Author Topic: U.S. military solicites for 600plus k .45acps (Read 1778 times)

kyote · « **on:** November 12, 2006, 12:06:02 PM »

seems that the wonder 9 is very lacking for our troops and was a huge mistake by the weapons procurment folks.and they have now put out a memo asking for demos in caliber .45acp as they are seeking to buy just shy of 700,000 auto pistols in that caliber/some with safteys some with out for the SF units.and suppersors for the SF ones that go on and off redely.
One of the NRA rags had a pretty good article on this and the writer tried to gain info from the diffenrt pistol companys on what they were going to do and if in fact they were going to supply pistols for the testing.most would not reply are say one way are the other what they were going to do.the list of folks supplying pistols for the test (if I remember them all)is as follows.
1)colt
2)Glock
3)sig
4)taurus
5)smith and wesson
6)springfield
7)FN
8)HK
9)rework the old inventoty of 1911
Beleive it must hold 10 rounds are better.

am wondering what you all think might be the winner and why.
I sadly think the glock will win.it allready does what they want except for the extrneal safety,which they will say is on the trigger.but I understand they have all ready produced a glock with a safety like the colt 1911..

hardertr · « **Reply #1 on:** November 12, 2006, 02:37:42 PM »

The Glock will take it hands-down. The military is big on "adverse conditions" equipment, and that is what the Glock is known for.

NOW....if Glock can avoid the problem they had when the contract for 9mm went to Beretta and actually have thier prototype ready on time....

I still don't see why we are going back to 45acp when the 40 S&W or 10mm would probably be better choices. 38 Super or 357 Sig might be nice to see as well. OH WELL, we always do seem to choose image over practicality. But then again, 1 45 to the chest has a much more profound impact than 10 9mm.

ccoker · « **Reply #2 on:** November 13, 2006, 04:36:18 AM »

I just want them all to be well armed...

Smokin Joe · « **Reply #3 on:** November 13, 2006, 05:05:38 AM »

There has been a major change concerning the JCP --Joint Combat Pistol.

As of September 5th., 2006, the JCP was "postponed":

"This notification is to inform Industry the Combat Pistol requirement is postponed indefinitely. USSOCOM will no longer issue a Request for Proposal."

http://www.fbo.gov/spg/ODA/USSOCOM/SOAL%2DKB/H92222%2D05%2DR%2D0017/Modification%2004.html

http://www.defensereview.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=920

Questor · « **Reply #4 on:** November 13, 2006, 09:00:19 AM »

I don't understand why the military would want to try using the 45ACP again. It seems like there are other options just as good today. Is it because they are required to use non-expanding ball ammo and that things like the 40S&W just don't do as well with ball ammo?

williamlayton · « **Reply #5 on:** November 14, 2006, 01:13:50 AM »

We seem to forget old things and why.
The order of things seems to demand punch rather than speed---which was why the .45 was begun to be used in the beginning.
The 10MM would seem to answer the demands but, as we have seen already, it has the drawback of recoil.
The demand for jacketed bullets in the military prevents use of hollowpoints. It has been discussed that the hollowpoint might not be a good answer in this conflict anyway, due to clothing and armor.
Now if one wants penetration of clothing and armor the better choice would be the 9X23 or super .38--thogh I think the punch of the .45 would compensate for the speed and would do a better job, all around.
The .40 lacks in comparision to the design of the .45 IMO.
In ball penetration is good, better than the .40.
I would like to see the 9X23 get a chance to show its stuff. Good round, good penetration, good speed, and with ball, good punch. The recoil is good and managable.
Blessings

44 Man · « **Reply #6 on:** November 14, 2006, 07:41:51 AM »

They dumped the .45 in the first place for political rather than practical reasons. The 1911 has always done the job asked of it in a very competent manner. Mostly it was because they wanted to comform and 'fit in' with our European allies. (just like they think it is 'cool' to be more like the Europeans now!) Just more PC stuff with some mumbo-jumbo about 'interchangability' of ammo, etc. That has never been an issue, only a justifacation. If they wanted true 'interchangability', all the nato nations should all have the same handguns and rifles. 44 Man

kyote · « **Reply #7 on:** November 14, 2006, 12:01:13 PM »

well smokinjoe,
that sure was a surpise.I would not have thunk they would do that.wonder whats up? a joint rifle pistol combo that use the same ammo??since it is getting kinda urbanish.

and I think every one is correct.the Geneiva convention does not allow any ammo except FMJ to my understanding.so the bigger the better..and the .45acp has proved itself.
as for the .40, the BP has the hottest ammo out there right now for carry.155gr HP.they are like ice picks when they hit some one..but they like them.and I can tell you that they are HOT rounds.and those New HK pistols they are being issued as they enter the trainging phase.just seem to love em.

Lloyd Smale · « **Reply #8 on:** November 30, 2006, 03:13:55 PM »

well said pal!

Quote from: 44 Man on November 14, 2006, 07:41:51 AM

They dumped the .45 in the first place for political rather than practical reasons. The 1911 has always done the job asked of it in a very competent manner. Mostly it was because they wanted to comform and 'fit in' with our European allies. (just like they think it is 'cool' to be more like the Europeans now!) Just more PC stuff with some mumbo-jumbo about 'interchangability' of ammo, etc. That has never been an issue, only a justifacation. If they wanted true 'interchangability', all the nato nations should all have the same handguns and rifles. 44 Man

alien319 · « **Reply #9 on:** December 31, 2006, 06:14:07 AM »

I am in the Marine Corps and the 9mm ammo we use is the NATO standard 124gr FMJ. The .45 ACP ammo will be 230gr FMJ. If hollow points were allowed the 9mm wouldn't be as bad of a choice. But none the less the rules are the rules and when FMJ must do go with a big fat slow round to create a bigger and better wound cavity. Imagine getting hit by almost a 1/2 marble going between 830-870 FPS. OUCH. I love the .45 ACP. Greatest combat pistol round ever created IMHO.

jimmyjam101 · « **Reply #10 on:** December 31, 2006, 10:53:27 AM »

I thought that the US military already chose the Springield Armory XD .45 acp. to replace those 9mm Berreta's. Am I mistaken?

hardertr · « **Reply #11 on:** December 31, 2006, 11:10:16 AM »

No, Sprinfield Armory is however trying to get the contract. They will show their new M&P45 at the '07 Shot Show.

The military has stated they are looking for a 40 or 45 to replace the Berretta 92 we currently use.
My bet is still on either Glock or H&K for the contract.

alien319 · « **Reply #12 on:** December 31, 2006, 11:32:29 AM »

I'm thinking along the same line. I believe it will be the HK USP45. It's bigger brother the Mark 23 is already being used by the US Navy SEAL's. It has pretty much all of the features the Military seems to be looking for. I don't know however if that weapon has passed and Government "Torture Tests". I think it will perform well under many conditions though.

hardertr · « **Reply #13 on:** December 31, 2006, 01:36:19 PM »

If the SEALs have it...believe me...it HAS passed the "torture test"

The contract will come down to $money$ now.

Lloyd Smale · « **Reply #14 on:** January 01, 2007, 12:47:04 AM »

seals allready use a .45 sig

DC · « **Reply #15 on:** January 01, 2007, 03:42:44 PM »

If I am not mistaken, the Kimber web site indicates that the Marine Special Ops units are already using Kimber 45ACP's
Before you get all exicted, remember I said "if I am not mistaken", I might have read it on the Springfield sitel....I'm just too lazy to go look again.
In any case, I don't think that the military in general is going to replace the Berretta any time soon. Buying a few .45's for special purposes is one thing, buying a million is another. Yes, the .45 has it all over the 9mm in stopping power but the Berretta holds more rounds, is VERY reliable and a solder can carry more extra ammo with less weight. It is just like the notion that the miltary will return to the .308 or some other "old reliable" heavier round, it is plain not true. Ask any soldier if he would like to carry 200+ rounds of .223 or half of that in .308, almost all will opt for light, more and fast.
As for the pistol thing, most never leave their holsters in combat except for special ops units. For all practical purposes, the 9mm Berretta is a great pistol.
Having said all that, I don't own a 9mm, most likely won't ever as I am a 1911 man and always have been. However I am practical and ex military and have worked with both.
Dana

Mikey · « **Reply #16 on:** January 02, 2007, 02:14:50 AM »

Ya know, it is really interesting. The 45 acp works; it worked in the past and it continues to work today. The regular Army and other regular military forces are armed with the politically correct 9mm whilest the more elite forces carry the 45 in any number of different configurations.

Now they are looking at bringing back the 45 acp for standard duty carry, because it works. Well, the Gneva Convention or the Hague Convention, don't recall which, mandated the use of fmj bullets which always gives the edge to the fatest bullet with the highest 'ouch' factor, the 45.

Handgun hunters realized yars back that just about the only way to make a roundnosed bullet more effective was to square off the nose and the edges of the shoulders. That bullet design by Elmer Keith is called the semi-wadcutter and it is more effective than the round nose. At thispoint there are two bullets out there that would make the 45 acp a more effective combat round and both are jacketed. One bullet is the MagTec fmj 230 gn swc. This slug makes beautifully 'square' holes in my targets and I now carry them in my 45s. The other slug is a heavyweight in either 260 or 300 gns and can be turned to be shot butt end first as a fmj. Either would wallop with more authority than the current 230 gn fmj round nose ball.

If any of these specialty 45s were properly tuned to feed and function with these square nosed swc type slugs then I firmly believe the combat capabilities of the 45 auto would be effectively enough enhanced to preclude any further notions of caliber switching. JMHO. Mikey.

alien319 · « **Reply #17 on:** January 02, 2007, 07:24:35 AM »

DC, you are not mistaken as I am a Marine. The Recon units do carry the Kimber and for good reason. Like you said the Beretta is an outstanding pistol but with FMJ ammo, not nearly powerful enough for stopping a 180-200 pound determined enemy toting an AK-47. The .45 like Mikey said is a much better stopper even with the use of FMJ. Also, the sidearm is being used more now than ever. They are easier to move around with in houses and buildings. I do believe that the many men and women in the military would rather have more stopping power, than carry more, less powerful ammo. The .223 is quite the accurate round but most of the energy is gone after 200 yards. The .308 is much more capable. I have a buddy who put it in a interesting way. "We (meaning the U.S. Military) are using a round meant for varmints. Most people would not use this round on anything larger than a Coyote, let alone a person weighing 200 lbs." A 55-grain FMJ bullet traveling 3250 FPS goes clean through a person at the close ranges of the city combat we are seeing. Granted a .308 will do the same but with a much larger bullet creating more damage. Sorry for the long post but there needs to be more powerful weapons in our aresonal for every military man or women to use.

CDA · « **Reply #18 on:** January 03, 2007, 04:00:08 AM »

Quote from: alien319 on January 02, 2007, 07:24:35 AM

there needs to be more powerful weapons in our aresonal for every military man or women to use.

AMEN!

DC · « **Reply #19 on:** January 03, 2007, 06:48:47 PM »

I will defer to the current usage of the weapons. While I had military experience with a few different shootin irons, I never had anyone shoot back. The paper targets we shot at were not hostile at all.

teddy12b · « **Reply #20 on:** January 10, 2007, 07:17:51 AM »

I was in the military and in the sand box. I have owned an AR-15 in 223, and a beretta 9mm. Those two bullets aren't enough. I've never used either in combat but when troops have been complaining about an less than sufficient weapon it's time to listen to them. Currently I've got an AR-15 in 6.8mm and an xd in 45acp. If I was redeployed I'd rather go back overseas with my own weapons than what the military has to offer.

I'll get off my soapbox and get back to the original post. I hope with all my heart the military goes to a 45acp. I have a hard time believing the polymer handguns (glocks, xd's etc) with stand up to the torture tests even though they are outstanding weapons otherwise. Just kinda hard to pistol wip somebody with a plastic gun or drive a hummer over it.

Give the troops bigger weapons! Hooah!