[jlh820]

Both branches have recently ordered new sidearms for their personnel. The Marines ordered Colt 1911's in .45ACP. The Army just reupped their order for 100,000 new Beretta M9's. If they could choose only one and it was up to you, what would you order for our troops and why?

 

[James6591]

That's a tough one, I like both.
Other than that, I won't vote or express any further of an opinion.
(Leave it up to you guys).

 

[jlh820]

That's a tough one, I like both.
Other than that, I won't vote or express any further of an opinion.
(Leave it up to you guys).

Before I posted this thread, I thought the answer was easy. And then I started going through a pros vs cons list in my head, and you're right James. This isn't an easy choice unless you pick the cop-out choice at the bottom. And by cop-out, I mean that you don't have a strong opinion either way.

 

[u250680]

I think the Marines thinking is, with all the recent urban conflict in the recent past and probably continuing in the future, there's been an increase in "close in" house to house and room by room incounters which would dicatate a higher stopping power handgun cartridge. I'd go with the .45 acp.

 

[bwinters]

I htink the 1911 is only for highly motivated troops. i have spoken to many ww2 and korea vets who almost had ads with 1911s.

 

[TMB]

I voted Colt 1911 45acp. I don't think it needed replaced to begin with.

 

[Gringo]

The 1911 has a proven track record, is there any other weapon in the U.S. inventory with as long a service history?

Not that it matters, Marines will win battles, whatever they are carrying...

 

[JK55]

I'm for the Colt 1911 because I too, believe the 1911 possesses superior "stop the fight" knock down power in an up-close / in-tight urban gunfight over the
Beretta M9.

Just my opinion...

 

[jlh820]

I didn't want to voice my opinion until this got rolling. I'm a 1911 fan. It's been my favorite semi auto since I knew what one was. I have 4 of them. However, I have two Berettas as well, a 92fs and a 96fs. The Berettas are well made and I think beautiful guns. But then so are my 1911's.

I voted for the 1911. Why? Because a soldiers main weapon is his rifle. The sidearm is often a last resort. So if you're down to fighting with your sidearm, I would want the one that has the best chance of one shot, one kill. I think the Berettas higher capacity are out weighed when you consider that it will often require 2 or 3 shots of 9mm for the same effect as 1 45.

But it was a hard choice because they both have their advantages.

 

[AmbroseLee]

I voted for 1911 .45 for both. It's been tested - through the ringer - and is still around. I don't have one but that won't last very long.

 

[Blkned]

As much as I dislike the M9 I have seen too many officers that cannot handle it. Change back to the 1911 and it will only get worse. With that said I voted change both to the 1911 because they have better stopping power and I want to carry one next deployment.

 

[kingpins9]

I'll take a broken-in 1911 any day over the Beretta 9.

Shooting twice is silly.

 

[SrBanjo]

Now that's a tough one. Both great guns. I just chose to leave it the way it is. Both have their benefits.

 

[BearcatShack]

I didn't vote. I don't know. Each fills a need for what they think they will need. I'm very happy Colt is getting more business. I wish Ruger could get in on that too.

 

[SnakeChief]

I voted, but I did not like the choices. I selected everyone use the Beretta. Folks here are talking about stopping power and clearly no one is going to dispute the power of 45 vs 9mm. However, the magazine size is an issue for me. They should have considered a double stacked alternative and the 45 would have been a clear winner. That being said, they should have considered the Beretta 96 (40 cal). No training or muscle memory changes, more power than 9, way more capacity than 45 single stack. Finally, if you have to pull a handgun (which is not your weapon of choice in CQB) that means your M4 or other SBR is out of ammo, and you are in deep stuff anyway. At that point 45 or 9 may not matter (and if it does, I want more than 7 or 8 rounds).

 

[SnakeChief]

I didn't want to voice my opinion until this got rolling. I'm a 1911 fan. It's been my favorite semi auto since I knew what one was. I have 4 of them. However, I have two Berettas as well, a 92fs and a 96fs. The Berettas are well made and I think beautiful guns. But then so are my 1911's.

I voted for the 1911. Why? Because a soldiers main weapon is his rifle. The sidearm is often a last resort. So if you're down to fighting with your sidearm, I would want the one that has the best chance of one shot, one kill. I think the Berettas higher capacity are out weighed when you consider that it will often require 2 or 3 shots of 9mm for the same effect as 1 45.

But it was a hard choice because they both have their advantages.

Hence the Beretta 96 and the 40 cal right? Perfect compromise. I have the 92A1 and 17 rounds is nothign to sneeze at!

 

[bsms]

I voted to leave it the way it is. I figure the average Army guy will need twice as many shots to get a hit as the average Marine.

BTW - I'm retired USAF. I don't believe in anything smaller than 500 lbs of explosive. My oldest daughter & son-in-law were Marines, and my son is in the Army. It can make for interesting conversations at Thanksgiving...

 

[kingpins9]

If we're worried about capacity/stopping power, then neither of the 2 pistols would suffice. To cure both of those 'problems', a G20 chambered in 10mm is what I would want to go to war with. 15+1 rounds of ammo, coupled with full-powered Buffalo Bore or Cor-Bon (not the wimpy stuff you buy in stores now) 10mm. What's not to love?

 

[SnakeChief]

If we're worried about capacity/stopping power, then neither of the 2 pistols would suffice. To cure both of those 'problems', a G20 chambered in 10mm is what I would want to go to war with. 15+1 rounds of ammo, coupled with full-powered Buffalo Bore or Cor-Bon (not the wimpy stuff you buy in stores now) 10mm. What's not to love?

I agree with this. I was initially thinking double stacked G21, but you are right. Although (and the reason I didn't mention G21), I think the Army is "afraid" of guns w/o manual safeties. This is odd as they had revolvers for pilots when I was in, and they had revolvers for years before the 1911.

 

[punkinlobber]

As a former marine I can only say let them Marines be Marines and let Army Dogs be Army Dogs. Each will know what is best for themselves.