[FCross7]

Originally Posted by sniper762

its a statistical proven fact that accuracy increased upon army's adoption of the m9. couple that with more tha double the shot capacity and ammo weight,i think they made a good move.

I'm not saying it didn't happen, because I honestly don't know, but I would like to see proof of this, if any such proof can be shown.

for all the army's specs and requirements, the m9, beats others hands down

In my opinion there are much better options out there than the M9. Even if you wanted to stay with the same size, caliber, and capacity, I would take a CZ over a M9 any day. In my opinion, the M9 has the ergonomics of a brick, not to mention that slide mounted safety, which is a horrible place for it. One, it's farther from your thumb than a frame mounted, and two, it's not too uncommon for the safety to be flipped on when manipulating the slide.

Just my .02 on the matter.

-Fred

[jismail]

I have a 92FS and personally love the ergonomics of the pistol and it performs flawlessly with all type of ammo. I think the trade off for the reliability is that it isn't as accurate as some other pistols due to it's design, but it is certinally accurate enough for battlefield conditions.

Regardless of mfg or caliber that is ultimately identified as a replacment, I think it is to our advantage to ensure we are not using a round that is not standardized in NATO. I think there is a lot to be said in being able to swipe the other guys ammo should you find yourself in short supply.

[Tackleberry1]

Originally Posted by jismail

I have a 92FS and personally love the ergonomics of the pistol and it performs flawlessly with all type of ammo. I think the trade off for the reliability is that it isn't as accurate as some other pistols due to it's design, but it is certinally accurate enough for battlefield conditions.

Regardless of mfg or caliber that is ultimately identified as a replacment, I think it is to our advantage to ensure we are not using a round that is not standardized in NATO. I think there is a lot to be said in being able to swipe the other guys ammo should you find yourself in short supply.

Using NATO standard ammo is smart. The problem is that the standard is not very effective when combined w/Geneva Convention restrictions on FMJ only.

As a defensive round here at home the 9mm has come along way with it's various loads and JHP configurations but when it's FMJ compared to FMJ this cartridge give up a truck load of stopping power to the .45 ACP.

TACK

[Jpyle]

But Colt’s variant is a single-action, cocked and locked pistol, which is not popular with many folks in Big Army.

Oh the humanity... 100 years later JMB would not have even gotten a trial...

[Bighead]

It never ceases to amaze me how someone can argue against capacity: "If you're accurate, you don't need a basket of bullets," and other such nonsense. What if I'm need to shoot 5 people? or 10? or 15? The modern soldier is deployed on a battlefield without lines, where they may be engaged in battles with multiple enemy over an extended period of time. This isn't confronting an armed robber at the Circle K. If you can carry a firearm that is ergonomic, weight efficient, and has high capacity why wouldn't you?

And if anyone failed to notice, the government is borrowing a lot of money, so affordability should a consideration. Considering the criteria set forth by the article, my first choice would be the new HK45. Considering that HK adds $100 for the "H" and another $100 for the "K", my actual recommendation would be for the FN FNP45 and FNP45 Tactical.

[Overkill0084]

Originally Posted by Marthor

Several attempts at a new handgun have died already. With budget pressures increasing like never before, don't expect and real new program to get any momentum.

Like the article said, selection process hasn't even started. This article is total speculation and fiction. The M9 will continue to serve as far out as we can see.

This^^
The govt is broke. We can't afford what we're doing now.
That said, I was disappointed that there were no CZs on the proposed list. Reliable, accurate, simple & w/ good capacity.

[Tackleberry1]

I'm a 1911 Devotee but I must agree with the need for hi capacity. Those who knock it must not have experienced the effect of suppressive fire.

TACK

[Marthor]

Originally Posted by Overkill0084

This^^
The govt is broke. We can't afford what we're doing now.
That said, I was disappointed that there were no CZs on the proposed list. Reliable, accurate, simple & w/ good capacity.

Even though a replacement of the Beretta M9 won't happen anytime soon, I would still proclaim the Beretta Px4 Storm 45 ACP as an obvious upgrade!

One thing regarding capacity, the 10+1 capacity of the Storm is better than the M9 too in that you don't have to "double tap" to get the same effect.