U.S.Marines readopting the 1911

T

Technosavant

New member
IMHO they would be better suited going to one of the big 3 for 1911, (Wilson, Brown, Baer), can also include Nighthawk, or even pistols by Springfield, or S&W. Apologies to companies I left out, I am sure there are many proven ones out there.
Click to expand...

One of the issues is going to be the company being able to actually supply enough guns to meet the contract. I'm not sure Wilson, Brown, Les Baer, Nighthawk, or most any maker in that kind of custom tier can meet that production volume.

Colt has lots of experience in such matters. I'm not sure how much Springfield can tool up for this- they seem to be having issues keeping up with the civilian market let alone even a moderate size government contract. Good guns, great company, but they seem to be maxed out.
 
W

Will Beararms

New member
Special Ops forces tend to carry what they want to within reason from 1911's to Glock 17/19/22's to Sig P226's, etc. No offense but the MEU 1911 is old news and unless our President has a change of heart, look for draw downs in manpower and material in the days that lie ahead.
 
D

Dr_2_B

New member
Just to clarify, what is a drive-by? Posting a link with little or no original thoughts from the poster?
 
R

RamItOne

New member
anyone else notice the odd seemingly useless trigger locks in the top pic?

1330034904005012511_marine_pistols_800_edit.JPG


Operators will be able to choose their own weapons to an extent, I'm sure nobody sitting in a blackhawk wants to see their buddy toting a hi point.... :D
 
R

rugerdude

New member
I love the fascination with what pistol "elite operators" are carrying. Most guys who participate in IDPA or IPSC regularly are likely much better pistol shooters. In terms of shooting, the civilian sector is miles ahead of anything that I've seen in the Marines.

As far as Marine Recon goes, Force company has MEU(SOC) 1911's and so do one of the MEU platoons in the MEU company and the rest of us have m9a1's.

My m9a1 is every bit the holster weight of a 1911 since that is about all they are ever used for. Machinegunners and M-32 gunners will often carry them for wild dogs or small spaces. I personally don't even carry one when I'm lugging the SASR around, partially because my current M9a1 won't fire 2 shots in a row without slapping the slide forward.

The amount of pistol training that we do pretty much precludes most people from even rating an opinion as to what sidearm they carry even IF they had the choice. We'd be much better off buying good mags and more training ammo for our 9-mils than getting the latest and greatest .45.
 
I

IMightBeWrong

New member
I once had the privilege of talking to a former Navy SEAL. One thing he told me was that no real SEAL would ever complain that their sidearm was a 9mm instead of a .45. I had a lot more confidence in my nines after that.

Apparently soldiers have as many different opinions as we do when it comes to sidearms, though. If soldiers would feel more comfortable with 1911s than the M9, I'd say give them the 1911s. But I would personally feel more comfortable with, say, an HK45 myself.
 
P

Pond James Pond

New member
My Glock is accurate to 600m.....
I can aim at something and can guarantee it will hit something....

Can someone clarify for me why a purported accurate range of 600m should be a selling point in a pistol?

Yes, it is impressive, but surely if that were the case bigger M4s could be obsolete in some cases... :confused:

Seems more of a gimmick than a valuable attribute...
 
T

TunnelRat

New member
After I added commentary,there should have been no reason why this was potentially considered a drive-by.
Click to expand...

Do yourself a favor, quit while you're ahead :D.

As to the topic itself, I see we dragged this out of the trash bin again. This rumor comes around what twice a year? Certain units will likely pick up different pistols depending on their mission. The overall pistol for the US military isn't changing anytime soon. There are way, way more important items on the budget that need addressing before this.
 
I

icedog88

New member
But where did his information come from? Is it his opinion masked as fact? Anywhere to check the validity of the info? Albeit that it was a few years ago, but FAST Co were not given any option to choose sidearms. M9. That was it. Nobody in the unit tried to ditch the 9mm in favor of the .45. I am not debating they are given the choice now, but I do question the author's assertion that we had been trying to ditch the 9mm as far back as the 80's.:rolleyes:
 
T

TunnelRat

New member
This time the funding is there however.
Click to expand...

I'll believe it when I see it :). I'll go one step further and say if they do have that money laying around, there are better ways to invest it than on sidearms.
 
D

dave9969

New member
As a former United States Marine
I was qualified on the 1911 and the Beretta's that came after.

I have seen guys that can not qualify at 50 yards with a 1911, so why would they need a gun that can hit at 600 yards? Have you ever tried to look 600 yards with iron sights? Honestly? At 200 yards a standard range target is difficult to make out clearly, at 600 yards with a pistol? I hardly think so.
 
L

ltc444

New member
two comments.

1. Rosewood. Elmer Keith used to pot 55 gal drums a 500 yds with his 1911.

2. Love the marines. They are more intrested in fighting than being policy wonks.
 
V

vranasaurus

New member
600 yards with a pistol? How dumb does he think people are?

Your not going to be effective at 400 yards because of a very short sight radius, slow moving round with the BC of a wall, and no shoulder stock to keep it steady. Is he on drugs?

BTW, who needs to shoot 400 yards with a pistol?

So, so, so dumb.
 
P

PSP

New member
To say "U.S.Marines readopting the 1911" is disingenuous. They MEU already has the 1911 in use and is looking for a replacement. This purchase is not to replace the M9, which is still in general use as the standard sidearm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top