Jump to content

US Military .45 Pistols


Edsel

Recommended Posts

Re: US Military .45 Pistols

 

Tri-Tac did a Traveller type game (FTL2448), they had a .460 Weatherby Magnum pistol, I don't think that would have much trouble with body armor. :eek:

 

The game designers admitted they just wanted to make the most over the top RPG gun they could think of. :thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 149
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Re: US Military .45 Pistols

 

NOT that I dislike the .45' date=' I just suspect the 10mm might provide a better military pistol overall.[/quote']

My understanding on various high velocity loads and such were that they weren't very easy to use. The 10mm falls into the same as the .45 super, .460 Rowland, etc. in that they are powerful rounds, and of course effective, but were just that much harder for the overall users to use. The FBI went with the 10mm for awhile and found the recoil to be too much for their uses, not to mention the significant flash of rounds like that.

 

In effect, the rounds surpass the majority of user's ability to use them effectively. Fast, accurate fire is more important than overall power due to its deployment, I guess, along with the extra penetration causing problems. Granted this is just from what I've read. Probably also due to like what you said.. your average troop doesn't spend enough time with the weapon to get that good with it, or their physical abilities just aren't on par with it.

 

I can personally deploy a .44 magnum with reasonable effectiveness (on the range, anyway, never been in a gunfight :D ) but that isn't the norm. A lot of cops struggled with the .357 magnum which was standard for awhile, and my wife loves that round (especially in the heavy loads, she's kind of a nut) but again, that's not the norm.

 

That's why the .40 S&W was developed, from my understanding, to make the 10mm more user-friendly (though some call it the .40 Short & Weak). *shrug* I guess it all depends.

 

This kind of stuff is what gets argued over and over in the gun rags... the only concensus I have seen is that you should shoot the most powerful round you can control well and work on placement, accuracy, and tactics. Heck, with modern ballistics, any caliber can be effective. Some guys, since they're required to use 9mm, will go to the +p+ rounds just to get the extra power. Some guys like the lightweight standards, and do just fine. I think its more the man than the gun or caliber.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: US Military .45 Pistols

 

I too can handle a .44 magnum pretty easily since I am sizable enough that the recoil isn't much of a problem.

 

A friend of mine has a Colt Delta Elite (10mm) and it is a pretty nice gun. The recoil is easily more than the .40 S&W I have shot. We fired a few shots in to some old rail road ties and the 10mm is certainly a better penetrator than the .40 S&W. I'd rather use the 10mm but I can see how recoil might bother some users. Another factor is that 10mm guns are becoming kind of scarce and that has driven up the ammo cost. I'd have to buy some 10mm reloading dies if I had one of those guns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: US Military .45 Pistols

 

Yeah, not too many 10mm out there... I'd love to try one, but I don't know anyone who has one, and kind of pricey to buy a gun just to see what its like. =)

 

I'll have to see if I can find one at the next factory shoot. For a "fighting pistol" though I prefer a .45 as its easy to shoot, has plenty of punch for most situations, and comes in some pretty nice handguns. Wish I could get a good carbine to go with it, though. I like the pistol/carbine in same caliber combination, plus pistol-caliber carbines are fun to shoot and pretty useful for home defense I'd think, but the shotgun will have to do for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: US Military .45 Pistols

 

Actually the Germans and later the Soviets (the Soviets took a beating initially then learned alot from the Germans) put the machineguns on the Loaders hatch' date=' pretty much for that reason, they wanted the Commanders to Command not shoot. The Israeli's took the large cupolas with machineguns off their M60 tanks since they felt the machinegun didn't add much and the large cuploas encouraged the Commanders to stay buttoned up, the Israeli's train their Commanders to keep the hatch open so they can actually see whats going on, it gives them much better situation awareness but does result in a high casualty rate among their tank commanders.[/quote']

 

The Germans, Soviets and Israeli's still put MGs on the commander's station, they just (sometimes for the first 2) also put them on the loader's staion. The M1 Abrams also has a MG on the loader's station.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: US Military .45 Pistols

 

Regarding the "wound method" for pistols, it is less a function of letting blood out than damage to specific tissue. To get a combat kill (as oppossed to he dies hours later in the hospital) you need to hit something that causes immediate effect. Hitting a major artery can do it, but that tends to be haphazard. The goal is to hit the head/brain or the heart/lungs. Hitting the spine also works, but that is a very difficult target.

 

The "Hatcher Report" from the early 20th century which backed using a .45 round did make the statment that bullet placement was the most important thing.

 

Regarding "tumbling" of 5.56 mm rifle rounds, tests conducted by the US Army found that it happened VERY rarely, it was largely a "military urban legand." These tests were reported in several forums, I saw them in Infantry Magazine, but we are talking of a quarter of a century ago. I cannot give a citation.

 

Regarding the "what are other NATO nations doing" question, as far as I know (and I still read Infantry Magazine regularly) most (if not all) are keeping the 9x19mm for their standard.

 

There is one other advantage to the .45 vs the 9mm. The .45 is a subsonic round, so that when used with a good suppressor it is silent. When the CIA and SEALs used a special silenced pistol in Viet Nam (called the "hush puppy") they used special, subsonic ammo. In WWII, standard .45 ammo was used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: US Military .45 Pistols

 

 

Regarding "tumbling" of 5.56 mm rifle rounds, tests conducted by the US Army found that it happened VERY rarely, it was largely a "military urban legand." These tests were reported in several forums, I saw them in Infantry Magazine, but we are talking of a quarter of a century ago. I cannot give a citation.

 

I did quite a bit of research about the rumors of tumbling bullets myself at one time, and the conclusion that seemed to be the most prvelant was that the first batch of M-16s that saw service in 'Nam tumbled the bullets, mostly after hitting soft cover like underbrush, for the same reason they jammed so often... the 5.56 ammo they were issued didn't match the characteristics of the ammo Eugene Stoner intended when he designed and built the weapon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: US Military .45 Pistols

 

Yeah, not too many 10mm out there... I'd love to try one, but I don't know anyone who has one, and kind of pricey to buy a gun just to see what its like. =)

 

I'll have to see if I can find one at the next factory shoot. For a "fighting pistol" though I prefer a .45 as its easy to shoot, has plenty of punch for most situations, and comes in some pretty nice handguns. Wish I could get a good carbine to go with it, though. I like the pistol/carbine in same caliber combination, plus pistol-caliber carbines are fun to shoot and pretty useful for home defense I'd think, but the shotgun will have to do for now.

 

Marlin made their Camp Carbine in .45 at one time, I never shot one but it looked like a nice rifle similar to the WW2 M1 carbine, IIRC it could use the magazine from a 1911A1 but its been awhile so I could be wrong on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: US Military .45 Pistols

 

Marlin made their Camp Carbine in .45 at one time' date=' I never shot one but it looked like a nice rifle similar to the WW2 M1 carbine, IIRC it could use the magazine from a 1911A1 but its been awhile so I could be wrong on that.[/quote']

I was thinking more in line with H&K's USC-45 based off of their UMP kind of thing. From Marlin, I'd like one of their .44 magnum lever guns with the pistol grip... a guide gun, i think it was called, but they don't make them anymore last I checked. =(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: US Military .45 Pistols

 

The 9mm parabellum (called the 9mm lugar in the US) was developed in Germany' date=' either at the start of the 20th century or just before. Since the German army still carried swords for a while after that, I don't believe your account above is accurate. It is a great story though.[/quote']

 

You are correct - side arms had been standard issue to officers (Infantry, cavalry AND navy) alongside swords for nearly a century before the Luger turned up. Not just in the German army (or armies) but in most European armies (as far as I know the Germans were unique at the time in issuing side arms to artillery oficers, though. I don't know what that was about). The luger was simply considered an improvement over the revolvers already in use.

 

The standard story (in the British army) is that Officers were issued side arms for protection in close combat, but were forbidden the use of carbines or rifles to encourage them to concentrate on the troops, not on shooting, when the situation was more fluid. I suspect that's an urban/military legend: Gentlemen were carrying a brace of pistols alongside their sword, as far back as the 1600's and I guess the practice simply became formalised over time.

 

cheers, Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: US Military .45 Pistols

 

I was thinking more in line with H&K's USC-45 based off of their UMP kind of thing. From Marlin' date=' I'd like one of their .44 magnum lever guns with the pistol grip... a guide gun, i think it was called, but they don't make them anymore last I checked. =([/quote']

I dig .44 Mag lever action carbines myself, they're neat!

 

Pistol Grip guide guns have entered the hazy realm of class 3 firearms, but can still be found if you have the paper to buy them

 

Check out http://www.wildwestguns.com for some neat toys

 

My favorite?

This bad boy... a pistol grip guide gun in .457 magnum or .50 alaskan (both uber hotloads), named the Bushwacker

"shown with S&W 329 for comparison"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: US Military .45 Pistols

 

You've got to be kidding... a pistol grip on a LEVER ACTION is class 3?!?!?!?!

 

Stupid gun control morons... you have got to be kidding me... they still have 'em in big bore leverguns, though, I was just on Marlin's site... that makes no sense...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: US Military .45 Pistols

 

Yeah, not too many 10mm out there... I'd love to try one, but I don't know anyone who has one, and kind of pricey to buy a gun just to see what its like. =)

 

I'll have to see if I can find one at the next factory shoot. For a "fighting pistol" though I prefer a .45 as its easy to shoot, has plenty of punch for most situations, and comes in some pretty nice handguns. Wish I could get a good carbine to go with it, though. I like the pistol/carbine in same caliber combination, plus pistol-caliber carbines are fun to shoot and pretty useful for home defense I'd think, but the shotgun will have to do for now.

 

EAA still makes 10mm pistols, they feel wonderful in my hand.

 

There is a company that makes a "carbine" that uses a 1911 as its basis.

 

THere are also companies that build .45 acp AR 15s, iirc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: US Military .45 Pistols

 

My understanding is that the FBI finally rejected the 10mm because the recoil was uncomfortable for lighter agents. The 10mm and .40 S&W are very similar its just the the 10mm has more power, therefore more fps and therefore better penetration. But the 10mm also has more recoil because of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: US Military .45 Pistols

 

My understanding is that the FBI finally rejected the 10mm because the recoil was uncomfortable for lighter agents. The 10mm and .40 S&W are very similar its just the the 10mm has more power' date=' therefore more fps and therefore better penetration. But the 10mm also has more recoil because of it.[/quote']

Ah, that sounds right. Thanks - I knew someone here would know (or be able to find) the specifics. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: US Military .45 Pistols

 

EAA still makes 10mm pistols, they feel wonderful in my hand.

 

There is a company that makes a "carbine" that uses a 1911 as its basis.

 

THere are also companies that build .45 acp AR 15s, iirc.

I'm not a huge fan of EAA pistols in general, something about them that doesn't sit well with me.

 

I've fired one of the carbines that are pistol conversions, the one I fired was based on a glock, but I wasn't impressed with how it worked. It also had a tendency to break its stock, since its cheap and epoxied together, and it had a lot of malfunctions. I'm sure it can work well, but it wasn't for me.

 

As for the .45 ACP AR's, I'm not a big fan of the AR due to reliability issues. I don't care how much you modify the weapon, I want something more rugged, which is why so many companies have been working to make a more reliable AR. I know I won't be in a desert or anything that'll cause that much problem, but I'm just not a fan of high-maintenance weapons. I'd rather have an AK if I have to use that class of weapon, as I'll give up some accuracy for more reliability. I've seen FN and H&K's reworks of the AR system and its been pretty impressive so far, so I'll see how those develop before considering it, even for a pistol caliber version. I also don't generally like weapons "adapted" to fit something. They also make a Thompson in semi-auto, but I don't like Auto-Ordnance products most of the time either. :D If I'm going to drop that kind of cash, I want something more purpose-built. I'm finicky that way. Besides, I don't NEED one, just want one, and the hot-rod comes first for now. =)

 

Thanks for the info and trying to help, though. I really appreciate it. I'm just picky. :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: US Military .45 Pistols

 

Cool' date=' another gun to write-up for my Dark Champions campaign. :):bmk:[/quote']

Didja look at the ammuntion stats for the Bushwacker there?

 

The .50 Alaskan throws 4200 Foot pounds.

Compared to 1590 from a .45/70, and 3108 from a .450 Marlin.

 

Big badda boom :bmk:

 

all in a gun small enough to strap to your thigh and hide under a coat.

Dark Champions, indeedy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: US Military .45 Pistols

 

Didja look at the ammuntion stats for the Bushwacker there?

 

The .50 Alaskan throws 4200 Foot pounds.

Compared to 1590 from a .45/70, and 3108 from a .450 Marlin.

 

Big badda boom :bmk:

 

all in a gun small enough to strap to your thigh and hide under a coat.

Dark Champions, indeedy!

Yep, I downloaded the PDFs with the reloading data. Our home game bases damage on caliber, so .50 does 3d6. Then we have a mechanic we use for penetration and that thing is fairly nasty.

 

Example. .45 ACP is 3d6-1d6 RKA, +1 STUN, with a x2 AR. That means that any resistand defense is doubled against it. The .45 ACP is not a good penetrator.

 

The .50 Alaksan works out to be 3d6 RKA, +2 STUN, x1 AR. It'll hurt people bad.

 

A .50 cal MG round is 3d6 RKA, +3 STUN with 8 points of piercing (it ignores the first 8 points of armor).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: US Military .45 Pistols

 

The standard story (in the British army) is that Officers were issued side arms for protection in close combat, but were forbidden the use of carbines or rifles to encourage them to concentrate on the troops, not on shooting, when the situation was more fluid. I suspect that's an urban/military legend: Gentlemen were carrying a brace of pistols alongside their sword, as far back as the 1600's and I guess the practice simply became formalised over time.

 

Actually, as of the late 1970's, that was the reason that in the US Army, Cpt and above only were (officially) issued sidearms.

I knew on field grade officer who had no problem with that, he said: " if it gets to the point where it is more important for me to shoot than direct others, I should have a good choice of weapons lieing around to choose from."

As a Cpt on manuevers I only carried a pistol, but if we had gone into actual combat I would have drawn an M16 or M203 from the arms room.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: US Military .45 Pistols

 

As a Cpt on manuevers I only carried a pistol' date=' but if we had gone into actual combat I would have drawn an M16 or M203 from the arms room.[/quote']

The M203 has gotta be fun, at least in a training capacity. I don't imagine anything is fun while under fire. :eg:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: US Military .45 Pistols

 

I'm not a huge fan of EAA pistols in general, something about them that doesn't sit well with me.

 

I've fired one of the carbines that are pistol conversions, the one I fired was based on a glock, but I wasn't impressed with how it worked. It also had a tendency to break its stock, since its cheap and epoxied together, and it had a lot of malfunctions. I'm sure it can work well, but it wasn't for me.

 

As for the .45 ACP AR's, I'm not a big fan of the AR due to reliability issues. I don't care how much you modify the weapon, I want something more rugged, which is why so many companies have been working to make a more reliable AR. I know I won't be in a desert or anything that'll cause that much problem, but I'm just not a fan of high-maintenance weapons. I'd rather have an AK if I have to use that class of weapon, as I'll give up some accuracy for more reliability. I've seen FN and H&K's reworks of the AR system and its been pretty impressive so far, so I'll see how those develop before considering it, even for a pistol caliber version. I also don't generally like weapons "adapted" to fit something. They also make a Thompson in semi-auto, but I don't like Auto-Ordnance products most of the time either. :D If I'm going to drop that kind of cash, I want something more purpose-built. I'm finicky that way. Besides, I don't NEED one, just want one, and the hot-rod comes first for now. =)

 

Thanks for the info and trying to help, though. I really appreciate it. I'm just picky. :o

 

 

I like the AR just fine, IIRC the .45 acp conversions are straight blowback like the 9mm Colt smg. THat is a sweet handling gun, though not as easy to carry slung in my opinion. Great pointing characteristics, my first burst from the hip was 4" low at about 40 feet. dead on for windage.

 

I don't like the Thompson in general, it is too heavy, etc.

 

I saw an article in Small Arms Review on on interesting sub-gun, the sidewinder. If you can find the magazine on the news stand, glance through it.

 

I admit that the carbine based on the 1911 that I fired felt clunky. The biggest problem I recall was what sounded like a huge spring in the stock, it just made it an odd experience.

 

more later

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: US Military .45 Pistols

 

Actually, as of the late 1970's, that was the reason that in the US Army, Cpt and above only were (officially) issued sidearms.

I knew on field grade officer who had no problem with that, he said: " if it gets to the point where it is more important for me to shoot than direct others, I should have a good choice of weapons lieing around to choose from."

Exactly - give an officer a rifle and he's tempted to play rifleman. Give him a pistol and all he can do is be a leader (or at least, try).

 

The M203 has gotta be fun' date=' at least in a training capacity. I don't imagine anything is fun while under fire. :eg:[/quote']

It's a blast all right. Surprisingly accurate too, with even minimal training.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...