If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS September Giveaway ***Smith & Wesson M&P 380 Shield***
9mm is a universal NATO round, guess the DoD wanted to be NATO friendly when they made that choice. Nice to see the Leathernecks going back to what works, Colts and 45's. Next we'll see the Tommy gun making a comeback, We could only hope.Interesting that the "elite marine" group has .45's and the remainder of the military has 9mm
Dude, the 1911's that they're going to be replacing aren't "supposedly" worn out...they're beat to s***. Most of them have been limping along since the 1950's.Lets hope they sell the supposedly worn out guns to civilians since its cheaper to just buy more than to rebuild
DudeDude, the 1911's that they're going to be replacing aren't "supposedly" worn out...they're beat to s***. Most of them have been limping along since the 1950's.
"The contract is built so we can re-buy the approved acquisitions objective three times, so we can buy 4,000 guns three times," Clark said. "These pistols will be getting used a lot; deployed a lot so the guns are going to get shot out."
MARSOC operators stay on a rigorous deployment cycle, "so they fire a lot of rounds. It's a 15,000-round plus [training] work-up to a deployment," Clark said.
"It's more efficient to replace the guns over time instead of attempting to completely rebuild them."
The military did not purchase any new 1911's in quantity after 1945-1946. There may have been a few purchases from Colt for special marksmanship units and such in the 1950's but that is purely speculative on my part and I have no documentary evidence to support that. There may have been some parts purchases as well, but DOD had a pretty robust inventory of 1911 parts from WWII. The last 1911A1 I was issued by the Army in 1991 (the M9 had not been fully fielded, even after Desert Storm) was a Remington-Rand that by serial number was four years older than I was !!! (I carried it proudly though, it was a WWII veteran after all).Dude, the 1911's that they're going to be replacing aren't "supposedly" worn out...they're beat to s***. Most of them have been limping along since the 1950's.
I'll get right on that. I was asking the question out of ignorance. Double stack mags weren't very popular back then (broomhandle maybe?) and neither were sa/da with decockers. Easy take down levers, fewer parts, and easier production might make some other designs seem more attractive. Without knowing what the judgement criteria were, it's hard to see what advantage a 1911 has over other newer designs in the same caliber.You should call the Commandant and tell him that the USMC doesn't know how to select a pistol...
A guy named Alvin York was pretty good with one, but they weren't all beat to hell yet in 1918.Nothing makes more sense than having enough bullet. I carried a Remington Rand 1911 when I was in southeast asia and it never malfuntioned. I'm not sure that it gets any better than big bullets that go bang ever time you need then to.
http://www.firstworldwar.com/bio/york.htmYork was charged by seven German soldiers who realized that he was operating on his own. He killed them all with his pistol.
I have a frame of one of these old warhorses, a Colt 1911 made for Uncle Sam in 1918 (it's now fitted with a newDuring the pistol trials in the early 1980's Colt offered to rebuild every 1911 in the US Armed Forces Inventory and re-chamber them to 9mm for approx $100 dollars per pistol. How that would have worked and whether Colt would have made money on the deal is open to considerable speculation IMO.
I can tell you that I personally saw 1911's (not 1911A1's in service but honest to God 1911's no relief cuts in the frame in the 1980's and early 90's) and cracked frames were not uncommon. These guns were just plain worn out even then.
They're in the inventory because for most bombing missions they are more effective (payload-wise) and can turn around faster between sorties...A fair question. Proven reliability, and good ergonomics, great for reactive shooting, hence an ideal combat handgun, perhaps less so for a citizen or a police officer who may be using the pistol as a "threat management tool." Even that point is arguable. Simple to field strip and maintain, to detail strip a 1911 or 1911A1, the parts become the tools.
There are more sophisticated aircraft than the B52 but they are in the inventory because they work. The 1911 works....
Shocked. I'm shocked.The Marines have decided to go with the Colt .45 pistol.
They are not. No Colts are.I would love to make one of those Colts my first 1911.
I don't think Colts are Mass compliant, are they?
None that were designed by John Browning. Seriously... just because the design is old, why is that a reason not to choose it? This is a gun that's been in continuous production for over a century - I don't think there's any other handgun that can say that. If it wasn't a decent design, I don't think it would have survived that long.
Not gonna happen. Colt made the decision not to bother with the MA market by jumping through the compliance hoops; we're such a small market that I don't think they'll bother to change that. You'll have better luck getting GOAL's gun law reform passed; that's the only way we'll ever have a chance at a new pony again, I'm afraid.Now Colt, get Mass Compliant, bring back the Pocket Nine (designed and marketed in the late 90's it would leave the S&W Shield in the dust, IMO) the Colt .357.
You own a Glock, don't you.Without knowing what the judgement criteria were, it's hard to see what advantage a 1911 has over other newer designs in the same caliber.
I haven't manage to wear out any of mine yet - you have?I buy McCormick flush fitting 8 rounders , I like the black ones. And they last a long time for me.