Army wants a harder-hitting pistol

More
10 years 5 months ago - 10 years 5 months ago #40650 by Ranchwagon
Replied by Ranchwagon on topic Army wants a harder-hitting pistol
We are talking a replacement service sidearm. JMO, but a sidearm is not intended to replace the rifle or carbine, and is for secondary use. That being said, it needs to not cost an arm and a leg, be reliable, take abuse, and have enough knockdown power at close range to be lethal. MOA accuracy is not required.

Oh wait, isn't that the good old reliable 1911 in 45ACP.

I still don't know why the Army got rid of it in favor of a clunky Beretta in 9mm.

The tunnel rats in Vietnam found the 1911 and a hand grenade to be a potent combination in close quarters. The recoil was light enough to get back on target quickly, rarely failed even when dirty and felt pretty darn good in the hand.

I guess that means my vote would be for bringing back the 1911 with modest improvements. It should be 45ACP to keep from overpowering a segment of service personnel (read some females and even some males, LOL)
Last edit: 10 years 5 months ago by Ranchwagon.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 5 months ago #40653 by Siscowet
Replied by Siscowet on topic Army wants a harder-hitting pistol

Ranchwagon wrote: We are talking a replacement service sidearm. JMO, but a sidearm is not intended to replace the rifle or carbine, and is for secondary use. That being said, it needs to not cost an arm and a leg, be reliable, take abuse, and have enough knockdown power at close range to be lethal. MOA accuracy is not required.

Oh wait, isn't that the good old reliable 1911 in 45ACP.

I still don't know why the Army got rid of it in favor of a clunky Beretta in 9mm.

The tunnel rats in Vietnam found the 1911 and a hand grenade to be a potent combination in close quarters. The recoil was light enough to get back on target quickly, rarely failed even when dirty and felt pretty darn good in the hand.

I guess that means my vote would be for bringing back the 1911 with modest improvements. It should be 45ACP to keep from overpowering a segment of service personnel (read some females and even some males, LOL)

That would work.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 5 months ago #40654 by Siscowet
Replied by Siscowet on topic Army wants a harder-hitting pistol

jtallen83 wrote: If it's the same company then they've been around since the late 70's at least. When I was in middle school there was a Detonics compact 1911 that I drooled over. They had a good reputation then and had the prices to match!

Same company. They were one of the first to focus on upgrading the 1911 platform.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.