jlh820

Both branches have recently ordered new sidearms for their personnel. The Marines ordered Colt 1911's in .45ACP. The Army just reupped their order for 100,000 new Beretta M9's. If they could choose only one and it was up to you, what would you order for our troops and why?

James6591

That's a tough one, I like both.
Other than that, I won't vote or express any further of an opinion.
(Leave it up to you guys).

jlh820

Before I posted this thread, I thought the answer was easy. And then I started going through a pros vs cons list in my head, and you're right James. This isn't an easy choice unless you pick the cop-out choice at the bottom. And by cop-out, I mean that you don't have a strong opinion either way.

u250680

I think the Marines thinking is, with all the recent urban conflict in the recent past and probably continuing in the future, there's been an increase in "close in" house to house and room by room incounters which would dicatate a higher stopping power handgun cartridge. I'd go with the .45 acp.

bwinters

I htink the 1911 is only for highly motivated troops. i have spoken to many ww2 and korea vets who almost had ads with 1911s.

TMB

I voted Colt 1911 45acp. I don't think it needed replaced to begin with.

Gringo

The 1911 has a proven track record, is there any other weapon in the U.S. inventory with as long a service history?

Not that it matters, Marines will win battles, whatever they are carrying...

JK55

I'm for the Colt 1911 because I too, believe the 1911 possesses superior "stop the fight" knock down power in an up-close / in-tight urban gunfight over the
Beretta M9.

Just my opinion...

jlh820

I didn't want to voice my opinion until this got rolling. I'm a 1911 fan. It's been my favorite semi auto since I knew what one was. I have 4 of them. However, I have two Berettas as well, a 92fs and a 96fs. The Berettas are well made and I think beautiful guns. But then so are my 1911's.

I voted for the 1911. Why? Because a soldiers main weapon is his rifle. The sidearm is often a last resort. So if you're down to fighting with your sidearm, I would want the one that has the best chance of one shot, one kill. I think the Berettas higher capacity are out weighed when you consider that it will often require 2 or 3 shots of 9mm for the same effect as 1 45.

But it was a hard choice because they both have their advantages.

AmbroseLee

I voted for 1911 .45 for both. It's been tested - through the ringer - and is still around. I don't have one but that won't last very long.

Blkned

As much as I dislike the M9 I have seen too many officers that cannot handle it. Change back to the 1911 and it will only get worse. With that said I voted change both to the 1911 because they have better stopping power and I want to carry one next deployment.

kingpins9

I'll take a broken-in 1911 any day over the Beretta 9.

Shooting twice is silly.

SrBanjo

Now that's a tough one. Both great guns. I just chose to leave it the way it is. Both have their benefits.

BearcatShack

I didn't vote. I don't know. Each fills a need for what they think they will need. I'm very happy Colt is getting more business. I wish Ruger could get in on that too.

SnakeChief

I voted, but I did not like the choices. I selected everyone use the Beretta. Folks here are talking about stopping power and clearly no one is going to dispute the power of 45 vs 9mm. However, the magazine size is an issue for me. They should have considered a double stacked alternative and the 45 would have been a clear winner. That being said, they should have considered the Beretta 96 (40 cal). No training or muscle memory changes, more power than 9, way more capacity than 45 single stack. Finally, if you have to pull a handgun (which is not your weapon of choice in CQB) that means your M4 or other SBR is out of ammo, and you are in deep stuff anyway. At that point 45 or 9 may not matter (and if it does, I want more than 7 or 8 rounds).