TexasCHLforum.com

Due to budget cuts, it will either be a potmetal Davis or Jennings .32 with a plastic 75 round drum mag for capacity


If I was choosin' for the armed services; .40 S&W Glock with maritime/marine spring cups ... they just work.

But, I'd have it built here/more American Workers in Georgia. Build a Factory ... Beretta did that in several countries to get the account; that's where Taurus originated, and some other companies which used to be Beretta plants/factories.

Also, after the Glock factory opens here, we won't need to worry if we can "import" their .380 (we can't on current point system) ... just build it here.

Jobs

I think glock would be a good choice but, correct me if I am wrong, doesnt the Army require the weapon to have a safety on it?

cubbyjg wrote:I think glock would be a good choice but, correct me if I am wrong, doesnt the Army require the weapon to have a safety on it?

Glocks have 3 ... but a fourth safety/thumb safety can be added ... especially at the American plant they can build



or

I love the 1911 and plan on owning one, but wouldnt that fact that there are lots of parts to field strip and the time it takes to field strip be a burden to soldiers?

RPB wrote:

cubbyjg wrote:I think glock would be a good choice but, correct me if I am wrong, doesnt the Army require the weapon to have a safety on it?

Glocks have 3 ... but a fourth safety/thumb safety can be added ... especially at the American plant they can build



or

I should have clarified, i meant an external safety. The three safeties are internal.

E150GT wrote:I love the 1911 and plan on owning one, but wouldnt that fact that there are lots of parts to field strip and the time it takes to field strip be a burden to soldiers?

Didn't seem to be during two World Wars and a multitude of other "Conflicts".

And there is only one part that requires to be removed to field strip it.

I happen to like the 92. A pistol is largerly a matter of personal preference as to what a person likes or dislikes.

The 92 has good and bad points, but they all do.

Whatever they choose to replace it will cause debate. Some will like it, some will not. I imagine a lot could be improved by additional training, better weapon maintenance, factory mags, etc.... Replacing pistols a little sooner. (They may choose the best, then they will at some point likely try to go cheap on the mags or something and screw up whatever they choose.) Sad, but it may very well happen.

Again, it is all what a person likes and none of them will please everyone.

AEA wrote:

E150GT wrote:I love the 1911 and plan on owning one, but wouldnt that fact that there are lots of parts to field strip and the time it takes to field strip be a burden to soldiers?

Didn't seem to be during two World Wars and a multitude of other "Conflicts".

And there is only one part that requires to be removed to field strip it.

yeah. I was thinking of how I field stripped my first 1911 and how that spring can really fly!

You only need to worry about the spring flying during reassembly. You don't even need to touch the Barrel Bushing/Plug/Spring to remove the slide and take out the Guide Rod and spring in reverse with no concern of "flying" unless you don't have a proper hold onto it.

The Govt. Peeps that forced the change to the M9 will probably replace it with a CZ, since Hi-Point probably cannot meet production numbers.

AEA wrote:You only need to worry about the spring flying during reassembly. You don't even need to touch the Barrel Bushing/Plug/Spring to remove the slide and take out the Guide Rod and spring in reverse with no concern of "flying" unless you don't have a proper hold onto it.

The Govt. Peeps that forced the change to the M9 will probably replace it with a CZ, since Hi-Point probably cannot meet production numbers.

I'm wondering if that might have some validity (CZ)??

Nothing the Govt. does makes any sense...

Although the CZ P-01 is now a NATO classified pistol and issued the NATO stock number NSN 1005-16-000-8619.

The CZ P-01 is the culmination of several years of exhaustive design and testing. Ceska Zbrojovka has always had some of the most rigorous testing requirements in the world but, the Czech National police has required that they go even further, the testing regiment for this new pistol was the most demanding anyone has ever encountered. There are almost 20 specific requirements covering everything from accuracy to interchangability, from safety to reliability/durability and everything in between.

The pistol: The CZ P-01 is a Gen 3 pistol that began as a requirement for a lightweight compact pistol that will deliver the accuracy and durability of a full size, full weight pistol. This was no small task, several manufacturers declined to even start the project.

The pistol was required to pass a wide variety of tests:

The police required that the pistol ensure the highest level of comfort, an extended slide release was added as well as an extended magazine release and the trigger was reshaped to give a more consistent pull throughout the trigger stroke.

I'm still thinking it will be a caliber change, as well. I guess anything is possible?

The article is pretty heavy on the M&P's and a safety is desired. How can you go wrong with a Sig P226 or P229? Alot more metal to last longer. A CZ-75 has both. This will be an interesting race for sure.

Regarding caliber, keep in mind that the military can't use expanding bullets - therefore ball cartridge bullet diameter is key. A .45 would be superior to the .40. I would think a .40 cal ball would have the same stopping power issues that the 9mm ball has. .45 ACP ball isn't exactly the hammer of Thor either but bigger is better when it comes to RN bullets.

If they could use JHP bullet designs, the 9mm, .40 and .45 would be nearly equal and I doubt they'd be considering abandoning the M9.

The slide failure problems encountered with the early M9's are a thing of the past. I've never shot an M9, but from what I understand the current pistols are very reliable and accurate - just not much stopping power with ball ammo.

So states a lover of the 1911....

Arguments for the .40:
-Smaller (more rounds in magazine or thinner grip width)
-Proven
-Economical

Arguments for the .45:
-It worked for us for 100 years, what is your problem?


/grabsPopcorn

gigag04 wrote:

Dave2 wrote:

gigag04 wrote:G21sf would be my gun of choice by my side.

I'd be ok with that. I'd prefer the G20sf, though... More power and higher capacity.

Ammo cost though.

I bet that'd come down with the military stocking up. Maybe not as low as .45, bu certainly lower than it is now.

Sadly, I think the result may be determined by which gun manufacturer has the deepest pockets...

I'm sure Glock would love to see 45GAP, Sig Sauer would love to see 357Sig, and Smith&Wesson would love to see .40S&W adopted.

And somebody tell me the logical reasoning behind the requirement of using ball ammo?