Single Stack, Compact 9mm for General Issue - Page 2 - Gun Hub
Gun Hub

Go Back   Gun Hub > Gun Hub Forum > Gun Talk

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-01-2016, 07:24 PM   #21
Senior Member
 
Diamondback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Seattle area--Sodom & Gomorrah on Puget Sound
Posts: 1,774
Quote:
Originally Posted by stand watie View Post
IrishCop,

While the M9 is adequate for uniformed carry (Most MALE Military Police LIKE the M9 & the M11, too.), MANY people, including any number of female MPs, who have smaller than average hands don't shoot it well.
(The same people don't usually shoot the M1911A1 well either.)

yours, sw
On the other hand, one working for you doesn't mean the other will too, either.

If I was designing a compact to fit someone like me, and it HAS to be 9mm and *no* single-action, I'd want to marry the Para LDA system to the Springfield EMP. (Well, for me personally I'd go a single-stack 9mm LDA in one of the three traditional sizes--I don't pretend to understand why the Little Guy With Big F... Gun card counterintuitively works for me, all I know is it's worked well my entire adult life and when something *does* work you don't just junk it just because you don't understand ow or why it does--but the EMP would allow a smaller frame to better fit the smaller-handed.
Diamondback is offline  
Old 10-01-2016, 07:27 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
stand watie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 3,286
IrishCop,

in point of fact, MOST of us USACIDC folks don't have the body mass to conceal the M9. under a suit-coat/sports coat. - That's WHY the "standard issue" for all agents is the M11.)

The Army might consider the P225 in GI dress.

yours, satx

Last edited by stand watie; 10-01-2016 at 07:28 PM. Reason: add
stand watie is offline  
Old 10-02-2016, 06:02 AM   #23
Senior Member
 
spwenger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Show Low AZ
Posts: 1,066
MARSOC Just Announced...

...that it has settled on the Glock 19 as the sole handgun authorized for its Marine Raiders. They mentioned the need for discreet carry on some missions.

Source

Last edited by spwenger; 10-02-2016 at 06:04 AM. Reason: Added the sentence about discreet carry.
spwenger is offline  
 
Old 10-02-2016, 06:50 AM   #24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skeptic49 View Post
Folks,
What we need is a weapon that can be carried all the time. Now big guns can be carried by some people, but my 1911 is not compatible with Florida attire despite what Tom Selleck did on "Magnum PI". Can a person really sit in a Ferrari with a 1911 behind his right hip, just to the right of the spine?

As I have mentioned before, in the Spanish civil war the Luftwaffe pilots preferred the Walther PPK and similar pistols, because they could carry it all the time, as opposed to Lugers.

Something like a Ruger LC9 Pro or the Kahr appeals.

Geoff
Who once went to an Army sponsored bull session on new pistols in the 1970s, I went in the door favoring big DA/SA hi cap pistols and came out a fan of the SIG P6!
however, if it's on the LEFT hip like the 1911 was designed for, it's a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT matter- I never got into a vehicle where my pistol was in the way b/c it was on my right hip- the right hand is where your shifter goes, the left on the wheel and or gun, also it's damned near IMPOSSIBLE to return fire from the right side if need be- way back when , on tv, one of heroe's had his 1911 in a modified hip holster mounted on the left side of the dash between the steering clumn and the door- and he COULD if need be, fire out the port side drivers window
one also has to remember that the 1911 was designed when the SABER was the primaqry for mounted troops and the manual of arms called for the crossdraw

Last edited by t-star; 10-02-2016 at 06:59 AM.
t-star is offline  
Old 10-02-2016, 06:54 AM   #25
Senior Member
 
stand watie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 3,286
spwenger,

I guess that I'm behind the times, but I thought that the MARINE RAIDERS were abolished during WWII??

yours, sw
stand watie is offline  
Old 10-02-2016, 07:19 AM   #26
Senior Member
 
csmkersh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 9,699
Quote:
Originally Posted by t-star View Post
one also has to remember that the 1911 was designed when the SABER was the primaqry for mounted troops and the manual of arms called for the crossdraw
The saber was on the left side and the pistol on the right, butt forward.

Oh, and Dean has the Manual of Arms on The Gun Zone.

The Gun Zone -- Field Manual 23-35

Oh, and the 1911 was used in the first cavalry charge down here in Texas when Patton Sr. was chasing Poncho Villa.

Last edited by csmkersh; 10-02-2016 at 07:23 AM.
csmkersh is offline  
Old 10-02-2016, 08:21 AM   #27
Senior Member
 
spwenger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Show Low AZ
Posts: 1,066
Okay, Here's Another Link...

Quote:
Originally Posted by stand watie View Post
spwenger,

I guess that I'm behind the times, but I thought that the MARINE RAIDERS were abolished during WWII??

yours, sw
Quote:
In 2014, the Marine Special Operations Regiment, serving under the United States Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command (MARSOC), was renamed the Marine Raider Regiment. This change was implemented to better show that modern Marine special operations forces trace their lineage and heritage back to the World War II Raiders. Individual Marines of the Marine Raider Regiment are once again called Marine Raiders.
Wikipedia article
spwenger is offline  
Old 10-02-2016, 08:43 AM   #28
Senior Member
 
spwenger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Show Low AZ
Posts: 1,066
Correct Me if I'm Mistaken...

Quote:
Originally Posted by csmkersh View Post
Oh, and the 1911 was used in the first cavalry charge down here in Texas when Patton Sr. was chasing Poncho Villa.
...but I recall the Punitive Expedition having two columns:
  • One was led by then Major Frank Tompkins, out of Columbus NM, site of the raid believed to have been led by Pancho Villa.
  • The other was led by then Brigadier General John Pershing. This one entered Mexico farther west in New Mexico, at Culberson's Ranch. George S. Patton, Jr. was in this column, after having persuaded Pershing to accept him as an aide. During that service, he successfully used his privately purchased Colt SAA revolver. Later, when he enhanced his image by wearing a pair of ivory-handled revolvers, one was the SAA and the other was a registered 3" S&W .357 Magnum.
I'm not disputing that there may have been a cavalry charge in Texas in which the 1911 was first used but I was not aware of one that was considered part of the Punitive Expedition.

(For those interested in a detailed history of the Punitive Expedition - including extensive background of how Woodrow Wilson's Progressive policies provoked the Villa raid on Columbus - the reprint of Tompkin's book Chasing Villa, while apparently out of print, is currently listed in both new and used copies at Amazon.com.)
spwenger is offline  
Old 10-02-2016, 11:15 AM   #29
Senior Member
 
csmkersh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 9,699
Quote:
Originally Posted by spwenger
...but I recall the Punitive Expedition having two columns:

One was led by then Major Frank Tompkins, out of Columbus NM, site of the raid believed to have been led by Pancho Villa.

The other was led by then Brigadier General John Pershing.
You are correct. I carelessly wrote Patton. He was there as a member of Pershing's staff.
csmkersh is offline  
Old 10-02-2016, 12:23 PM   #30
Senior Member
 
stand watie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 3,286
spwenger,

INTERESTING. = I had not heard that.
(I wish that my old friend, CPL R.B. Lewellen, who was a MARINE RAIDER in the raid on Makin Island, had lived to see that happen.= R.B. lost his right arm in the first 2 hours that raid to a 7.7MG round.)

yours, sw
stand watie is offline  
Old 10-02-2016, 02:56 PM   #31
Senior Member
 
csmkersh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 9,699
Quote:
I'm not disputing that there may have been a cavalry charge in Texas in which the 1911 was first used but I was not aware of one that was considered part of the Punitive Expedition.
The "last cavalry charge" distinction may be the 11th U.S. Cavalry in the Mexican Punitive Expedition. On 05 May 1916, six troops of that regiment attacked a Villista band at Ojos Azules, Mexico. The bugler sounded the charge as the troopers swept through the area and engaged the enemy -- but with pistols, not sabers. The charge at Ojos Azules was lead by Apache scouts serving alongside the 11th Cavalry regiment. The was the last horseback charge by the US Cavalry.

The U.S Army's first use of trucks in a military operation was also in the "Punitive Expedition" in pursuit of Villa into the mountains of northern Mexico in 1916. Villa had raided Columbus, N.M., killing several people and causing much damage. Brigadier General John Pershing organized a large force of troops, horses, and vehicles to catch Villa. Among the motor vehicles were some 1915 GMC model 15, three-quarter-ton trucks.

Last edited by csmkersh; 10-02-2016 at 07:03 PM.
csmkersh is offline  
Old 10-06-2016, 04:47 AM   #32
Senior Member
 
shep854's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Birmingham AL
Posts: 2,050
Interestingly, there is (was?) a single-stack version of the Beretta 92 (92M) that would have been perfect for smaller personnel, and parts-common with the M9, but the SIG P11 got the nod instead--consolation prize??
shep854 is offline  
Old 10-06-2016, 04:55 AM   #33
Senior Member
 
spwenger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Show Low AZ
Posts: 1,066
As I Recall...

Quote:
Originally Posted by shep854 View Post
Interestingly, there is (was?) a single-stack version of the Beretta 92 (92M) that would have been perfect for smaller personnel, and parts-common with the M9, but the SIG P11 got the nod instead--consolation prize??
...as the autoloader transition took hold in American LE, the US Postal Inspection Service gave its folks their choice among the DAO versions of the full-size 92, the compact 92 (which I believe had been issued by Maine State Police) and the single-stack 92M. I've heard nothing of that last version for a few decades and believe that it has gone the way of such niche guns as the single-stack .380 Model 86, with its tip-up barrel.
spwenger is offline  
Old 10-06-2016, 04:59 AM   #34
Senior Member
 
shep854's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Birmingham AL
Posts: 2,050
Quote:
Originally Posted by spwenger View Post
...as the autoloader transition took hold in American LE, the US Postal Inspection Service gave its folks their choice among the DAO versions of the full-size 92, the compact 92 (which I believe had been issued by Maine State Police) and the single-stack 92M. I've heard nothing of that last version for a few decades and believe that it has gone the way of such niche guns as the single-stack .380 Model 86, with its tip-up barrel.
Not getting the US military contract (and the '94 AWB with its 10-rd mag restriction) was likely the kiss of death by buyer apathy.
shep854 is offline  
Old 10-06-2016, 05:12 AM   #35
Senior Member
 
spwenger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Show Low AZ
Posts: 1,066
Please Enlighten Me

Quote:
Originally Posted by shep854 View Post
Not getting the US military contract (and the '94 AWB with its 10-rd mag restriction) was likely the kiss of death by buyer apathy.
I just checked Blue Book and found a listing for the Model 92F Compact "M" "similar to Model 92F Compact, except has 8 shot straight line mag., plastic grips only. Imported 1990-93."

Why would the Bill Crime of 1994 have been its "kiss of death"? Granted that some people credit the "AWB" for the introduction of such guns as the Glock 26 but, according to the above, it seems as though the 92M fell out of favor before the ban and it doesn't look as though Beretta felt that it merited a second chance in the US market after the ban.

spwenger is offline  
Old 10-06-2016, 05:23 AM   #36
Senior Member
 
shep854's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Birmingham AL
Posts: 2,050
Quote:
Originally Posted by spwenger View Post
I just checked Blue Book and found a listing for the Model 92F Compact "M" "similar to Model 92F Compact, except has 8 shot straight line mag., plastic grips only. Imported 1990-93."

Why would the Bill Crime of 1994 have been its "kiss of death"? Granted that some people credit the "AWB" for the introduction of such guns as the Glock 26 but, according to the above, it seems as though the 92M fell out of favor before the ban and it doesn't look as though Beretta felt that it merited a second chance in the US market after the ban.

With capacity limited to 10 rounds, 'full-size' pistols were seen as impractical. IN RESPONSE to the limitation, the production of smaller pistol designs took off. Why buy something as big as a 92, when smaller guns with the same capacity were becoming available?
shep854 is offline  
Old 10-06-2016, 05:30 AM   #37
Senior Member
 
spwenger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Show Low AZ
Posts: 1,066
Okay...

Quote:
Originally Posted by shep854 View Post
With capacity limited to 10 rounds, 'full-size' pistols were seen as impractical. IN RESPONSE to the limitation, the production of smaller pistol designs took off. Why buy something as big as a 92, when smaller guns with the same capacity were becoming available?
...but I thought that we had been talking about single-stack service pistols chambered in 9x19mm.

I guess that I missed something.
spwenger is offline  
Old 10-09-2016, 12:14 PM   #38
Senior Member
 
shep854's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Birmingham AL
Posts: 2,050
Quote:
Originally Posted by spwenger View Post
...but I thought that we had been talking about single-stack service pistols chambered in 9x19mm.

I guess that I missed something.
That was the starting point.
shep854 is offline  
Reply

  Gun Hub > Gun Hub Forum > Gun Talk


Search tags for this page

single stack compact

Click on a term to search for related topics.

Thread Tools
Display Modes





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2002 - 2017 Gun Hub. All rights reserved.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.