Going back to Colts (or equal 7 round mag gun) is a big step backwards for US.

If you really need a "macho" caliber why not take two steps forward and issue .45GAP (Glock automatic pistol) weapon, same performance than .45ACP, but in a smaller case, thus allowing larger mags (14 rounds in glocks own model?)

Or go to .357Sig offering allmost .357Mag power in a short cased automatic pistol round, which allows large capacity mags...

.45ACP is ancient round, only reason to go back to it is the nostalgy of good old times in the minds of the Brass...

As for a side arm i'm more than happy with my CZ-75B in 9mm Luger

I dont know what you could possibly be thinking!!!??? The 9mm parabellum is a ancient round too. Did you go to public school??
Think about what you are saying and posting on here. Some of us do know some history.
Many Police Departments have gone back to the .45 ACP as they have found the 9mm,40 caliber and others wanting. This is obvous. These departments have new pistols not the Colt Government.
I like my Colt Government but wouldnt advise it on most people because of the weight. There are newer more effecient and more accurate .45 pistols out there than the Colt Government...right out of the box.


Thanks,
Orangetom

Originally posted by northwolf
I was refering to .45Gap and .357Sig as better options to .45ACP, since they offer similar capabilities (or even better) in smaller packages allowing higher magazine capacity (btw .45Gap uses same bullets as .45ACP and .357Sig uses the .357Mag/Special bullets and has equal Muzzle velocity, but is packed into a .40 case)

.45GAP doesn't allow you to fit any more rounds in the same size magazine because it's only shorter and not slimmer than .45ACP.

Since the military can only use FMJ, choosing the .357 SiG would make no sense because you are still using a non-expanding 9mm caliber bullet at 1350fps instead of the more usual 1200fps, terminal ballistics would be essentially identical to 9x19.

.40S&W has more promise, but the .45ACP is generally considered to be easier to shoot because of its significantly lower operating pressure and its smoother recoil impulse. If you have ever compared the 2, you should have noticed that .40's tend to torque (twist) in your hand quite significantly.

It was a logical and inevitable choice, militaries who continue to use 9mm FMJ in anything other than an SMG are under-armed in my opinion. 9mm JHP is a different story entirely.

Originally posted by Lonestar24

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
...
While British SAS went for the HK MP5 early, ASAS chose the Ingram because it fired off a closed-bolt....

If you are referring to the Ingram MAC M10, this is not true. That one fires from an open bolt (like the majority of SMGs), while the MP5 fires from a closed bolt (the first-shot accuracy is one of the reasons for its popularity in LE).

Hey, I'm just quoting the magazine article about SAS that was in the last issue of Australian Defender I read before I left Australia the first time a couple of years ago. As it was a couple (or so) years ago, my memory could be just a little inaccurate. It's possible they chose it because it came with a supressor very early in its manufacture history.

I never said anything about the MP5's operating system, because I don't know about it. I assumed it was closed bolt because I've never heard of it having misfire incidents like the Sterling, which I know is open bolt, but that's just assumption. I've never quite understood the use of an open bolt system, given its apparrent safety problems. I've heard of Sterlings going off when they were dropped, not cool if you're the Digger standing next to the F1 when it hit the ground.

isnt this because the berreta is being replaced by the .45 MK23 I think thats why

SOCOM has had the MK23 for some time and it is proving to be reliable so the MK23 is going from SOCOM deployment to general procurement.

HK USP Full Size Frame. = MK 23

.45 calibre coming back? the US would then replace thier MP5s with the HK UMP .45s.

The .45 calibre was invented back in the first world war to kill the enemy completley. The German Parabellum also invented round the same time or both before was only designed to injure the enemy having one of his mates to carry him out the frontline so the opposing army would run out of men for thier front line so they would end up wasting time carrying thier own men out the firefight.

What else are they going to bring back, The 'Tommy gun'? or the M3A1'Grease gun' and other .45 weapons

I like my PARA SST .45 ACP but I LOVE my SIG 226. Owning one, I can see why the SEALs chose the 226. They're accurate, and a lot more ammo can be stacked in a single mag without compromising the guns intended profile. Coupled with some of that blended metal 9MM ammo showcased at the Blackwater Shootout 2005, a 9mm can be a formidable weapon. Don't count the "nine" out just yet.

Should use 10 mm caliber. Its better than the .45. In my view of course.

for those of you dogging the browning hi power, i'm here to tell you that it is the most accurate pistol i have ever shot. regardless of how powerful the load is, you still have to be able to hit the target reliably and accurately. if i was in charge of choosing a weapon that novices can use effectively (and lets face it, the majority of soldiers in any military are only going to be average shooters), this is the one i would pick. accurate, reliable, easy to use and easy to break down and clean in the field, and able to take high capacity mags (i use 13 rounders).

unless youre talking revolvers.....thats a whole nother ballgame.

Originally posted by Browno
.45 calibre coming back? the US would then replace thier MP5s with the HK UMP .45s.

The .45 calibre was invented back in the first world war to kill the enemy completley. The German Parabellum also invented round the same time or both before was only designed to injure the enemy having one of his mates to carry him out the frontline so the opposing army would run out of men for thier front line so they would end up wasting time carrying thier own men out the firefight.

What else are they going to bring back, The 'Tommy gun'? or the M3A1'Grease gun' and other .45 weapons

The M3 Grease Gun is a weapon with an awesome reputation for two reasons, it was simple and reliable, exactly what the Sten was supposed to be.

Given the the official name of the Colt .45 is Colt Government 1911 and the US didn't come into the war until 1917, I don't see where you get the idea that the .45 was invented in WW1.

And in 1914 the theory was to kill as many of the enemy as possible, the "scientific" theory of wounding hadn't yet gained currency. You're forgetting that men were still advancing line-abreast into the fire. As they had during the American Civil War. You didn't stop to help your mates, that's what stretcher-bearers were for.

Both rounds were pre-war. The 9mm parabellum came out in 1902 for use in the Luger, which "perfected" the toggle-lock system used in the Borchardt.

edit:sp

[edit on 1-12-2005 by HowlrunnerIV]

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
I've never quite understood the use of an open bolt system, given its apparrent safety problems.

Open bolt is mainly for better cooling of the chamber and to prevent cook-offs. Depending on the used method the bolt mass momentum acting against the recoil can also promote controllability during automatic fire.

Originally posted by robertfenix
isnt this because the berreta is being replaced by the .45 MK23 I think thats why

SOCOM has had the MK23 for some time and it is proving to be reliable so the MK23 is going from SOCOM deployment to general procurement.

HK USP Full Size Frame. = MK 23

The Mk.23 mod.0 will never be a general issue pistol. It was designed exclusively for SOCOM needs (who wanted an "offensive handgun", while pistols in military terms are rather "defensive" tools). That thing is a monster, only second in size to a full-size Desert Eagle. And it is too expensive.

And a USP Full Size Frame = a USP. The Mk.23 is not part of the USP program and was developed parallel on request.

[edit on 1/12/2005 by Lonestar24]

I was watching a show about the attack on Falluja and one marine was talking bout how almost all the terrorists were duped up on heroin and other drugs, giving them the ability to take hits a normal person couldn't.
He talk about how in a house sweep he shot one terrorist 3 times (not sure of the weapon he used) and the terrorist still managed to run out the house and over a fence before he collapsed. A higher caliber would ensure that drugs or not he's going down with he first round. I never understood why they switched to the 9mm in the 80's.

personel on special teams use special type weapons for special jobs. Many fo these weapons are not what one gets off the shelf if they are even availiable to the public. Same with the ammo. There is recently alot of specialty ammo out there not available to the public.
I agree...with the poster who said the Browning Hi Power is a fine pistol. I have had the privilege of shooting one at the gun range. They are reliable and accurate. I just dont care for the caliber though there is much better ammo types availiable than in the day the High Power first came on the market. Ive shot the Berettas ..not impressed..the Tarus clones..not impressed either. .357 sigs ..not impressed either.
I have not fired many of the new .45ACPs on the market ..some of you may have more hands on experience in this than myself.
I am not enamoured of the concept of the .45 GAP but if you folks think it is ok..so be it. It is still a rather new cartridge on the market and speaking for myself ..I like being able to go many different places and finding .45ACPs on the shelf. Same with .38/357s. You can most certainly find 9mm everywhere now days. Somehow I dont think this will happen with .45 GAP. Same thing with .357 Sig.
By the way ..Northwolf..I reload for .45ACP, 38/357 and a host of rifle calibers. I am just not intrested in stocking up tools or supplys for another caliber..no matter what they say is its ballistics etc. When I load for carry I use factory JHPs. When I load for the practice range I use downloaded lead bullets or FMJs. I have a case of FMJ bullets in my garage. It will take me awhile to shoot them up..same with lead bullets ..in .45 and .38 caliber.
There must be something very wrong with me..I just dont think large capacity magazines are that big a allure..or sales pitch. When I carry my .45ACP Colt Government I carry three spare 8 shot Wilson magazines..how much do I need to carry. When I carry my 4 or 6 inch barreled .357 I carry three speed loaders in addition to what is in the wheel. How much do I need??

On the teams ..yes pistols are often a offensive weapon..definitely. If I were on a team I too would be very choosy about my pistol. No doubt.
I just find it intresting that so many are going back to the .45 ACP after all the whoopla about the other calibers. Technology seems to be coming back around. It seems that John Browning was really on to something.

In somewhat of a similar style it reminds me of that list going around of what worked well and didnt work well in Iraq as far as weapons. Some of the old stuff is still used and works well ..not so per se with much of the new high tech stuff. Alot of the newer high tech stuff seems to be high maintnence.

Thanks,
Orangetom

Read Blackhawk Down. I know I keep referring to this in various threads, but it's relevant.

One Delta operator, whose name people are probably sick of hearing from me, tells Mark Bowden about hitting Aideed militiamen multiple times with rounds from his CAR 15/M4, call it what you will, and them going straight through and leaving only a pinprick hole exactly 5.56mm in diameter. There was no tumble and no keyholing.

Part of the problem was that he was using greenspot (I think) light armour-piercing rounds which went through flesh like it wasn't there. Another part is the sheer accuracy of the M16, it has too many rifling grooves.

The other part of the problem was that many militiamen chewed Caq - low-grade marijuana. It isn't nearly like child-soldiers or Congo-loonies hyped up on dugees laced with heroin and gunpowder, but is a low-level painkiller.

It doesn't need to be heroin. At Waterloo many of the British cavalry sat down that morning and got pissed. Once they went into battle the alcohol only slightly degraded their horsemanship (they were streets ahead of the French anyway) and fairly thoroughly squashed their fear. The problem was they didn't hear the recall. But they fought like hell.

That sounds like or similar to the stories coming out of the Phillipines at the turn of the 1900s against some kind of Phillipino tribesmen on some kind of drug. The .38s of those days didnt drop them but the .45s did or so the stories go. I dont think they used .45 ACP but the revolvers in .45 long colt. Still it is a very heavy bullet for a pistol verses the .38 calibers. Alot of energy delivered on target.

You know something West Point. I never fully appreciated that about energy delivered till I got one of these .50 caliber black powder rifles. In round ball or maxi ball.. if you watch it closely when someone is shooting it ..you can actually see the bullet going down range. What you realize when you watch it hit..something like a 2 liter bottle of water or a ceramic bathtub tile....it has a terrific impact. Its not high velocity but the impact is staggering. This was my first understanding that speed is not everything.
Mind you now...there are some significant improvements in ammo for these rifles and pistols now days...sabots and jacket hollowpoints in saboted loads...even pre made or molded charges..but still I learned alot of respect for a simple lead bullet in one of these old time weapons.

Thanks,
Orangetom

Originally posted by WestPoint23
I never understood why they switched to the 9mm in the 80's.

Politics.

In the '50s the US forced NATO to adopt .30 cal federal as its standard calibre (re-named 7.62NATO). That meant that the Commonwealth had to completely re-arm from .303, the French had to ditch their traditional calibre, the (West) Germans had to shift from 7.92 Mauser when they were given an army...

The US were the only NATO force carrying a .45ACP pistol. Everybody else used 9mm.

Given that the US forced the change to 7.62 and then circumvented it by shifting to 5.56, if they were demanding sigularity of calibre, they had to play along and it was easier and cheaper for them to shift than everybody else. Politics were also pretty much at the root of the decision to choose the Beretta as the new 9mm pistol.

Now, the Brits were developing the EM2 assault rifle (the original bullpup system) in a strange calibre and the Yanks pretty much forced them to drop it, you can imagine how happy the Brits were when after re-equipping with SLRs at the expense of their superb prototype the Yanks jumped ship in favour of the Armalite/M16. There was no way the Brits were about to ditch the Sterling, Hi Power and MP5 in order to go to .45ACP.