Page 1 of 4

Article: Army wants a harder-hitting pistol

PostPosted: Thu, 03 Jul 2014 23:22:59
by Chasbo00
The U.S. Army is moving forward to replace the Cold War-era M9 9mm pistol with a more powerful handgun that also meets the needs of the other services.

As the lead agent for small arms, the Army will hold an industry day July 29 to talk to gun makers about the joint, Modular Handgun System or MHS.

The MHS would replace the Army's inventory of more than 200,000 outdated M9 pistols and several thousand M11 9mm pistols with one that has greater accuracy, lethality, reliability and durability, according to Daryl Easlick, a project officer with the Army's Maneuver Center of Excellence at Fort Benning, Georgia.

"It's a total system replacement -- new gun, new ammo, new holster, everything," Easlick said.


http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/07/03/ ... p=features

Re: Article: Army wants a harder-hitting pistol

PostPosted: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 00:33:51
by MarcSpaz
Should be fun to see who wins and with what.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ] Image

Re: Article: Army wants a harder-hitting pistol

PostPosted: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 00:40:10
by WRW
More money to burn.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ] Image

Re: Article: Army wants a harder-hitting pistol

PostPosted: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 01:46:07
by BertMacklin
MarcSpaz wrote:Should be fun to see who wins and with what.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ] Image


I'm betting Colt by a long shot, they are already trying to reuse the 1911 again with USMC. Not sure what would be the brainchild for all of their complaints should realistically be. 9mm platforms being converted to 40? Glock 22 or 31, not aware of any wear beyond a 17 round wise, serious malfunctions occurring at the 10's of thousands round count or well beyond, no slide mounted safety, faster learning curve than a 1911 but still not good enough. They want a rocket ship that flies like kite but with less emissions and they'll get it, test it, have issues with recoil and then buy some more 1911's or M9's.

Re: Article: Army wants a harder-hitting pistol

PostPosted: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 07:12:05
by trailrunner
That article mentioned two issues: poor stopping power of 9mm, and problems with the Beretta platform.

Regarding the poor stopping power of the 9mm: They knew the limitations of 9mm when they selected the 9mm, but the 9mm gave them two advantages: compatibility with NATO, and a large magazine capacity. So what are their choices in a new caliber? Semi-auto pistol rounds only have so much stopping power. The 357 Sig and 45 GAP might have more power, but these calibers are probably not mainstream enough for the military. 10 mm might be a good choice, but they could eventually wind up with 40 S&W. Or back on 9mm.

As far as the platform goes: Maybe it's time to move to a modern polymer striker-fired gun.

Re: Article: Army wants a harder-hitting pistol

PostPosted: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 12:24:18
by OakRidgeStars
I'm thinking Glock's in 40 S&W will be the winner.

Article: Army wants a harder-hitting pistol

PostPosted: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 13:08:02
by RO73
One of the requirements is a manual safety. They should look at the FNX 45. Meets all the requirements and holds 15 + 1 of 45 ACP.

Re: Article: Army wants a harder-hitting pistol

PostPosted: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 13:33:26
by dorminWS
Or maybe a hybrid-1911 along these lines:

http://www.stiguns.com/the-sti-apeiro/


Re: Article: Army wants a harder-hitting pistol

PostPosted: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 13:39:26
by dusterdude
Betcha it will be a 40


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Article: Army wants a harder-hitting pistol

PostPosted: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 14:36:02
by Kreutz
Where will the old M9's go?

I carried one in the Army and would love to buy one.

Re: Article: Army wants a harder-hitting pistol

PostPosted: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 15:03:25
by trailrunner
OakRidgeStars wrote:I'm thinking Glock's in 40 S&W will be the winner.


I doubt that Glock would add a manual safety.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Article: Army wants a harder-hitting pistol

PostPosted: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 16:40:48
by BertMacklin
Kreutz wrote:Where will the old M9's go?

I carried one in the Army and would love to buy one.


If your thinking surplus, it will be a cold day in hell before any fascist in office lets that happen ever again.

TR-
I bet Glock would bend over backwards to get that contract, as most companies would, for an Army sidearm. Add one manual safety and a nice overcoat, call it the Glock 22A1, sell a few thousand and 10's of thousands more because of that legacy to the civilian market, much like the M9.

Re: Article: Army wants a harder-hitting pistol

PostPosted: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 16:46:47
by VACoastie
We did this move quite a few years ago in the Coast Guard. We used to shoot the Beretta 9MM but have switched over to the Sig Sauer P229 DAK .40S&W. Great pistol and easy fits the hands of many different sized members well.

I won't be surprised if they don't go the same direction for the Army as well. Colt is great, but from what I've heard is they're a pain in the maintenance department.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ] Image

Re: Article: Army wants a harder-hitting pistol

PostPosted: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 17:16:37
by skeeterss0
i was in when the Marines changed from colt 45's to berreta 9mm's. i thought that was a major mistake then.

i figure the army will settle on a 40 cal. would love to see them go with the S&W M&P.

Re: Article: Army wants a harder-hitting pistol

PostPosted: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 17:47:34
by dusterdude
Me too skeeter,the m9 is/was a pos from the start


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Article: Army wants a harder-hitting pistol

PostPosted: Tue, 08 Jul 2014 20:33:46
by grumpyMSG
The M11 is actually a Sig P228. The SEALs run it's full size brother in the P226. Whether they change round or not I don't know, but like the last two or three attempts at a new pistol or carbine, the move will be stopped due to there not being a sufficient advance in the next weapon. That said I won't be surprised if they went with a DA/SA pistol with a decocker (no external safety, but a heavy first trigger pull) or a double action only with a moderate but heavier trigger pull (probably in the 7-9 pound range). I would be a little surprised if they went with a striker fired design, due to the inability to pull the trigger a second time if the pistol doesn't go off.

No matter, I doubt nothing will come of it in the end...

Re: Article: Army wants a harder-hitting pistol

PostPosted: Tue, 08 Jul 2014 21:25:40
by Quigley
It really should be a Glock but it won't


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Article: Army wants a harder-hitting pistol

PostPosted: Tue, 08 Jul 2014 21:28:31
by Palladin
I move they adopt the .50 Desert Eagle :pistol:

Re: Article: Army wants a harder-hitting pistol

PostPosted: Tue, 08 Jul 2014 22:22:40
by WRW
Palladin wrote:I move they adopt the .50 Desert Eagle :pistol:


If they are serious about wanting a harder hitting pistol, that would be the way to go. For that much weight, though, I'd just as soon carry a .45. Not a .40. With ball ammo size matters.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ] Image

Re: Article: Army wants a harder-hitting pistol

PostPosted: Wed, 09 Jul 2014 00:00:41
by MarcSpaz
Quigley wrote:It really should be a Glock but it won't


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Due to its proven dependability, Glock is the most widely used pistol for police and military forces in the world. However, I think there is very little chance that the US military will ever use one, for 2 big reasons...

1.) With the very rare exception for a few small specialty groups, the US military uses American built weapons. They are not too keen on foreign companies supplying the US military with anything. Don't want to be dependent on a source or supply chain that can be cutoff, tampered with in some way or used as a method/tool to undermine the US.

2.) The resent Gen 4 Glock 22's (as well as some other models) have proven to be less than desirable or reliable. Explains why I see Gen 3 G22's still selling new and used at higher cost than the Gen 4 G22.

I have to say, I specifically bought my Sig P226 because if the SEALS use it to ensure their success and survival, it should be a great carry weapon for me. The only difference between their pistol and mine is the insignia laser etched into the slide.

If you are a Glock fan or if the military was ever going to go with Glock, I would love to see this in the field... or at least run through the "over the beach" testing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DQWn23rtXU