User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 10:38:53 AM EDT
[#1]
Do you see any chance CZ will enter a choice or 2 for any testing?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 10:41:07 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Do you see any chance CZ will enter a choice or 2 for any testing? John Wayne (the Staff member here) has stated that they, in his anecdotal experience, would probably not do too well in torture tests. So, maybe not? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 10:46:07 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
no. having spent way too much time with M9 in combat, the safety can move up and down as you move around. Especially mounted on your chest. No matter what condition you carry it in, it could be on safe or fire when you draw. I had no problem carrying it on safe because I was going to sweep the safety everytime anyway. safeties on combat pistols are stupid now. I would argue that a safety such as a 1911 has, that actually locks the slide, is very positive (very rare to actually move it by accident, and even then you can hear the click) and is not just a lever/decocker, is still relevant. It's the only type of safety I find useful. I do find a safety that does not lock the slide to be undesirable. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 10:49:09 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I would argue that a safety such as a 1911 has, that actually locks the slide, is very positive (very rare to actually move it by accident, and even then you can hear the click) and is not just a lever/decocker, is still relevant. It's the only type of safety I find useful. I do find a safety that does not lock the slide to be undesirable. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
no. having spent way too much time with M9 in combat, the safety can move up and down as you move around. Especially mounted on your chest. No matter what condition you carry it in, it could be on safe or fire when you draw. I had no problem carrying it on safe because I was going to sweep the safety everytime anyway. safeties on combat pistols are stupid now. I would argue that a safety such as a 1911 has, that actually locks the slide, is very positive (very rare to actually move it by accident, and even then you can hear the click) and is not just a lever/decocker, is still relevant. It's the only type of safety I find useful. I do find a safety that does not lock the slide to be undesirable. For me, if I am drawing my pistol, if I do remember to sweep the safety, it will be a miracle. DAO with a hammer or something like a glock safety are the way to go. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 10:49:36 AM EDT
[#5]
Just want to say I was wrong.
I was actually just convinced on modularity being important for Joe's sidearm. Night vision use was mentioned, and since our guys go in harms way after dark a lot, and they use night vision a lot, and it's a bitch to use iron sights with NVGs on, a rail for mounting an IR laser would make it a LOT more useful at night, especially if you were snooping around in some hadji's house. So now all we need is a bulletproof IR laser that's small enough to mount on the pistol and a holster that won't snag on it. PM Soldier, You've got your work cut out for you. 
Or you could just turn it over to REF if they're still kicking down in Crystal. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 10:55:52 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
............ For me, if I am drawing my pistol, if I do remember to sweep the safety, it will be a miracle. DAO with a hammer or something like a glock safety are the way to go. Yeah, that makes sense............I can see where a soldier would have one less thing to worry about in times of HUGE stress. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 10:59:30 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
John Wayne (the Staff member here) has stated that they, in his anecdotal experience, would probably not do too well in torture tests. So, maybe not? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Do you see any chance CZ will enter a choice or 2 for any testing? John Wayne (the Staff member here) has stated that they, in his anecdotal experience, would probably not do too well in torture tests. So, maybe not? Only reason why I ask is the P07/09 or SP01 Tactical seem to fill a lot of the needed "specs". Then again I have no experience with CZ so I wouldn't know how they would hold up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 11:03:00 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, those are actual changes that were needed. Swapping to a new pistol isn't. Need something for CCW work. The M11 was the purpose of that. M11 isn't working? Go with the new Beretta 92 Compact. http://www.beretta.com/assets/2/15/DimGalleryLarge/J90C9F10_3QT_R_BK.jpg Same parts and magazine compatibility with the fullsize M9. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
As for outdated... we're stilling using metallic cartridges that propel metallic projectiles through the combustion of nitrocellulose powders. A new pistol will do the same thing. Same thing with the whole XM8 debacle and even the FN SCAR-16. They all do the same shit as the M4. Launch a 62gr 5.56 projectile. Terrible, terrible viewpoint. So limited yet so broad at the same time. With that point of view the SPCS is a waste of time versus the IOTV.. Or the M1A1 vs M1A2. Or M240L versus M240B. Ops core vs ACH. M224 Vs M224A1. Equipment changes, sometimes not in ways that are very measurable for the outside viewer, but very relevant for the user. Just because you also use a pistol either recreationally or in your profession does not make you qualified in the same manner as a military user. http://www.beretta.com/assets/2/15/DimGalleryLarge/J90C9F10_3QT_R_BK.jpg Same parts and magazine compatibility with the fullsize M9. So your answer is to switch to another pistol for compact needs as opposed to making a consolidated platform right when the M9 is almost weeded out of the force completely naturally? There are changes that are needed. The ability to mount a vis/IR light has been expressed here by multiple servicemembers, yet all of you on the outside claim to know better than us what improvements we need and don't need. You are on the outside, so it would probably serve you well to remember that when you blow off improvement metrics as being unnecessary. Notice a trend in most of the platforms I listed? Most of them had to do with weight reduction. A pound here, pound there may seem trivial to you, but then you aren't carrying this shit up a mountain in Wardak at 13,000' either. A swap from the M9 to a Glock 19 for example would result in a 13oz weight reduction alone. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 11:33:07 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well... Except it isn't. .45ACP and 9mm FMJ rounds produce wound channels that are damn near indistinguishable. You just get fewer or them per magazine e with the .45.  Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
My personal choice would be .45acp as its a decent man stopper even with ball ammo. Well... Except it isn't. .45ACP and 9mm FMJ rounds produce wound channels that are damn near indistinguishable. You just get fewer or them per magazine e with the .45. Sorry pal...but when you're limited to ball ammo mass and diameter are the only way to substitute for a lack of expanding ammunition. Are you really trying to argue that a 124gr 9mm FMJ bullet is equal to a 230gr .45 FMJ bullet? Only in the GD. 350 ft/lbs or 500 ft/lbs energy? Some modern .45 handguns hold as many rounds as the M9... |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 11:36:22 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How effectively can you get said projectile on target, under ALL conditions, for all soldiers, is the bigger issue now I think. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: As for outdated... we're stilling using metallic cartridges that propel metallic projectiles through the combustion of nitrocellulose powders. A new pistol will do the same thing. Same thing with the whole XM8 debacle and even the FN SCAR-16. They all do the same shit as the M4. Launch a 62gr 5.56 projectile. How effectively can you get said projectile on target, under ALL conditions, for all soldiers, is the bigger issue now I think. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 11:38:47 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Just want to say I was wrong. I was actually just convinced on modularity being important for Joe's sidearm. Night vision use was mentioned, and since our guys go in harms way after dark a lot, and they use night vision a lot, and it's a bitch to use iron sights with NVGs on, a rail for mounting an IR laser would make it a LOT more useful at night, especially if you were snooping around in some hadji's house. So now all we need is a bulletproof IR laser that's small enough to mount on the pistol and a holster that won't snag on it. PM Soldier, You've got your work cut out for you. Or you could just turn it over to REF if they're still kicking down in Crystal.  Instead of a visible laser use an IR.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 11:39:51 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Instead of a visible laser use an IR. I've been ragging on CT to do a "Class 1" IR version of that for awhile now. The low-power laser would be ideal actually... full-power IR lasers bloom like a MF at pistol ranges. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 11:41:52 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So your answer is to switch to another pistol for compact needs as opposed to making a consolidated platform right when the M9 is almost weeded out of the force completely naturally? There are changes that are needed. The ability to mount a vis/IR light has been expressed here by multiple servicemembers, yet all of you on the outside claim to know better than us what improvements we need and don't need. You are on the outside, so it would probably serve you well to remember that when you blow off improvement metrics as being unnecessary. Notice a trend in most of the platforms I listed? Most of them had to do with weight reduction. A pound here, pound there may seem trivial to you, but then you aren't carrying this shit up a mountain in Wardak at 13,000' either. A swap from the M9 to a Glock 19 for example would result in a 13oz weight reduction alone. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: As for outdated... we're stilling using metallic cartridges that propel metallic projectiles through the combustion of nitrocellulose powders. A new pistol will do the same thing. Same thing with the whole XM8 debacle and even the FN SCAR-16. They all do the same shit as the M4. Launch a 62gr 5.56 projectile. Terrible, terrible viewpoint. So limited yet so broad at the same time. With that point of view the SPCS is a waste of time versus the IOTV.. Or the M1A1 vs M1A2. Or M240L versus M240B. Ops core vs ACH. M224 Vs M224A1. Equipment changes, sometimes not in ways that are very measurable for the outside viewer, but very relevant for the user. Just because you also use a pistol either recreationally or in your profession does not make you qualified in the same manner as a military user. http://www.beretta.com/assets/2/15/DimGalleryLarge/J90C9F10_3QT_R_BK.jpg Same parts and magazine compatibility with the fullsize M9. So your answer is to switch to another pistol for compact needs as opposed to making a consolidated platform right when the M9 is almost weeded out of the force completely naturally? There are changes that are needed. The ability to mount a vis/IR light has been expressed here by multiple servicemembers, yet all of you on the outside claim to know better than us what improvements we need and don't need. You are on the outside, so it would probably serve you well to remember that when you blow off improvement metrics as being unnecessary. Notice a trend in most of the platforms I listed? Most of them had to do with weight reduction. A pound here, pound there may seem trivial to you, but then you aren't carrying this shit up a mountain in Wardak at 13,000' either. A swap from the M9 to a Glock 19 for example would result in a 13oz weight reduction alone. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 11:44:20 AM EDT
[#14]
CT does do a IR laser for the m9, they even have a dual laser setup.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 11:44:50 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: CT does do a IR laser for the m9, they even have a dual laser setup. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 11:46:02 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What fucked up POS unit do you belong to? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There is nothing wrong the current Beretta big army says you're wrong. Although I do think this will turn into a big dog and pony show of bids and they will stick with the beretta in the end due to "budget concerns" like the last 3 times it was up for re consideration. That's because big Army passes M9s around to different people and it gets treated like a drunk stripper in the barracks. Then after a few years you get a beat to hell pos pistol that desperately needs to be rebuilt or replaced, but since the commander and his staff get pencil whipped at the range, nobody cares enough to do it. Frankly, IMO, the way the Army handles pistol issue and operator/armorer maintaince is criminal. Whatever your flavor of choice, glock, S&W, etc; if they are constantly mistreated and abused by the Army like the M9 is, you're going to end up with racks of fucked up pistols that barely shoot straight. What fucked up POS unit do you belong to? We treat our M9s the best we can, but they are fucking old. They are drawn/PMCSed on a daily basis, but old shit breaks. I've had my safety snap off twice in the past month. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 11:48:35 AM EDT
[#17]
I was commenting on commanders and the staff getting pencil whipped instead of getting their asses out to the range to qualify.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 11:49:14 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sorry pal...but when you're limited to ball ammo mass and diameter are the only way to substitute for a lack of expanding ammunition. Are you really trying to argue that a 124gr 9mm FMJ bullet is equal to a 230gr .45 FMJ bullet? Only in the GD. 350 ft/lbs or 500 ft/lbs energy? Some modern .45 handguns hold as many rounds as the M9... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
My personal choice would be .45acp as its a decent man stopper even with ball ammo. Well... Except it isn't. .45ACP and 9mm FMJ rounds produce wound channels that are damn near indistinguishable. You just get fewer or them per magazine e with the .45. Sorry pal...but when you're limited to ball ammo mass and diameter are the only way to substitute for a lack of expanding ammunition. Are you really trying to argue that a 124gr 9mm FMJ bullet is equal to a 230gr .45 FMJ bullet? Only in the GD. 350 ft/lbs or 500 ft/lbs energy? Some modern .45 handguns hold as many rounds as the M9... Well wound ballistics experts in the post WW II and Korea the study of weapons effects said the following Study of Weapons Effects CHAPTER II Ballistic Characteristics of Wounding Agents Maj. Ralph W. French, MAC, USA (Ret.), and Brig. Gen. George R. Callender, USA (Ret.) From an analysis of these facts and the requirements for penetration of skin and bone, it can be readily appreciated that the .45 caliber bullet is of little value as a wound-producing agent except in the softer tissues and at near ranges. The bullet often fails either to penetrate or to fracture bone and practically never shatters bone in the manner common to the rifle bullet or fragment. The Japanese and German sidearms with muzzle velocities of approximately 1,100 f.p.s. were much more effective as antipersonnel weapons than the .45 caliber weapon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 11:50:31 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well wound ballistics experts in the post WW II and Korea the study of weapons effects said the following Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
My personal choice would be .45acp as its a decent man stopper even with ball ammo. Well... Except it isn't. .45ACP and 9mm FMJ rounds produce wound channels that are damn near indistinguishable. You just get fewer or them per magazine e with the .45. Sorry pal...but when you're limited to ball ammo mass and diameter are the only way to substitute for a lack of expanding ammunition. Are you really trying to argue that a 124gr 9mm FMJ bullet is equal to a 230gr .45 FMJ bullet? Only in the GD. 350 ft/lbs or 500 ft/lbs energy? Some modern .45 handguns hold as many rounds as the M9... Well wound ballistics experts in the post WW II and Korea the study of weapons effects said the following Study of Weapons Effects CHAPTER II Ballistic Characteristics of Wounding Agents Maj. Ralph W. French, MAC, USA (Ret.), and Brig. Gen. George R. Callender, USA (Ret.) From an analysis of these facts and the requirements for penetration of skin and bone, it can be readily appreciated that the .45 caliber bullet is of little value as a wound-producing agent except in the softer tissues and at near ranges. The bullet often fails either to penetrate or to fracture bone and practically never shatters bone in the manner common to the rifle bullet or fragment. The Japanese and German sidearms with muzzle velocities of approximately 1,100 f.p.s. were much more effective as antipersonnel weapons than the .45 caliber weapon. shills for HK. Everybody knows that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:00:08 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just because I don't have a tank doesn't mean I don't have a DD-214. I do understand what you're getting at. But the issue still for the most part is training not equipment. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
As for outdated... we're stilling using metallic cartridges that propel metallic projectiles through the combustion of nitrocellulose powders. A new pistol will do the same thing. Same thing with the whole XM8 debacle and even the FN SCAR-16. They all do the same shit as the M4. Launch a 62gr 5.56 projectile. Terrible, terrible viewpoint. So limited yet so broad at the same time. With that point of view the SPCS is a waste of time versus the IOTV.. Or the M1A1 vs M1A2. Or M240L versus M240B. Ops core vs ACH. M224 Vs M224A1. Equipment changes, sometimes not in ways that are very measurable for the outside viewer, but very relevant for the user. Just because you also use a pistol either recreationally or in your profession does not make you qualified in the same manner as a military user. http://www.beretta.com/assets/2/15/DimGalleryLarge/J90C9F10_3QT_R_BK.jpg Same parts and magazine compatibility with the fullsize M9. So your answer is to switch to another pistol for compact needs as opposed to making a consolidated platform right when the M9 is almost weeded out of the force completely naturally? There are changes that are needed. The ability to mount a vis/IR light has been expressed here by multiple servicemembers, yet all of you on the outside claim to know better than us what improvements we need and don't need. You are on the outside, so it would probably serve you well to remember that when you blow off improvement metrics as being unnecessary. Notice a trend in most of the platforms I listed? Most of them had to do with weight reduction. A pound here, pound there may seem trivial to you, but then you aren't carrying this shit up a mountain in Wardak at 13,000' either. A swap from the M9 to a Glock 19 for example would result in a 13oz weight reduction alone. Veteran or not, you are still on the outside right now. The issue is training AND equipment, across the board. Conditions are as perfect as they are going to get, the needs have been identified, this is happening. End of story. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:01:17 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Problem solved for NVG use then. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
CT does do a IR laser for the m9, they even have a dual laser setup. Except for pesky thing like lights. Then we still have the issues of weight reduction, removing the slide mounted safety, parts longevity advances, and the ability to incorporate a modular frame and system. Playing piecemeal catchup for each metric makes no sense when we are sending most of the guns to the smelter anyway. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:03:44 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well wound ballistics experts in the post WW II and Korea the study of weapons effects said the following Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
My personal choice would be .45acp as its a decent man stopper even with ball ammo. Well... Except it isn't. .45ACP and 9mm FMJ rounds produce wound channels that are damn near indistinguishable. You just get fewer or them per magazine e with the .45. Sorry pal...but when you're limited to ball ammo mass and diameter are the only way to substitute for a lack of expanding ammunition. Are you really trying to argue that a 124gr 9mm FMJ bullet is equal to a 230gr .45 FMJ bullet? Only in the GD. 350 ft/lbs or 500 ft/lbs energy? Some modern .45 handguns hold as many rounds as the M9... Well wound ballistics experts in the post WW II and Korea the study of weapons effects said the following Study of Weapons Effects CHAPTER II Ballistic Characteristics of Wounding Agents Maj. Ralph W. French, MAC, USA (Ret.), and Brig. Gen. George R. Callender, USA (Ret.) From an analysis of these facts and the requirements for penetration of skin and bone, it can be readily appreciated that the .45 caliber bullet is of little value as a wound-producing agent except in the softer tissues and at near ranges. The bullet often fails either to penetrate or to fracture bone and practically never shatters bone in the manner common to the rifle bullet or fragment. The Japanese and German sidearms with muzzle velocities of approximately 1,100 f.p.s. were much more effective as antipersonnel weapons than the .45 caliber weapon. That's an obvious statement in regards to any pistol round. You can find documented cases of just about every round out there failing to stop an advarsary...up to and including .50BMG. I claimed that I would prefer to see a .45 replacement due to personal preference. Glad to see so many others concerned with my personal opinion. More evidence the GD is dilldos... |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:03:49 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sorry pal...but when you're limited to ball ammo mass and diameter are the only way to substitute for a lack of expanding ammunition. Are you really trying to argue that a 124gr 9mm FMJ bullet is equal to a 230gr .45 FMJ bullet? Only in the GD. 350 ft/lbs or 500 ft/lbs energy? Some modern .45 handguns hold as many rounds as the M9... No apology is necessary. You're just not correct. First of all... where in the blue fuck are you finding 1000FPS 230gr FMJ .45? 
How exactly does the extra mass of the .45 FMJ bullet offer better incapacitation potential? I'll wait. Admittedly, the .45 bullet does represent about a tenth of an inch increase in bullet diameter, with the corresponding greater chance of hitting vital body structures. This extra bullet diameter, however, is tiny, and doesn't always translate into wider wound channels anyway. Some modern .45 pistols hols as many rounds as the M9 used to....at the expense of having a 2x4 for a grip. 17-20 round mags are very common now for the M9. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:07:43 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No apology is necessary. You're just not correct. First of all... where in the blue fuck are you finding 1000FPS 230gr FMJ .45?
How exactly does the extra mass of the .45 FMJ bullet offer better incapacitation potential? I'll wait. Admittedly, the .45 bullet does represent about a tenth of an inch increase in bullet diameter, with the corresponding greater chance of hitting vital body structures. This extra bullet diameter, however, is tiny, and doesn't always translate into wider wound channels anyway. Some modern .45 pistols hols as many rounds as the M9 used to....at the expense of having a 2x4 for a grip. 17-20 round mags are very common now for the M9. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Sorry pal...but when you're limited to ball ammo mass and diameter are the only way to substitute for a lack of expanding ammunition. Are you really trying to argue that a 124gr 9mm FMJ bullet is equal to a 230gr .45 FMJ bullet? Only in the GD. 350 ft/lbs or 500 ft/lbs energy? Some modern .45 handguns hold as many rounds as the M9... No apology is necessary. You're just not correct. First of all... where in the blue fuck are you finding 1000FPS 230gr FMJ .45?
How exactly does the extra mass of the .45 FMJ bullet offer better incapacitation potential? I'll wait. Admittedly, the .45 bullet does represent about a tenth of an inch increase in bullet diameter, with the corresponding greater chance of hitting vital body structures. This extra bullet diameter, however, is tiny, and doesn't always translate into wider wound channels anyway. Some modern .45 pistols hols as many rounds as the M9 used to....at the expense of having a 2x4 for a grip. 17-20 round mags are very common now for the M9. Must suck to have midget hands. My wife might be able to give you some tips. She has small hands and still manages to handle and shoot .45's just fine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:08:12 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Except for pesky thing like lights. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
CT does do a IR laser for the m9, they even have a dual laser setup. Except for pesky thing like lights. Not trying to be argumentative (or a dick) here, I've already been "outed" as an "outsider" here.
What are all these scenarios you guys are running into where you need a light or a suppressor or IR laser but don't aren't using your rifle? Serious question. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:09:32 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Must suck to have midget hands. My wife might be able to give you some tips. She has small hands and still manages to handle and shoot .45's just fine. Brilliant riposte.
Still looking for 500ft/lb 230gr .hardball..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:11:17 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not trying to be argumentative (or a dick) here, I've already been "outed" as an "outsider" here.
What are all these scenarios you guys are running into where you need a light or a suppressor or IR laser but don't aren't using your rifle? Serious question. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
CT does do a IR laser for the m9, they even have a dual laser setup. Except for pesky thing like lights. Not trying to be argumentative (or a dick) here, I've already been "outed" as an "outsider" here.
What are all these scenarios you guys are running into where you need a light or a suppressor or IR laser but don't aren't using your rifle? Serious question. You haven't asked a serious question thus far in this thread. All I've seen is loaded questions to initiate your trolling. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:11:22 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For me, if I am drawing my pistol, if I do remember to sweep the safety, it will be a miracle. DAO with a hammer or something like a glock safety are the way to go. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
no. having spent way too much time with M9 in combat, the safety can move up and down as you move around. Especially mounted on your chest. No matter what condition you carry it in, it could be on safe or fire when you draw. I had no problem carrying it on safe because I was going to sweep the safety everytime anyway. safeties on combat pistols are stupid now. I would argue that a safety such as a 1911 has, that actually locks the slide, is very positive (very rare to actually move it by accident, and even then you can hear the click) and is not just a lever/decocker, is still relevant. It's the only type of safety I find useful. I do find a safety that does not lock the slide to be undesirable. For me, if I am drawing my pistol, if I do remember to sweep the safety, it will be a miracle. DAO with a hammer or something like a glock safety are the way to go. I doubt Army ever goes away from a safety, because they just won't trust their lowest common denominator with it no matter what research you fling at them. But I totally agree with you. Especially about DAO hammer. IMO, that really would be the way to go. Doubt they'll do that either though because of the chicks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:11:55 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
...the issue still for the most part is training not equipment. Training will help whether you are using a flintlock pistol or a Glock 19. But we all know that there are other factors that will help you hit your point of aim, such as being able to see the target, see the sights, hold the weapon comfortably, and other factors related to the weapon itself. The Army is going to do what it is going to do, but I say it's still better to have some improvement rather than none. We all know that any taxpayer money not spent is going to go for the 0bama's next extravagant vacation anyway. I'd rather see it spent on new pistols for the Army. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:12:13 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Must suck to have midget hands. My wife might be able to give you some tips. She has small hands and still manages to handle and shoot .45's just fine. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Sorry pal...but when you're limited to ball ammo mass and diameter are the only way to substitute for a lack of expanding ammunition. Are you really trying to argue that a 124gr 9mm FMJ bullet is equal to a 230gr .45 FMJ bullet? Only in the GD. 350 ft/lbs or 500 ft/lbs energy? Some modern .45 handguns hold as many rounds as the M9... No apology is necessary. You're just not correct. First of all... where in the blue fuck are you finding 1000FPS 230gr FMJ .45? How exactly does the extra mass of the .45 FMJ bullet offer better incapacitation potential? I'll wait. Admittedly, the .45 bullet does represent about a tenth of an inch increase in bullet diameter, with the corresponding greater chance of hitting vital body structures. This extra bullet diameter, however, is tiny, and doesn't always translate into wider wound channels anyway. Some modern .45 pistols hols as many rounds as the M9 used to....at the expense of having a 2x4 for a grip. 17-20 round mags are very common now for the M9. Must suck to have midget hands. My wife might be able to give you some tips. She has small hands and still manages to handle and shoot .45's just fine. A 1911... sure. A FNX-45? No... also you didn't state where you're getting your 1000fps 230gr .45 ACP from either.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:12:39 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not trying to be argumentative (or a dick) here, I've already been "outed" as an "outsider" here.
What are all these scenarios you guys are running into where you need a light or a suppressor or IR laser but don't aren't using your rifle? Serious question. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
CT does do a IR laser for the m9, they even have a dual laser setup. Except for pesky thing like lights. Not trying to be argumentative (or a dick) here, I've already been "outed" as an "outsider" here.
What are all these scenarios you guys are running into where you need a light or a suppressor or IR laser but don't aren't using your rifle? Serious question. The same scenario where you need a pistol and aren't using your rifle, but at night.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:14:06 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
http://images2.opticsplanet.com/365-240-ffffff/opplanet-crimson-trace-laser-grip-beretta-lg402m-main.jpg Instead of a visible laser use an IR. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Just want to say I was wrong. I was actually just convinced on modularity being important for Joe's sidearm. Night vision use was mentioned, and since our guys go in harms way after dark a lot, and they use night vision a lot, and it's a bitch to use iron sights with NVGs on, a rail for mounting an IR laser would make it a LOT more useful at night, especially if you were snooping around in some hadji's house. So now all we need is a bulletproof IR laser that's small enough to mount on the pistol and a holster that won't snag on it. PM Soldier, You've got your work cut out for you.
Or you could just turn it over to REF if they're still kicking down in Crystal. http://images2.opticsplanet.com/365-240-ffffff/opplanet-crimson-trace-laser-grip-beretta-lg402m-main.jpg Instead of a visible laser use an IR. Funny M9 lasergrip story. The Div HHC for 1AD had lasergrips on all their pistols in Baghdad 03. After the redeployment, the pistols were sent to get reblued and the armorer didn't take them off or write lasergrips on the paperwork. Every single pistol came back with stock grips. "What lasergrips? We didn't sign for any" |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:14:33 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Must suck to have midget hands. My wife might be able to give you some tips. She has small hands and still manages to handle and shoot .45's just fine. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Sorry pal...but when you're limited to ball ammo mass and diameter are the only way to substitute for a lack of expanding ammunition. Are you really trying to argue that a 124gr 9mm FMJ bullet is equal to a 230gr .45 FMJ bullet? Only in the GD. 350 ft/lbs or 500 ft/lbs energy? Some modern .45 handguns hold as many rounds as the M9... No apology is necessary. You're just not correct. First of all... where in the blue fuck are you finding 1000FPS 230gr FMJ .45?
How exactly does the extra mass of the .45 FMJ bullet offer better incapacitation potential? I'll wait. Admittedly, the .45 bullet does represent about a tenth of an inch increase in bullet diameter, with the corresponding greater chance of hitting vital body structures. This extra bullet diameter, however, is tiny, and doesn't always translate into wider wound channels anyway. Some modern .45 pistols hols as many rounds as the M9 used to....at the expense of having a 2x4 for a grip. 17-20 round mags are very common now for the M9. Must suck to have midget hands. My wife might be able to give you some tips. She has small hands and still manages to handle and shoot .45's just fine. This gun is supposed to be able to replace intermediate sized carry guns like the M11 and G19 as well. An FNP-45 TAC or HK45 can't do that. Even the HK45C is being used as a full-sized handgun by the elemnts fielding them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:15:13 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Brilliant riposte.
Still looking for 500ft/lb 230gr .hardball..... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Must suck to have midget hands. My wife might be able to give you some tips. She has small hands and still manages to handle and shoot .45's just fine. Brilliant riposte.
Still looking for 500ft/lb 230gr .hardball..... 400 not 500... |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:17:42 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A 1911... sure. A FNX-45? No... also you didn't state where you're getting your 1000fps 230gr .45 ACP from either. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Sorry pal...but when you're limited to ball ammo mass and diameter are the only way to substitute for a lack of expanding ammunition. Are you really trying to argue that a 124gr 9mm FMJ bullet is equal to a 230gr .45 FMJ bullet? Only in the GD. 350 ft/lbs or 500 ft/lbs energy? Some modern .45 handguns hold as many rounds as the M9... No apology is necessary. You're just not correct. First of all... where in the blue fuck are you finding 1000FPS 230gr FMJ .45?
How exactly does the extra mass of the .45 FMJ bullet offer better incapacitation potential? I'll wait. Admittedly, the .45 bullet does represent about a tenth of an inch increase in bullet diameter, with the corresponding greater chance of hitting vital body structures. This extra bullet diameter, however, is tiny, and doesn't always translate into wider wound channels anyway. Some modern .45 pistols hols as many rounds as the M9 used to....at the expense of having a 2x4 for a grip. 17-20 round mags are very common now for the M9. Must suck to have midget hands. My wife might be able to give you some tips. She has small hands and still manages to handle and shoot .45's just fine. A 1911... sure. A FNX-45? No... also you didn't state where you're getting your 1000fps 230gr .45 ACP from either. Corbon...950fps / 461ft-lbs. I never claimed 1000fps. Small hands up there made that claim. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:20:25 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
400 not 500... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Must suck to have midget hands. My wife might be able to give you some tips. She has small hands and still manages to handle and shoot .45's just fine. Brilliant riposte.
Still looking for 500ft/lb 230gr .hardball..... 400 not 500... Most 230gr FMJ is closer to about 380... which is a whopping 30 ft/lbs more than 9mm NATO spec. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:21:35 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
400 not 500... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Must suck to have midget hands. My wife might be able to give you some tips. She has small hands and still manages to handle and shoot .45's just fine. Brilliant riposte.
Still looking for 500ft/lb 230gr .hardball..... 400 not 500... No no no no!!!!!!!!! You meant .45 Magnum!
Damn I wish that round was popular. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:23:07 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Corbon...950fps / 461ft-lbs. I never claimed 1000fps. Small hands up there made that claim. You claimed 500 ft/lbs. That's damn near 1000fps. Math are hard. Now you've picked a boutique round that isn't even FMJ.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:25:51 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Veteran or not, you are still on the outside right now. The issue is training AND equipment, across the board. Conditions are as perfect as they are going to get, the needs have been identified, this is happening. End of story. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Terrible, terrible viewpoint. So limited yet so broad at the same time. With that point of view the SPCS is a waste of time versus the IOTV.. Or the M1A1 vs M1A2. Or M240L versus M240B. Ops core vs ACH. M224 Vs M224A1. Equipment changes, sometimes not in ways that are very measurable for the outside viewer, but very relevant for the user. Just because you also use a pistol either recreationally or in your profession does not make you qualified in the same manner as a military user. http://www.beretta.com/assets/2/15/DimGalleryLarge/J90C9F10_3QT_R_BK.jpg Same parts and magazine compatibility with the fullsize M9. So your answer is to switch to another pistol for compact needs as opposed to making a consolidated platform right when the M9 is almost weeded out of the force completely naturally? There are changes that are needed. The ability to mount a vis/IR light has been expressed here by multiple servicemembers, yet all of you on the outside claim to know better than us what improvements we need and don't need. You are on the outside, so it would probably serve you well to remember that when you blow off improvement metrics as being unnecessary. Notice a trend in most of the platforms I listed? Most of them had to do with weight reduction. A pound here, pound there may seem trivial to you, but then you aren't carrying this shit up a mountain in Wardak at 13,000' either. A swap from the M9 to a Glock 19 for example would result in a 13oz weight reduction alone. Veteran or not, you are still on the outside right now. The issue is training AND equipment, across the board. Conditions are as perfect as they are going to get, the needs have been identified, this is happening. End of story. Sorry, but the primary role of a sidearm is just that. Military isn't LE where a sidearm is their primary. It is their secondary. The Beretta 92FS/M9 is fine for the intended role. Some of the guns need to be replaced. Replace them. We do the same with worn out M16s and M4s. Want IR... Crimson Trace fits the bill. Want a light? Beretta makes the pistol with a rail. Or get accessory rails from a third party vendor like Surefire. I guarantee you that the specs will be in 9mm. So once again, what does switching do? Save money and spend what we save the smart way. INCREASE TRAINING Because if you're talking about the need for IR, a light, suppressor, and all that hogwash and our GIs can't fucking figure out how to properly carry and use what they have right now. It is all a fucking waste of time and money. Scrap the worn out M9s, gut them for usable parts, replace with new production, and train our troops in proper pistolcraft. If anyone has better insight in this field... it is LE. Why? Because they use a pistol as their primary. We already went through this with the JCP Trail, and the XM8 trial. The replacement of the 1911 was needed. The replacement of the Beretta is not. I know for damn sure that if a pistol is adopted as the replacement for the Beretta. Troops will still be fucking retarded, training will still suck ass, guns will still be cleaned to until the finish is worn off, they will be treated like old end of the line 2 dollar whores, and Private Snuffie will still ND into the TOC Coffee Pot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:26:21 PM EDT
[#40]
Doesn't the M9 have like a 3,000 round service life on the locking block and something like 30,000 on the slide?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:27:43 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What are all these scenarios you guys are running into where you need a light or a suppressor or IR laser but don't aren't using your rifle? Serious question. Do you even Call of Duty bro? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:28:11 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Funny M9 lasergrip story. The Div HHC for 1AD had lasergrips on all their pistols in Baghdad 03. After the redeployment, the pistols were sent to get reblued and the armorer didn't take them off or write lasergrips on the paperwork. Every single pistol came back with stock grips. "What lasergrips? We didn't sign for any" Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Just want to say I was wrong. I was actually just convinced on modularity being important for Joe's sidearm. Night vision use was mentioned, and since our guys go in harms way after dark a lot, and they use night vision a lot, and it's a bitch to use iron sights with NVGs on, a rail for mounting an IR laser would make it a LOT more useful at night, especially if you were snooping around in some hadji's house. So now all we need is a bulletproof IR laser that's small enough to mount on the pistol and a holster that won't snag on it. PM Soldier, You've got your work cut out for you. Or you could just turn it over to REF if they're still kicking down in Crystal. http://images2.opticsplanet.com/365-240-ffffff/opplanet-crimson-trace-laser-grip-beretta-lg402m-main.jpg Instead of a visible laser use an IR. Funny M9 lasergrip story. The Div HHC for 1AD had lasergrips on all their pistols in Baghdad 03. After the redeployment, the pistols were sent to get reblued and the armorer didn't take them off or write lasergrips on the paperwork. Every single pistol came back with stock grips. "What lasergrips? We didn't sign for any"
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:28:43 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The same scenario where you need a pistol and aren't using your rifle, but at night. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
CT does do a IR laser for the m9, they even have a dual laser setup. Except for pesky thing like lights. Not trying to be argumentative (or a dick) here, I've already been "outed" as an "outsider" here.
What are all these scenarios you guys are running into where you need a light or a suppressor or IR laser but don't aren't using your rifle? Serious question. The same scenario where you need a pistol and aren't using your rifle, but at night. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:30:19 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
. http://www.sigsauer.com/upFiles/catalog/product/M11-A1-D-detail-L.jpg Is it even issued yet? There was a big stink about that when Sig named it the M11-A1 Hell, I have two of em (Black and Brown), and think it's one of the best pistols made right now. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There will not be a new general issue pistol for decades. This is just another circle jerk for some retard to use as a bullet point for his/her next promotion. http://www.sigsauer.com/upFiles/catalog/product/M11-A1-D-detail-L.jpg Is it even issued yet? There was a big stink about that when Sig named it the M11-A1 Hell, I have two of em (Black and Brown), and think it's one of the best pistols made right now. The whole M11-A1 was an attempt by Sig to be able to keep supplying M11s to the DoD despite the fact they no longer make them or have a contract to supply any more. The M11s appear to be coming to a lifecycle end and, like Beretta, Sig would rather the DoD buy (currently produced) P229s labeled M11A1s than have a new competition conducted. So the M9s and M11s (the 2 most issued sidearms in the Army) are both nearing the end of life. 1911s are being fielded well beyong their lifespan. We also have M9A1s and limited numbers of unit level P226, G17, G19, G22, G23, G26, G27, HKs... and the list goes on. Across the services we are also fielding HK45s, HK45Cs, 1911s/M45/M45A1, M&Ps, P239s, P229s, P228s, etc... Whatever the Army/Air-force adopted will make it's way into mass use by the USMC and USN. Hopefully this will streamline the DoD across the board and provide a near universal solution for all but the highest assets of JSOC. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:30:29 PM EDT
[#45]
Has FN's FNS9 turned out to be a solid pistol? Seems like it would meet the requirements you guys are arguing about. I don't know much about it.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:32:36 PM EDT
[#46]
Fuck it, MK23's for everyone.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:33:18 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Problem solved for NVG use then. Except for pesky thing like lights. Not trying to be argumentative (or a dick) here, I've already been "outed" as an "outsider" here. What are all these scenarios you guys are running into where you need a light or a suppressor or IR laser but don't aren't using your rifle? Serious question. The same scenario where you need a pistol and aren't using your rifle, but at night. http://i.imgur.com/VBb4lXm.jpg N'ah Bro....   |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:35:38 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryWait, are you trying to infer that pulling the trigger with your support hand isn't the best way to do it? Way to out yourself as a low tier operator bro.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:36:52 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You claimed 500 ft/lbs. That's damn near 1000fps. Math are hard. Now you've picked a boutique round that isn't even FMJ.... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Corbon...950fps / 461ft-lbs. I never claimed 1000fps. Small hands up there made that claim. You claimed 500 ft/lbs. That's damn near 1000fps. Math are hard. Now you've picked a boutique round that isn't even FMJ.... Ever type on an iPhone before? Guess not. Either way...this thread is entertaining as we watch you get but hurt over someone else's personal preferences. Must be tough being you...always concerned over what others do and think. I'll think about you the next time my wife is rocking a G21 at the range. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2015 12:37:55 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Has FN's FNS9 turned out to be a solid pistol? Seems like it would meet the requirements you guys are arguing about. I don't know much about it. http://truthaboutguns-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/IMG_9307.jpg In my limited experience with this pistol, as well as it'b big bro, the FNX 45, I found them to be easy to use and extremely accurate. The accessory market for them was too limited (mags, holsters, sights............) so I sold them. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
