http://usmcweapons.com/articles/Pistol/M9%20MMNF.htm

So, my question is is there any chance that the Marine Corps is going back to the Colt (updated) as the standard sidearm and dumping the Beretta? Would you like to see this happen? Why not if one .45 round will do the job of a clipful of M9 rounds, ok I exagerrate, make it 2, still 2x the firepower. One shot, one kill.

I bring this up because I hear change is in the wind if not imminent.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: PT,

Not very likely. The key item to note was the inital reason for shifting to the 9mm in the first place. In NATO the standard round of choice is the 9mm. On paper it sounded like a good deal. In reality, we have yet to have to rely on NATO allies to supply us with ammo. Our own supply system works too well.

i think we should should drop the 9mm, it is a police caliber, the miliatry needs more firepower.

we generally have more firepower than we are allowed to use.....

cmon now, i'm suiprised none of you brought up the G 22 - i'd rather be holding one of those in my hand than the 9mm or .45

well i think the stupid rules of engagemen are outdated and need to be rvised/dropped any way. but if you are diong a room clearing would you rather have a 9mm which might take mutiple shots to stop a foe are a 45. one shot one kill. when it comes to cqb the bigger the calbier the better

room clearing is best done with a 12 gauge....

Anyone familiar with the SOCOM community will know, most SF personnel still carry M9s. They are switching it up to the SOCOM USP .45 or the Glock .30 as needed. There are always situations in which a judgement call is made for firepower needed.

Room clearing with a twelve gauge? Bah. I am a big fan of clearing the whole building with a thermobaric Hellfire. Its the coolest, one shot, and blows the bad guys out of windows and they flop around like a dead monkey. Check out its effectiveness on militaryvideos.net. Video is "Renegade Troop 4/3ACR in Tal Afar"

This message has been edited. Last edited by: CavScout19D30,

Well im kind of in a mental toss up here on this one...I mean i personally love the punch afforded by th .45 compared to the 9mm. Even more so when you have to stuff it with what is universally known as a poor man stopper in NATO ball rounds. But you also have to look at it in a realistic point of view. If the ballon goes up and for one reason or another your down to your sidearm then it def a butt puckering situtation. Definantly in a MOUT situation so that clip of 15 rounds is an assest. So i would have to vote for a polymer framed light weight weapon with a bouble stack magazine full of .45 rounds that is easy to shoot and reliable as hell. Hmmmm sort of sounds like a Glock to me

It would be pretty damn nice if the USMC would go back to using the Colt, but it just doesn't seem to likely. Besides, the Beretta is a very reliable sidearm that will get the job done.

I'd say the 9mm has many advantages such as better penetration, cheaper cost, and lower recoil (therefore easier to train people to use), so the .45 ACP is not automatically better. But in the Issue of the 1911 vs the M9, the 1911 is obselete holding only 7 rounds and being very heavy. I think a comparison of a modern .45 and a modern 9mm would be better.

quote:

Originally posted by Matt White:
i think we should should drop the 9mm, it is a police caliber, the miliatry needs more firepower.

Deffinitly, 9mm doesnt even penatrate body armor so the military needs to drop it and re service the M1911 the best pistol ever made(my opinion)

1. The .45 is much worse at penetrating body armor
2. Their are many pistols made since then that are lighter, more erganomic, and with vastly high magazine capacities than the 1911.

hyperion, don't take this the wrong way as I'm not flaming you, just trying to seek clarification ok? What are you basing these statements on? I have seen 9mm bounce right off windshields where .45 punches right through.

Are you a gun owner?

First off you were very polite and I don't see it as a flame at all, I'd be happy to explain.
1. Obstacles such as a windshield are different than body armor. They act like hard body armor which resists and push back with force and hardness, whereas soft body armor distributes the force over a wide area dispersing it.
2. I am basing it off of the facts I have.
A. There is only a very small difference in the kinetic energy of the 2 rounds, a difference of some 20-30 joules at most.
B. the 9mm bullet is significantly thinner than the .45, first this decreases drag therefore allowing it to lose less velocity. But much more importantly this focuses the impact on a significantly small target area, this makes it harded to spread out the force as it is more concentrated, one reason why APDS rounds are so thin.

Hyperion...u smoking crack! My 1911 A-1 will punch threw 1/4" steel at 10 yards where my Glock 19 goes pingggg. Who needs ammo when u can kill the enemy WITH the gun.

So of course I'm going to believe someone who tells me I'm smoking crack and uses the word ping with 3 extra g's.

.45 does go through 1/4 inch steel at 10 yards whereas a 9mm doesn't.

DefenseTech
Exclusive: Air Force Revives .45-cal Handgun

Air-Force-pistols-web.jpg

Twenty years ago, the US Department of Defense decided to replace the
.45-cal M1911 handgun with the 9mm M9 Beretta as the standard-issue sidearm.

To say this decision was controversial is an understatement.

You will find plenty of defenders of the M9, such as this one, but also
many, many critics. The critics say the M9's 9mm bullet lacks the
"knock-down" power to immediately disable a human being. If this human being
is shooting at you, you'd also prefer a bullet that could make this person
stop.

I give you the Air Force Future Handgun program, which has just entered the
market survey phase. The air force says it "may specify" a .45-caliber
round, which is larger than the 9mm and the same size used on the M1911
phased-out in the late-1980s.

The air force program comes several months after the army and Special
Operations Command cancelled the Joint Combat Pistol program, which also
sought to bring back the .45-calibre sidearm.

History may be repeating itself. Legendary Air Force Gen. Curtis LeMay kept
interest alive in the Colt M16 rifle while the army hopelessly pursued the
Springfield M14. Will the air force now usher the .45-calibre sidearm back
into the inventory, with the army again forced to play follow-the-leader?

-- Stephen Trimble
April 18, 2007 03:14 PM

To be honest it seems much more like the other way around. The .45 symbolizes the idocy that was the M14 and the 9mm symbolizes the M16, where these people are those who constantly complain that we need the M14 and it's ilk back.