Posted on Jul 3, 2014
What would you replace M9 with? The Army is looking at .357, .40, and .45ACP
26K
223
201
3
3
0
Which of the rounds that the Army is looking at replacing the M9 with would you pick? .357 Sig, .40 S&W and .45 ACP Or would you pick something else? Why?
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/07/03/army-wants-harder-hitting-pistol/
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/07/03/army-wants-harder-hitting-pistol/
Equipment
Army
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 65
1
1
0
I would use the .45 ACP for the increased stopping power. However, due to the cost of the .45 I would give back some of the power IOT save some $$ and go with the .40 S&W.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Something to consider, we have a lot of small female senior leaders in the Army that I have seen show difficulty firing a 9mm. If you put a .45 ACP in the hands of a 5'0" 50 year old that weighs 120 lbs and has small hands, they won't be able to fire it effectively. If we decide to field a larger pistol, we should use common sense and ensure units give leaders the opportunity to choose a M4 or M9 instead of forcing them to qualify with the weapon that is assigned to their MTO&E position. Truthfully, we should do that now. I don't care if there's a female next to me in combat, but I want her to be able to put rounds downrange accurately when the need arises.
(1)
(0)
(1)
(0)
SFC Walter Mack
Holy crap! I wrote this a month ago, just a sec...,
I may have been a bit off topic, but you did understand correctly. If you do not, as a fellow Marine (check the profile), see that a rifle should always be close at hand (mine was), then I'm not sure we're going to see eye to eye. Anywhere that you have to leave a rifle behind in theater, such as a hospital, you would also drop that 9mm.
Once again, I was off topic. Yeah, go with the 45 ACP. That gun is the bomb diggity!
I may have been a bit off topic, but you did understand correctly. If you do not, as a fellow Marine (check the profile), see that a rifle should always be close at hand (mine was), then I'm not sure we're going to see eye to eye. Anywhere that you have to leave a rifle behind in theater, such as a hospital, you would also drop that 9mm.
Once again, I was off topic. Yeah, go with the 45 ACP. That gun is the bomb diggity!
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Like many of you I have owned and shot everything from 9mm to 44mag. I think the Army either needs to change the ammo we use in 9mm if they wish to stay with that caliber or go to the .357SIG.
I don't mind 9mm myself and have shot a lot of it in different grains in my POW 9mm's and in my issued M9. I have shot a lot of 40S&W at the same time and have a lot trigger time on this round along with the .357SIG and a 45ACP.
Yes The .40 caliber. Is an excellent cartridge, but the recoil is snappy, and more difficult to shoot. Even more than a. 45acp. The. 357sig recoils in a very pronounced manner, but it is fast and your gun lines up on target faster than the 40 caliber. The 357sig is more powerful and has a good track record even though it has not been around as long as the others.
I like the .357SIG due to it being easier to shoot than the 40S&W as it does not have the muzzle flip or the snappiness or up and twist like the 40S&W has. I would describe the .40 as "snappy" up and the .357 "recoil" back at you if that makes any sense. The .357SIG also has a 100 yard flat range trajectory when fired unlike the other pistol rounds, I like that I know that within 100 yards my round is not going to drop or be high unless I move my sights and then fire the gun.
I like many others here love the good old 45ACP and it has a history in every branch and is still used today by units in different branches. It is effective and will works really good. What a lot of people that due not understand about firearm's is that it does not matter what type of bullet is used it all comes down to shot placement.
There have been many people killed with a 22LR and .380 all due to shot placement. If you take a pistol class you will see and know how to effectively employ your handgun and where your shots need to hit.
I would say as to the platform that should be recommend for a new gun should be either a SIG 226R or 229R, H&K P30 if the Army would stop worrying about not having a external safety then I would recommend the M&P series SIG 320 and then the Glock series.
I don't mind 9mm myself and have shot a lot of it in different grains in my POW 9mm's and in my issued M9. I have shot a lot of 40S&W at the same time and have a lot trigger time on this round along with the .357SIG and a 45ACP.
Yes The .40 caliber. Is an excellent cartridge, but the recoil is snappy, and more difficult to shoot. Even more than a. 45acp. The. 357sig recoils in a very pronounced manner, but it is fast and your gun lines up on target faster than the 40 caliber. The 357sig is more powerful and has a good track record even though it has not been around as long as the others.
I like the .357SIG due to it being easier to shoot than the 40S&W as it does not have the muzzle flip or the snappiness or up and twist like the 40S&W has. I would describe the .40 as "snappy" up and the .357 "recoil" back at you if that makes any sense. The .357SIG also has a 100 yard flat range trajectory when fired unlike the other pistol rounds, I like that I know that within 100 yards my round is not going to drop or be high unless I move my sights and then fire the gun.
I like many others here love the good old 45ACP and it has a history in every branch and is still used today by units in different branches. It is effective and will works really good. What a lot of people that due not understand about firearm's is that it does not matter what type of bullet is used it all comes down to shot placement.
There have been many people killed with a 22LR and .380 all due to shot placement. If you take a pistol class you will see and know how to effectively employ your handgun and where your shots need to hit.
I would say as to the platform that should be recommend for a new gun should be either a SIG 226R or 229R, H&K P30 if the Army would stop worrying about not having a external safety then I would recommend the M&P series SIG 320 and then the Glock series.
(1)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
The only time I ever found the .40 to be "snappy" is when I was shooting hot loaded JHPs in the 165gr range. With "GI" 180gr FMJ, I found the .40 to be very easy to shoot, with recoil on par with the.45 (which I find has more of a "rolling" recoil than "snap")....I have small hands. I found that the .357SIG has much more snappier recoil than the .40 and .45.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
The round that has proven itself over the years and has not failed is the .45ACP. One .45 will do what it takes 3 or 4 9mm to accomplish. True, you do not have the magazine capacity of the 9mm, but the stopping power of a single .45 ACP does away with the need for additional ammunition for the same target. The military made a big mistake, in my opinion, when they went away from the M1911. It has served the military for many decades and should still be in use.
(1)
(0)
SSG William Patton
I beg to differ LTC. Speaking from experience as a soldier in Vietnam and a cop on a Louisiana street, one shot was sufficient in more than on occassion to take down the other guy and put them out of commission permanently. If you need more than one shot I suggest more time on the range.
(1)
(0)
SPC Geoffrey Jenkins
I agree with the stopping power of a .45ACP,
but you have these hippie generation protesters that will lobby to congress that we do not need that much killing power on human beings/lmfao
but you have these hippie generation protesters that will lobby to congress that we do not need that much killing power on human beings/lmfao
(0)
(0)
SSG William Patton
Geoffrey, I agree with your point on the idiots lobbying Congress to spare lives. I was always taught that a wounded enemy soldier tied up several soldiers to remove them from the battlefield, but having been on the battlefield, I have seen enemy soldiers kill my buddies. I never shot to wound, though I know some of my shots did just that. Hitting the bulls eye is difficult when the target shoots back, but if training is sufficient, it does take over in high stress situations like a fire fight and more times than not, the target is hit in the kill zone. All citizens should be required to serve in the military so they would understand the potential to get into a gun battle. Then, if they had their lives on the line, they would think differently. It is great to protest about being humane if your ass is not hangin in the wind.
(1)
(0)
SSG William Patton
Jeff, You are correct about the .45 making a bad day for the receiver. I had the misfortune to use deadly force as a cop and one incident the receiver was only hit in the shoulder. Even with a quart of Wild Turkey in him, he felt it that night and it took the fight out of him quickly. An inch to the right and I would have split his skull. But when the target shoots back, being dead accurate is sometimes difficult.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
If it were my decision to make, I would find a solid 44. Sp /44. Mag. Lots of power, little ability to pierce, but we train marksmen. I'd rather have a high caliber low round pistol than vice versa in a close range gun fight.
(1)
(0)
SSG William Patton
Too big for most people to handle, unless you are Clint Eastwood as Inspector Callahan, SFPD. If you get the first shot where it is supposed to go, very effective, but subsequent shots tend to go everywhere. I had a police buddy I worked with that carried and S&W .44 mag and his dream was to catch a robber coming out of a convenience store. One night he got his chance. He emptied the .44 mag and never cut a hair. The first shot was high and went through the wall of a house 40 yards behind the perp. It nearly hit a little girl sleeping in her bed. In the 1970s the California Highway Patrol did a 5 year study of actual combat situation involving troopers. Each officer was given a different caliber weapon from the .44 mag., 45 ACP, .357, 9mm, and .38 special. The .40 was not available then. The study revealed the .44 mag was the most deadly, but officers indicated that if their first shot was not accurate, they had trouble getting back on target. Next was the .45 ACP in the number of kills and officers liked it for both its power, accuracy, and ease of getting back on target after the first shot. The .357 was too powerful at close range and hollow points tended to fail to open at the 7 yard line. The .38 special followed and then the 9mm in the number of kills in actual comba situations. Most police agencies today use the .40 caliber for its power and ease of handling after the first shot. Myself, I carried a Model 1911 A in Vietnam and as a cop and it never let me down.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
As much as I dislike the M9, it has performed satisfactorily, and it's in a very common caliber. If it's not broke don't fix it
(1)
(0)
SSG Dean Stambaugh
I never got it.What good would it do me to have a 16rd magazine when it took 2 or more rounds to take someone down.Go back to the.45,it's a no brainer!!!!!!
(1)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
7 round mag = 7 chances to hit. 3 mags = 21 rounds
15 round mag - 15 chances to hit. 3 mags = 45 rounds
Even if a 9mm doesn't have the "stopping power" of a .45, having more rounds keeps you in the fight longer and allows you to put more rounds downrage. Volume of fire matters just as much at times as the damage that fires causes.
15 round mag - 15 chances to hit. 3 mags = 45 rounds
Even if a 9mm doesn't have the "stopping power" of a .45, having more rounds keeps you in the fight longer and allows you to put more rounds downrage. Volume of fire matters just as much at times as the damage that fires causes.
(1)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
Also, remember that you don't necessarily need to kill or even wound the enemy to successfuly defned youself. You just have to get him to stop what he's doing and go/do something else. If putting up a hail of bullets convinces your enemy that being near you is an unhealthy place to be, than that is effective too.
(0)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
WO1 Palmer, I am not advocating that you don't aim with the intention of hitting and killing your target. I am saying that hitting your target is not always necessary to achieve the goal of self-defense in a combat situation.
It is often said that a pistol is used to fight your way to something bigger. If you can keep your opponent's head down with pistol fire while getting to a rifle or machine gun, then the weapon served it's purpose even if you didn't hit anything but the ground around him. And having more bullets makes that easier to do.
It is often said that a pistol is used to fight your way to something bigger. If you can keep your opponent's head down with pistol fire while getting to a rifle or machine gun, then the weapon served it's purpose even if you didn't hit anything but the ground around him. And having more bullets makes that easier to do.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
1
1
0
If I remember right we had the 45 before the 9. Personally I have a 44. So I would go with that one but it isn't on your list.
(1)
(0)
SSG William Patton
The .44 Mag. is too big and too hard to control in a semiauthomatc platform. I policed with officers who carried the .44 mag. and after the first shot, they could not hit the target, much less the bulls eyes.
(1)
(0)
I would say that I am not opposed to the 9mm as you could get ammo that would improve the damage of a target. I was reading an article and saw some great points. The 40 cal is not really a great option due to the fact that no gun was design for that round. They are all on a 9mm frame and that frame wears out fast with the additional power. I would almost favor a 45 but them who really uses side arms that much in the regular army. MP's would be hit the hardest as the M9 is their primary weapon when performing their duties. I think the 357 could show promise but the pistol will have to bring a lot of options to the table.
(1)
(0)
MAJ Jim Woods
I have had a G23 for almost 20 years. I am a S&W and Glock Armorer and have been a Firearms Instructor for 47 years (ran my first range as a 2Lt in 1967 with .45's).
My G23 has well over 20,000 rounds fired through it and I still run through our qual course with just head shots. Nothing has been replaced on the pistol and I don't clean it but maybe 6 times a year.
I'm not saying that the Glock is the best or that the .40 cal is the best. But the terminal ballistics on a .40 are far greater than any 9mm and the recoil increase is minimal on the Glock due to the engineering of the polymer frame. It actually assists in the reduction of recoil as compared to say a Sig or Beretta. I have recently fired quite a bit with a S&W M&P (.40 and 9mm) and am impressed by it. it appears that Smith built the original full size M&P around the .40 and then offered it in the 9mm (I could be wrong on this). The Beretta is based on an "old" frame originally offered as the 92F then the 92FS before the M9. This was engineered in the late 70's early 80's before polymer frames (even the Glock back then had a weak polymer frame). The M9 is basically a 30 year old design (lot's of aluminum) and at the least needs to be upgraded using modern metals and polymers.
The original question was about replacing the 9mm with a .357, .40, or .45. and the FN 5.7 (rifle cartridge). Of course you could also consider the 10mm as some of the Fed Agencies have (and regretted). The point is that there are way too many calibers out there that perform better than the 9mm.
Of course as a Firearms Instructor, the first round is the only one that counts! Even my little Kel-Tec P3AT.380 with a properly placed round at a reasonable range will do the job and "stop" the bad man. As one of my "old" firearms buddy's used to say "Hardball to the coconut ends the gunfight every time."
My G23 has well over 20,000 rounds fired through it and I still run through our qual course with just head shots. Nothing has been replaced on the pistol and I don't clean it but maybe 6 times a year.
I'm not saying that the Glock is the best or that the .40 cal is the best. But the terminal ballistics on a .40 are far greater than any 9mm and the recoil increase is minimal on the Glock due to the engineering of the polymer frame. It actually assists in the reduction of recoil as compared to say a Sig or Beretta. I have recently fired quite a bit with a S&W M&P (.40 and 9mm) and am impressed by it. it appears that Smith built the original full size M&P around the .40 and then offered it in the 9mm (I could be wrong on this). The Beretta is based on an "old" frame originally offered as the 92F then the 92FS before the M9. This was engineered in the late 70's early 80's before polymer frames (even the Glock back then had a weak polymer frame). The M9 is basically a 30 year old design (lot's of aluminum) and at the least needs to be upgraded using modern metals and polymers.
The original question was about replacing the 9mm with a .357, .40, or .45. and the FN 5.7 (rifle cartridge). Of course you could also consider the 10mm as some of the Fed Agencies have (and regretted). The point is that there are way too many calibers out there that perform better than the 9mm.
Of course as a Firearms Instructor, the first round is the only one that counts! Even my little Kel-Tec P3AT.380 with a properly placed round at a reasonable range will do the job and "stop" the bad man. As one of my "old" firearms buddy's used to say "Hardball to the coconut ends the gunfight every time."
(0)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
When they started getting wear problems with the .40's in the Gen 1 Glocks, they reinforced the frame in the subsequent Gen II and Gen IIIs.
(0)
(0)
SSG Roger Ayscue
9mm in 147 grain FRANGIBLE is OK, but make mine an M1911A1 with a 230 grain ANYTHING and he ain't getting up. 230 grain ball is like a brick at 650 miles per hour, ANY hit and he goes down.
(0)
(0)
Sig Sauer 226 & 229 in 357 Sig. Many federal agencies and police departments have adopted the round. Sig Sauer weapons because there already in service.
(1)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
Bullet weights ranging from 115 to 150 grains (7.5 to 9.7 g) have been offered. Loads are available with energies from 488 foot-pounds force (662 J) to over 568 foot-pounds force (770 J), and penetration depths from 9 inches (230 mm) to over 16.5 inches (420 mm) are available for various applications and risk assessments.
(0)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
Because of its relatively high velocity for a handgun round, the .357 SIG has an unusually flat trajectory, extending the effective range.
(0)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
The bottleneck shape of the .357 SIG cartridge makes feeding problems almost non-existent. This is because the bullet is channeled through the larger chamber before being seated entirely as the slide goes into full battery.
(0)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
The goal of the .357 SIG project was to offer a level of performance equal to the highly effective 125 grains (8.1 g) .357 Magnum load. The .357 SIG accomplishes this with a 125 grains (8.1 g) bullet at a muzzle velocity of 1,450 feet per second (440 m/s) out of a 4 in (102 mm) barrel, which is generally identical to the velocity achieved by standard factory 125 grains (8.1 g) .357 Magnum loads out of a 4 in (102 mm) revolver barrel.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google