9mm Sucks B@lls > Give 'em back the .45

[glenn1]

These discussions are always entertaining. As is always the case, it's painfully obvious who has actually fired the weapons being discussed, and who has never seen a gun outside of a dangerous game of CS.

Myself, i think the military would do just as well to take a step back, and go to a wheelgun as the primary sidearm for most troops who need it. A nice solid .357 Magnum would be a good choice, or even a .45 ACP. Much simpler to maintain, and the learning curve is far shorter, officers aren't the sharpest tools in the shed after all, best to keep it simple for 'em.

BTW, I use Corbon in all my handguns. Where can I get me some of that "armor piercing" stuff.

It's right next to the Winchester 9mm HEAT rounds

 

[kgraeme]

It amazes me how impassioned people here are about something they hopefully will never have to really know anything about. It's incredibly sad, really.

The Baretta I used was a good tool. The 1911 did the job if it was tight, which contract spec kept it from being for various reasons. I've put guns away and I'm honestly sorry these days for those who are in positions that they need to carry them. Even more sorry for those that aren't, but feel the need to carry them anyway.

Originally posted by: DaveSohmer
My experience with talking to people who have had to "pull the trigger" is that this remembrance comes soon enough.

Yep.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Originally posted by: kgraeme
It amazes me how impassioned people here are about something they hopefully will never have to really know anything about. It's incredibly sad, really.

The Baretta I used was a good tool. The 1911 did the job if it was tight, which contract spec kept it from being for various reasons. I've put guns away and I'm honestly sorry these days for those who are in positions that they need to carry them. Even more sorry for those that aren't, but feel the need to carry them anyway.

Originally posted by: DaveSohmer
My experience with talking to people who have had to "pull the trigger" is that this remembrance comes soon enough.

Yep.

There are two Master Chief SEALS stationed here. Shall I ask them next week for the definitive word on sidearms?

 

[Scipionix]

Originally posted by: DaveSohmer There are two Master Chief SEALS stationed here. Shall I ask them next week for the definitive word on sidearms?

I have an idea what they'll say . . . something along the lines of anything that's in the hands of a SEAL.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Originally posted by: Scipionix

Originally posted by: DaveSohmer There are two Master Chief SEALS stationed here. Shall I ask them next week for the definitive word on sidearms?

I have an idea what they'll say . . . something along the lines of anything that's in the hands of a SEAL.

These guys are not pretentious and will give me an honest opinion.

 

[Scipionix]

Originally posted by: DaveSohmer

Originally posted by: Scipionix

Originally posted by: DaveSohmer There are two Master Chief SEALS stationed here. Shall I ask them next week for the definitive word on sidearms?

I have an idea what they'll say . . . something along the lines of anything that's in the hands of a SEAL.

These guys are not pretentious and will give me an honest opinion.

I would not argue with them if they said that since it would mostly be true, but yes I would be curious.

 

[Tominator]

There are two Master Chief SEALS stationed here. Shall I ask them next week for the definitive word on sidearms?

Want their answer? Sorry, but SEALS are experts in their line of work and it is decidely NOT the work of the normal soldier!

All else being equal I'd seriously wonder about them if they picked a 9MM over a .45! You can tell them I said that!

Most Seals have never seen combat let alone a protracted conflict wherein support from the rear for extended periods was in question. Their mission is totally different than the everyday grunt.

 

[glenn1]

These guys are not pretentious and will give me an honest opinion.

While you're at it, ask them where a new sidearm (in whatever caliber) rates on their "wish list" of equipment they'd like to have.

From my experience, that was so far down the list as to be off the chart. What my team would have wanted instead would have been something like these: improved/lighter crypto gear; lightweight secure wireless communications apart from HF and satcom (something along the lines of a secure cell phone); improved battery technology; on demand realtime battlefield mapping, intel, and OB info; and additional standoff direct fire weaponry (along the lines of the Mk19, but lighter and possibly man-portable in a pinch).

 

[308nato]

I only own 2 handguns. A USP .45 and an old Czech officers CZ-52. I bought a USP 9mm the day HK released them. I think it was about 2 years after that they finally released the USP in a .45 civilian version. I traded my 9 for the .45 the first day my brother in law could get one (he's an FFL licensed 'smith who works for a Class III dealer/manufacturer - God I love my brother in law). I have been looking for a nice used SOCOM at a good price but it hasn't happened yet.

Basically I prefer long guns and focus my skills there. I'll take my Springfield Supermatch over the pistola anyday. But, its kind of hard to carry that in the glovebox. Although my wife can fit her CAR-15 9mm in the big diaper bag with the stock collapsed.

The USP is a sweet shooter. The CZ-52 intrigued me because it shoots a 30 caliber bottleneck case high velocity subgun round. 7.62x25, same as the PPSH-41. It has a higher muzzle velocity from the pistol than most big bore rifles. It penetrates like you wouldn't believe.

Dave Sohmer, could you ask your SEAL friends to give their opinion on the M92 vs the HK SOCOM ? I would like to hear what they have to say. Thanks.

 

[js1973]

308nato-

A little higher up in this thread I mentioned not liking polymer handguns. In particular, I was referring to my friends .45 USP Tactical. I just can't shoot it accurately. However, he also has a Norinco 1911 that I can shoot almost as well as my S&W .357. Were you accurate with your USP right from the start?

 

[308nato]

Originally posted by: js1973
308nato-

A little higher up in this thread I mentioned not liking polymer handguns. In particular, I was referring to my friends .45 USP Tactical. I just can't shoot it accurately. However, he also has a Norinco 1911 that I can shoot almost as well as my S&W .357. Were you accurate with your USP right from the start?

Out of the box with the 9mm was like shooting a laser beam. The .45 has a little bigger grip circumference than I am used to so getting the feel to be "natural" took a bit of getting used to. Its not unusual for someone (especially those with small hands) to have a problem with the large polymer handguns. Since they take up so much "space" (for lack of a better word) in your hand a problem is presented when squeezing the trigger. One tends to pull the trig with the whole finger rather than the fingertip. This pulls your hand down and to the left if right handed or down to the right if a lefty.

Maybe that doesn't make sense. Go grab a handgun from your politically correct storage area, make sure no rounds are chambered and than dry fire shooting as you usually do. Now wrap something around the grip to make it larger and watch how your finger/hand work against you. A little practice and you will be fine with the combat tupperware.

 

[Scipionix]

Wait a minute, what's a 308 Nato?

 

[308nato]

Originally posted by: Scipionix
Wait a minute, what's a 308 Nato?

A 308nato flies out of this very fast and very straight.

 

[Scipionix]

Originally posted by: 308nato

Originally posted by: Scipionix
Wait a minute, what's a 308 Nato?

A 308nato flies out of this very fast and very straight.

No, a .308 Winchester or a 7.62mm NATO flies out of it very fast and very straight

But that does look like a damned fine rifle you got there.

 

[308nato]

No, a .308 Winchester or a 7.62mm NATO flies out of it very fast and very straight

Handloads. Match .308 bullets, 7.62 NATO once fired brass. Hence 308nato. Crossbred in my own rumpus room.

 

[incallisto]

Originally posted by: Scipionix

Originally posted by: 308nato

Originally posted by: Scipionix
Wait a minute, what's a 308 Nato?

A 308nato flies out of this very fast and very straight.

No, a .308 Winchester or a 7.62mm NATO flies out of it very fast and very straight

But that does look like a damned fine rifle you got there.

Speaking of fine rifles, a friend of mine picked up this hot number: surgical precision anyone?

 

[Scipionix]

Originally posted by: 308nato
Handloads. Match .308 bullets, 7.62 NATO once fired brass. Hence 308nato. Crossbred in my own rumpus room.

Ahh, get cheap brass and put the best bullets in them. Sweet.

 

[Chaotic42]

But then our military would be able to fight! We can't have that.

Might as well give them Japanese pistols from WW2.

 

[ShotgunSteven]

If I was forced to abide by the Geneva Convention, I would want to be carrying something like the Heckler & Koch USP-45 or the Heckler & Koch Mark 23 SOCOM. Another option would be a Glock 20 chambered for 10mm.

I have several handguns in a variety of calibres, so I am not just giving my opinion based on Counter-Strike.

For those that only have their firearm experience via video games, I recommend buying yourself a Glock and installing a set of THESE on it.

 

[burnedout]

Originally posted by: js1973

On a side note, isn't it a rare thing for one of our soldiers to ever have to pull his sidearm out in combat?

The basic philosophy is: Air Support --> Indirect --> Crew Served --> Individual. Of course mission and necessity dictate. I personally viewed sidearms like others might regard an important insurance policy. Anywho, M60 gunners also carried the M1911 before the MTOE changed to M16. CSS troops (mainly mechanics) in some mech units carried .45 cal M3s until the mid 80s. Those M3s represented yet another unmaintained, inaccurate mess.

Originally posted by: glenn1

Myself, i think the military would do just as well to take a step back, and go to a wheelgun as the primary sidearm for most troops who need it. A nice solid .357 Magnum would be a good choice, or even a .45 ACP. Much simpler to maintain, and the learning curve is far shorter, officers aren't the sharpest tools in the shed after all, best to keep it simple for 'em.

A practical idea, although I wonder about the acceptance factor. We still had .38 revolvers in the inventory during the early 80s. S&W design? Can't remember. Unfortunately, most were in the same poor condition as the M1911. At the time, they were considered garrison arms for MPs and FODs anyway.

 

[AndrewR]

A practical idea, although I wonder about the acceptance factor. We still had .38 revolvers in the inventory during the early 80s. S&W design? Can't remember. Unfortunately, most were in the same poor condition as the M1911. At the time, they were considered garrison arms for MPs and FODs anyway.

The .38 S&W revolver was also the standard sidearm for aircrew until it was replaced by the Beretta.

Personally, as Russ says, I'd rather have the 9mm with +P Hydrashok than a .45. A 9mm has more ammo capacity, and I'm a much better shot with it because that's what I own (been looking for a good .45, but they're too expensive for my budget). I did a damage test on some old books among three rounds: standard FMJ, +P hollow points, and +P Hydrashoks. The difference between the FMJ and the two latter rounds, in particular the Hydrashok, was amazing. The Hydrashok blew out little pieces of confetti out of the back of the book -- to imagine what would happen to a human body was frightening.

However, given the choice, I'd rather carry a GAU-5 (simply because the laser site on that is awesome).

 

[Mister T]

can someone please explain the different ammunition types?

I have no clue what people mean by +P and hydrashok

 

[glenn1]

can someone please explain the different ammunition types?

I have no clue what people mean by +P and hydrashok

Certainly. For small arms (revolvers, pistols, rifles, etc.), there are essentially two major types of ammunition available and in common use, and numerous other types which are far less common. I'll go over the two major types first

First of all, the most basic type of ammunition, which the military is required by the rules of war to use, that being ball ammunition (also known as full metal jacket, or FMJ, or copper jacketed). Essentially, it's probably what you think of when you think bullet. It's going to be one solid piece projectile.

The second major type are expandable rounds. There are slightly different types (jacketed hollow-point, softpoint, etc.) they're all designed to do essentially the same thing, have the bullet expand into a mushroom style shape upon initial penetration. A bullet which expands has a larger cross-section, which does more damage. Hydra-Shocks are simply a well-regarded name brand of hollowpoint ammunition, made by the company "Federal."

As for the other types of rounds (which have their devotees, but represent a tiny fraction of sales), the biggies would probably be frangible (bullets designed to shatter into tiny shards on impact), flachette rounds (think a steel dart shot from a gun), non-lethal rounds (think plastic/rubber bullets, bean bag ammunition and such).

The term +P is a technical term, which refers to a high velocity loading of a particular cartridge. Essentially, a particular round has a set specification for the amount and type of powder loading it's supposed to get, and a spec for the amount of pressure the round generates when fired. A +P round indicates one which has been "juiced up" to a higher than specification loading factor. It's a marketing term, kinda like how you can have a V8 engine with a Turbocharger. Think of a +P loading as a hot rodded bullet.


Here's a wonderful site which will give you tons of information from someone incredibly much more versed about the subject of ballistics than anyone here, it's worth a look. It has some good photos and charts as well.


The mechanics of terminal ballistics

 

[308nato]

Originally posted by: Scipionix

Originally posted by: 308nato
Handloads. Match .308 bullets, 7.62 NATO once fired brass. Hence 308nato. Crossbred in my own rumpus room.

Ahh, get cheap brass and put the best bullets in them. Sweet.

Those are for my plinking rounds. I get the bullets cheap (prior mentioned brother in law). For serious shooting I load new brass. However, as I am a poor farmer, I can't load everything with new brass. I go through way to much ammo to afford that. That is about the only downfall to having your own private range available 24/7/365.

 

[Hammer]

I'm curious, defintely let us know. I don't think they'll say the 9mm though.

Originally posted by: DaveSohmer

Originally posted by: Scipionix

Originally posted by: DaveSohmer There are two Master Chief SEALS stationed here. Shall I ask them next week for the definitive word on sidearms?

I have an idea what they'll say . . . something along the lines of anything that's in the hands of a SEAL.

These guys are not pretentious and will give me an honest opinion.