Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > Handguns > Semi-Auto Handguns > VIDEO: Shooting the World's Largest .45ACP Semi-Auto Handgun

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-08-2012, 01:35 PM   #1
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Amsdorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 565
Liked 119 Times on 90 Posts
Likes Given: 20

Default VIDEO: Shooting the World's Largest .45ACP Semi-Auto Handgun

It's a brick. It's the world's first and perhaps only crew-served .45ACP. You have to be about seven feet tall and weigh 400 pounds to conceal carry it. When you run out of ammo you can use it as a battering weapon.

It is, the one, the only, the world's largest .45ACP semi-automatic handgun, I present, the HK MK23!!

Anyone use one before?

http://youtu.be/-bsR-8ckQdI?hd=1

__________________
Member of: NRA (Life); GOA (Life); NSSF; GCA.
Guns and Shooting Videos: VDMA Videos.
Amsdorf is offline  
SSGN_Doc Likes This 
Reply With Quote

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today - It's Free!

Are you a firearms enthusiast? Then we hope you will join the community. You will gain access to post, create threads, private message, upload images, join groups and more.

Firearms Talk is owned and operated by fellow firearms enthusiasts. We strive to offer a non-commercial community to learn and share information.

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today! - Click Here


Old 09-08-2012, 02:14 PM   #2
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
dog2000tj's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 8,309
Liked 3734 Times on 1824 Posts
Likes Given: 13269

Default

Why would they make it so big?

__________________

Member: NRA GOA

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Est sularas oth mithas

"either way, you were guilty by association, so you were smited...." JD

dog2000tj is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2012, 09:10 PM   #3
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
SSGN_Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 4,126
Liked 1976 Times on 1174 Posts
Likes Given: 424

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dog2000tj View Post
Why would they make it so big?
They made it for Special Operations folks to give them an "offensive pistol" Made to be hig capacity, standard to long barrel, large bore for better stopping power with FMJ, and ability to mount a supressor, which also meant iti needs high sights.

HK really pursues military and law enforcement contracts. A contributing factor to their high prices, and what is largely found to be horrible customer service if you aren't a department, or other contract purchaser (have heard that they may have improved.)

They make good stuff but the MK23 borders on ridiculous. After it was made the SEALs decided it ws really on the large side to be practical as a pistol, and for teh weight of ammo and weapon they could use a short barreled upper on an M16 lower and get a light weight compact firearm that actually hit harder. (MK18)

Very cool looking gun. Fun to shoot. The size and polymer frame make it pleasant to shoot. Trigger is nice. The ambidextrous mag release is nice too.

FN makes a similar beast of a .45 as well.

I think the SEALs enjoy jerking firearms manufactureres around to see what they can get them to make. And manufacturers will jump on it because a government contract is guaranteed money. Saying it is made for the SEALs guarantees mall ninjas will be all over the guns too, in the commercial market, like mud on a hog. Look at the sucess of the sales and prices of the MK 23, and the Sig 226 Navy model (Mk25). The SEALs actually do like the Sigs though, because they are a normal sized pistol that really does function well in the type of environment they work in.
__________________
SSGN_Doc is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2012, 09:47 PM   #4
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
dog2000tj's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 8,309
Liked 3734 Times on 1824 Posts
Likes Given: 13269

Default

I would have thought just the opposite ... that SF operators would want a pistol to be small and compact. I can understand a minimum size/weight to help with recoil and controlability but that thing is huge! reminds me of the DE .50 - sure looks cool ... until you have one in your hands and try operating it, then you realize how silly it is

Thinking that SF would only use pistols in CQB or as a last resort I wonder why they just don't opt for a modular rifle system. One where they can change uppers to meet mission specific needs. If they know they are going to be entering a compound and going room to room why not just pop on a 9" suppressed upper chambered in the same caliber as their battle rifle? I mean, how short does a firearm really need to be?

Picture a soldiers size standing with 2 hands on a pistol taking aim - then compare that to the same soldier operating a 9" supressed upper rifle ... off hand about the same size, maybe even a better profile while carrying the rifle

__________________

Member: NRA GOA

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Est sularas oth mithas

"either way, you were guilty by association, so you were smited...." JD

dog2000tj is offline  
SSGN_Doc Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2012, 10:35 PM   #5
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
SSGN_Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 4,126
Liked 1976 Times on 1174 Posts
Likes Given: 424

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dog2000tj View Post
I would have thought just the opposite ... that SF operators would want a pistol to be small and compact. I can understand a minimum size/weight to help with recoil and controlability but that thing is huge! reminds me of the DE .50 - sure looks cool ... until you have one in your hands and try operating it, then you realize how silly it is

Thinking that SF would only use pistols in CQB or as a last resort I wonder why they just don't opt for a modular rifle system. One where they can change uppers to meet mission specific needs. If they know they are going to be entering a compound and going room to room why not just pop on a 9" suppressed upper chambered in the same caliber as their battle rifle? I mean, how short does a firearm really need to be?

Picture a soldiers size standing with 2 hands on a pistol taking aim - then compare that to the same soldier operating a 9" supressed upper rifle ... off hand about the same size, maybe even a better profile while carrying the rifle
Your reasoning is sound and is similar to teh reason that they are not widely adopted for SF use. The idea was to give them a replacement for a rifle in pistol form. Turned out it wasn't so brilliant.

Also that kind o reasoning went into teh MK18 short barreled upper, and then the SPR Mk12. The original concept of the Mk12 SPR was to give the SEALs a Special Purpose Receiver with 18" match barrel that they could pop on a carbine if it turned out that they needed a compact precision platform. This way they could pack the nice light M4 upper for CQB and have a midrange sniper upper if it was needed to convert over. Later the Mk18 came along with a shorter barrel than the M4.

The modular characteristics of the M16 platform just really hadn't been fully taken advantage of before.
__________________

Last edited by SSGN_Doc; 09-08-2012 at 10:41 PM.
SSGN_Doc is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2012, 10:55 PM   #6
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
dog2000tj's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 8,309
Liked 3734 Times on 1824 Posts
Likes Given: 13269

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SSGN_Doc View Post
Your reasoning is sound and is similar to teh reason that they are not widely adopted for SF use. The idea was to give them a replacement for a rifle in pistol form. Turned out it wasn't so brilliant.

Also that kind o reasoning went into teh MK18 short barreled upper, and then the SPR Mk12. The original concept of the Mk12 SPR was to give the SEALs a Special Purpose Receiver with 18" match barrel that they could pop on a carbine if it turned out that they needed a compact precision platform. This way they could pack the nice light M4 upper for CQB and have a midrange sniper upper if it was needed to convert over. Later the Mk18 came along with a shorter barrel than the M4.

The modular characteristics of the M16 platform just really hadn't been fully taken advantage of before.
I have to wonder why the military wouldn't adopt across the board the concept of modularization. I realize that all the branches feel they "need" role specific equipment but in reality I don't believe they do. How many different calibers of bullets does a military really need to kill an enemy? Do the Airforce, Navy, Army and Marines really need all these different aircraft - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_United_States_military_aircraft ?

Granted I realize that politics plays a major role in the Pentagons plans but wouldn't they be better served at focusing on optimization and uniformity of equipment across the branches?
__________________

Member: NRA GOA

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Est sularas oth mithas

"either way, you were guilty by association, so you were smited...." JD

dog2000tj is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2012, 12:17 AM   #7
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
clr8ter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: South Central NH
Posts: 3,031
Liked 859 Times on 572 Posts
Likes Given: 522

Default

Maybe it needs to be shown alongside another gun, but I don't find it to be obscenely huge......large, no doubt.

__________________
clr8ter is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2012, 12:26 AM   #8
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
dog2000tj's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 8,309
Liked 3734 Times on 1824 Posts
Likes Given: 13269

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by clr8ter View Post
Maybe it needs to be shown alongside another gun, but I don't find it to be obscenely huge......large, no doubt.
The guy in the video is not huge but he is a decent sized fellow. When he first displays the pistol he has his trigger finger extended straight out. On a bigger person the distance between the back of the thumb and the tip of their trigger finger would be about 6", maybe 7". Based on that scale the pistol would have an overall length of about 10" or more

That's a pretty big honkin pistol if you ask me
__________________

Member: NRA GOA

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Est sularas oth mithas

"either way, you were guilty by association, so you were smited...." JD

dog2000tj is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2012, 01:15 AM   #9
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
SSGN_Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 4,126
Liked 1976 Times on 1174 Posts
Likes Given: 424

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dog2000tj View Post
I have to wonder why the military wouldn't adopt across the board the concept of modularization. I realize that all the branches feel they "need" role specific equipment but in reality I don't believe they do. How many different calibers of bullets does a military really need to kill an enemy? Do the Airforce, Navy, Army and Marines really need all these different aircraft - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_United_States_military_aircraft ?

Granted I realize that politics plays a major role in the Pentagons plans but wouldn't they be better served at focusing on optimization and uniformity of equipment across the branches?
Each branch does have some unique needs when it comes to aircraft and in some small arms.

Landing on an aircraft carrier is a lot different than landing on a land based runway. Arresting gear, tailhooks, landing gear upgrades, corrosion resistance all play a role in naval aircraft. An airframe goes through a lot more abuse in a seagoing version.

But you also see waste in the small things. Like my nice blue digital camoflage uniform. Why? Wouldn't any other camo uniform fill the role as a working uniform? Now the Navy is looking at replacing it with a woodland digital camoflage uniform. Each sailor gets a uniform allowance to pay for replacing worn uniforms each year. Most uniforms will last two to three years if taken care of. So the replacments that I bought a year ago will no longer be authorized, and I will have to replace them early with new uniforms.

the cost to the tax payer is in the research and contracts to obtain the uniforms initially.

We could put all the branches in Multicams and save a lot of money across the board.
__________________
SSGN_Doc is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2012, 01:32 AM   #10
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
SSGN_Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 4,126
Liked 1976 Times on 1174 Posts
Likes Given: 424

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by clr8ter View Post
Maybe it needs to be shown alongside another gun, but I don't find it to be obscenely huge......large, no doubt.
Here it is compared to a H&K USP Tactical in .45.



Then you add the supressor, light/laser module, and it gets pretty chunky for a handgun
(both of these are obviously MK23s, early model and later model)

__________________

Last edited by SSGN_Doc; 09-09-2012 at 01:37 AM.
SSGN_Doc is offline  
dog2000tj Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Reloading 45ACP for Semi-Auto Tommy gun rgbaker77 Ammunition & Reloading 5 04-13-2012 06:12 AM
World's Largest Centerfire Rifle- .950 Vikingdad The Club House 11 03-20-2012 05:31 AM
semi auto handgun for target shooting assain618 Semi-Auto Handguns 11 03-17-2012 04:08 PM
best 22 semi auto handgun jeffalex17 General Handgun Discussion 37 01-10-2011 03:19 AM
The world's largest gun show? AsmelEduardo The Club House 2 04-29-2009 11:30 PM