9mm, Too old?
- Thread starter Armymedic
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 210
I Agree with the majority of posters here. lets keep the PDW as far away from here as possible...
I as a trucker have no need for a smaller calibre weapon.... if and when we in the PRes get to try the C7A2, it will be interesting to see how much better it may be for us to use in the trucks. failing that, the only time ive ever been doing training where I felt a pistol would be a better choice then a rifle was when we were doing base defence and VCP's. even then Id rather have a carbine rifle like a C8, or an SMG (ie MP5) since I'd still have all the benefits of smaller size, but still have enough punch behind me and enough ammo to deal multiple threats... though at the end of the day, I'll take whatever I get and employ it to the best of my abilities......
My limited experiance has me thinking that if I had to go onto the other side of the wire in my truck, I want whatever is going to have the best combination of accuracy, mobility, and punch I can get...
Failing that I'll settle for the C7.
besides, as the real BTDT's have said, its not the kit that makes you a soldier...
regards
Josh
I as a trucker have no need for a smaller calibre weapon.... if and when we in the PRes get to try the C7A2, it will be interesting to see how much better it may be for us to use in the trucks. failing that, the only time ive ever been doing training where I felt a pistol would be a better choice then a rifle was when we were doing base defence and VCP's. even then Id rather have a carbine rifle like a C8, or an SMG (ie MP5) since I'd still have all the benefits of smaller size, but still have enough punch behind me and enough ammo to deal multiple threats... though at the end of the day, I'll take whatever I get and employ it to the best of my abilities......
My limited experiance has me thinking that if I had to go onto the other side of the wire in my truck, I want whatever is going to have the best combination of accuracy, mobility, and punch I can get...
Failing that I'll settle for the C7.
besides, as the real BTDT's have said, its not the kit that makes you a soldier...
regards
Josh
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 160
As a gunner my rifle is a PITA 95% of the time, it snags on everything it is not bashing into. I would trade it for anything with a 14-16" barrel and a true folding stock.
As for the 5.7mm round sucking does anyone have any links to "proof of this" or is it being spun by the rumour mill? As far as stopping power I would not hunt anything (armed or not) with .223 if I had the choice.
As for the 5.7mm round sucking does anyone have any links to "proof of this" or is it being spun by the rumour mill? As far as stopping power I would not hunt anything (armed or not) with .223 if I had the choice.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
As others have mentioned, if you have a BHP fresh from war stock and new mags you'll be gtg. That's not to say I would turn my nose up at a G19 
However if it's a choice between more weapons training with the BHP and buying new pistols, I'll take the weapons training.
And I think a C-8 with a 10.5 inch upper may be a better choice than a PDW...
However if it's a choice between more weapons training with the BHP and buying new pistols, I'll take the weapons training. And I think a C-8 with a 10.5 inch upper may be a better choice than a PDW...
medicineman
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 4,412
- Points
- 1,110
Ditto from everybody else - only probs I`ve had with issue Brownings are mag failures. Again as mentioned, what we need are new mags, lots of rounds to put into them and shoot out, and finally time, patience and proper training (OK, also the money) to use these weapons properly. I wonder where/how crackhead junior officer had his ND - only one`s I`ve seen (or almost had once in my case : ) were from bad handling drills. Also, never thought of it as big or bulky - I took a combat pistol course with concealed carry using a Browning clone and didn`t notice, see or feel a problem with it.
MM
) were from bad handling drills. Also, never thought of it as big or bulky - I took a combat pistol course with concealed carry using a Browning clone and didn`t notice, see or feel a problem with it. MM
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
Gunnerlove said:
From Tactical Forums by way of Self Defence Forums:
Dr. Gary K. Roberts, terminal ballistics researcher and member of the International Wound Ballistics Association, had this to say about the 5.7 x 28 mm over at Tactical Forums:
Other than being able to perforate soft body armor, the 5.7 x 28 mm used in the FN P90, as well as the 4.6 x 30 mm fired from the HK MP7 cause wounds less incapacitating than those made by 9 mm FMJ fired from a pistol. Other than being able to perforate soft body armor, the 5.7 x 28 mm used in the FN P90, as well as the 4.6 x 30 mm fired from the HK MP7 cause wounds less incapacitating than those made by 9 mm FMJ fired from a pistol.
I have personally fired the 5.7 x 28 mm FN P-90; velocity, penetration, and tissue destruction is like a .17 Hornet--far less than we see with 75 gr TAP or 77 MK out of our M4?s. Winchester RA45T 230 gr JHP?s fired from our duty 1911?s crush more tissue and penetrate further than the 5.7 x 28 mm. Use of the 5.7 x 28 mm is a good way to ensure mission failure.
Several papers have described the incredibly poor terminal performance of projectiles fired by the FN P90.
--Dahlstrom D, Powley K, and Gordon C: ?Wound Profile of the FN Cartridge (SS 190) Fired from the FN P90 Submachine Gun". Wound Ballistic Review. 4(3):21-26; Spring 2000.
--Fackler M: "Errors & Omissions", Wound Ballistic Review. 1(1):46; Winter 1991.
--Fackler M: "More on the Bizarre Fabrique National P-90", Wound Ballistic Review. 3(1):44-45; 1997.
--FBI Academy Firearms Training Unit. FBI Handgun Ammunition Tests 1989-1995. Quantico, U.S. Department of Justice--Federal Bureau of Investigation.
--Hayes C: ?Personal Defense Weapons?Answer in Search of a Question?, Wound Ballistic Review. 5(1):30-36; Spring 2001.
--Roberts G: ?Preliminary Evaluation of the Terminal Performance of the 5.7 x 28 mm 23 Grain FMJ Bullet Fired by the New FN P-90 , Using 10% Ordnance Gelatin as a Tissue Simulant?, AFTE Journal. 30(2):326-329, Spring 1998.
--Roberts G: ?Terminal Performance of the 5.7 x 28 mm 31 Grain SS-190 FMJ Bullet Fired by the FN P-90 in 10% Ordnance Gelatin.?, AFTE Journal. In Press.
The early 5.7 x 28 mm 23 gr FMJ bullet fired by the FN P-90 had insufficient penetration for law enforcement and military use. The current 31 gr SS-190 FMJ bullet has nearly adequate penetration, but the wound resulting from this projectile has a relatively small permanent crush cavity, as well as an insignificant temporary stretch cavity. Although the 5.7 x 28 mm penetrates soft body armor, wounding potential is at best like a .22 LR or .22 Magnum. Even 9mm NATO FMJ makes a larger wound--and we are all aware of the awe inspiring incapacitation potential of M882 ball from the M9......
Numerous other projectiles commonly used for law enforcement and military special operations applications, such as a good 9mm, .40 S&W, or .45 ACP JHP, the better 5.56 x 45 mm BTHP/JSP loads, as well as 12 gauge shotgun slugs and 00 buckshot, all provide better penetration, crush more tissue, and have far greater potential to reliably physiologically incapacitate an aggressor than the 5.7 x 28 mm 31 gr SS-190 FMJ bullet fired by the FN P-90. Law enforcement agencies and military special operations units are strongly urged to avoid adoption of this weapon system.
I think that pretty much covers it. If you need more info on Gary Robert's creds, just google International Wound Ballistics Association
I've shot the Browning competitively (Atlantic Area pistol team a couple of eons ago) and I have always been perfectly happy with its accuracy and reliability.
My old "competition" pistol (which was the pistol in unit stores that rattled the least when shaken, then properly sighted in with the aid of a gun plumber) would routinely group sub 2" at 15m in my hands (and I was about mid-pack on the team in terms of talent)
And I'll echo the comments on mag selection.
If it ain't broken, don't fix it.
DG
My old "competition" pistol (which was the pistol in unit stores that rattled the least when shaken, then properly sighted in with the aid of a gun plumber) would routinely group sub 2" at 15m in my hands (and I was about mid-pack on the team in terms of talent)
And I'll echo the comments on mag selection.
If it ain't broken, don't fix it.
DG
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
I feel the need to throw my two cents in here, if for no other reason than to get a couple of things off of my chest. I have to agree (for the most part) with what Kevin and several others have said, however i will expand a bit.
We have far too many people contributing to the whole "the CF needs a new pistol" argument than is necessary. Just because you were issued one on deployment a time or two, carried one for a whole two weeks on exercise, saw one from a distance or rubbed up against one in passing does not necessarily qualify you to comment or contribute to the mix. If you do not aggressively seek out further instruction, practice what you learn (often), and constantly maintain your standard of performance, guess what?? - there is small chance that you will be competent to operate the system under stress!! I average about 1K of pistol shooting per month - I would shoot more but things demand my time like work, family, and the Reserves (as well as a bit of time conferring with Dr. Guinness!! ;D), I can detect a noticeable drop in personal skill when I skip a week or two, as happens occasionally. It is a skill that requires time and dedication to master, and which deteriorates rapidly when neglected!! I would contend even more so than the service rifle or LMG/GPMG. Aside from those pers on the Hill, no pers in the CF get adequate time with the system (on the Gov't dime) to be considered as a high-end competent end-user. There are, granted, those out there who train and practice on their own, and these are the folks that have the background and experience to contribute to the argument.
I am unashamedly a 1911 guy myself and happen to think that the .45 ACP is about ideal for the intended purpose. For a 9/.40 platform the Browning fills the bill quite nicely for Condition 1 carry, though I'd feel better about the 9 with a fast HP. However I am not naive enough to believe that this (SA Cond 1) is either desirable or likely to be the ideal solution. As much as it pains me to say, we have to work to the Lowest Common Denominator - this dictates "GLOCK" for any of you not paying attention up to this point. these are incredibly robust and simple pistols (though they do have problems - don't believe all the press) and, when purchased in quantity are incredibly cheap to outfit large numbers of pers with. I resisted the "plastic fantastic" for a lot of years, however I now own 5 of them in various configs. I still think they are ugly as Hell, but give the devil his due - they do work well. They won't replace the 1911/P35 in my affections, but they have their place.
For those of you who have made the comment "something bigger than the 9 - shake your head!! Ain't gonna happen, and as much as I love the .45, a service pistol ctg is a service pistol ctg. Anemic when compared to the rifle of any flavour. The solution to this problem is and has been for some time "shoot 'em in the face" - this brings us back quite directly to the skill facet of the pistol problem; how to hit a relatively small, fairly mobile target in a compressed timeframe. The answer?? High level training and lots of (regular, consistent) practice!!
To those of you who tout the PDW as the "next great thing" - it is an answer in search of a question, and Dr Roberts assessment says it all for me...
Bottom line, while there are those who will state that the pistol is an item no longer needed in the greater context, I find them a comforting thing to have around, so long as you possess the skill level to take advantage of it's limited benefit. I think we should return to the days of old when officers and SNCO's who might require on) would buy and maintain their own pistol and sword (I have been accused of being a man of the '90's - the 1890's!!!)
I do still shoot competitively, however I'm much more relaxed about the whole thing now...
My name is mudgunner49, and I approve this message...
We have far too many people contributing to the whole "the CF needs a new pistol" argument than is necessary. Just because you were issued one on deployment a time or two, carried one for a whole two weeks on exercise, saw one from a distance or rubbed up against one in passing does not necessarily qualify you to comment or contribute to the mix. If you do not aggressively seek out further instruction, practice what you learn (often), and constantly maintain your standard of performance, guess what?? - there is small chance that you will be competent to operate the system under stress!! I average about 1K of pistol shooting per month - I would shoot more but things demand my time like work, family, and the Reserves (as well as a bit of time conferring with Dr. Guinness!! ;D), I can detect a noticeable drop in personal skill when I skip a week or two, as happens occasionally. It is a skill that requires time and dedication to master, and which deteriorates rapidly when neglected!! I would contend even more so than the service rifle or LMG/GPMG. Aside from those pers on the Hill, no pers in the CF get adequate time with the system (on the Gov't dime) to be considered as a high-end competent end-user. There are, granted, those out there who train and practice on their own, and these are the folks that have the background and experience to contribute to the argument.
I am unashamedly a 1911 guy myself and happen to think that the .45 ACP is about ideal for the intended purpose. For a 9/.40 platform the Browning fills the bill quite nicely for Condition 1 carry, though I'd feel better about the 9 with a fast HP. However I am not naive enough to believe that this (SA Cond 1) is either desirable or likely to be the ideal solution. As much as it pains me to say, we have to work to the Lowest Common Denominator - this dictates "GLOCK" for any of you not paying attention up to this point. these are incredibly robust and simple pistols (though they do have problems - don't believe all the press) and, when purchased in quantity are incredibly cheap to outfit large numbers of pers with. I resisted the "plastic fantastic" for a lot of years, however I now own 5 of them in various configs. I still think they are ugly as Hell, but give the devil his due - they do work well. They won't replace the 1911/P35 in my affections, but they have their place.
For those of you who have made the comment "something bigger than the 9 - shake your head!! Ain't gonna happen, and as much as I love the .45, a service pistol ctg is a service pistol ctg. Anemic when compared to the rifle of any flavour. The solution to this problem is and has been for some time "shoot 'em in the face" - this brings us back quite directly to the skill facet of the pistol problem; how to hit a relatively small, fairly mobile target in a compressed timeframe. The answer?? High level training and lots of (regular, consistent) practice!!
To those of you who tout the PDW as the "next great thing" - it is an answer in search of a question, and Dr Roberts assessment says it all for me...
Bottom line, while there are those who will state that the pistol is an item no longer needed in the greater context, I find them a comforting thing to have around, so long as you possess the skill level to take advantage of it's limited benefit. I think we should return to the days of old when officers and SNCO's who might require on) would buy and maintain their own pistol and sword (I have been accused of being a man of the '90's - the 1890's!!!)
I do still shoot competitively, however I'm much more relaxed about the whole thing now...
My name is mudgunner49, and I approve this message...
- Reaction score
- 19,725
- Points
- 1,360
MG49, have you seen the new Browning Super 9 (compo lower, steel slide)? Have been thinking of getting a pistol when I get back home, options would be either G17 or a P35 variant... Thanks.
Cheers,
Duey
Cheers,
Duey
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Duey said:
Duey,
I have not seen it and would like to at least get my hands on one before commenting on it. The whole "polymer pistol flavour of the month" thing has been done with varying degrees of success - for instance Glock/Walther P99 good - others (no names, no pack drill) not so good...
- Reaction score
- 18,809
- Points
- 1,260
G17
If you want to shoot my 19 we can arrange range time...
A friend in Fla's fiance just bought the new Browning -- I am waiting for a report -- but I am very satified with the Glocks (get nite sights as their platic sights suck and dont stand up to repeated drawnign from a hoslter). I had a G23 but could never warm up to .40S&W. I find I shoot the smaller 19/23 frame better than the full 17/22 size.
Oh and Blake - excellent post BTW
If you want to shoot my 19 we can arrange range time...
A friend in Fla's fiance just bought the new Browning -- I am waiting for a report -- but I am very satified with the Glocks (get nite sights as their platic sights suck and dont stand up to repeated drawnign from a hoslter). I had a G23 but could never warm up to .40S&W. I find I shoot the smaller 19/23 frame better than the full 17/22 size.
Oh and Blake - excellent post BTW
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 210
Slightly OT here.. due to the company I was trying to order my norinco Sig knockoff from, NOT having the item in stock when they said they did. I am once again shopping for a pistol.
Trying to Decide at this point between a 9mm Glock and a 9mm Walther P99.
I know that the glock is a solid piece of kit, I'm wondering if anyone here has tried the P99 and have an opinion on it. as far as quality durability, etc...
Ive only Handled them, and Felt the P99 was alot more comfortable then the Glock, but my main concern is which one is going to withstand more useage?
thanks
Josh
Trying to Decide at this point between a 9mm Glock and a 9mm Walther P99.
I know that the glock is a solid piece of kit, I'm wondering if anyone here has tried the P99 and have an opinion on it. as far as quality durability, etc...
Ive only Handled them, and Felt the P99 was alot more comfortable then the Glock, but my main concern is which one is going to withstand more useage?
thanks
Josh
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Cpl Thompson said:
I have spent a lot of time putting rounds downrange with the Glock and have fired the P99 (albeit in .40 S&W) casually. I see no reason why the Walther would not/should not be durable, however it has not been around long enough to establish a "Glock-like" track record. The interchangeable grip backstraps are awesome and allow you to custom fit the grip to your hand - you can do the same to the Glock with a belt sander, a steady hand and a fearless heart...
I agree wholeheartedly with KevinB that the 9 is the way to go in Glock. To that end both of my G22's as well as my G19 are all presently sporting 9mm barrels and mags :cheers:, and work quite well in this configuration. An added benefit to this is that my wife and I are all shooting the same calibre which has greatly simplified logistics on match/range day!!
blake
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
KevinB said:
Why thank you - it appears that we share more than a common good taste in beer :cheers: :cheers:
blake
"shoot 'em in the ...."
Use "A Bridge Too Far" as a trg film in this case. Sean Connery and a BAP.
;D
I own a Colt DE in 10mm. It is fairly expensive to feed, and my next 1911 will be in .45 ACP. Though I DO wish someone would widen the .40 "Small and Weak" to .50.
I had to smile at the comments above regarding handloading a 9mm towards a .38 super. Would bowling pins be involved in this project?
;D
I read that it was the US Cavalry who steered the US into .45 ACP. Their targets being mounted enemy, a hit on a horse was as good as a hit on the rider. And to stop a horse, the bigger the hole, the better...
Of course, excited horses don't react to pain as we do ...
There are other legends involving the Thompson/Lagarde trials, etc., of that era.
Had .38 Super (invented in 1929, I think) been around in 1905, "ol' slab sides" herself may have come out in .38 Super rather than .45 ACP, according to the same writer.
Who knows?
We still have something like 12,000 plus BAPs in storage, and we probably wear out our issued opistols more by cleaning and carrying rather than using. For your average soldier, a newer, fancier pistol would be a mere fashion accessory.
9mm is adequate. What alternate do people have in mind? .357 SIG? .50 AE? Remember why the FBI moved from almost adopting 10mm to going for .40 S&W? Stopping power versus training power. Training power wins, in the end.
A low PF hit is better than a high PF miss.
Tom
Use "A Bridge Too Far" as a trg film in this case. Sean Connery and a BAP.
;D
I own a Colt DE in 10mm. It is fairly expensive to feed, and my next 1911 will be in .45 ACP. Though I DO wish someone would widen the .40 "Small and Weak" to .50.
I had to smile at the comments above regarding handloading a 9mm towards a .38 super. Would bowling pins be involved in this project?
;D
I read that it was the US Cavalry who steered the US into .45 ACP. Their targets being mounted enemy, a hit on a horse was as good as a hit on the rider. And to stop a horse, the bigger the hole, the better...
Of course, excited horses don't react to pain as we do ...
There are other legends involving the Thompson/Lagarde trials, etc., of that era.
Had .38 Super (invented in 1929, I think) been around in 1905, "ol' slab sides" herself may have come out in .38 Super rather than .45 ACP, according to the same writer.
Who knows?
We still have something like 12,000 plus BAPs in storage, and we probably wear out our issued opistols more by cleaning and carrying rather than using. For your average soldier, a newer, fancier pistol would be a mere fashion accessory.
9mm is adequate. What alternate do people have in mind? .357 SIG? .50 AE? Remember why the FBI moved from almost adopting 10mm to going for .40 S&W? Stopping power versus training power. Training power wins, in the end.
A low PF hit is better than a high PF miss.
Tom
- Reaction score
- 33
- Points
- 560
The reason that the M-1911 was a .45 cal had to do with the American experience in the Phillipines in the first part of the 20th century. Moro warriors (often "juiced up" on powerful narcotic drugs) were known to rush at Americans swinging their wickedly sharp knives from very short range (i.e. jumping out of crowds, or from hiding in a doorway or a hut....where have we seen this recently?).
Standard revolvers did not hold enough ammunition to engage a rapidly moving target, and it was noted that the .38 cal did little to stop these charges. Larger calibre pistols like the Colt .45 did have the power to drop an Amok warrior in his tracks, provided you could hit him before the sixth "BANG".......
It seems we are going full circle; many so called SOF model pistols displayed in AUSA by various vendors were .45 cal because of the superior stopping power (I was rather impressed by the HK .45 cal USP. I was even more impressed by the suggested price!). I also noted a trend towards offering carabines in 9mm as well, with the long barrels providing a fairly substantial increase in muzzel velocity and energy.
Of course, if you want max stopping power in a compact package which relatively untrained troops can use to good effect, there is nothing like a cut down 12 gauge shotgun with 00 magnum shot.... >
Standard revolvers did not hold enough ammunition to engage a rapidly moving target, and it was noted that the .38 cal did little to stop these charges. Larger calibre pistols like the Colt .45 did have the power to drop an Amok warrior in his tracks, provided you could hit him before the sixth "BANG".......
It seems we are going full circle; many so called SOF model pistols displayed in AUSA by various vendors were .45 cal because of the superior stopping power (I was rather impressed by the HK .45 cal USP. I was even more impressed by the suggested price!). I also noted a trend towards offering carabines in 9mm as well, with the long barrels providing a fairly substantial increase in muzzel velocity and energy.
Of course, if you want max stopping power in a compact package which relatively untrained troops can use to good effect, there is nothing like a cut down 12 gauge shotgun with 00 magnum shot.... >
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Mike_R23A said:
Mike,
The 19 is a 12(6) prohib due to barrel length. The G17 is only 1/2" longer in both the barrel and the butt, so no huge deal. Something that was done recently by Daryll Bolke over at the 10-8 forums is to shorten the but of the 17 to the point where it can use G19 mags - while still retaining the ability to use the longer G17 and 33-rd G18 mags also. This was done as (apparently) the G19 is the most prolific service pistol on the int'l scene. I am seriously considering doing this to my G17 as the shorter butt has always felt better to me. If you do go Glock, go 9!!
blake
Similar threads
