What Caliber should our Armed forces be carrying as their side arm?

I would personally prefer .45, but I have no military experience. And the enormous cost of a conversion, coupled with the inertia fighting any change even if real evidence of the inferiority of the 9mm existed, would make such a change take a number of years.

The son of a friend of mine saw considerable action in Iraq. He is not impressed with the combat effectiveness of the 9mm. He is likewise not impressed with the M4, the short barrel doesn't give the 5.56 the velocity it needs. He says that the 7.62X39 fired from AK variants is much more effective in the type of fighting that he saw.
 
@Hardworker

Not when those 60 rounds of 45 are divided into the 9 or so mags it would take to hold that many vs 4 for 9mm
Click to expand...

Five, not nine. Five mags of 12. HK USP, for example. I'd rather carry 5 mags of .45 ACP instead of 4 mags of 9mm.
 
Why not give them a .44 Automag like Dirty Harry? Or a .475 Wildey Magnum like Charles Bronson? :o

A military sidearm isn't a Hollywood style primary weapon. And 10mm is too expensive, overly powerful and not commonplace enough. Things like economy of scale, NATO compatibility and being able to transport lots of rounds easily are important to military decision makers. That said, if they are going to be stuck with FMJ ammo, I'd like to see them use a modern hi-cap .45 ACP. Assuming it could pass their battery of tests, I'd think the SA XD45 or maybe the M version could do the job.
 
Glock 21

Another vote for the Glock 21. .45 acp is my caliber of choice. That being said, many police departments go with the Glock 22. The extra rounds certainly don't hurt in a SD situation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top