Army dumping M9?????

[chris]

SF has Glocks now

Don't they get to have anything they want? (Serious question)...

yeah pretty much within reason they do.

[FNH5-7]

As for your absolutely insane suggestion. That is just plain sacrilege. A manual thumb safety completely defeats the purpose of a Glock. Might as well keep the Beretta M9 if you do that. Shame on you for making that suggestion.

Pick one.

Glock did it twice, they can do it again.

[Dark Mod]

Honestly im a BIG fan of the M9. Never had a malfunction, it was always very acurate and really took a beating. I had no problems qualing expert several times, and was always there for me when i needed it. As an MP it was my main weapon on base, and i would bet my life on it.

[Tacit Blue]

heard about this today. go back to the .45 and be done with it. it served our country well for 70+ years let it serve us again.

1+ from the WW1 to WW2 and until recently, the 1911 has served our country countless times. Who cares about what NATO allies are carrying, .45 is a proven man stopper. These are just sitting in drmo, collecting dust. Why not recall them into service?

USMC Force recon uses Springfield Operator 1911s,kimbers and HK45's for a reason.... If the DoD wants to piss away money, on new some high speed pistol, the same mistake is bound to be made again.

[Army GI]

heard about this today. go back to the .45 and be done with it. it served our country well for 70+ years let it serve us again.

Agreed. Just because something has been around the block once or twice doesn't mean it needs to be replaced.

Ma Deuce has been around since the 20's and it's still going strong:



The M14 has been around since the 50's, and has since been pulled out of retirement to fill the DMR role which the M16 is mediocre at. It is better than ever in it's new incarnation as the M14EBR-RI!!! They literally take the barreled action out of the old wood stock, and drop them into the new solid, machined aluminum stock, and it's shooting .86 MOA! It's the M14 at it's full potential.

[awall919]

Im also under the impression that the M9 should be replace. I own a 96fs and think its a great gun but both the 96 and the m9 are too heavy. Im not a solider but if i had to carry all that heavy gear along with an m9 id be pretty pissed knowing there were handguns out there far lighter. id rather have my glock 17 or a 1911( if it carried more ammo).
Some may disagree but i hope they do change sidearms, id love to have a military surplus m9 to go with police trade in 96fs

[WW2Buff]

How many times have they said similar things before? I also don't think we're going to up and change service pistols in the middle of a war. I don't see this happening for a few years at least.

P.S. I love the M9

[Nordschleife]

YES PLEASE REPLACE THAT POS M9.

I've had two slides break on me, the armory was constantly fixing them, I can't even remember how many parts found their way to DRMO.

Beretta was able to provide more bang for the buck when they proposed that initial contract by simply cutting down on materials used for each M9 made.

[Bavaria1990]

YES PLEASE REPLACE THAT POS M9.

I've had two slides break on me, the armory was constantly fixing them, I can't even remember how many parts found their way to DRMO.

Beretta was able to provide more bang for the buck when they proposed that initial contract by simply cutting down on materials used for each M9 made.

nato ammo wears the internals out alot faster than regular loads-also, who knows how many rds have been through your issue m9 before you got it.
have a 92fs police trade in with 2k no probs. and no idea of how many before I got it.

[Nordschleife]

nato ammo wears the internals out alot faster than regular loads-also, who knows how many rds have been through your issue m9 before you got it.
have a 92fs police trade in with 2k no probs. and no idea of how many before I got it.

That's a very good point, however, your's is a 92FS, that's a good pistol. I've compared my gunny's personal 92 alongside a M9 and saw some disparaging differences in build. We did notice a thinner slide, different sights, and a slightly heavier trigger pull on the m9 compared to the 92, but then again those M9s were way older.

[Army GI]

nato ammo wears the internals out alot faster than regular loads-also, who knows how many rds have been through your issue m9 before you got it.

Probably not a lot. Most army weapons sit in an armory and are only taken out once or twice a year to qualify. A string of shots is 50 rounds.

[Saigon1965]

Any stats out there regarding usage of sidearms for the MIL?

[Snoopy47]

Probably not a lot. Most army weapons sit in an armory and are only taken out once or twice a year to qualify. A string of shots is 50 rounds.

So if I fail to qualify will I be given additional ammo for additinal training. How many times can I "fail" before I HAVE TO qualify

[Army GI]

So if I fail to qualify will I be given additional ammo for additinal training. How many times can I "fail" before I HAVE TO qualify

Oh yeah, forgot about that

Also, don't forget if the commander request "too much ammo." You have to burn it all up because returning brass is easier than returning live rounds to the ASP

[steelrain82]

in my old unit we obviously had the M9. i liked it, and we would be at the range practically every other week (all week) shooting thousands of rounds through them. 50 guys shooting thousands of rounds for roughly a year through each pistol and maybe a handful or two of weapon problems. and these pistols (not all but most) were old and beat. these pistols get their use for years on end. i had a few problems mainly stovepipes and jams, but those were due to magazines or ammo.

and just because they are issued doesnt mean everyone gets a pistol or that they even get range time other than the yearly requal which is really garbage. so most of the time it is the shooter that sucks and their lack of maintenance of the pistol.