To those who dis the 9mm

[Just One Shot]

The April 2009 issue of American Rifleman is reporting that Beretta has received a new contract to supply 450,000 handguns. It's the biggest handgun contract since WW II that was awarded to Colt.

Now you may be wondering what model it is? What is the caliber? It has to be a .45, right? Actually it's the model 92FS, that's right, 9mm, so much for the 9mm being ineffective for self defense!

 

[SIRVEYR666]

The US Government made this decision. The US Government, okay. Just because they order more of the same doesn't mean that it works. Look at what the American sheeple do at the polls. Same ineffective people over and over and over...:banghead:

They would order 450,000 of those stupid T-shirt cannons if, "Well, that is what we've been using, so why not just get some more of those things..."

 

[wabrams]

Or it could be it is the cheapest round to purchase and Berretta was the lowest bidder.

 

[Shear_stress]

Now you may be wondering what model it is?

Uh, not really. They've been using the thing for a generation.

I am perfectly fine with the 9mm. The M9 is a good pistol too, if a bit large. That said, I seriously hope you don't believe that popularity equals quality. Ford sold a lot of Pintos.

 

[bill in IN]

You should remember that they are only criticizing, not offering to stand in front of their statements.

 

[sarduy]

people say that 9mm is weak and 1 round may not stop a thread.....but hey... if 1 round doesn't do the job you got 14 more to go

 

[ArmedBear]

I happen to like how the M9 shoots, but it has had problems in the field. SpecOps units that actually consider sidearms to be serious tactical weapons certainly do use other pistols and other calibers.

This decision says a few things to me:

1. Berettas in 9mm are good enough for what the military figures regular personnel (i.e. people who will never actually fire a pistol in combat, and won't use a sidearm except to make an arrest, hold prisoners, or something similar) need.
2. Nobody in DC really wanted to ditch the 9mm cartridge for general issue. It's so nice and cheap! And of course our NATO allies have been such a vital part of our military actions lately, we need to share pistol ammo with them...
3. The US Military does not take sidearms seriously as combat weapons, except for Special Ops.

The 9mm is a fine round for a compact pistol. However, a full-size 9mm like a 92FS, loaded with FMJ, is best suited the target range IMO. It's accurate, well-balanced, and low-recoil. I don't currently own one, but I keep wanting to buy one for exactly that purpose.

It isn't a great balance between effectiveness and size/weight, for a gun that's carried into a combat zone.

 

[BCCL]

When most government programs fail, their solution is to spend more money doing the same.


Looks like they still use that theory!

 

[heron]

Our government is also still spending money on Star Wars . . .

 

[JImbothefiveth]

A .40 or a good .45 will stop better than a 9mm. I like 9mm, it's just not as good as a .40 or .45. (Unless you can't shoot .40 or .45 as good.)

You should remember that they are only criticizing, not offering to stand in front of their statements.

Hey, I don't want to get shot with a .22. Doesn't mean I would want to trust it for self defense.

Our government is also still spending money on Star Wars . . .

I think that's actually good. If we could effectively block nukes, we would probably be, without a doubt, the world's most powerful nation.

 

[rbernie]

I happen to like how the M9 shoots, but it has had problems in the field

Most, if the almost all, of the complaints about the M9 in the Sandbox were traced to the oiled phosphate finish on the USGI magazines - the finish would hold dust and cause sluggish feeding and jams. A switch to a non-phosphate finish on the USGI mags has reportedly cleared up this issue.

I am not a huge fan of 9mm FMJ for personal protection, but if that's what I was given that that's what I would train to use effectively.

I have zero concerns about carryin' a 9mm for my own personal protection when loaded with modern SD ammo, and in fact that's pretty much all I've been carrying for a while now.

Did the article state who the recipients of the pistols would be?

 

[Lucky]

How do they carry the M9, cocked or is the first shot DA?

 

[N.WoodsGuy]

i like the M9..........and i like the 9mm round.

Are there more potent stoppers out there.??...............Of course!

A 9mm round has plenty of stopping power for what it's intended use is.....<Humans.)

 

[MT GUNNY]

Hammer Down, Safety off. That way you can have your First Shot be a Double action one.

The Only Problem with 9MM that I have, is the Fact that I don't have one Yet!!

 

[ArmedBear]

I have zero concerns about carryin' a 9mm for my own personal protection when loaded with modern SD ammo

Sure.

My point about the Beretta is that it's downright HUGE for a 9mm pistol, not that 9mm has no purpose -- though with FMJ it is about the worst choice among major calibers.

The fact remains, SpecOps types don't use the things if they can help it and have AFAIK despised the things since someone first said, "You're not a SEAL 'til you've eaten Italian steel."

Now the Beretta's longevity and durability as a service arm probably has to do with its significant size and bulk for a 9mm. Like I said, I like it. I like the P-38-derived grip ergos on the Beretta and the XD (and the old Walther too). The weight makes it a pleasure to shoot.

However, I don't believe that the brass perceive pistols as combat weapons for regular personnel.

 

[doubs43]

I love the logic here: The US Government made a decision to buy more 9mm pistols so that PROVES the effectiveness of 9mm. This is the same government who was still issuing the Krag and Trapdoor Springfield for economic reasons while many South American Banana Republics were armed with modern Mausers. Using the same logic we should still be using the Krag and Trapdoors as they are obviously more effective because the government says so.

The 1911 WAS (and IS) the better mousetrap. Buying the M9 in 9mm was a POLITICAL decision and NOT based on which cartridge was a more effective combat round.

 

[JR47]

The Beretta also had problems with the magazines that were used in them. Some were replacements, and were feed problems from the start. One group's answer was to instruct it's troops to only load ten rounds in the magazine!

 

[ArmedBear]

So you have a pistol the size of a 92, loaded with 10 FMJ 9mms?

Hell, your average CCW holder probably has more firepower in a pocket or purse.

 

[amd6547]

I don't find my 92FS "huge" at all. It is a service pistol, and it's size is just about right for a full sized pistol.
The grip fits my medium-sized hands fine, and the pistol handles the recoil of the 9mm like it is a 22.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

This decision says a few things to me:

It says to me the Beretta lobbyist did a better job of providing percs and parties than the other companies.

When the switch was made to the 9mm sidearm, I was stationed at a post were such a decision was made, and noticed that quite a few of the officers who made that decision suddenly owned really nice, new, Beretta O/U shotguns. Within 18 months of that purchase and issue, the spec ops folks were back to using .45 ACP.

LD

 

[ArmedBear]

the pistol handles the recoil of the 9mm like it is a 22.

Exactly. That's why I think it's a great target pistol.

 

[OregonJohnny]

I actually read about the order for 450,000 more Berettas months ago, maybe as far back as last summer. So it's not recent news. And it's not really surprising, either. The 9mm NATO round is what our military has been using for it's sidearms for at least the last 25 years. Is it superior to .45ACP? Probably not. But the US military doesn't exactly like change, especially since it would cost millions to replace all the Beretta M9 pistols with something else.

As for the M9/92FS bashing that sometimes goes on when discussing it as the US military sidearm, it's all about magazines.

From a post I made months ago in a thread discussing the M9:


Some hate the 92/M9. It has received a lot of unfair bad press over the years for a few reasons, all of them to do with the military. Although it won the military pistol trials back in the 80's, (along with a Sig Sauer) it had initial problems that were quickly fixed. From Wikipedia:

"Prior to its widespread adoption by the U.S. military, questions were raised in a General Accounting Office report after an incident where a slide failure on a Beretta 92SB caused injuries to Naval Special Warfare personnel[3] and more failures were later observed in additional testing. These failures included both military and civilian Beretta models with very high round counts and after investigation they were deemed the result of ammunition supplied by the U.S. Army which exceeded the recommended pressures specified by NATO and by Beretta, but nonetheless provoked a modification in the M9 design to prevent slide failure from causing injuries."

More recently, the reliability of M9s in Iraq has been questioned, but it turns out it's due to low-quality magazines contracted by the government. Again, from Wikipedia:

"The U.S. military has been criticized for not purchasing magazines from Beretta. In 2006, the military awarded a contract to Airtronic USA due to the previous manufacturer, Check-Mate Industries, charging too much per magazine[4], though Check-Mate magazines are still sometimes issued. Check-Mate magazines have been shown to have severe problems with reliability. Prior to Check-Mate magazines being purchased, the military purchased magazines from Mec-Gar. Because Mec-Gar magazines had the least problems, some troops issued the M9 buy their own Mec-Gar magazines."

And finally, the 3rd complaint seems to come from soldiers disappointed in the capabilities of the 9mm NATO round itself, nothing to do with the actual Beretta firearm. But all these issues have, unfairly in my opinion, given the M9 a somewhat bad reputation in some circles.

I have nothing but great things to say about the 92/M9.

 

[N.WoodsGuy]

i have been shooting an M9 for quite a while.
have to say...........it's a nice shooting gun.

i love the 1911 as well..............

Because it handles recoil so nice...........means it's user friendly.........which usually means more shots placed where they need to be in less time...............good for "Targets" of any kind...........if ya get my drift!!

i do agree though...............buy different magazines!!
The stock ones are fine and i haven't personally had a problem with them.
But there are some better after market ones out there.

When it comes down to it..............Everyone one i know either loves it or hates it.
To each their own is what i say.

 

[N.WoodsGuy]

Yeah that whole "slide" flying off thing..........LOLLOL!!!........man that was a big thing!!
They have fixed that problem though.............

 

[Dan Crocker]

Yeah...the mags they give us really blow. Every time I've had a goof with an M9, it's been related to the mags. On my last tour, NONE of my mags would slide-lock the pistol. I ordered some from home and they did the trick.