Alternate military calibers

[seeker_two]

As we've had the whole 9mmP-vs-.45ACP-in-the-military debate, I would like us to explore other options for military use. If you could decide on the new military sidearm, what calibers (other than 9mmP & .45ACP) would you choose?

I would choose the 10mm. It's a large-bore, but it has enough power and penetration for military use. It can also be adaped easily to hi-capacity pistols (HK USP) and silencers (heavier bullets for subsonic use). And the 10mm really shines in longer barrels (i.e. SMG's)

I'd also suggest the 9x25 Dillon (10mm necked down to 9mm) as well. See reasons above.

OK, quartermasters. Name your options...

 

[lonegunman]

The 10 mm would not be a good choice.

Don't get me wrong, I love the 10mm. However, one of the complaints about the 45 was its recoil was too much for some of the people. 10 mm would only be worse in that regard.

If the military did go with the 10, it wouldnt take them long to water it down to something a lot weaker, like the 40 S&W.

 

[Mike Irwin]

Bingo, .40 S&W was what I immediately thought of.

 

[MJRW]

I too was thinking 40 S&W. I just love that round. Good power without too much kick and capacities are acceptable. I just don't like the way 9mm feels.

 

[support_six]

I also would choose the .40. ...and seeker_two, the proponency for development of small arms for all services lies with the Army Infantry School, Directorate of Combat Developments. The proponency for supply of ammunition lies with the Ordnance School, Directorate of Combat Developments.

We Quartermasters have proponency for (1) General Supply -- tanks to toilet paper, (2) Food/Combat Rations, (3) POL -- petroleum, oils, lubricants, (4) Airdrop of cargo, (5) Water, (6) Field Services -- bakeries, laundry, bath.

The QM motto is, "Keep the best, issue the rest"

Bruce Woodbury -- Retired Quartermaster Colonel

 

[krept]

I'd say 10mm, make 'lite' ammo for those who don't want the recoil, but give the folks that want the full power the option to go BOOM.

Platform? Probably a Glock or USP.

 

[Pigshooter]

45 win mag for normal troops, 10mm for the sailors, flyboys and women

 

[yorec]

Yep - the obvious choice is the .40 S&W. Comparable power with the 45 and able to fit in high capacity 9mm framed weapons already chosen 'cause they fit the bill.

Biggest debate here i think is what platform the military should be choosing to house it in.

Beretta 96? H&K UMP? H&K USP? Some good stuff out there...

 

[M1911]

10 mm? Nope. Too long a round. It requires handguns with large grips. Remember that many of our soldiers these days are women with smaller hands. Many of them would not be able to handle the 10mm due to the grip size.

M1911

 

[Onslaught]

10 mm? Nope. Too long a round. It requires handguns with large grips.

10mm grips are only "bigger than average" with Polymer framed pistols using Polymer mags. Using metal Para Ordnance mags, you can fit 10mm into a USP40, which is the same width as the USP9... Of course, depending on your perspective, you may consider the USP9 as a large gripped pistol. Certainly you'll always have those who can't handle larger grips, but even the current M9 has that problem. Isn't that why there's the Sig option for small hands?

I think 10mm would be excellent for SpecOps and other "real soldiers", but never for the "New Army" general population

 

[seeker_two]

support_six :

Thanks for the info. I stand corrected...

 

[Pigshooter]

You know, last time they had a problem with the 45 not being enough, they made a 30 carbine that was small, light weight, and a step up for a support troop over a single action pistol.

Why not issue a sporterized version of the mini-14 in 223 and spend the bucks on a good powerful pistol for the fewer sidearms they'll need? It worked in WWII and Korea, when production and raw materials were important, it could work today where cost is the driver.

/me thinks about WWIII surplus M-14 bullpups flooding the market in 2042....

 

[DMK]

You know, last time they had a problem with the 45 not being enough, they made a 30 carbine that was small, light weight, and a step up for a support troop over a single action pistol.

Why not issue a sporterized version of the mini-14 in 223

Isn't that one of the reasons the M4 carbine came about?

Carbines and subguns are geat, but the only problem with them is the soldiers can't easily strap them to their sides. If something happens quickly and unexpectedly, as it often does in combat, a Beretta strapped to your side is much better than a carbine 10 yards back in the Deuce and a half.

 

[Andrewh]

That is why I always thought it would be good to have a hip holster for the m4. I originally thought of it for the full size m-16, but the m4 would be easier for kneeling.
It is set up so you can pop it out of its holster pulling out to the side, or if you are surprised and have to fire from the hip, it would allow you to "kick it" and rotate it on the hip and make it fire when it finishes the rotation. Giving you a return fire snap shot.
But I digress from the topic.
Though I hate to come up with a use for a new round to justify its existance, why not the 357 sig. Don't get me wrong I love the 40, but in order to keep with the lower recoil, why not go for the lighter round.

 

[Zorro]

7.62 X 25 MM.

Armor piercing and High Velocity. Just need a lightly jacketed FMJ that will fragment in flesh to complete it.

 

[Pigshooter]

The M4 is still a heavy, bulky SOB. It is hampered because everything has to be interchangeable nowadays. The military has its geekish obsessions just like any other organization. Why do you need a carbine that accepts a grenade launcher? You don't, unless the carbine is going to replace your battle rifle. That is another debate entirely (308 vs 223).

If you took a fluted, stainless Mini14, on a traditional polymer stock, make it compatible with M16/M4 magazines (but issue with a 15rd mag), you'd have a sweet little 223 support rifle that weighs nothing. Make a bullpup version of the stock and a hip-holster too.

You can still have a pistol, but make it massive and loud. DE in 454 Casull or something

 

[Brian Busch]

Calling the M4 heavy and bulky? Are you kidding?

 

[New_comer]

Then pump up the 9mm!

9 x 23mm Winchester would be the ticket.

All the advantages of high capacity, significantly increased power, potential for greater penetration in FMJ, very sturdy cartridge.

IMO, practically a rifle bullet for handguns...

 

[Snowdog]

I'll agree with Zorro. I believe the 40 S&W would make an excellent choice, but I also think it would be wise to pit it up against other contenders such as the 7.62x25 or a larger case capacity .30caliber hybrid.
I understand bottle-neck cartridges are inherently feed reliable.

Tactical penetration, trajectory (range) and general "umph" should be included to determine the winner. Range doesn't sound like much of an issue with a sidearm, but it sure as heck doesn't hurt to have the option of an extended engagement range if for some unseen reason it is absolutely needed (bragging rights).

There's a lot of appeal to a 135-155gr .40 caliber truncated slug offering 1350-1250 FPS, but an 85gr .30 caliber FMJ (maybe truncated for a more efficient energy transfer) at 1700+ FPS from a "modernized" 7.62x25 sounds good too.

If I were to add my two cents to the creation of a new round, velocity and a truncated profile would be my primary concern.

 

[agtman]

"10mm" for NATO?


Some may recall, a while back, a few articles that surfaced in the gun rags about NATO possibly replacing the 9mm with something a bit more "potent." The various military higher-ups inside NATO were said to be seriously looking at the American 40 S&W cartridge.

But, of course, most NATO members hardly would be favorably inclined to have a Yankie caliber forced on them, so the story related that, in order to win full support, NATO would likely rename the .40 the "10mm NATO". ('Course, real Americans don't wear U.N. blue, do they? ).

Anyway, IIRC, the story said that NATO liked the 180gn-weight bullet in a FMJ profile. Haven't heard anything about it lately, but a 10mm "derivative" cartridge for the military probably isn't as far fetched as it sounds.

Besides, if NATO ever adopted the .40/"10mmNATO" as its official pistol caliber, just think about all the cheap surplus ammo that would be hitting the market.