Marines to Purchase .45

[Smitty's Retired]

Just received my latest copy of American Rifleman. In the "Random Shots" is a short blurb that says the U.S. Marines has awarded Colt Defense LLC. with a contract for 12,000 1911A1 pistols in the CQBP configuration. In my opinion, they should have never went away from the 1911A1 in the first place.

[jh45gun]

It has been reported here somewhere. I agree they should have never went to the 9mm

[Baja_Traveler]

The Coast Guard moved to the Beretta the year I got out, and as a Gunners Mate I thought it was the stupidest move they could have ever made. Now that there has been a real shooting war going on the military brass are realizing the error of their ways...

[44man]

My grandson got on, on another site. He agreed that the nine was a bad choice over the .45.
I got a warning about it. He was correct about the poor choice of the nine for the soldiers.
I just read an article about a homeowner shooting some BG 4X with a nine and he ran away to be captured later. He will survive to suck tax dollars for a long time.
How do I respond when getting a warning about my and my grandson's feelings about the nine?
Give me a 1911!

[scattershot]

What was the warning for? This is still a free country, as far as I know.

[km101]

The switch to the 9mm was all political, rather than bassistics. I was supposedly to bring the US troops into conformity with NATO standards. Seems like the brass is finally willing to admit what the troops have known all along! The 9mm is a poor second to the .45 in combat situations!

[gunfan]

Well, there you go again. The .45 should never have been abandoned. The 9 works, but not as well as the .45. A nice H&K MP .45 would serve rather well.

Scott

[_Hawkeye_]

Are these 1911s going to be reliable? Most modern ones that I have seen seem not to actually shoot. That would be the only question I would have.

[Matthew 25]

Hawkeye, I wouldn't doubt their reliability a bit.

I do love the 1911, but I wonder why they don't choose a plastic wonder like gunfan said with the HK. I've got 18 round 45 mags for my XDm. As cool as the 1911 is, I'd still take a functional 18 round 45 for a combat role.

[rromeo]

In my opinion, they should have never went away from the 1911A1 in the first place.

They never did go away from the .45. The standard units switched, and will continue to use Beretta M9s, but the Recon units stayed with 1911s and those guns are getting replaced with this order.
This will not be a be a change that many people will notice.

[garym1a2]

I have a Kimber TLERL2, great gun, very accurate and quite reliable. That said if I am going to war I rather have my GLOCK 21SF or my GLOCK22. Big mags are always better when the rounds are flying. P.S, these Glocks are well known for their relaiability and for the price of the 1911 they could have gotten 4 times as many Glocks!

Hawkeye, I wouldn't doubt their reliability a bit.

I do love the 1911, but I wonder why they don't choose a plastic wonder like gunfan said with the HK. I've got 18 round 45 mags for my XDm. As cool as the 1911 is, I'd still take a functional 18 round 45 for a combat role.

[1Shirt]

It is Marine tradition and stopping power reality!
Semper Fi!
1Shirt!

[44man]

What was the warning for? This is still a free country, as far as I know.

Darned if I know. My grandson only explained about bullet choice to maximize affects and how hard it is to get a nine just right. I was signed on and he went to the site to read. I did not find anything he said wrong. I was blamed. I had to search for what he said.
I have a reputation and am hunted because I tell it like it is.
It is hard. I don't go there often but there are bricks on the road that if you step on the wrong one you will bump into the local expert.

[punkinlobber]

The U.S. military adopted the 9MM in exchange or NATO adopting the 5.56MM. The marines used the M9 for fleet troops but non-fleet troops such as Embassy personel and guards kept the M1911, many of which are many decades old. It seems the new weapons are to replace an aging arsenal.

[44man]

I will always be old school. A 1911 or 30-06, .308 or .50 BMG.
The M1 would shoot through a tree to kill anyone behind it. It takes 100,000 rounds from the toy .223 to to kill anyone hiding in a jungle. It is only effective in the open, not when an enemy is behind block or concrete, even a tree. A 30-06 tracer would penetrate 2' of wood and ball is better let alone armor piercing.
The nine is a feely-touchy thing to make you feel safe. It is the junk for war when you can't hurt the enemy, no expanding bullets so the answer is always BIGGER.
Don't you find it strange a sniper can blow a BG into 1000 pieces with a .50 but you can't use a good bullet from your battle rifle or handgun?
How about the UN making IED's or suicide bombers illegal?
One bomb goes off and the whole country should be carpet bombed. Attack our embassy and face rockets and minie guns until nobody was standing, then take out the leaders.
Then the creep and Hillary spends $70,000 of taxpayer money to apologize. I would turn the countries into rubble. Burn all the crops, shut off all money, starve them out.
I would pull every one of our troups out and take every gun and uniform given to them. How stupid to arm and train the enemy!
Sorry for the rant but most of you do feel the same after seeing what has gone on.

[parrott1969]

I like the 45acp but ballistics say your wrong about the 9mm. Police reports on one shot stops also say your wrong. The 9mm, 40 and 45 are all in the 90% range. Keep in mind that the military does not use your moma's 9mm load. Nato standard is 124 grain bullet at 1200 or 1250 fps. Remember that with 9mm its 124 grain moving 1200ish fps, 40 is 180 @ 950ish fps, 45 is 230 @ 750 ish fps. My freind, a doctor & 45 nut, likes to say it the rule of holes. 9mm makes a hole this big o, a 45 makes a hole this big O.

You can blame John Mc Cain on the demise of the 45 acp. Read where the military did not want to let it go. So he sponsered a bill that did away with funding repair parts

[44man]

Humans are frail creatures---BUT! Remember when the .45 came into the scene because drugs made men never stop?
Yes a .22 anywhere will put a normal person on the ground.
It is still size of the bullet compared to your mental state.
Look at the civil war with .54's, .58's and larger, slow, lumbering boolits that did utter destruction to a man. Hit in the arm or leg and it was gone.
Hit a doped up creep with a nine and he might kill you. How many LEO's were under gunned with the .38? Would you be a hero going up against a Thompson with a .38 or would you be dead?
The .45 ACP is affective and there is no doubt.
Velocity or ME does not do the killing or stopping. Ballistics is wrong for stopping power.
A .40 might not be enough but a 10mm is close kin to a .41 mag.
You do need energy, not book stuff. Energy applied along with penetration. Bullet selection is important.
You need to tell us what nine bullet is supplied to our men in the field. Would you bet your life on it?

[1Shirt]

Like 44man, I am old school! Started with a Garand and a 1911 on Paris Island. When I switched to AF after the first hitch, and they handed me a 30 carbine, and had me shooting at 25 yds, and there was only 38 revolvers at that time. I thought it was a game.

As a supply Sgt. that supported AF Combat Controlers, I had about 20 of the first AR-15's, and really thought they were a joke. But there was so much hype about them that the other branches followed suit. Felt less than secure in Nam with the 15.

Love the ctg (223), and have made P-dog kills to 350-400 yds with a bolt Sav. and a 1x9 twist. And as far as I am concerned that is what the ctg is designed for. Yep, old school and proud of it!
Semper Fi!
1Shirt!

[M-Tecs]

You can blame John Mc Cain on the demise of the 45 acp. Read where the military did not want to let it go. So he sponsered a bill that did away with funding repair parts

McCain was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1982, he served two terms, and was then elected to the U.S. Senate in 1986.

Since the Military began looking for a new sidearm to replace the 1911 in the 70’s and in 1980, the Beretta 92S-1 design was chosen over all other entries I am not buying that McCain was responsible for the demise of the 1911 or the 45 acp.

The 1980 results were challenged by the Army. The Army placed a Formal Request for a second set of Test Samples in November of 1983 and new tests were completed in 1984.

In 1985 the M9 became the service pistol for all five branches.

I agree that replacing the 1911 with the M9 was a mistake.

Clinton had 400,00 M-14 cut up when they were still the US Navy’s service rifle.

The stock pile of serviceable M14’s and 1911’s should have been left in storage for future emergency use or as we see in Afghanistan with the M14 Enhanced Battle Rifle that is in great demand but not enough rifles or parts on hand.

You have to be careful of what you wish for. The Army had been trying for a new service pistol since the 70’s. They were on board until they found out it was going to be the NATO 9mm. Hardly McCain’s fault. Decided before he was in Congress.

All the M-16’s M-16A-1's and most of the M-16A-2’s have been scraped out or sold to other counties. Once it obsolete it is no longer supported.

Unlike the M-14’s a large number of the 417,448 .45 caliber pistols in inventory were at the end of their service life (Comptroller General’s report,PLRD-82-4, dated 3-8-82).

So “You can blame John Mc Cain on the demise of the 45 acp” but I am not going to blame this one on him.

It was a mistake to make the 1911 obsolete but not funding an obsolete program is not a mistake.

[olaf455]

"A 9 millimeter might expand but a 45 ACP will not shrink"