TexasCHLforum.com

I was active duty during the transition. I preferred the M1911. We were told that the change was to allow commonality in handgun ammo with our NATO buddies.

Let the flames begin!

Why? Eh. I own a springfield 1911a1. Its a good firearm. That being said, I would take a beretta, nearly any beretta over it in a combat situation. The 92f for example, probably one of the best firearms Ive shot.

1911 for me. Not a 9mm fan. Old school I guess. Ive allways liked larger calibers even when I was in my teen years.

I picked up an Auto Ordnance P14-45 about 3 mo ago. 1911 style, alloy frame, .45 cal, 14 rd capacity. Sweet side arm. I am very short and rather round in the middle, even so with my CrossBreed Supertuck holster no printing. Maybe the bestof two philosophys?

Garry

Logistics. Same reason all of our military vehicles have the same lights.

Compliance with NATO standardization on 9x19mm Parabellum rounds for handguns.

As with every choice the military makes, there are nay-sayers and claims that the choice was rigged or that a lesser weapon was chosen to replace a better one. I believe that as in most matters of military logistics, they made the choice that seemed to be the best solution.

I happen to like the .45 ACP and M1911A1. I think they chose a lesser weapon (but not necessarily round). No, I don't like the Beretta 92FS/M9, but that's just my opinion, and should be worth about what you paid for it.

There are very large numbers of handguns chambered in 9x19mm Parabellum in use in military and police organizations around the world (not to mention in civilian hands), and the huge majority of users disagree with my evaluation. I would not choose to pick a fight with any of them, but will instead stick to my guns (make mine 1911, please!).

XtremeDuty.45 wrote:

surprise_i'm_armed wrote:"the US
decided that our ammo needed to match theirs?



SIA

Along with the 9mm being a NATO round the 92 has a higher mag capacity (I personally do not like it and wish we would have stuck to the 1911 as it is 45 and IMO a much better gun...no offense to 92 users, just my opinion).

We use NATO rounds so that when we fight along side other NATO countries we can swap out ammo easily in the heat of battle. This is why we use the 5.56 for our M16/M4 instead of the 7.62 that the AK47 uses, even though the 7.62 is a larger round and is what our enemies use in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I don't think it'll happen anytime soon or even all that at once, but I definately see the 6.8 spc replacing the 5.56 as the primary cal. used by federal govt. agencies and the Armed Forces. It's a perfect compromise between the 5.56 and the 7.62. But of course what would normally make perfect sense to anyone else is typicallly the opposite direction the govt. goes. So on second thought, maybe not.....

surprise_i'm_armed wrote:"9mm's were invented by Europeans to annoy their neighbors."
Author unknown.

IIRC, NATO doesn't even have fully integrated radio equipment, but the US
decided that our ammo needed to match theirs?

Do you think the M9 has been a quality sidearm?
Other Beretta owners here on the forum seem to like theirs, except for the
large size hindering concealability.

SIA

I like it. It shots straight and I've never experienced a ftf. Now, I've never had the honor of testing it the harsh conditions our brave folks in uniform have, but the range can get real dusty.

Plus, the way I figure it all those "extra" rnds make up for the lack of mass per projectile.

If I could not use one of my 1911's and was forced to use a 9mm, I would use my Browning Hi-Power. Even if 13 rounds is light by today's standards, the Hi-Power is slim and easily concealed. It points naturally and is an excellent design.

1st choice will ALWAYS be a 1911 in .45 ACP.

AEA wrote:If I could not use one of my 1911's and was forced to use a 9mm, I would use my Browning Hi-Power. Even if 13 rounds is light by today's standards, the Hi-Power is slim and easily concealed. It points naturally and is an excellent design.

1st choice will ALWAYS be a 1911 in .45 ACP.

I like Hi-Powers. Problem for guys like me is that we know to little about them and there are so many "clones" made by so many different countries out there, that I couldn't eve begin to guess what to look for and tell which one is better than the next. Plus most Hi-powers I've seen are easy in the $800s and above and these were the used ones. That's just too much dough for a gun I know too little about. But I know guys who swear by them and would likely clip ya one if you bad mouthed their particular Hi-Power.

AEA wrote:1st choice will ALWAYS be a 1911 in .45 ACP.

I like the sig on the forum that says ".45 b/c shooting twice is silly" Can't remember who it is but I like it.

Edit: It's .45mac.40!

LostInAustin wrote:

AEA wrote:1st choice will ALWAYS be a 1911 in .45 ACP.

I like the sig on the forum that says "I shoot .45 b/c shooting twice is silly" Can't remember who it is but I like it.

Nothin says love like a warm P220, still smokin from a long day of big hole makin......

I have to admit crapshoot....i do have sig fever and I can't seem to get rid of it.

LostInAustin wrote:I have to admit crapshoot....i do have sig fever and I can't seem to get rid of it.

You and me both buddy. But I just can't seem to get behind that new .380. It just looks like they were trying too hard. Let the Colts look like Colts. I mean they already had a .380. If it ain't broke.....