1911Forum banner

1 - 20 of 39 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Can anyone tell my why the military stopped issuing the 45 and started with the 9mm beretta.I was just curious as to the down grade in caliber.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
626 Posts
I think mainly because of the 9mm being the nato / standard pistol round. And they like to buy new stuff. Even when its a step backward....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,664 Posts
This topic has been well covered for years in gun magazines and internet forums but I'll take a stab at it.

The US military was looking for a sidearm that was compatible with other forces (Nato for example), had a higher magazine capacity than the 1911, lighter recoil and possibly lower cost.

A soldier is issued a pistol for combat and with it he gets two additional magazines. With the Beretta you have 45 rds of 9mm; with a 1911 you have 21 rds of .45 acp.

With either rd. you still must make good hits and possibly hits on multiple targets.

The Beretta 92 has more rounds in a pistol of similar size than the one it replaced. It has lower recoil so it is easier to shoot, easier to train new recruits with little or no handgun experience.

In spite of a lot of internet b*ll****, the 9mm is about as effective as any other fmj round.

9mm has been the military standard for most of the world for 100 yrs or so and they are fine with it.
(It seems that only in the US where "bigger is always better" that the 9mm gets so little respect.)

The Beretta is extremely accurate, reliable and very easy to disassemble for cleaning.

Just a few of my thoughts on the subject this morning.

ETA

I own 1911's and Berettas, appreciate the differences and love both handguns.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,016 Posts
The USA agreed circa 1950 that our next sidearm would be a 9mm for "interoperability" with NATO. The Army then looked at the Colt Commander, S&W models 39 and 44, the High Standard T-3, and a lightweight Browning HP but concluded that there were enough .45s and .38 revolvers in inventory that a new pistol was not justified.
It was not for 30 years that we got to the point of having to buy new pistols.

You have to consider that we won out in the standardization agreements.
We adopted the European pistol caliber but got our rifle calibers accepted not once but twice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,179 Posts
This topic has been well covered for years in gun magazines and internet forums but I'll take a stab at it.

The US military was looking for a sidearm that was compatible with other forces (Nato for example), had a higher magazine capacity than the 1911, lighter recoil and possibly lower cost.

A soldier is issued a pistol for combat and with it he gets two additional magazines. With the Beretta you have 45 rds of 9mm; with a 1911 you have 21 rds of .45 acp.

With either rd. you still must make good hits and possibly hits on multiple targets.

The Beretta 92 has more rounds in a pistol of similar size than the one it replaced. It has lower recoil so it is easier to shoot, easier to train new recruits with little or no handgun experience.

In spite of a lot of internet b*ll****, the 9mm is about as effective as any other fmj round.

9mm has been the military standard for most of the world for 100 yrs or so and they are fine with it.
(It seems that only in the US where "bigger is always better" that the 9mm gets so little respect.)

The Beretta is extremely accurate, reliable and very easy to disassemble for cleaning.

Just a few of my thoughts on the subject this morning.

ETA

I own 1911's and Berettas, appreciate the differences and love both handguns.
You pretty much covered it. Pretty much the same reasons as the switch to the AR over the M14/ M1 Carbine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 · (Edited)
Thanks folks I thought of some of those reasons but I was curious about what others had to say. Thanks for the good info.And I agree about the 9mm, thats what my wife has for edc. I also own 3 and love each one. Very good round in mho
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,158 Posts
Aviano Air Base likely also played into the decision making, as well as sending some $$ to our European friends.

i prefer the 1911 (have each).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,076 Posts
nicely put Coltman...I think you took about 70 pages of banter on this topic and got it down to one smooth paragraph...bravo!:biglaugh:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,139 Posts
Can anybody say why NATO adopted the 9mm in the first place?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
287 Posts
I think one of the main reasons the U.S. military adopted the 9mm was the availability of the round in combat situations. You could pick up enemy rounds and fire them in your weapon.

As far as the recoil and training goes, I don't buy into it. I've shot just about every 9mm pistol out there, and several .45s including H&K, EAA, Sig, and my Kimber. And always, the 9mm had a sharper recoil and more pronounced muzzle flip. The .45 was more of a soft shove straight back with little muzzle flip. Soldiers that were issued and trained with the .45 knew how to shoot them and get the most from them because they knew they were limited in magazine capacity. They didn't waste rounds. Now I've heard old soldiers talk about the horrible accuracy of some of the guns they used, but I've seen some government issue models that had great accuracy too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,086 Posts
I think one of the main reasons the U.S. military adopted the 9mm was the availability of the round in combat situations. You could pick up enemy rounds and fire them in your weapon.

QUOTE]

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

To be honest I've never seen a Mak or TT chambered in 9mm. Most Warsaw Pact pistols and sub guns were chambered in those funky little bottleneck rounds the Russians use.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
287 Posts
I think one of the main reasons the U.S. military adopted the 9mm was the availability of the round in combat situations. You could pick up enemy rounds and fire them in your weapon.

QUOTE]

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

To be honest I've never seen a Mak or TT chambered in 9mm. Most Warsaw Pact pistols and sub guns were chambered in those funky little bottleneck rounds the Russians use.
I mispoke. Sorry. I meant rounds used by allies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,166 Posts
Not sure how much impact it had, but the 80s was the time of the
WONDERNINE! The 9 was viewed as perfection. Hi-caps flowed.

But get this def of Wondernine from urbandictionary.com:

A high-power, high-capacity 9mm semi-automatic pistol.
The versions with magazines holding more than 10 rounds are now reserved for law enforcement use. They are very popular however with gang criminals, who compensate their sloppy marksmanship with quantitative firepower.

Watch out, these dudes get their wondernines out pretty quickly.
 
1 - 20 of 39 Posts
Top