Army's new handgun bid, how do you think it will go? - Gun Hub
Gun Hub

Go Back   Gun Hub > Gun Forum > Handguns

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-12-2015, 09:42 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Northern Nevada
Posts: 5,678
Army's new handgun bid, how do you think it will go?

Modular Handgun System - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Very interesting, it's not caliber specific and they specifically want a cartridge that performs better than the current 9mm.

They're asking for "modularity", for different grip and magazine configurations.

It seems to me they looked at a Sig 250 or 320 and said, let's do that.

I guess it all depends on what they consider "modular"?

As for the cartridge, I really wonder where that's going to go. They said they want a pistol with a lifespan of 35k rounds. If they were to go to something like a .40 S&W, then the guns are going to have to be the size of a .45 ACP if they're going to get that many rounds through a .40.
Kevin Gibson is offline  
Old 02-12-2015, 02:34 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
CaptainGyro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Greater Waxhaw Metropolitan Area
Posts: 1,168
The .40 gets my vote. My duty weapon is a .40, and I think it strikes the perfect balance between the 9 and the .45: nearly the same muzzle energy as the .45 and nearly the same capacity as the 9. The .40, to my way of thinking, is a no-brainer.

I regularly shoot all three calibers, and in similarly sized weapons there's not spit's worth of difference in recoil. The .40 is capable of very good accuracy, and is very reliable. Females seem to have no more problem with it than with the 9. The only drawback that I'm aware of is that weapons chambered in .40 are rarely concealable, but that shouldn't be much of an issue in this competition.
CaptainGyro is offline  
Old 02-12-2015, 04:49 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,929
Maybe they have gone to a Euro-style concept of a high velocity round like the 5.7 or some other round meant to penetrate armor?
DavidE is offline  
 
Old 02-12-2015, 05:26 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
stand watie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 3,301
To All,

Personally, I can see NO reason to change the current Army handguns OR to spend the $$$$$$$$ that it would cost to do it. = Most especially, I truly LIKE the Sig-Sauer that my former agency (USACIDC) uses AND it is well liked by both our male & female agents. - I'm OK with the M9 but it's not my favorite AND it is just too big for many soldier's hands.

That said, there is a place for a .45ACP handgun for special opns units IF the relatively few & quite elite troops want something more powerful than 9mm ball.
(NO providing 2 types of handgun ammo isn't a "big deal", even in the combat zone as you are talking about a small quantity of ammo.)

just my OPINION, sw
stand watie is online now  
Old 02-12-2015, 07:31 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Charlie Petty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 6,955
S&W was well aware of the 2005 paper and the M&P was definitely aimed at it. The replaceable grip sizes certainly were.

I think polymer is here to stay and I've always felt the M9 grip was uncomfortable. I suspect a lot of them are also nearing the end of their service life.

While I agree that the .40 is a good cartridge and was my duty caliber too, I think we are stuck with NATO.
Charlie Petty is offline  
Old 02-12-2015, 08:16 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
bearcat6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,768
I always thought the Beretta was bigger than it needed to be.
bearcat6 is offline  
Old 02-13-2015, 05:53 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,135
you forget the possibility
of using it as a sap
t-star is offline  
Old 02-13-2015, 10:03 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Skeptic49's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: St. Augustine, FL
Posts: 2,253
The Beretta is available in .40 S&W.
Geoff
Who notes some of those are timing out of various Police Orgs and appearing on the surplus market.
Skeptic49 is offline  
Old 02-13-2015, 10:44 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,135
I've also heard( not seen) of various failures when the 92 was upgraded to the 96 equiv by means of a spring, mag and barrel swap- you're SUPPOSED to be able to do this as the 40 is based on the 9mm- don't know if the factory 96s have this problem
t-star is offline  
Old 02-13-2015, 10:46 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: SW Missouri
Posts: 589
While the 96 is the .40 equivalent of the M9, it's not as durable as the 9mm. It's still a good pistol, but the platform was designed for a lesser caliber. Mass covers this fairly well in his book on Beretta pistols.

Beretta's Px4 on the other hand fits the modular bill.

I don't pretend to know anywhere near as much as everyone else here does about guns, or ammo, but assuming they adhere to the restrictions concerning hollow-point ammo, is .40 significantly better than 9mm? For that matter, is it significantly worse than .45? Given that that the advent of .40S&W occurred mainly in civilian and police circles where hollow points are used, is there enough information on field performance to say?

Again, I'm ignorant on this, so I'm asking out of genuine curiosity.
Solomon Kane is offline  
Old 02-13-2015, 11:04 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Northern Nevada
Posts: 5,678
Quote:
Originally Posted by bearcat6 View Post
I always thought the Beretta was bigger than it needed to be.
Well let's remember what it was designed to be; a military service sidearm. For a military service sidearm there are advantages to it being on the large side. First off larger pistols tend to last much longer than smaller pistols. And they're easier for most people to shoot.
Kevin Gibson is offline  
Old 02-13-2015, 11:06 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Northern Nevada
Posts: 5,678
Given what was available in 1985 I think they chose the right pistol. I like the M9 better than the Sig 226 of 1985. Had we chose the 226 there would have been just as many issues as we had with the M9. The 228 has had it's share of issues, but you just don't hear about them because there is so few of them.

But the M9 has become very dated. Although I think it's an excellent pistol, changes in auto pistol technology are such that there are lots of pistols that make a whole lot more sense.
Kevin Gibson is offline  
Old 02-13-2015, 11:21 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Northern Nevada
Posts: 5,678
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainGyro View Post
The .40 gets my vote. My duty weapon is a .40, and I think it strikes the perfect balance between the 9 and the .45: nearly the same muzzle energy as the .45 and nearly the same capacity as the 9. The .40, to my way of thinking, is a no-brainer.

I regularly shoot all three calibers, and in similarly sized weapons there's not spit's worth of difference in recoil. The .40 is capable of very good accuracy, and is very reliable. Females seem to have no more problem with it than with the 9. The only drawback that I'm aware of is that weapons chambered in .40 are rarely concealable, but that shouldn't be much of an issue in this competition.
Delta played with the .40 S&W round and they generally liked it. But they dumped it because re-supply became so problematic.

I think the .40 can be a decent service round, but the gun manufacturers need to wake up to some realities. It's WAY more .45 than it is 9mm. Meaning, if they want to get a 35,000 round life span out of their guns, then they will need to make their guns the size of .45's. And once you get a gun that size, why not just make it a .45?

The elite forces have recognized that the whole handgun that defeats body armor thing just isn't really going to happen; at least not this time around. So they train to shoot for the pelvis first knowing there's a small likelihood the body armor will extend down that far. So they want a cartridge that will break a pelvis; and .40 S&W will indeed do that. But so will a .45 ACP.

In a few ways the .40 S&W is a better round than .45 ACP. Penetration is better with the .40 S&W, and of course you get greater magazine capacity.

Since the Marines are the only one's using .45 ACP anymore, I don't think a change to another round will be anymore traumatic than any other round.

It's hard to tell what they're going to like under the category of "more effective than 9mm". First I can't help but think this will be the first requirement to be thrown out of the window.

I personally am not real impressed with FMJ anything in handguns, so I'd take more twice the capacity over a bigger bullet. I think we're seeing that even with .45 ACP it's taking multiple hits to put people down. The FBI has come to that realization with their change back to 9mm. If it's going to take multiple rounds to put someone down, then magazine capacity starts to become real important.

If "more effective" means better barrier penetration, then sticking with the .35 caliber bullet put pushing it faster makes the most sense. The immediate knee jerk is the .357 Sig, but I'd much rather see someone extend the 9mm case rather than going to the bottle necked so you don't lose magazine capacity.

Any way you look at it, making a change away from a NATO standard is going to be a VERY tough nut to crack. Look at the STANAG magazine. Of all the magazines out there, it's the worst design of them all, yet no one's changing because A- we like it, and B- it's the standard.
Kevin Gibson is offline  
Old 02-13-2015, 01:25 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,135
'extend the case of the 9mm- ie the 38 super, 9mm largo , Bergmann and a host of other so- called 9mm longs- we've been down this road many times and still keep coming back to the nato 19mm length- to tell the truth, I question the role of the pistol in the modern soldiers' toe now that i'm shooting a tavor-just as handy as a pistol and there's a lot less body exposed and it's a more precise shot too
t-star is offline  
Old 02-13-2015, 02:10 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Northern Nevada
Posts: 5,678
Quote:
Originally Posted by t-star View Post
'extend the case of the 9mm- ie the 38 super, 9mm largo , Bergmann and a host of other so- called 9mm longs- we've been down this road many times and still keep coming back to the nato 19mm length- to tell the truth, I question the role of the pistol in the modern soldiers' toe now that i'm shooting a tavor-just as handy as a pistol and there's a lot less body exposed and it's a more precise shot too
Color me jealous...It's not often a new gun comes out and I don't get to play with one, but I haven't had a chance to play with a Tavor.

But personally I would never want to be at war without a handgun. Rifles take hits far too often, and you can never tell when your rifle is just going to go tits-up on you for God knows why?

Now honestly most soldiers aren't all that well armed with a pistol in their hands, but for me personally, I'm good on man sized targets all the way out to 150 yards with a handgun. Regardless, beats the hell out of being unarmed.
Kevin Gibson is offline  
Old 02-13-2015, 06:53 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
bearcat6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,768
I hear they are looking at a new rifle also. One that will be easier to operate.
bearcat6 is offline  
Old 02-13-2015, 07:19 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Charlie Petty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 6,955
The only real connection between the .40 and 9mm is that it was designed to fit a 9mm platform.

I did a lot of the work that helped my PD to adopt it and early testing of both guns and ammo. I like it a lot.

That said, I think the logistics of using it in a military application is a deal breaker as Kevin indicated.

While I have not been a fan of the Glock they truly did pioneer the use of polymers and they are the most important advance in handguns... maybe since Browning.

Polymers are a very significant factor in holding costs down and offer ergonomic possibilities not realistic with either steel or aluminum. That is a really big deal in any government procurement.
Charlie Petty is offline  
Old 02-14-2015, 01:46 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
Skeptic49's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: St. Augustine, FL
Posts: 2,253
There I wuz...(Army talk for "Once upon a time") I went to an Army focus group on West Ft. Hood. I went in with the opinion an Army pistol should be a high cap DA/SA pistol. I came out a fan of the Sig P6 (225) a small 8 round magazine compact pistol.

IMHO, the US Army needs a compact pistol which can be carried everywhere and should, starting with Commissioned and Warrant Officers and Senior NCOs. I haven't forgotten the Ft. Hood 'incident" or the Navy Yard 'incident" and WAY too many "incidents" around the violent world.

Geoff
Who is thinking of my Kahr P9094N or my SWaMPy 9c with night sights.
Skeptic49 is offline  
Old 02-14-2015, 06:07 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,155
About the .40 being based on the 9mm..................the concept was to design a cartridge that could fit in a 9mm frame because that fits more folks hands. [Also why you're not going to see the 38 Super or something similar as a service pistol. The reach to trigger has to be too long.]

The initial problem with that was that entirely too many simply used their current 9mm and slapped a .40 slide assembly on top. The results were very poor accuracy and short life. To this day, certain brands still have a lot of broken guns. Those that designed something .40 to start with did better (M&P40).

I know several CFI who decided to go with the .40 flow and came to bitterly regret it. Lower scores, broken guns and wrist injuries caused the regrets. One is currently transitioning their folks back to 9mm (not Illinois SP, who also did so).
William R. Moore is offline  
Old 02-14-2015, 08:16 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
WaltGraham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Posts: 3,451
Hard to beat the M&P in .45...

Simple, reliable, accurate, configurable, sufficient hole size.
WaltGraham is offline  
Reply

  Gun Hub > Gun Forum > Handguns


Search tags for this page

army handgun bid

,

new army handgun

,

us army handgun bid winner

,

us army pistol bid

,

us army xm17 handgun

Click on a term to search for related topics.

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Now I've done it .......(THIS is a HANDGUN?) TommyGunn Handguns 5 01-11-2012 02:05 PM
First Handgun Barcochris Handguns 58 04-20-2009 01:51 PM
New Army Handgun? smince Handguns 109 10-28-2005 01:52 PM
the best handgun ohyes Gun Talk 1 07-29-2004 08:30 PM




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.