View Full Version : Marines Returning to M1911
Hope this is not a repeat. Did a quick search with no results.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/28/marines-pay-22m-to-go-back-to-their-old-guns-colt-45-caliber-pistols/
I would certainly like to have one of those! :D
It's only over a 100 years old. Great Pistol, but it's 2012. Need I say more
Streck-Fu
07-29-2012, 06:25
With many good double stack options available, why limit the capacity?
Actually the reason they went with the 1911. The process of acquiring a new pistol would have taken years. Since they are essentially buying the same gun. The process was much faster. The Marines can't just buy a new gun as fast as the Army spec ops can.
TiroFijo
07-29-2012, 16:59
I'm not a .mil guy, nor a US citizen, but I've read reports that the USMC was looking for a COTS replacement of their MEUSOC/M45 for at least a decade, and this solicitation is more than two years old. Perhaps they cannot just select anything they want, but it sure took them some time to select a 1911. They are not "returning" to the 1911, just replacing the relatively small numbers they already have at hand.
There are very interesting stories about this selection all over the net, with pictures and even the USMC less than stellar test report included...
Team Sergeant
07-30-2012, 10:22
100,000 1911 gunsmiths and 1911 parts dealers just breathed a sigh of relief. :D
We should bring back the Model T too.
100,000 1911 gunsmiths and 1911 parts dealers just breathed a sigh of relief. :D
We should bring back the Model T too.
Yeah, it's old tech. But you can cusomize the grips... :D
Badger52
07-30-2012, 13:11
We should bring back the Model T too.I've got a park'd beater 1911, runs great; but if they're gonna keep the nostalgia going could I please have my 3/4T truck back please, in M43 ambulance configuration would be nice but the basic M37 is ok, w/winch, 1 ea.
The cost of .45ACP die-sets and other components just went the same direction as the ratio of 1911-related ad pages in the magazines. The fora-sphere is acting like this is some 'Messianic event' and America just came to her senses...
:rolleyes:
Guymullins
07-30-2012, 13:30
I own a Luger P08, which was designed just three years before the Colt 1911 and also had a long and distinguished history in the German and other forces.
The Luger was replaced by the Walther P38 mainly because the Luger was just too expensive to make. The engineering is complex and the "Breaking Knee" action elaborate. It never fed wonderfully , mainly because of the angle of the butt to the barrel was too acute. This made it perhaps the most pointable handgun ever made, but feed from the magazine to chamber suffered. Loading the long magazine was also very difficult, especially if one did not use the special tool supplied for this purpose. The Colt 1911 on the other hand was simpler to manufacture, fed like a dream, packed a bigger wallop and because it outclassed the Luger everywhere, except in looks and weight, had a much longer service life. This latest order from the Marines just confirms that some of the older designs are superior to all the modern slickness that is often sold to us as technological advances, but is in fact cost saving shortcuts.
I guess I am in the minority here. I don't have a problem with their choice. A brand new Colt 1911 produced to todays specs is a far cry from the old worn out 1911's that sat on the arms room shelves back in the day.
I'd take one of these new Colts into combat over an M9 every day of the week and twice on Sundays. I have put thousands of rounds thru my 1911's with hardly a burp.;)
I guess I am in the minority here. I don't have a problem with their choice. A brand new Colt 1911 produced to todays specs is a far cry from the old worn out 1911's that sat on the arms room shelves back in the day.
I'd take one of these new Colts into combat over an M9 every day of the week and twice on Sundays. I have put thousands of rounds thru my 1911's with hardly a burp.;)
Oh, I love a 1911, myself. Addicted to them.
The point is, you say "hardly a burp"-they do sometimes burp. I like the ones that never burp, because of Mr. Murphy.
I'm planning on ordering a Les Baer when I finish pouring money into this shack, but I'll keep an HK as a fighting gun (God forbid I ever have to use it for that). Less reloading, too. :cool:
The 1911 pistols they have now are unserviceable. They had to work with the system they have, even if that system sucks. The big Marine Corps is very much in charge of MARSOC. They are not a separate entity like Army Spec Op's. It's extremely frustrating for them.
Guymullins
07-31-2012, 03:48
I wonder whether this Marine order for the .45 has anything to do with a general feeling that the older bigger calibers are perhaps better after all?
I know that many of our military regretted going 5.56 from 7.62 Nato. We never had a .45 pistol option but switched from a Star 9mm to the CZ 9mm which was a great improvement.
I wonder whether this Marine order for the .45 has anything to do with a general feeling that the older bigger calibers are perhaps better after all?
I know that many of our military regretted going 5.56 from 7.62 Nato. We never had a .45 pistol option but switched from a Star 9mm to the CZ 9mm which was a great improvement.
Guy, when I was a young Pistols and Subs Instructor (low man on the totem pole) at Wpns Branch, we were still talking about the Hatcher Formula; I bet the reason for using the .45 is still somewhat based on those results.
To me, it's seems logical that a bigger chunk of lead ball, going slower, is gonna open a bigger can of smoke.
Inflexible Six
07-31-2012, 08:55
I think that 1911 CQBP is a beaut, but I'm prehistoric.
Forgive my ignorance but it says that Marines were complaining about the accuracy of the M9. I thought it was supposed to be a relatively precise handgun? I've also read that it's pretty hard for anyone to out-shoot their pistol(whether it be a Glock, Sig, Beretta, etc.), not true?
Team Sergeant
07-31-2012, 10:02
The M9 is deadly accurate, I know first hand. I'm guessing the Marines don't like the lack of knock down power. I'm sure most handguns were not in the running just because the Marines wanted an American made sidearm.
With many good double stack options available, why limit the capacity?
Maybe they have inside info that a new magazine ban will affect military too. :D
Derek
Guymullins
07-31-2012, 12:17
Actually the .45 is a newer caliber than the 9mm. We went to a 9mm because the rest of NATO was 9mm
Yeah Brush, there were about two years in it.Of course, by older, I meant older in use, not necessarily when they were designed. I suppose it made more sense for the US to go to the 9mm as I presume your sub-machine guns were already 9mm after the de-commissioning of the Thompson ? Didnt make much sense to have three types of ammo being used. We had commonality with the 9mm Star pistol and the UZZI 9mm HMC, so we only changed to 5,56 rifles when NATO did .
Inflexible Six
07-31-2012, 13:58
Most Marines I know are biased from the get-go toward the 1911. They lack faith in the 9. For whatever reason. But I'd wager that the majority of Marines who've been in contact--the majority, not all--have not had to go to their sidearm in a lethal situation. So lack of faith in the 9 may have little to do with operational experience.
I think if you have to go to your secondary weapon and it does the job, it's going to make you a believer, no matter what caliber it is.
after seeing several people shot with 22, 9mm 45, 223 etc etc I have a 45 for my self defense. 9mm if fmj is not that great unless you are good enough to make head shots in combat. I know I am not that good so I carry a 45 with HP ammo
Shooting them in the head is a no-brainer (npi) after you've put two in the sternum. :D
Guymullins
07-31-2012, 17:01
The 9mm is very popular here as a carry gun. The main reasons are: It used to be easy to get army ammo for your civvy gun for free, but perhaps more to the point. A lot of our everyday crime involves vehicle hi-jacking. The 9mm penetrates car doors and windows better than many other rounds, so it is quite useful in the everyday world. Personally, I carry a Star PD .45 which is the Spanish version of the small Colt 1911, I think you call it the Commander. I use ball ammo, so the penetration through car doors is not bad. It is not very accurate, having a very short barrel, but shooting distances tend to be very personal here, so handiness and knock-down power are important.
The M9 is deadly accurate, I know first hand. I'm guessing the Marines don't like the lack of knock down power. I'm sure most handguns were not in the running just because the Marines wanted an American made sidearm.
The article is wrong. This 1911 is replacing older 1911 pistols, not the M9. 22.5 million dollars. If my math is correct. Thats over $1800 per gun.
Team Sergeant
08-01-2012, 08:17
The article is wrong. This 1911 is replacing older 1911 pistols, not the M9. 22.5 million dollars. If my math is correct. Thats over $1800 per gun.
I think I read it was $200 for the gun and $1600 in future parts and labor.......:munchin ;)
DR_BRETT
08-01-2012, 13:40
I wonder whether this Marine order for the .45 has anything to do with a general feeling that the older bigger calibers are perhaps better after all?
I know that many of our military regretted going 5.56 from 7.62 Nato.
Bigger = Better. The M14 was my rifle -- accurate and powerful .
- DR_BRETT
Guymullins
08-01-2012, 13:47
Bigger = Better. The M14 was my rifle -- accurate and powerful .
- DR_BRETT
I absolutely agree Dr Brett, mine was the NATO FN folding butt Para 7.62 and it could shoot out enemy hiding behind big truck steel wheels. Their AK47 of the same caliber couldnt do that because of the lower charge.
Bigger = Better. The M14 was my rifle -- accurate and powerful .
- DR_BRETT
That would logically apply to pistols as well, wouldn't it? As long as they function...
Buffalobob
08-01-2012, 15:32
The M14 was heavy and the ammo was heavy and it had a slow cyclic rate.
All depends upon the war you fought and where and how you fought it.
frostfire
08-01-2012, 20:16
Not sure about issue 1911 vs issue M9. If there's complain of poor accuracy of M9, I'm willing to bet it's the shootability (rear-heavy among other factors) instead of its mechanical accuracy. Also the inherent accuracy/aerodynamics of 9mm vs. 45. IIRC, when the AMU went to accurized M9, they blew the Marine shooters with their accurized 1911 out of the water at Camp Perry. This year at the President's 100. a Marine shooter won the match with M9 as well.
I was shooting steel challenge match in TX against a Marine shooter who's issued Kimber operator, altho he was using his personal STI. He sure loves his 1911's and beat me by .24 seconds. Is that worth the extra $$$$ against my cheap ass tupperware 9mm pistol, you decide:D....oh, that $$$ STI did "burp" more than a few times. LIttle dent on magazine lip...burp. Not enough lubrication....burp. Poor reloads ammo....burp....and so on:D
With many good double stack options available, why limit the capacity? FNP-45 is a nice way to go !
DR_BRETT
08-02-2012, 14:23
The M14 was heavy and the ammo was heavy and it had a slow cyclic rate.
All depends upon the war you fought and where and how you fought it.
Thanks to all for responding.
I hear some men (Ladies are included) STILL utilize the M14, and there are plenty of fast-cycle rifles, too. Obviously, ALL sorts and types of weapons are required -- small arms and Napalm and bombs, etc., did not replace each other as tools for a task, that is KILL the enemy in order to SAVE lives .
ZonieDiver
08-02-2012, 14:34
Bigger = Better. The M14 was my rifle -- accurate and powerful .
- DR_BRETT
I absolutely agree Dr Brett, mine was the NATO FN folding butt Para 7.62 and it could shoot out enemy hiding behind big truck steel wheels. Their AK47 of the same caliber couldnt do that because of the lower charge.
My weapon of choice was the Browning Automatice Rifle. Of course, I had a gun bearer and seven porters to carry the ammunition, and all those 20 round magazines. (I actually had TWO gun bearers. One would hand me a second, loaded BAR, while the other replaced magazines on the first.)
Besides, if it was good enough for Kirby, it was good enough for me!
DR_BRETT
08-02-2012, 14:38
". . . some of the older designs are superior to all the modern slickness that is often sold to us as technological advances, . . ."
Amen -- and this includes ALL designs, physical and conceptual .
DR_BRETT
08-02-2012, 14:49
No. 37 ZonieDiver: --
You Trigger-Pullers have all the fun, so to speak -- I mostly was stuck with Radio Operation, and got to leave for the trenches when the enemy BANGS/Troops got too close. Wish I could have operated the B.A.R. -- one of the greatest machines ever devised, by all accounts .
("BANGS" = rocket/mortar explosion sounds -- for non-experienced viewers of this thread)
ZonieDiver
08-02-2012, 14:54
No. 37 ZonieDiver: --
You Trigger-Pullers have all the fun, so to speak -- I mostly was stuck with Radio Operation, and got to leave for the trenches when the enemy BANGS/Troops got too close. Wish I could have operated the B.A.R. -- one of the greatest machines ever devised, by all accounts .
("BANGS" = rocket/mortar explosion sounds -- for non-experienced viewers of this thread)
Dang, I knew I should have used pink.
(Notice how the quoting is done...and it reallllly isn't all that cumbersome. Trust me, its worked for those of us here on this forum for years, and years.)
DR_BRETT
08-02-2012, 15:03
Dang, I knew I should have used pink.
(Notice how the quoting is done...and it reallllly isn't all that cumbersome. Trust me, its worked for those of us here on this forum for years, and years.)
!! -- I just now got here, after reading and responding to your comment on "The government knows best" thread
http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38995&page=3
I responded with "Okay, I will use your quotation system."
Buffalobob
08-02-2012, 15:10
Dr Brett
This is a special Forces forum. You should contain your remarks on weapons to the humor section. :D
DR_BRETT
08-02-2012, 15:16
Dr Brett
This is a special Forces forum. You should contain your remarks on weapons to the humor section. :D
Will do, and my remarks were sincere and serious .
Okay, so I have a question (two questions). I am just wondering if some guns and or ammo are easier to shoot and hit the target (for a novice) with a minimum of instruction, while others might require a little more training, precision and skill? If so could this have been a factor in the decision? (Taking into account trigger pull, kick, weapon weight, and maybe a whole host of other factors that I probably have never heard of). Thanks in advance.
Okay, so I have a question (two questions). I am just wondering if some guns and or ammo are easier to shoot and hit the target (for a novice) with a minimum of instruction, while others might require a little more training, precision and skill? If so could this have been a factor in the decision? (Taking into account trigger pull, kick, weapon weight, and maybe a whole host of other factors that I probably have never heard of). Thanks in advance.
Expertise in the use of any weapon comes with training. Vogel could outshoot a novice with any weapon the novice selected, and any novice with similar physical characteristics as Vogel can become an expert with proper training.
The 1911's a very "shootable" pistol ergonomically, but contains parts that systematically and periodically must be adjusted, modified or replaced to make it function accurately and consistently (I don't think 100% consistency will ever be reached).
A .45 cal ball will do more damage than a 9 mm. To quote Maj. Plaster, "9mm sucks!" when your intent is to put the enemy down as instantly as possible.
Some highup mucketymuck decided the money spent on this particular group of warriors' choice for a sidearm was warranted; it has precedent with other doorkickers.
For the unit the Colt was selected, an HK45 or even a G21 could have been made to work-it's not ease of use that was a determining factor, IMO.
animalmenace
08-08-2012, 12:53
I imagine some of you have read this study before, and it pertains specifically to law enforcement, but still an interesting read about handgun cartridges from the FBI.
http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf
EDIT: It's from 1989, but as far as I am aware, ballistics haven't changed much since then.
Inflexible Six
08-08-2012, 13:52
Okay, so I have a question (two questions). I am just wondering if some guns and or ammo are easier to shoot and hit the target (for a novice) with a minimum of instruction, while others might require a little more training, precision and skill? If so could this have been a factor in the decision? (Taking into account trigger pull, kick, weapon weight, and maybe a whole host of other factors that I probably have never heard of). Thanks in advance.
I had a Zen epiphany with the 1911. I couldn't hit jack-scratch with it until I learned to go along for the ride. And once I did, I was blowing water snakes out of drainage ditches with shots on the fly. It was some kind of spiritual thing...;)