DoD finally decides on new handguns.

[sign216]

I'm with you 216.  I think revolvers are best. 

Placing shots rather than spraying them IMO.

When the nuclear apocalypse comes, the electro-magnetic pulse will disable all of those fancy auto-magics, and revolvers will be the only guns left working.

At least that's what I tell myself. 

[Aaron D.]

Oil, hell, I hear a revolver-vs-auto argument coming!

Revolvers are too expensive and take more care to maintain though.

[Ncdan]

DAO is different on striker guns like the new Sig P320. The trigger pull on my Glocks (also striker-fired) is only around 4.5 lbs and it is the same for every shot. Hammer-fired guns in DAO typically have heavy triggers...9-12 lbs.

I think that the military learned a lesson when they fielded the three shot burst feature on AR-pattern rifles. The sear was a rotary design that gave the rifle three different-feeling triggers. It had a negative effect on accuracy (as well as on peelbacks and other immediate actions to break contact) and the return to the old style sear happened post haste. Striker pistols deliver a reasonable trigger-pull that is consistent in feel with every shot. M9s (Beretta 92F) on the other hand, were DA/SA guns that had a 10 lb pull on the first shot



Mm

(DA) and a 4 lb pull on subsequent shots (SA). Two widely different triggers on the same gun makes for lousy trigger control under stress, particularly with new or infrequent shooters.

Striker guns will never be as beautiful as the hammer-fired revolvers and automatics of the past, but they are simpler, more rugged, and easier to master. I expect that the Sig will give good service.

Good review sheep:)

[pete mcgee]

Well dont forget that 9mm is the nato standard.
Also remember that the idea is not to necessarily kill your opponent but to wound him.
A dead opponent is dead, no further action required, a wounded opponent on the other hand can take up to 10 people to treat, transport etc, this is draining on resourses and costs money.
That presupposes that you are fighting a semi civilised opponent that has similar outlooks to your side.
The other issue is felt and perceived recoil and the distinct shortage of rounds fired in training.
9mm due to economies of scale is also cheaper and made by most western nations.

[LowRyter]

Well dont forget that 9mm is the nato standard.
Also remember that the idea is not to necessarily kill your opponent but to wound him.
A dead opponent is dead, no further action required, a wounded opponent on the other hand can take up to 10 people to treat, transport etc, this is draining on resourses and costs money.
That presupposes that you are fighting a semi civilised opponent that has similar outlooks to your side.
The other issue is felt and perceived recoil and the distinct shortage of rounds fired in training.
9mm due to economies of scale is also cheaper and made by most western nations.

I see nothing civilized about any of this,  semi or otherwise.

But your point is true.

[Lannis]

Well dont forget that 9mm is the nato standard.
Also remember that the idea is not to necessarily kill your opponent but to wound him.
A dead opponent is dead, no further action required, a wounded opponent on the other hand can take up to 10 people to treat, transport etc, this is draining on resourses and costs money.

That's not part of the equation for military or police pistols.    As has been pointed out, these are not primary war-fighting weapons, used on the battlefield where wounding rather than killing your opponent might be a strategic benefit.

These are close-in, self-defense weapons, within whites-of-the-eyes range, by people who have been caught without their primary weapons system or where the battle lines have been overrun by the enemy.

Whether it's kill or wound, the primary purpose of a pistol is to STOP your opponent, and fix him so he's not a right-this-second threat.

"Wounding" is not always going to "stop" a determined enemy.   Shocking his body with an impact that he can't overcome, or hitting his central nervous system, WILL stop him no matter how berserk he is.   "Wound channels", "internal bleeding" and such take time to work, and you haven't got time when he's in pistol range ....

Lannis

[Sheepdog]

As an Army vet and a retired federal agent, I can assure you that I was never trained to wound rather than aim at the very center of my target. Bullets with bad terminal ballistics are more the work of the The Hague Convention than some conscious decision to maim as a preferred option in combat. The cost of armed confrontation is dear enough without making it uglier than it is already...

[Farmer Dan]

As an Army vet and a retired federal agent, I can assure you that I was never trained to wound rather than aim at the very center of my target. Bullets with bad terminal ballistics are more the work of the The Hague Convention than some conscious decision to maim as a preferred option in combat. The cost of armed confrontation is dear enough without making it uglier than it is already...

Any one with real world training knows to aim center mass for a kill shoot.  This crap about wounding is what politicians created to cover their ass over the weak 9mm idea.   It don't matter if you wound one bad guy or twenty you don't take out anymore than what is there.  Wounded bad guys will shoot back they get mad when you hurt them.  They are not going to stop an on going battle because somebody got hurt.  The kill shoot is used to save your life from being taken by a bad guy either wounded or not.

People have been brainwashed into believeing that the 9mm is good.  That's ok, there are people that believe politians are good too.   I'm disabled so I spend most of my day sitting in a chair.  Guess what I use to defend my home with? a 1911 Not a 9mm or a polition.

[Tom]

The DoD wanted larger rounds capacity.  17 & 21 rd. clips.   

[oldbike54]

 OK fellas , are we really discussing how effective a particular handgun is at killing or maiming people and our Gov'ts involvement in war ? Think about this for just a moment , maybe you can see the problem .

 Dusty

[Chuck in Indiana]

Yeah, its getting political. .but it lasted longer than I expected. 

[oldbike54]

Yeah, its getting political. .but it lasted longer than I expected. 

 Yep , Chuckie gets the cookie .

 Dusty

[LowRyter]

 

[Bill]

For what it's worth the FBI still issues the 1911 to agents. But as far as I know it's only to SWAT team members. Those agents get customized 1911's. So they must think there is an advantage for some of it's members to have the trusty old gun. Too expensive to train and issue to regular agents tho.

[Tom]

Better stopping power.  38 caliber revolvers weren't hacking it in the Philippines for the U.S. Army.  Going back to the single action 45 was a temporary measure till they could get the auto M1911.
The Moro rebellion hastened the development of the pistol.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moro_people
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1911_pistol

[jcctx]

Any one with real world training knows to aim center mass for a kill shoot.  This crap about wounding is what politicians created to cover their ass over the weak 9mm idea.   It don't matter if you wound one bad guy or twenty you don't take out anymore than what is there.  Wounded bad guys will shoot back they get mad when you hurt them.  They are not going to stop an on going battle because somebody got hurt.  The kill shoot is used to save your life from being taken by a bad guy either wounded or not.

People have been brainwashed into believeing that the 9mm is good.  That's ok, there are people that believe politians are good too.   I'm disabled so I spend most of my day sitting in a chair.  Guess what I use to defend my home with? a 1911 Not a 9mm or a polition.

Are you telling me Gene & Roy had it wrong~they just shot the gun out of the bad guys hands?????

[Gliderjohn]

From jcctx:

Are you telling me Gene & Roy had it wrong~they just shot the gun out of the bad guys hands?????

No...they were actually shooting for center of mass but were not as good a shots as we had been led to believe. 
GliderJohn

[Lannis]

Are you telling me Gene & Roy had it wrong~they just shot the gun out of the bad guys hands?????

If I had a revolver that would shoot 17 times without reloading, I could probably shoot the gun out of Bart Taggart's or Silky Slim's hand too .... 

Lannis

[sign216]

Thought I'd share my latest purchase: Colt Police Positive in caliber 32-20 (think Robert Johnson "32-20 Blues").




private picture upload

[Chuck in Indiana]

Kool. Never have seen one.

[Gliderjohn]

IMHO the 32-20 is an underrated cartridge, especially if one reloads. Quite versatile.
GliderJohn

[sign216]

Kirby and Glider,
Glad to see some appreciation for the 32-20.  Yep, you need to handload to get anything out of it, and then it's a powerful piece. 

I sold my 32-20 rifles a while back, when I stopped doing much small game hunting.  I should get back into that, but the city liberals in my state (Mass) outlawed hunting w centerfire rifles.  Can you believe it?

Here's the song 32-20 blues.  The song isn't as simple as it appears.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0H_5PSNokk

Joe

[Lannis]

I sold my 32-20 rifles a while back, when I stopped doing much small game hunting.  I should get back into that, but the city liberals in my state (Mass) outlawed hunting w centerfire rifles.  Can you believe it?

Joe

I believe it, and not necessarily because it was city liberals (which it may very well be).   

In flat, fairly population-dense areas, a centerfire rifle round can go a LONG way if it ricochets off the ground, or was being held a little "high" on the target, and can be pretty dangerous.

Lots and lots of deer and turkey killed over the years with shotguns or big pistols in Eastern Virginia with no need for .243s or 6.5mms ..... !

Lannis

[rocker59]

9mm?  Really? They obviously did not waste their time on ballistics testing.

When the USA went to the Beretta 30-years ago, they went to 9mm in order to be aligned with NATO forces.

For the military a pistol is not a primary weapons system only officers, snipers, MP's and downed aircrew have anything to do with them. I'll preface this with I have no idea and a google search may answer it 9mm is possibly the NATO standard now, not that the USA follows the NATO standard on a regular basis. .45ACP probably made sense when people were running around regularly with sub machine guns in the same caliber which is no longer the case.

9mm has been NATO standard since NATO started.  USA has been 9mm (for most pistols) since the Beretta 92 replaced the M1911 .45 ACP thirty years ago.

USA went to 9mm to align with NATO forces.  Or, that was the line at the time.

Makes sense, as most modern operations are joint and having only one pistol/SMG round really simplifies the supply chain.

Me?  10mm, FTW!!!

[rocker59]

  remember that the idea is not to necessarily kill your opponent but to wound him.
A dead opponent is dead, no further action required, a wounded opponent on the other hand can take up to 10 people to treat, transport etc, this is draining on resourses and costs money.
That presupposes that you are fighting a semi civilised opponent that has similar outlooks to your side.
The other issue is felt and perceived recoil and the distinct shortage of rounds fired in training.
9mm due to economies of scale is also cheaper and made by most western nations.

That is the plan when fighting at a distance with a rifle.

When in close combat, you want them to fall dead with the first round.

That is the reason USA went to .45 ACP from .38 Long Colt early in the 20th Century.

Bunch of soldiers had to get F'd up in the Phillipines to learn that lesson.

[sign216]

I believe it, and not necessarily because it was city liberals (which it may very well be).   

In flat, fairly population-dense areas, a centerfire rifle round can go a LONG way if it ricochets off the ground, or was being held a little "high" on the target, and can be pretty dangerous.

Lots and lots of deer and turkey killed over the years with shotguns or big pistols in Eastern Virginia with no need for .243s or 6.5mms ..... !

Lannis

Lannis,

Be careful with the philosophy of "society needs to make things safe."
That's how they will make us safe from motorcycling.

Joe

[Lannis]

Lannis,

Be careful with the philosophy of "society needs to make things safe."
That's how they will make us safe from motorcycling.

Joe

In general, I agree.

The difference here, I think, is that the guy who will get killed if he's not "safe" is the guy on the motorcycle, and not someone else over the horizon.

With a heavy rifle in a populated area, the guy in potential danger is NOT the guy with the rifle.

Lannis

[Cam3512]

If I had a revolver that would shoot 17 times without reloading, I could probably shoot the gun out of Bart Taggart's or Silky Slim's hand too .... 

Lannis

Yup, Hollywood has those.  It kills me when an action hero's wheel gun never runs dry!