Pentagon Seeks New Sidearm

BloodStripe

BloodStripe

Marine
SOF Support
Joined
Feb 27, 2014
Messages
4,747
Location
CONUS
SSMP
Military Mentor
http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Se...on-taking-bids-for-replacement/5191417641526/

The Pentagon announced it will actively seek a new manufacturing contract to replace Beretta as the primary sidearm of the United States military.
Gun manufacture Smith & Wesson and a division of General Dynamics have already announced plans to enter a jointly-produced firearm based on Smith & Wesson's M&P, an already popular polymer pistol used by law enforcement agencies around the world.
Click to expand...

I always hated the M9. It was nice that it was ambidextrous for us southpaws, but overall I just never cared for it. There seemed to be too many malfunctions (stove pipe seemed to be the most common) even on the range. Fortunately, the only time I ever had to conduct a transition was during CQB school and not during an operation.
 
Never had a problem with the M9.
I am not convinced we will see a new pistol though.
How many pistol tests has the Army/AF run? 2?4?

Just buy Sigs (won't happen) or M&P.
 
TLDR20 said:
We got Glocks in group and they were pretty slick.
Click to expand...

I like Glocks well enough, but do you really think the Pentagon is going to trust Joe with a pistol with no manual safety? Not saying I agree with that thought process, but that's how I think the winds will blow.
 
Totentanz said:
I like Glocks well enough, but do you really think the Pentagon is going to trust Joe with a pistol with no manual safety? Not saying I agree with that thought process, but that's how I think the winds will blow.
Click to expand...
That's why M&P will do well.
RumInt says the AF wanted .40 cal M&P's but the Army whined and killed the competition before they could finish it.
Then told everyone the M9 was good enough.
 
TLDR20 said:
We got Glocks in group and they were pretty slick.
Click to expand...

I have had my Glock 17 for years. Thousands of rounds, and never a problem. I had an FBI/FTU upgrade several years ago, by one of their FTU guys, return spring, tritium sights, and some grip enhancements. It carrys pretty well in a SafariLand paddle rig. It rides a bit high on the hip, but stays out of sight even under short jackets.
 
Last edited:
SOTGWarrior said:
I can't comment first hand on the Marine Corps 1911, so I will just stay in my lane and direct you to those who have

http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=3250
Click to expand...

The article talks generically about 1911s and doesn't specifically mention the Marine Corps CQB M45. The link basically says 1911s suck. Kyle Lamb says 1911s suck. I'm not one to contradict Kyle Lamb because I admire the guy very much, but I don't agree with this. Get an old 1911 with a slide that works like butter, something that's been broken it real good, bluing all wore off and shoot the crap out of it and it's a Zen freakin level of enlightenment thing. 8-):-) Yeah I know, SOWT disagrees because he's an M&P guy and I'm stuck in the Middle Ages. But everytime I turn around some agency or another is going through a handgun identity crisis.
 
Last edited:
The big issue is the ability to train people quickly with retention of skill on minimum time and rounds. The M9 is a hard pistol to learn to shoot well, it takes more maintenance knowledge and devotion. Smart armorers to check locking blocks, replace springs, firing pins, etc. Most units military wide do not maintain the M9 or the M11 to schedule or properly for that matter.

Training wise, I've taught thousands on the M9 and have taught hundreds on the Glock. The Glock is stupid easy and I can have a person with little to no experience combat effective with it in about 6 hours and 250-300 rounds. M9 double the round count and time frame. I'm not talking qualification, I'm talking combat affective.

I think the M&P 9 w/ thumb safety would be the most logical option for troops and keeping the brass happy, G17 would be the best option IMO.
 
Ocoka One said:
The article talks generically about 1911s and doesn't specifically mention the Marine Corps CQB M45. The link basically says 1911s suck. Kyle Lamb says 1911s suck. I'm not one to contradict Kyle Lamb because I admire the guy very much, but I don't agree with this. Get an old 1911 with a slide that works like butter, something that's been broken it real good, bluing all wore off and shoot the crap out of it and it's a Zen freakin level of enlightenment thing. 8-):-) Yeah I know, SOWT disagrees because he's an M&P guy and I'm stuck in the Middle Ages. But everytime I turn around some agency or another is going through a handgun identity crisis.
Click to expand...
No SOWT had a 1911 as his first issue weapon.
I have 1st hand experience with a weapon that receives so-so care.
There were some issues with the M45 acquisition process, I assume the Marines got them fixed; that said, I assume the MARSOC .45's have a higher caliber armorer (when compared to the average Marine Armorer) taking care of them, the Marines using them (again an assumption) are better trained then the Marines in more conventional forces.
I also know Ms SOWT's 1911 isn't as reliable as my M&P.
Her 1911 is babied, and shouldn't have as many FTF's as it has (but reading the link SOTGWarrior posted explains a lot).
I am not convince we need .45's; 9mm and .40 cal with better training may be more effective than buying new 1911's.

What I want is a pistol with a rail, weapon light (maybe with a laser too), different grips (or backstraps) for people with different sized hands, use the money saved by not buying $3K 1911's to buy more ammo so we can train personnel properly. Use the money saved to send Unit Armorers to Factory (Manufacturer) Armorer's Courses so they are better trained.

have a good evaluation, and write the requirement based on what is needed, not based on the weapon some CSM wants (MK 45 as a prime example).
 
Last edited:
I'm an old opinionated bastard and spout off sometimes after a few beers. Of course I defer to your experience and expertise in the matter of modern tactical sidearms. My 1911 never let me down but that doesn't mean they're perfect...or right for present day use. It just means I'm predjudiced and pig-headed. ;-)
 
Ocoka One said:
I'm an old opinionated bastard and spout off sometimes after a few beers. Of course I defer to your experience and expertise in the matter of modern tactical sidearms. My 1911 never let me down but that doesn't mean they're perfect...or right for present day use. It just means I'm predjudiced and pig-headed. ;-)
Click to expand...

One of the issues besides NATO for doing away with 1911's was maintenance, again not enough skilled armorers to keep them serviceable. Most of the units that kept 1911's had highly skilled armorers and the shooters were as knowledgeable as many of the armorers/ smiths. Units like service shooting teams tier one SOF, etc.

My issue with 1911's is capacity and parts. Too many parts, not enough rounds and heavy. That said a well tuned and maintained 1911 is one the most accurate firearms I've ever used. Seconded by the M9 which can produce 1 1/2 " groups at 25m. Again lots of parts, heavy and difficult to learn/maintain properly.

Most polymer framed pistols offer much better reliability, easy maintenance, simple trigger system and accuracy above most peoples capability. Also the service schedule is normally longer (I.e. how many rounds before re-springing and detail strip inspection, etc).

The firearms industry and technology has advanced considerably over the past 25years. It doesn't mean old faithful (1911) sucks or is not capable. Just means there are better tools, that reduce cost and extend service life, that offer higher capacity and easier trainability.

Pvt snuffy hunting down his recoil spring that just went across the room, is not something I enjoyed screwing with training time when I had to do a 12 HR PMI in 3-4 hours.
 
Ocoka One said:
I'm an old opinionated bastard and spout off sometimes after a few beers. Of course I defer to your experience and expertise in the matter of modern tactical sidearms. My 1911 never let me down but that doesn't mean they're perfect...or right for present day use. It just means I'm predjudiced and pig-headed. ;-)
Click to expand...
Don't get me wrong.
I like the 1911, I just think there are better weapons for CONVENTIONAL Military units.
The M9 would be better if the folks writing the specs knew what the words meant (i.e. tolerance for trigger pull is 7-9 lbs, that's a pretty wide margine, especially for new/inexperienced shooters)
 
SOWT said:
.... train personnel properly. Use the money saved to send Unit Armorers to Factory (Manufacturer) Armorer's Courses so they are better trained.
Click to expand...

This. I got looked at sideways when I wanted to send 18Bs and the company arms room guy to the Glock Armorer's course. Yeah....
 

Similar threads

8
Kimber kisses up..................2nd Amendment issues.
Replies
11
Views
3K
Minuteman1636
M
Ravage
Faster combat power, less exposure in the assault zone
Replies
1
Views
3K
AWP
AWP
Back
Top