round, i have owned 9mm, 40 and 45.. 40 seems to work for me... I do agree that the 45 is a superior round tho.


----------



## turbo6

Handguns aren't magic death rays, people survive 45 wounds and can die from a single 22 wound.

People act like 45 is like a shotgun and 9s are like pellet guns. Ballastically, the advantage isn't that substantial, at least with civilians. Im not required to use ball ammo.


----------



## rice paddy daddy

turbo6 said:


> Handguns aren't magic death rays, people survive 45 wounds and can die from a single 22 wound.
> 
> People act like 45 is like a shotgun and 9s are like pellet guns. Ballastically, the advantage isn't that substantial, at least with civilians. Im not required to use ball ammo.


But! But! Hollywood movies show handguns blasting bad guys right off their feet and 5 feet backwards! Don't tell me this isn't true.:-o

We all know the only Magic Death Ray is an AR tricked out with 10 pounds of crap.:-D


----------



## jbrooks19

rice paddy daddy said:


> But! But! Hollywood movies show handguns blasting bad guys right off their feet and 5 feet backwards! Don't tell me this isn't true.:-o
> 
> We all know the only Magic Death Ray is an AR tricked out with 10 pounds of crap.:-D


I prefer 11 pounds of crap on mine. Yes it is 100% necessary.....


----------



## Slippy

Magic Death Ray? I think I saw them play at the Fox Theater in Atlanta back in '79? Rockin' good show if I recall.


----------



## Denton

I saw in the list the 10mm. They'll never use that. The women and the limp-wristed would never be able to get a second shot off.


----------



## csi-tech

I am a devotee of the 9mm. I have seen too many people succumb to this round to call it underpowered or ineffective. It is the overwhelming round of choice in gangland and has enough power to sail through car doors and windows then impart enough energy to deposit brain matter all over the interior. I have seen one go through siding, then a wall stud, then gypsum wallboard, through a human neck and up into an attic and lodge in the roof sheeting. I carry .45 acp on duty but I don't feel at all under-gunned with my Glock 26 and extra magazine topped off with Critical Duty ammo.

I know the Army says it is underpowered and I'm sure there is a great deal of experienced shooters and soldiers backing that up. When it comes to gun calibers, I trust my experience and my own eyes and 25 years of processing crime scenes. It is my caliber of choice, my wife's caliber of choice and will be for the foreseeable future. Your mileage may vary.


----------



## Kauboy

Damn... and here I just bought a Glock 19 last year so I could use the military's surplus cache when SHTF.
Guess I gotta wait and see what they come up with now. 

I do still have the trusty .40S&W PX4 handy, so I'm ready if they go that route.

Since the FBI went with the 10mm, has there been any analysis done on effectiveness in the field?
I've also read that other agencies use the .357sig. Any reports on this one?

On the bright side, 9mm prices should come down more.


----------



## keith9365

Sounds like some general got his knob polished by the right lobiest. Unless you hit the brain or spine ball ammo, 9mm or 45 just pokes a hole to let the blood out. If you are hopped up on meth or the belief in allah and the 72 virgins it ma take more than one round of any handgun caliber. That being said I like 9mm but not the m92.


----------



## rice paddy daddy

The military is limited to hardball ammo. With no expansion, the bigger the hole the better.
With modern self defense handgun ammo the terminal results are about the same. But don't believe that someone shot 9 times with a 9MM or a 45 ACP can not still kill you. A fully oxygenated brain can perform meaningful tasks (such as pulling a trigger) for up to 18 seconds even after the heart stops.


----------



## Kauboy

rice paddy daddy said:


> A fully oxygenated brain can perform meaningful tasks (such as pulling a trigger) for up to 18 seconds even after the heart stops.


That is gross and fascinating.


----------



## SoCal92057

Gun & Ammo article on the move by the U.S. Marine Corps away from the 9mm.

Semper Fi: Colt M45A1 CQBP Marine Pistol Review | Guns & Ammo


----------



## paraquack

I'll still go with the .45 ACP. The wife unfortunately can't handle it and uses a 9mm.


----------



## wallyLOZ

Both the 9mm and the 45acp have a place and time for me. In the winter, I carry my Colt Officers model under an outer layer, in a cross draw shoulder holster. In the warmer months I carry a sub-compact Sig in an IWB holster or belly holster. Would prefer to carry the 45 year round, but concealment becomes the obstacle.


----------



## Chipper

Personally I like the 10mm, Glock 20. Heard large percentage of criminals are starting to wear body armor because of more armed civilians. I would think the military would be facing the same situation with our enemies. Doesn't make sense to carry something that will be ineffective anyway. 

If the soldier can't qualify with the 10mm they always could be a cook. I would want the 10mm at least if I was going into combat and putting my life on the line.


----------



## Old SF Guy

After my first tour to Afghanistan I stopped carrying a 9mm and switch to the 45. The reason was not due to caliber but rather the magazine. The double stack mag of the Beretta ALWAYS....ALWAYS failed to feed due to sand getting inside. I would clean hell out of them and no matter what I did they still would fail to feed after the 1st or 2nd round. The single stack 1911 45 mags where reliable. I will take 8 rounds that will fire reliable over 15 that won't. As far as caliber....SHot placement....Not size of round is the key.


----------



## MI.oldguy

I will be brief on this,as, I am no historian.reason one they adopted the .45 acp was,the Filipino Moros (Bangsamoro), were a fanatic ethnic muslim warrior tribe who could not be stopped by the .38 round hence the .45 acp was adopted. look at the pic below.look familiar?...the US mil.caliber debate has been going on forever as stated, US mil did not have the desired results in the 'Stan
with the .9mm pistol round.maybe one of the reasons is over in Afghanistan we are fighting a fanatic ethnic muslim warrior ( see other pic,look familiar?).for CQB maybe there should be a round which will penetrate better.being a NATO ally we cannot have a hollow point expanding bullet.so, what's the answer?. even in Chicago and Detroit etc, there are the gangstas that wear multiple carhartt coats if not body armor and these jackets will absorb a jacketed hollow point bullet most of the time.maybe US mil should look at an SBR in 5.56,or something else or even the 5.7x28 or a version of the 7.62 x39 which the russians basically copied from the germans after WW II. in a SBR.granted an SBR wont handle well in CQB but at a certain point, the mass of a pistol vs caliber will be the dividing line between what certain soldiers will be able to operate.in short, I dont think ANY pistol will do the job of a rifle.


----------



## Kauboy

oldguy, I'd love to see the 5.7 get its day in the sun.
A rifle round from a handgun(FN FiveseveN) would pack a bit more punch, for sure.

However, as you rightly stated, a pistol can't do the work of a rifle. The longer barrel and longer burn/pressure time is what really delivers the POW factor.
The gun testers at "The Box-o-truth" have a saying when they test various situations with pistols and rifles.
"A handgun is a handgun... but a rifle is a RIFLE!"
Simple, yet poignant.


----------



## SDF880

Isn't the military pretty much stuck with using FMJ ? If that is so I'd sure rather launch a big ol 230GR FMJ 45ACP than a 9MM. 
I do like the 10MM round but I too doubt they would go for it.


----------



## sparkyprep

The OP forgot to mention that the military is limited to ball ammo, while I am not.


----------



## MI.oldguy

sparkyprep said:


> The OP forgot to mention that the military is limited to ball ammo, while I am not.


Nor am I.we even have some 5.56 jhp's for when the feces entwine the turbine.


----------



## SquirrelBait

rice paddy daddy said:


> But! But! Hollywood movies show handguns blasting bad guys right off their feet and 5 feet backwards! Don't tell me this isn't true.:-o
> 
> We all know the only Magic Death Ray is an AR tricked out with 10 pounds of crap.:-D


Just pile it on until you cant hang another ounce of crap on it! XD Then you can scare the target to death! LOL


----------



## tango

The military will never go to 10mm.
The girls and some guys cannot shoot it well. 
Check the FBI protocols after the Miami shootout, hence the S &W 40 (short and weak 40)
The military had the best available in the 45ACP in the 1911, but Nato wanted the 9mm.


----------



## alterego

I Place My Bet On Adoptions OF 40 Smith Wesson


----------



## SAR-1L

rice paddy daddy said:


> We all know the only Magic Death Ray is an AR tricked out with 10 pounds of crap.:-D


If you add 5 more pounds of crap to it does it become a Death Star? ^^


----------



## Fuzzee

A pistol round regardless is still a pistol round. I understand wanting something bigger if they can have it since their still sticking to an outdated mandate in an old treaty and stuck with FMJ. I have no problems with 9mm myself and bet my life on it everyday. And carry Beretta's, but I carry Hydrashok's too. The Army is the Army though and soldiers deserve whatever advantage they can get in small arms. With huge amounts of money spent in the defense budget on so many other weapons that are heaping pieces of crap (cough, cough, F35, cough, cough.) I'm more than happy to have the Army get new small arms if a majority aren't happy and want one. Sadly for as many intelligent people in the Army, there's more I'm afraid who actually make Forest Gump look like Stephen Hawking. So I have absolutely no doubt the whole process with be the normal cluster ####, take way too long, cost way too much, have endless changes and updates long after whatever they adopt is adopted. From a former 11B Paratrooper, good luck Army. You know you need it.




.


----------



## keith9365

MI.oldguy said:


> Nor am I.we even have some 5.56 jhp's for when the feces entwine the turbine.


Feces entwines the turbine? Thats frikkin hilarious!


----------



## jimb1972

Fuzzee said:


> A pistol round regardless is still a pistol round. I understand wanting something bigger if they can have it since their still sticking to an outdated mandate in an old treaty and stuck with FMJ. I have no problems with 9mm myself and bet my life on it everyday. And carry Beretta's, but I carry Hydrashok's too. The Army is the Army though and soldiers deserve whatever advantage they can get in small arms. With huge amounts of money spent in the defense budget on so many other weapons that are heaping pieces of crap (cough, cough, F35, cough, cough.) I'm more than happy to have the Army get new small arms if a majority aren't happy and want one. Sadly for as many intelligent people in the Army, there's more I'm afraid who actually make Forest Gump look like Stephen Hawking. So I have absolutely no doubt the whole process with be the normal cluster ####, take way too long, cost way too much, have endless changes and updates long after whatever they adopt is adopted. From a former 11B Paratrooper, good luck Army. You know you need it.
> 
> .


Unfortunately you are right, because in the end the weapons adopted will be chosen in a political decision. To gain some politicians approval they will adopt a weapon produced in someones district, accessorized by another's constituents, tied to an increase in some military budget or military base agreement. Rarely does the government get the tool for the job and small arms are not as sexy as carriers or fighter jets.


----------



## TJC44

So what would happen to all of those decommissioned 9mm's? ...aside from DHS...


----------



## HuntingHawk

These BS threads come up every few months. Something people don't understand that NATO troops MUST use NATO standard ammo? So anytime US troops work with other NATO troops sidearms must be 9mm. So 9mm is not going away.
US forces not with NATO troops can be set up for 45ACP or whatever.


----------



## Coppertop

TJC44 said:


> So what would happen to all of those decommissioned 9mm's? ...aside from DHS...


Seeing the way our "Leaders" are, they will be in Mexico soon.


----------



## 6811

MI.oldguy said:


> I will be brief on this,as, I am no historian.reason one they adopted the .45 acp was,the Filipino Moros (Bangsamoro), were a fanatic ethnic muslim warrior tribe who could not be stopped by the .38 round hence the .45 acp was adopted. look at the pic below.look familiar?...the US mil.caliber debate has been going on forever as stated, US mil did not have the desired results in the 'Stan
> with the .9mm pistol round.maybe one of the reasons is over in Afghanistan we are fighting a fanatic ethnic muslim warrior ( see other pic,look familiar?).for CQB maybe there should be a round which will penetrate better.being a NATO ally we cannot have a hollow point expanding bullet.so, what's the answer?. even in Chicago and Detroit etc, there are the gangstas that wear multiple carhartt coats if not body armor and these jackets will absorb a jacketed hollow point bullet most of the time.maybe US mil should look at an SBR in 5.56,or something else or even the 5.7x28 or a version of the 7.62 x39 which the russians basically copied from the germans after WW II. in a SBR.granted an SBR wont handle well in CQB but at a certain point, the mass of a pistol vs caliber will be the dividing line between what certain soldiers will be able to operate.in short, I dont think ANY pistol will do the job of a rifle.


the Filipino moros were the enemy at the time. but the moros who would not go down were the "jurumentados" basically it means a berserker. they tied their testicles with a rope to the point the it hurts so bad that they could not feel anything. also, they were made to believe that the pain was caused by their enemy and the only way to ease the pain is to kill the enemy. it is also believed that the jurumentados became very strong and able to cut down a 1903A3 springfield bolt action rifle with their serpentine sword called "kriss"


----------



## jimb1972

HuntingHawk said:


> These BS threads come up every few months. Something people don't understand that NATO troops MUST use NATO standard ammo? So anytime US troops work with other NATO troops sidearms must be 9mm. So 9mm is not going away.
> US forces not with NATO troops can be set up for 45ACP or whatever.


In the 50's .308 was the NATO rifle round because the US said so, in the 70's NATO went to .223 because the US had adopted it in the 60's. If the US decides to change small arms and ammunition the rest will follow eventually because the US is the nation all the Western powers want on their side if push comes to shove regardless of their rhetoric in times of peace.


----------



## redhawk

I am a 9mm devotee for several reasons, one I shoot it well and if need be my wife can pick up my gun and shoot it. I do not feel that the 9mm is underpowered and as a medic and later working in the E.R. I have seen first hand what a 9mm is capable of...then again I have seen what just about any caliber can do to the human body. I carry either a 9mm or a .357 mag. and I never feel undergunned or underpowered...JM2C


----------



## MI.oldguy

keith9365 said:


> Feces entwines the turbine? Thats frikkin hilarious!


That quote is not copyrighted,use it as often as you want..................LOL!!...


----------



## keith9365

mhans827 said:


> the Filipino moros were the enemy at the time. but the moros who would not go down were the "jurumentados" basically it means a berserker. they tied their testicles with a rope to the point the it hurts so bad that they could not feel anything. also, they were made to believe that the pain was caused by their enemy and the only way to ease the pain is to kill the enemy. it is also believed that the jurumentados became very strong and able to cut down a 1903A3 springfield bolt action rifle with their serpentine sword called "kriss"


Im pretty sure that if you tied a rope around my balls I'd be pissed off too!


----------



## bigdogbuc

keith9365 said:


> Im pretty sure that if you tied a rope around my balls I'd be pissed off too!


I'll be impressed when somebody can tie there balls, around the rope. Now THAT, would be something!


----------



## csi-tech

SAR-1L said:


> If you add 5 more pounds of crap to it does it become a Death Star? ^^


I think it just becomes a crap star.


----------



## SoCal92057

HuntingHawk said:


> These BS threads come up every few months. Something people don't understand that NATO troops MUST use NATO standard ammo? So anytime US troops work with other NATO troops sidearms must be 9mm. So 9mm is not going away.
> US forces not with NATO troops can be set up for 45ACP or whatever.


Not until the mid 80's did the U.S. military adopt a 9mm sidearm. Prior to that time NATO forces other than the U.S. carried a 9mm sidearm and U.S. forces carried a .45 sidearm. Compatibility is an important consideration but not the only consideration. If the U.S. military returns to a .45 sidearm it will not be the first time they have gone it alone. Having carried both, I prefer the .45.


----------



## Denton

Kauboy said:


> Damn... and here I just bought a Glock 19 last year so I could use the military's surplus cache when SHTF.
> Guess I gotta wait and see what they come up with now.
> 
> I do still have the trusty .40S&W PX4 handy, so I'm ready if they go that route.
> 
> Since the FBI went with the 10mm, has there been any analysis done on effectiveness in the field?
> I've also read that other agencies use the .357sig. Any reports on this one?
> 
> On the bright side, 9mm prices should come down more.


The FBI went with the 10mm for a little while, but then went with the .40. Recoil was kicking butts.

The SRT units still use it. Not many skirts in those units.


----------



## Alpha-17

TJC44 said:


> So what would happen to all of those decommissioned 9mm's? ...aside from DHS...


DHS in large part uses .40S&W. That big order a few years back for the massive amount of Federal HST JHP ammo was in .40S&W if I recall.



HuntingHawk said:


> These BS threads come up every few months. Something people don't understand that NATO troops MUST use NATO standard ammo? So anytime US troops work with other NATO troops sidearms must be 9mm. So 9mm is not going away.
> US forces not with NATO troops can be set up for 45ACP or whatever.


No, we're not "required". It's nice to meet standardization agreements, but it's not like NATO will sue us if we don't use the same thing. As others have said, it won't be the first time. We started using 5.56 in the early '70s for our guys in Europe, and made the rest of NATO adopt the same, and it was a decade after that that we finally adopted 9mm. Even now, we're turning away from the standard NATO rifle bullet, the SS109, issued in the States as the M855 green tip in favor of a new design, the M855A1.


----------



## 2000ShadowACE

The Marines already made the switch back to the 1911. The Navy Seals have chosen to stay with the 9 in their Sigs, but they are noted for being much more accurate in their shot placement than the average dog face or devil dog. Us squids felt lucky to be issued S&W model 10 when on guard duty. Otherwise we had to lug around a Mossburg Mariner 12 ga.


----------



## Arizona Infidel

turbo6 said:


> Handguns aren't magic death rays, people survive 45 wounds and can die from a single 22 wound.
> 
> People act like 45 is like a shotgun and 9s are like pellet guns. Ballastically, the advantage isn't that substantial, at least with civilians. Im not required to use ball ammo.


Hello. I'm not required to use ball ammo either. So the advantages you realize, well, ditto for the .45. Do you realize the .45 Federal HST expands to an inch in diameter? Your 9mm expands to the size of an unfired .45 round. :lol:


----------



## tango

The Seals also use H&K 45, Ruger 22lr pistol and others, depending on the mission.


----------



## turbo6

Arizona Infidel said:


> Hello. I'm not required to use ball ammo either. So the advantages you realize, well, ditto for the .45. Do you realize the .45 Federal HST expands to an inch in diameter? Your 9mm expands to the size of an unfired .45 round. :lol:


No one is arguing the 45 is a bad round. But it doesn't make 9mm any less lethal either. Just ask Biggie, Tupac, Trayvon, Oscar Pistorius' partner etc


----------



## Beach Kowboy

.45,10mm and .40 cal in that order...


----------



## Innkeeper

wallyLOZ said:


> Both the 9mm and the 45acp have a place and time for me. In the winter, I carry my Colt Officers model under an outer layer, in a cross draw shoulder holster. In the warmer months I carry a sub-compact Sig in an IWB holster or belly holster. Would prefer to carry the 45 year round, but concealment becomes the obstacle.


You should be able to carry a .45 even in summer I carry the Glock 30sf in 45 wearing shorts and a baggy T in the summer, it is a subcompact and even with a double stack magazine easily concealed if you want to go single stack the Glock 36 does the same thing easy conceal wearing minimal clothing.


----------



## Innkeeper

TJC44 said:


> So what would happen to all of those decommissioned 9mm's? ...aside from DHS...


You would not want one, not all that great , and besides the run of the mill troop treats them as bad as most kids treat the neighbor kids toys.


----------



## Kauboy

Innkeeper said:


> You would not want one, not all that great , and besides the run of the mill troop treats them as bad as most kids treat the neighbor kids toys.


A cheaper gun with some of the most widely available parts on the market?
I'll take 3!


----------



## Alpha-17

Arizona Infidel said:


> Hello. I'm not required to use ball ammo either. So the advantages you realize, well, ditto for the .45. Do you realize the .45 Federal HST expands to an inch in diameter? Your 9mm expands to the size of an unfired .45 round. :lol:


^------Truth.

Seen it. HSTs are nasty little bullets. I switched over to them after doing some backyard-ballistics in the form of water expansion tests.



9mm 124gr HST left, .45ACP 230gr HST right.


----------



## SoCal92057

Alpha-17 said:


> ^------Truth.
> 
> Seen it. HSTs are nasty little bullets. I switched over to them after doing some backyard-ballistics in the form of water expansion tests.
> 
> 
> 
> 9mm 124gr HST left, .45ACP 230gr HST right.


A picture is worth a thousand words.


----------



## Notsoyoung

If I had to guess what the Army will change to I will go with a 1911 model in .45 acp if for no other reason then the U.S. Marines bought 20,000 of them last year.


----------



## PaulS

I doubt the majority of armed forces will return to the 45. Not because it isn't as good as any caliber out there - just to save face. They turned away from it in favor of a different caliber so going back would be an admission of error. They will likely go with the 40. It is a ballistic twin for the 45, comes in 15 round mags, and has been proven to have similar penetration and stopping power. The ammo is just enough smaller that one can carry more rounds without more weight. There is no way any military will adopt the 10mm. It is a ballistic twin to the 357 Magnum and it would be difficult for the average soldier to control.


----------



## Armydude1

This is almost the same discussion as 5.56 vs 7.62.


----------



## Smitty901

The only reason we switched to a 9mm was to make NATO happy. The m9 is a good weapon and better than many. It held up well .
I was POed they dropped the 1911.
If and when they get a new side arm it will not be a 40 or a 10mm. Nor will it be a sig 357. The US military has problems with the type service member they are recruiting. They have become weaker over all and less likely to even try and improve. PT standards have been lower a few times now and PT failure has become expectable. 
Don't hold you breath waiting for the new one. They have been getting a new rifle sense 2004. The M2 was going to be moth balled at least a dozen times. Aint happened yet.
They already have a .45 setup they way they want it. Some Marines units have them and some Army have them. The US military does not issue the side arm as a primary weapon to many. It is a low security guard duty weapon, a back up for the machine gunner.
In Iraq a lot of M9 were issued to service members that would not normally have one. They served little purpose. In some cases it was just so you could be armed in the FOB at all times while walking to take crap. 
The 1911 is a boat anchor but it worked no madder what.
Do not confuse LE and combat they are two different worlds even if some would like to make you think different. 
Just because LE carries it does not mean it is right for you as your personal Carry. Same goes for the Army.
What may work for your local LE may not be right of a soldier. LE rarely live for months at a time in a rough environment.


----------



## Seneca

I can see the military changing to different pistol manufacturer. Going to a different cartridge? not so much. Our allies would have to be on board for a complete change over.


----------



## alterego

With The Current Administration. The Current Availability. And The Wanton Nature To Turn Us Over To The Enemy. I Am Going To Bet On The .22 Long Rifle.


----------



## Smitty901

The US pays for most of NATO. We provide most of the troops. Truth is WE are NATO most of the rest are NATO in name only. We should be telling them what to carry.
I just hope that glock don't slip in with one of their cheap models. The 92f has held up better than the credit it gets. The negative statements about the open breach are just someone looking of issue. As for mag issues show me any mag or belt feed weapon that did not have an issue now and then with so many in use.
If it was not such an odd ball I could see the 357 sig doing a fine job. even in a ball round the 357 will punch though some tough stuff.
The 45 is an issue for our new stronger meaner soldiers they don't want a heavy weapon to carry that they will likely never use in real time. And it don't come in pink.







The 45 they already have above.
If I had to carry a side arm in combat I would want a Colt just like my personal Para double stack 14 rounds . Draw back is it is heavy, a is plus the weight allows it to shoot well. Accurate as it gets, reliable as a Ruger. Of course I know it would never happen. We move to lighter smaller weapons. Combat troops carry to dam much weight now.
Para 45.


----------



## randy grider

I think what a lot of people are missing is the millitarys concept developed back in viet nam when they went to the 5,56 M-16. A millitary weapons purpose is take the opponent out of the fight, not neccessarily kill them. A corpse gets little attention, a wounded man hinders them more than a corpse, hence taking 3 or more out of the fight. In addition to that you can carry so many more rounds of lighht caliber ammo. Pack around a 1,000 rounds of 5.56, think thats heavy ? pick up a 1,000 rounds of 30-06 and you will understand. I know that a .45 has more knockdown than a 9 mm, I also know that m-9 has twice the capacity of the old 1911. Im a huge fan of 1911's, and M-1-A's, but know some green kid from the streets of Brooklynn will become proficient faster with the M-16 simply because of low recoil. There is a place for everything, and I feel our soldiers have the best.


----------



## Notsoyoung

wallyLOZ said:


> Both the 9mm and the 45acp have a place and time for me. In the winter, I carry my Colt Officers model under an outer layer, in a cross draw shoulder holster. In the warmer months I carry a sub-compact Sig in an IWB holster or belly holster. Would prefer to carry the 45 year round, but concealment becomes the obstacle.


I carry a 1911 in the Winter and a 9 mm in the Summer because of the way I dress.


----------



## HuntingHawk

US military NATO troops will carry the 9mm.


----------



## Seneca

Can't they just pick one and stick with it! I tell ya!:lol:


----------



## Sinkhole

The problem with the 9mm as a military combat round is not the power of 9mm itself but more a factor of the ammo used. It is a well known fact that FMJ ammunition, which we are forced to use, is much less than ideal when it comes to stopping power. FMJ ammo has a tendency to leave a tiny wound track and drastically over penetrate. Changing to a larger caliber may to some small extent counter this issue but it will not change the fact that a FMJ in any caliber is gonna suffer from these issues. Many LEAs are switching back to 9mm from .40S&W, supporting the fact that 9mm is a capable caliber. Do you carry FMJ ammunition in your carry gun? Of course not and you know why. Remember just cause the military does it does not mean it's gospel, nor does it mean it's the best idea, it's mean they are using what best fills their needs with in a certain realm of limitations. As far as I'm concerned pretty much all hand gun rounds are under powered, but given a choice between semi-auto handgun calibers I personally would choose 357Sig. Why? because it is ballistically as close to 357 Magnum as one can get in a semi-auto pistol without buying a $1400 Coonan. .357 Magnum plain and simple is the best all around pistol cartridge available. Sure there are more powerful cartridges on the market, but one needs to consider performance, cost, availability and controlability. Controlability is why the FBI dropped the 10mm. what the military really needs is a new bullet that will comply with the Geneva convention and still expand and/or cause a much lager wound track than a comparable FMJ.


----------



## csi-tech

The 9mm will kill a man. Pure and simple. Given a choice I would carry a Howitzer, but I prefer the 9mm over anything currently available. I use the Critical Duty +P.


----------



## Jeep

Look if you can shoot....then 9mm is plenty sufficient. I do have a .45 but my 9mm is my weapon of choice. In my experience the only reason why the 9mm didn't work as effectively was due to poor marksmanship and adrenaline


----------



## Smitty901

Combat and Civilian/LE use are different worlds, different rules ,different needs. You can not compare the two


----------



## tango

Some "special units" in the military may choose a different round, but, the military, as a whole, will continue to use the 9mm because it is a NATO round.
That will not change in the fore seeable future.


----------



## Seneca

I have shot the critical duty ammo (non +P) in 9mm at the range to see if it is reliable in the Beretta and it is. As self defense ammo goes it is decent ammo though expensive. The CCI/Speer gold dot ammo is also pretty good as a SD ammo, still expensive. Those are my two favorites. 

I agree the military is limited to ball ammo and that puts both the 9mm and 45ACP back to square one as far as their overall effectiveness goes. If there is a new caliber on the horizon, I suspect it too will suffer the same limiting factors as it's predecessors and that limiting factor being that it is ball ammo.


----------



## Notsoyoung

tango said:


> Some "special units" in the military may choose a different round, but, the military, as a whole, will continue to use the 9mm because it is a NATO round.
> That will not change in the fore seeable future.


The U.S. Marines bought 20,000 1911's last year in order to change over from the 9mm. They didn't seemed concerned about NATO.


----------



## Titan6

Ill keep my 9 mm..It has served me well!


----------



## dsdmmat

The Army just let a new contract to buy Berettas (100K of them IIRC) it doesn't look like they are dumping them anytime soon.


----------



## Alpha-17

dsdmmat said:


> The Army just let a new contract to buy Berettas (100K of them IIRC) it doesn't look like they are dumping them anytime soon.


I saw that. Seems like this contract is mostly to help keep the models they have now in service, and replace a few at a time rather than a whole new order. Don't forget, the Army had no intention of switching from the M4, but still wasted millions on a carbine competition, and wasted millions of dollars on ACU gear even after they had decided to switch to something else. They could blow a billion dollars on something, and dump it a couple of years later, and not think twice about it.


----------



## Smitty901

Don't get excited until you see soldiers turning the M9 in and them being truck off to scape. Not betting you will see that anytime soon. It could happen but unlikely.


----------

