Are European handguns rubbish? [Archive]

simonmark6

08-01-2011, 12:50 PM

He might have been commenting on how difficult it is to purchase a decent handgun illegally in Europe. Many of the under the table arms dealers are Russian and generally sell things like the Baikal, a gas firing pistol converted to 9mmP and coming with a dodgy silencer. By all accounts those aren't great guns.

It's not totally accurate, however, a mate of mine is a Police Inspector dealing with gun crime in this area. The last arms dealer they arrested was carrying a couple of Kalashnikovs, several re-activated Ingrams, three .357 Colts as well as a selection of 9mm autos. By all accounts the crappy .22s and Saturday Night Specials are entry level shooters with anyone but the sixteen-year old wannabes take whatever they can get.

All of this is still very dangerous, in the UK you can get shot dead for having a piece of wood in a plastic bag. Just possessing an illegal gun carries a sentence that is longer than murdering someone. Other European countries are similarly draconian.

That said, you'd expect a CIA agent to have better contacts.

dragoon500ly

08-01-2011, 01:07 PM

natehale1971

08-01-2011, 03:11 PM

Panther Al

08-01-2011, 05:23 PM

I would hazzard to say that the Europeans make more high quality handguns than anyone else in the world. Panther Al's list says it all (and don't forget Glock).

Perhaps the character was referring to Russians, specifically. Their handguns are weak, to say the least.

I am trying very hard to forget Glock... ;) Oh, and add Steyr to the list of great pistols as well.

Hummm, there is one handgun that does make you wonder just what the designer was thinking....the P9S is a decent little pistol, but the mag release is on the bottom of the grip....little hard to do a rapid mag change!

I'll stick to my old Colt Mark IV Series 70......

Mag releases on the bottom of the grip is a very european thing: Goes along with what we consider a pistol is supposed to be used for and what they think:

For the Americans, Pistols are a combat tool: meant to be used in combat with the goal of killing as many people as fast as possible using a minimum of ammo. Hence, the magnums, the .45's, etc...

For the Europeans, Pistols are secondly a back up weapon for when the shit has well and truly hit the fan, and primarily as an Officers weapon; a status symbol more than a combat tool. A holdover from when officers came from an official Officer (or Noble- sometimes the same thing) class. Hence, Mag capacities are typically lower, as well as the use of lighter ammo compared to the US. Hence, the .32's, .380's, the 9mm's, etc... They don't want a heavy rugged massive pistol: something nice and light is much easier to tote around if they never plan on using it in the first place.

Of course, thats just my opinion, and you know what they say about opinions... and to be fair, Europe is coming around to the US point of view on pistols.

StainlessSteelCynic

08-01-2011, 06:06 PM

There's also the possibility that Clancy was using that statement to illustrate some aspect of the CIA agent's personality/character. That is to say, perhaps the agent was written as being biased against European firearms and just made the sort of statement that you hear often enough about car marques.

Like everyone here as mentioned, the Europeans do make some pistols that range from fine to outstanding but as Panther Al specifically stated, it just took the Europeans some time to realize that pistols are more than just status symbols or authority symbols.
Other current/former European pistol makers include: -
Astra
Benelli
CZUB (AKA CZ) - The CZ75 in particular
Korriphila
Korth
MAB
Mauser - Who hasn't seen the C96 AKA Broomhandle Mauser for example?
Sphinx
Steyr
Star
Tanfoglio

Raellus

08-01-2011, 07:01 PM

I am trying very hard to forget Glock... ;) Oh, and add Steyr to the list of great pistols as well.

Have you had a bad Glock experience?

I really like my Glock 19. It's light, easy to maintain, a pleasure to shoot- and it cost hundreds less than an H&K or SigSauer. I wanted a Walther P99, but apparently, they stopped making/selling them in the States a couple of years ago. I'm actually rather pleased that I decided to go Glock. They're so common that both factory and aftermarket parts and accessories are easy to find and relatively innexpensive. It's the gangbangers and nutters that use them that give them a bad rap.

StainlessSteelCynic

08-01-2011, 08:56 PM

Have you had a bad Glock experience?

I really like my Glock 19. It's light, easy to maintain, a pleasure to shoot- and it cost hundreds less than an H&K or SigSauer. I wanted a Walther P99, but apparently, they stopped making/selling them in the States a couple of years ago. I'm actually rather pleased that I decided to go Glock. They're so common that both factory and aftermarket parts and accessories are easy to find and relatively innexpensive. It's the gangbangers and nutters that use them that give them a bad rap.

I think his response may be due to several instances where either poor training on/understanding of the Glock safety mechanism resulted in unauthorized discharges by people who should have known better or (the more likely of the two I think), where several Glock pistols have been found to be poorly manufactured and resulted in pistols blowing themselves apart in the users hand.
I don't recall if the destructing pistols were ones manufactured in Austria or at the Smyrna, Georgia factory in the US.

Panther Al

08-01-2011, 10:02 PM

In all honesty: Yes, the Glock is a good pistol: I might even go as far to say its an outstanding pistol. But I do have my reasons, but for the most part really are not on point.

I'm a huge Steyr fan: I loved my Steyr GB. It is one of the two pistols that first nodded in the direction of combat pistols in that it had a large (18 Rd) magazine capacity (The other was the HK VP70, though for a different reason, also, having owned one of the *fun* versions, I can tell you from personal experience the trigger pull is horrible). It had its issues. Mainly because Steyr screwed up by letting Rogak build them. But once Steyr took over, its star was in the ascendent. As the first hi-cap 9mm, it was destined for greatness, except a year or so later some goofballs came up with this plastic thing called a Glock, and well... ;)

Losing the Austrian Army contract - the GB was considered a shoo-in due to capacity, and the fact that it is a very soft shooter - to Glock put the nail in its coffin.

Thats one reason, the other is that I had the misfortune to have a Glock fail on me at a very unpleasant and unfortunate moment. Not a dig on the design: even Ferrari makes a lemon every now and then. And lets face it, a full auto glock is just pure fun.

The occasions when they was first being purchased by law enforcement and the users shot themselves with unfortunate regularity is a training issue: not fully the fault of the design - mostly. I don't like the trigger at all and how they are taken down. But thats all personal.

As to the list, yeash. How did I forget CZ. There is a company that never gets the props it is due.

95th Rifleman

08-01-2011, 10:06 PM

I am trying very hard to forget Glock... ;) Oh, and add Steyr to the list of great pistols as well.

Mag releases on the bottom of the grip is a very european thing: Goes along with what we consider a pistol is supposed to be used for and what they think:

For the Americans, Pistols are a combat tool: meant to be used in combat with the goal of killing as many people as fast as possible using a minimum of ammo. Hence, the magnums, the .45's, etc...

For the Europeans, Pistols are secondly a back up weapon for when the shit has well and truly hit the fan, and primarily as an Officers weapon; a status symbol more than a combat tool. A holdover from when officers came from an official Officer (or Noble- sometimes the same thing) class. Hence, Mag capacities are typically lower, as well as the use of lighter ammo compared to the US. Hence, the .32's, .380's, the 9mm's, etc... They don't want a heavy rugged massive pistol: something nice and light is much easier to tote around if they never plan on using it in the first place.

Of course, thats just my opinion, and you know what they say about opinions... and to be fair, Europe is coming around to the US point of view on pistols.

Depends on point of view I guess.

Up until recently the British army has used the FN Browning, a 9mm weapon that has a 13 round mag. Compare that to theold American 1911 which was a .45 and only carried 7 rounds.

Today the british use the SIG 226 which is another 9mm with a 15 round mag. American went with the M9 to replace the 1911 which is a 9mm Berretta 92 with a 15 round mag.

Seems to me that America is actualy coming around the the European point of view on handguns, not the other way around.

HorseSoldier

08-01-2011, 10:09 PM

Looking at the actual list of pistols made by European countries, it's hard to think of what Clancy is driving at -- Glock, Sig, FN, etc etc etc.

I could see expressing dissatisfaction with Russian pistols, specifically -- they're still trying to figure out the concept of a fighting handgun as far as I can tell, but Western Europe got on that bandwagon in the 60s to 80s, depending on firm and specific design.

Panther Al

08-01-2011, 10:14 PM

Depends on point of view I guess.

Up until recently the British army has used the FN Browning, a 9mm weapon that has a 13 round mag. Compare that to theold American 1911 which was a .45 and only carried 7 rounds.

Today the british use the SIG 226 which is another 9mm with a 15 round mag. American went with the M9 to replace the 1911 which is a 9mm Berretta 92 with a 15 round mag.

Seems to me that America is actualy coming around the the European point of view on handguns, not the other way around.

Hrm... 50-50 on that. Yes, we went with the 9mm. Not too happy about that, but I do like the mag cap that it allows. I really do think that if the .40 existed, it would have been a good compromise chambering for NATO use. Not a fan of the 9: Decent round, but not really a man stopper. I agree that the .45 is a bit much for a lot of shooters. And the size holds back the mag cap. I don't think it was the right call, we should have stuck with the 45, but... I agree that when you consider all the reasons, going to the 9 was a reasonable choice.

Now: If I had to pick a pistol that would be the only one I would ever have, can't trade, sell it, get another of any kind, nor have easy access to parts?

Browning HP all night long. Even over the 1911. The 45 is hard on parts, over the years it wouldn't hold up as well as the High Power would with its lighter 9mm loads.

StainlessSteelCynic

08-01-2011, 11:15 PM

My 10 cents worth.

Speaking as someone kind of in the middle (that is, not American and not European), I think in regard to this particular point, that the US definitely had the lead when it comes to viewing the pistol as a combat weapon.
For example, it was only about half a century before World War 1 that handguns were used in gunfights in the US, Europe didn't really have that kind of situation (i.e. the US Wild West era).

Although the C96 Mauser had a decent magazine capacity of 10-rds and a decent round, the first (of what we would consider), high capacity magazine on a pistol was for the Browning Hi-Power where the Hi-Power was related to the magazine size rather than the power of the ammunition. The Browning HP was of course, designed by John Browning who was born in the USA in 1855 - just the right time to be told all those tales of gunfights in the streets of Wild West towns and also to see the change from revolvers to automatics.

Depends on point of view I guess.

Up until recently the British army has used the FN Browning, a 9mm weapon that has a 13 round mag. Compare that to theold American 1911 which was a .45 and only carried 7 rounds.

Today the british use the SIG 226 which is another 9mm with a 15 round mag. American went with the M9 to replace the 1911 which is a 9mm Berretta 92 with a 15 round mag.

Seems to me that America is actualy coming around the the European point of view on handguns, not the other way around.

Hrm... 50-50 on that. Yes, we went with the 9mm. Not too happy about that, but I do like the mag cap that it allows. I really do think that if the .40 existed, it would have been a good compromise chambering for NATO use. Not a fan of the 9: Decent round, but not really a man stopper. I agree that the .45 is a bit much for a lot of shooters. And the size holds back the mag cap. I don't think it was the right call, we should have stuck with the 45, but... I agree that when you consider all the reasons, going to the 9 was a reasonable choice.

Now: If I had to pick a pistol that would be the only one I would ever have, can't trade, sell it, get another of any kind, nor have easy access to parts?

Browning HP all night long. Even over the 1911. The 45 is hard on parts, over the years it wouldn't hold up as well as the High Power would with its lighter 9mm loads.

B.T.

08-02-2011, 03:39 AM

Brad Thor's first book Lions of Lucerene (sp) has his main character in Swiss Confederation hunting for the kidnappers of the President. And he needed a gun but couldn't buy a real one... so he bought an airsoft pistol of the pistol he really wanted to get... because he felt the appearence of hving a gun was better than not having a gun....

In several countries that would not be a good idea. The laws on posessing and carrying weapons here in Europe are very restrictive. Have a look to the laws on knifes in the UK, for example.

Here in Germany you can be charged for showing a airsoft in public. And the fees can be enormous, depending on situation. It is, however, not a crime, it is an "Ordnungswidrigkeit" ("infringement of law" is what my dictionary calls that circumstance, I hope, this gives an idea to all of you.).

Well, the rest has been said. Some very fine handguns here in Europe, selling good on the international weapons market and very popular with law enforcement agencies all over the world.

Caradhras

08-02-2011, 04:13 AM

Thanks for all the replies - interesting. I did think there were a lot of very good European arms manufacturers and hence must be some good handguns. I had heard that those very heavy handguns like the Desert Eagle were too unwieldy to be as effective as a 'normal' handgun.

For clarification, the CIA guy does specifically say European not Russian (or I wouldnt have been too surprised).

bobcat

08-02-2011, 04:37 AM

well lets see. john browning was an american.
glocks are by design(double action with no manual safety) unsafe to carry loaded
and i have yet to hold a Beretta that wasn't crap

but SIG, HK, and the Cz 75 make up for the crapiness of those i mentioned and then some.

of course i never trust any weapon made in a country where i cannot legally carry said weapon. (a prime example of the reasons why is the SA80)

Tegyrius

08-02-2011, 06:24 AM

I think his response may be due to several instances where either poor training on/understanding of the Glock safety mechanism resulted in unauthorized discharges by people who should have known better or (the more likely of the two I think), where several Glock pistols have been found to be poorly manufactured and resulted in pistols blowing themselves apart in the users hand.
I don't recall if the destructing pistols were ones manufactured in Austria or at the Smyrna, Georgia factory in the US.

IIRC, most of the Glock kaboom incidents were in the .40 S&W and .357 SIG models, which combine a higher-pressure cartridge with a partially-unsupported casing. A lot of them were a convergence of factors... including excessive powder charges in reloaded casings.

(ObT2k: This is one hazard of reusing brass multiple times.)

As to the list, yeash. How did I forget CZ. There is a company that never gets the props it is due.

+1. IMO, if you don't want to carry plastic, the CZ 75 is one of the best values on the market today.

glocks are by design(double action with no manual safety) unsafe to carry loaded

Yeah, I know. Hard to believe anyone survived carrying revolvers all those years... :rolleyes:

- C.

95th Rifleman

08-02-2011, 12:57 PM

Europe produces, arguably, the world's best handguns. Afterall even the US military use an Italian 9mm as their standard service pistol.

The main argument is mainly over the balance between stopping power and magazine capacity. The heavier and more effective the round, the less you get to play with. Most militaries have chosen in favour of capacity.

However in the 21st century a new factor has come into play, armour penetration. Most modern militaries use body armour as standard which makes both the .45 and the 9mm useless. The Germans have developed a 4.6mm round to deal with arour while FN has gone with a 5.7mm.

As body armour becomesmore and more widespread the compromise will become a complicated triangle of factors and will become far more interesting.

buzzgunner

08-02-2011, 01:27 PM

Thats one reason, the other is that I had the misfortune to have a Glock fail on me at a very unpleasant and unfortunate moment. Not a dig on the design: even Ferrari makes a lemon every now and then. And lets face it, a full auto glock is just pure fun. I'll start out by stating that 1911-pattern semis are my favorite handguns of all time (I love my Kimber TLE-II). Having said that, I like Glocks a lot and would really like to know what kind of failure you had with your Glock. My wife and I have both been certified Glock armorers for years and every function failure we've ever seen can be traced back to either a) poor maintenance, or b) pilot error.

As for full-auto Glocks, you can have 'em. Every time I've ever fired a Glock 18, I've come away with a back taste in my mouth. The cyclic is so high and the overall accuracy is so poor, the only thing you really accomplish making a lot of noise and wasting a lot of ammo in a remarkably short time. Full-auto handguns are, in general, about as useful as a screen door on a submarine. If forced to pick one, however, I'll go with a Beretta 93R. The fold-down front grip and burst fire feature at least provide a hope that you'll hit your target a couple times before the magazine runs dry.

natehale1971

08-02-2011, 02:19 PM

B.T. The reason why he felt that way, was because he was tracking down a group of Swiss Mercs who had kidnaped the President of the United States (while making it look like it was done by terrorists), while running away from the Secret Service because they thought he was somehow involved... and having to operate under the radar. the only times he 'showed the gun' was to get people out of danger when the bad guys showed up.

It's a really good read, and i can't do it justice in just a couple of lines.

In several countries that would not be a good idea. The laws on posessing and carrying weapons here in Europe are very restrictive. Have a look to the laws on knifes in the UK, for example.

Here in Germany you can be charged for showing a airsoft in public. And the fees can be enormous, depending on situation. It is, however, not a crime, it is an "Ordnungswidrigkeit" ("infringement of law" is what my dictionary calls that circumstance, I hope, this gives an idea to all of you.).

Well, the rest has been said. Some very fine handguns here in Europe, selling good on the international weapons market and very popular with law enforcement agencies all over the world.

dragoon500ly

08-02-2011, 03:04 PM

I've had to depend on a .45 twice in my life (both times in a home invasion situation). Say what you will about the 9mm, IMHO, when your life is on the life, the .45 ACP will put your man down every time.

95th Rifleman

08-02-2011, 03:58 PM

Panther Al

08-02-2011, 04:20 PM

I'll start out by stating that 1911-pattern semis are my favorite handguns of all time (I love my Kimber TLE-II). Having said that, I like Glocks a lot and would really like to know what kind of failure you had with your Glock. My wife and I have both been certified Glock armorers for years and every function failure we've ever seen can be traced back to either a) poor maintenance, or b) pilot error.

As for full-auto Glocks, you can have 'em. Every time I've ever fired a Glock 18, I've come away with a back taste in my mouth. The cyclic is so high and the overall accuracy is so poor, the only thing you really accomplish making a lot of noise and wasting a lot of ammo in a remarkably short time. Full-auto handguns are, in general, about as useful as a screen door on a submarine. If forced to pick one, however, I'll go with a Beretta 93R. The fold-down front grip and burst fire feature at least provide a hope that you'll hit your target a couple times before the magazine runs dry.

The coil spring in the trigger assembly became dislodged. No idea how, as it was a fairly new pistol and I hadn't played with the trigger - I'm a believer than unless you are a trained armorer in that particular weapon, never fuck with the safety and trigger mechanism - more than you would while doing routine cleaning. Just one of those freak things that just happen I figure.

As to the 18: I said it was fun, not useful in anyway other than if you a gangsta trying to look cool - and if thats the case, you've already lost ;). The VP70 is actually remarkably controllable as well as the 93R, tuck the stock nice and tight, and since you have one hell of a pull on the trigger to get it to break, you wind up with a nice tight hold as a beneficial side effect - but yes, the 93R is slightly better: that stubby fore grip does the trick right nice. And the Kimber is a excellent choice. Best 1911 for the buck out there.

StainlessSteelCynic

08-02-2011, 06:04 PM

Tegyrius

08-02-2011, 07:28 PM

For those of you that have used any of the 1911 type .45s, do you have any thoughts on the Para-Ordnance models for increasing the mag capacity?
I have no idea what they cost in comparison to say a Kimber so are the Para-Ordnance models as cost effective?

I don't know if it's justified or not, but Para has a reputation for somewhat variable QC. Their LDA trigger is not the same as a classic 1911 single-action, though I believe they do make some of the double-stack guns with traditional 1911 triggers. You'd better have big hands, though.

- C.

pmulcahy11b

08-02-2011, 10:35 PM

The way I feel about the general question posed by the thread title is, yes and no. Like everything else, some European handguns are absolutely top-notch, and some are crap. US, Canadian, and even Chinese and Russian handguns, the same way (though the ratio of excellent-to-crap may change from country to country).

Panther Al

08-02-2011, 11:18 PM

Hummm, there is one handgun that does make you wonder just what the designer was thinking....the P9S is a decent little pistol, but the mag release is on the bottom of the grip....little hard to do a rapid mag change!

I'll stick to my old Colt Mark IV Series 70......

Mmmm... the P9. One of the first HK Pistols, with the P4 being first. Its action was, and is, unique - basically the G3 roller lock system shrunk down to fit in a 9mm pistol. This is one I always wanted to get my hands on, but never had the chance - or when I did, the pistol was junk and not worth the money.

The P9 was Single Action with an exposed hammer during the Prototype stage, though when it entered production the hammer was no longer exposed. Also, a small number of select fire versions of the prototype was built, as far as I know none was actually produced commercially - you can tell if its a select fire version by the lever mounted on the frame underneath the slide mounted safety. Less than 500 P9's was built: making them quite rare.

As an aside on the P4: It has a interesting lineage. Its based heavily on the Mauser HsC: which shouldn't be surprising. The main designers of the pistol was Alex Seidel and Tilo Möller. Seidel, in addition to founding HK, was one of the major designers of the HsC, Möller later on developed this 9mm Roller Locked Submachine gun for HK that had some minor success.... ;)

The P9S was a double action version, and made up the bulk of all production. In addition to the basic P9S, there was a few selective fire prototypes made, that used a stock design that later saw the light of day with the VP70. Also built was a number chambered in 7.65x21.5 for sale in Italy, as well as sport and target models. There is talk of a .22 conversion kit, but the only time I have seen pics of one was of factory prototypes.

Also on the statement of unsafe guns because of the lack of an external safety and double action designs... well... lets just say the P7 has a rep for being *very* safe, and falls into that category - though you could argue that the cocking lever counts as a safety after a fashion.

waiting4something

08-03-2011, 12:25 AM

For those of you that have used any of the 1911 type .45s, do you have any thoughts on the Para-Ordnance models for increasing the mag capacity?
I have no idea what they cost in comparison to say a Kimber so are the Para-Ordnance models as cost effective?

I have to say something here. I used to own a Para Ordanance P-14-45 back in the late 90's to mid 2000's. The idea of a 1911 with a high capacity magazine was great, but the one I bought was a lemon. Half the time when I tried to squeeze the trigger, the trigger wouldn't go. I called the company about it and they where dirt bags about it and didn't want to fix it. So over the years I had two smith's try to fix it and both failed to do so. I ended up giving it to my brother that has one that works fine, so he could use it as spare parts. Later he gave it to a friend that was a gun guru and he replaced the series 80s parts with series 70s and said it worked fine. Good concept, but I will never buy from those jackasses again.
I also bought a Springfield Armory hi capacity GI and it was junk. It jammed alot and the grip felt terrible. I ditched that for a loss. If I ever go with another 1911 45 acp it will be a single stack(Kimber I'm thinking). The only 1911 style I own now is a LAR Grizzly MK1 in 45 winchester magnum. I like that gun a lot....

dragoon500ly

08-03-2011, 08:00 AM

The British developed the "double tap" method to ensure quick, clean 9mm kills.

:D

With a .45 you just need one!

dragoon500ly

08-03-2011, 08:14 AM

For those of you that have used any of the 1911 type .45s, do you have any thoughts on the Para-Ordnance models for increasing the mag capacity?
I have no idea what they cost in comparison to say a Kimber so are the Para-Ordnance models as cost effective?

I've tried the 9rd and 12rd mags, the problem is the .45 is a hefty round and there, IMHO, seems to be more jamming problems due to magazine misfeed. I've been firing .45 since I was introduced to the M-1911A1 back in 1977. I currently own three, two Colt Mark IV Series 70 and a Series 80. The Series 70 are the best.

When you purchase a .45, people will tell you that you need to replace the wooden grips, that you have to have the feed ramp smoothed and polished, that you need to have a ambidextrous safety installed, the sights have to be replaced with glow-in-the-dark, the list of mods really is almost a mile long!

Straight out of the box, the Series 70 will shoot a 2-inch group at 50 yards. I have never experienced any feeding problems that were not related to a bad magazine (get US military surplus mags) or poor ammunition (IMHO Winchester .45 is not worth the effort to throw away).

I have fired ball, hollowpoint, Glaser, and tracer out of my pistols and never a problem with feeding, especially when using Federal ammo. The best .45 ammo actually comes out of South Korea, it burns sweet with less residue than anything I've seen stateside.

The Colt Mark IV, Series 80 is not as good as the Series 70, I have broken extractors (3!) and a firing pin and had to get my local gunsmith to tune the piece. According to him, the Series 80 suffered with some pretty bad quality control problems due to Colt farming out production to third parties. No idea if this is true or not, but it could explain the Series 80 problems.

waiting4something

08-03-2011, 07:02 PM

As a whole I would say Europe has much more to choose from as far as combat pistols. North America's selection is pretty limited. Thats why until recently the Glock has been the king of law enforcement. Hell they been kicking ass on the U.S. market since the late 80's. Glock is finally getting dethroned by the Swith and Wesson's M&P model. aAside from 1911 variants and the M&P I don't think we really have anything to offer. Thats really puzzling when you think about it. If it wasn't for the 100 year old 1911 design we would look as bad as the some of the eastern bloc countries.

Sanjuro

08-03-2011, 08:19 PM

Legbreaker

08-03-2011, 08:24 PM

Bullets HURT!!!
Even a .22 LR which is more likely to bounce off a cotton shirt than do any lasting damage.
Perhaps the SAS recognise the fact that you don't necessarily have to kill to take an opponent out of the fight. The higher capacity of 9mm weapons over .45 is definately a bonus and the .45 still isn't a sure kill (although it's certain to mess you up if it hits).

Panther Al

08-03-2011, 08:58 PM

Its more a case of what they are used to, and doctrine in my opinion.

9mm gives lots of ammo per pound: And it is adequate for the job. Now in the US it appears that the .45 is still the king: Its a better round, but has less rounds per pound. So... training, doctrine, and what the users are used to.

Raellus

08-03-2011, 10:16 PM

Check out any handgun forum and you will find dozens of threads devoted to the debate between the various caliber handgun rounds.

Both 9mm and .45 have their advantages and disadvantages. It's nearly a wash. It really depends on what round the shooter is most comfortable with.

Pro 9mm:
More rounds per mag/more hi-cap options
Greater muzzle velocity with most 9mm loads = better penetration (could be a con in certain scenarios)
JHP ammo has decent stopping power
Slightly less recoil than .45

Anti-9mm:
Not as much stopping power
high velocity ammo = overpenetration concern

Pro .45:
Better stopping power
Doesn't really need JHP ammo for above
not as much concern with overpenetration

Anti-.45:
Fewer rounds per mag/fewer hi-cap options
Slightly slower muzzle velocity = slightly less penetration than 9mm
More recoil

I went 9mm because I wanted my wife to be able to shoot comfortably and accurately. Even 9mm has a bit more kick than she'd like. I can't imagine she'd be comfortable shooting a .45. With modern JHP ammo, the 9mm is a good self defense weapon, comparable, if not superior to, the .45 (IMHO). I think it really comes down to what you shoot best with. Debating 9mm vs. .45 is kind of a waste of time. It's moot.

And, to bring us back to the title thread, who makes the best 9mm handguns in the world? The Europeans!

95th Rifleman

08-04-2011, 02:08 AM

It's interesting to note that the latest Russian pistol design, the Grach, is in 9x19mm, which is basicly a copy of the NATO standard. Up untill the Grach the Russians had used cartridges that had a reputation for relative lack of stopping power and weakness.
In general the Russians have never respected the use of pistols outside of police work. Being the nation to pioneer asault rifles they have relied on shortened assault rifles or SMGs for PDW work. The AK74U and Bizon2 are examples of this philosophy.

dragoon500ly

08-04-2011, 09:46 AM

I'm the first to admit that the .45 is not for everyone. Its a hefty cartridge that requires a hefty pistol to use it correctly. And as we used to joke, with a M1911, after you shot the a**hole 7 times, you can always club him to death!!!

9mm is fun to shoot. I own a Glock and I have a lot of fun on the range, but in a situation where my life depends on it, I will depend on my Mark IV, I simply have no faith in the 9mm as a reliable man-stopper. So I'll guess I will stick with what I like.

At least until the 5MW pulse laser rifle comes out!

Sanjuro

08-04-2011, 11:25 AM

When you start shooting double-taps on a firing range it does start to attract attention from other range users...

HorseSoldier

08-04-2011, 02:30 PM

I have only ever fired pistols on firing ranges, under controlled conditions, so I am only qualified to ask questions on this topic:
the SAS are routinely given the freedom to choose their own weapons- why do they seem without exception to choose 9mm (usually SIG226 or 228)?
It could be habit (being British, they are accustomed to 9mm) or a wish to stay with the most easily available ammunition, but if .45" was that much better I would have thought it would at least see use on anti-terror ops...

The liberty special operations units have to select their own weaponry is generally overstated. For the most part, even in organizations that can select alternatives to their parent organization/nation's standard issue weaponry, there is still (usually) a requirement for standardization within the unit and a tendency to remain within the confines of the existing ammunition logistics system.

That said, 45 ACP isn't really all that much better. All practical combat pistol calibers are rubbish when it comes to actually reliably killing/stopping a bad guy, and it's much more about the ability to make multiple hits fast than it is to deliver one overwhelmingly massive wound (which pistol calibers just can't provide consistently). Even in the SF ODAs I've worked with where they were using 1911s dragged out of retirement and refurbished the main motivation was loathing of the Beretta design, rather than the caliber, and the definitive superiority of the 1911 as a fighting gun in terms of ergonomics and trigger.

95th Rifleman

08-04-2011, 03:32 PM

The liberty special operations units have to select their own weaponry is generally overstated. For the most part, even in organizations that can select alternatives to their parent organization/nation's standard issue weaponry, there is still (usually) a requirement for standardization within the unit and a tendency to remain within the confines of the existing ammunition logistics system.

That said, 45 ACP isn't really all that much better. All practical combat pistol calibers are rubbish when it comes to actually reliably killing/stopping a bad guy, and it's much more about the ability to make multiple hits fast than it is to deliver one overwhelmingly massive wound (which pistol calibers just can't provide consistently). Even in the SF ODAs I've worked with where they were using 1911s dragged out of retirement and refurbished the main motivation was loathing of the Beretta design, rather than the caliber, and the definitive superiority of the 1911 as a fighting gun in terms of ergonomics and trigger.

That's a good point, military pistols are last resort, backup weapons. You will always want to be carrying an assault rifle or SMG in combat.

dragoon500ly

08-04-2011, 04:47 PM

A lot of the problem with any handgun's knockdown power is in its ammo. FMJ really handicaps a pistol, IMHO. Best choice for pistol ammo would be HP or even Glaser, but the various services don't use either.

As a tanker, you had a choice of defending your tank with a .50-cal, great machine gun, but really sucks when the enemy is crawling over your tank; or a M1911...if you were crewing a M-48/60, then you had a third choice, you could always pull out your M-3A1 and see how many died laughing.

Like a lot of TCs, I put my faith in a privately purchased 12 gauge. Sure it violates the rules of war someplace, but when they are crawling up your rear deck, half a dozen rounds of 00 would help convince them to go bother some one else. And considering the number of privately owned shotguns in the arms room, I was far from alone in my viewpoint.

When the M-1 came out, I was thrilled! For the first time "they" listened to a treadhead and gave us something other than a SMG old enough to draw Social Security! A bright, shiny M-16!

Pistols and SMGs are cute, they are fun to shoot and they impress hell out of the civilians. But face reality, they are both last ditch defensive weapons. I shoot a pistol 3-4 times a month and burn through about 200 rounds. That gives me a lot of advantage over somebody who shoots once a year. And I don't trust hitting with a pistol under a stress situation much beyond a dozen meters or so.

Going into combat, especially dismounted, you would find me either humping along a M-203, a SAW or a M-240.

At least until the development of a man portable tacnuke!

Griff

08-04-2011, 06:18 PM

Two and half cents (inflation..)....

Having used my (nearly worthless and most despised) M9 Beretta five times now in combat, I agree it is a weapon of last resort. Every time I've had to use the damn thing I wound up "getting physical" with my opponent. Since the last time I've gone to carrying a cross slung 12 Gauge shotgun. It's a bit unwieldy at times, but I figured since I'm just as likely to engage in hand to hand any way, screw it.

I still carry the required M9 (because it's required), but it's more for show. It's number one aspect and use in Iraq and A-stan.....former regimes used pistols for executions, so whenever I rest my hand on it, all disruptive/argumentative/chaotic behavior by the Locals stops. It's a pretty decent diplomat in that area, but a "combat pistol".....Not no, but HELL NO!

And yes if I had my choice it would be 1911 type (Kimber,but Uncle Sugar ain't paying for that), or as decent compromise .40 (Glock/Sig/S&W).

As far as Europeans making "crap" handguns....No more than any other global arena of arms manufacture, and by and large a hell'uva lot less.

Now to the nods of the US Military going to 9mm over the .45. That was a bow to NATO in the 80's. The reasons (as I was told them back then) were logistics (all our allies used 9x19) and the larger body of female service members entering (and expected to enter in the future). Not a sexist move by the US Army (they had conducted several tests in late 70's and early 80's), but just one of several reasons why they moved to the 9mm. The choice of the Berreta, well I'll just point you toward the very persuasive (and phenomenally rich) lobbyist who I'd dearly like to get my hands on. In the end it was adopted by the "US Military" just like you would adopt your foreign cousins crackheaded underachieving and expensive off spring, by massive weight of pressure from outside sources (and you would loathe every day that decision was made for you). So in that regard, yes it's our pistol of "choice". In the end it's always about money.

And just in case some one didn't pick on the, somewhat ambiguous, clues.......
I HATE the M9 pistol!!! Just in case. ;)

Sua Sponte

HorseSoldier

08-04-2011, 08:37 PM

As far as Europeans making "crap" handguns....No more than any other global arena of arms manufacture, and by and large a hell'uva lot less.

+1. At my last unit we had a few Norinco clones of the Sig 226 in our arms room as part of our foreign weapons training/familiarization set (no idea why Chinese Sig clones and not the real thing). If I remember right, the double action on the triggers actually gauged at something like 32 pounds, and were just gritty and miserable in single action, even though the trigger pull was more reasonable.

The Korean issue 9mm's (DP-somethings, I'm not remembering the full nomenclature right now) weren't too bad. Not my first choice for a pistol, but I'd take one over a Mak or it's Polish or Czech equivalents any day.

Sanjuro

08-05-2011, 05:27 AM

Griff, can I draw you out about the Beretta M9? I fired the original 92S on which it was based (long before the UK handgun ban), but again only on a firing range.
Unfortunately I no longer have the book with the reference, but I remember reading about "The Great American Pistol Test" carried out in the late 1970s.
From memory, the 92S was adopted primarily for reliability- in the entire 10,000 round test it only had 5 stoppages!
Is it reliability or accuracy which is the problem in the real world? If reliability, is it just the difference between testing on a firing range and combat conditions, or is it because of problems in manufacture specific to the US version?
I have also just read a Wikipedia article which refers problems with ammo more powerful then the NATO standard 9mmP, and with non-Beretta made magazines.
Please note this post is in no way a contradiction of yours, just an opportunity for me to learn a little more.

dragoon500ly

08-05-2011, 11:33 AM

Perhaps this can help, I was in the service when the great 9mm test was held.

Please note that I mentioned 9mm specifically. You see the decision to follow NATO's lead and move to 9mm was made in Congress as part of the policy to standardize as much as possible with NATO, this was the birth of the STANG magazines, the switch to 120mm and yes, the switch to 9mm. From a viewpoint of trying to streamline NATO's screwy supply system, it made sense. It still does.

When the decision was made to seek a replacement for the M-1911A1, there was no doubt that it would be a 9mm. The testing phase was designed to get the best choice. Each submitting designer had to submit 1,000 pistols from a CURRENTLY in production model. The Army would then randomly select 100 pistols and fire 10,000 rounds each in four different tests. Bids would then be taken from the final three and that would determine who would get the contract.

The final three choices came down to Beretta, SIG and Smith & Wesson. The lowest bid was Beretta. There was a bit of sour grapes about this and Smith & Wesson lobbied Congress, stating that the bidding process wasn't followed, that Beretta had reliability issues and that Beretta did not have a US plant (they actually did, in Maryland) and S&W was able to force a retest.

S&W failed the retest, miserably.

And that was the end of the matter.

My local sheriff departments used M92S for several years before switching to Glocks. There is a story of three deputies getting into a shoot out with a couple of crack heads. Two of the deputies used M92s and the third, getting ready to retire, still carried his old Colt .357 Magnum Python. In the shooting report, the 9mm deputies fired a total of 38 rounds of 9mm, hitting one suspect in the arm. The old wheel-gun deputy fired two rounds, hitting both suspects in the upper chest and killing them.

As has been mentioned previously in this thread, it really comes down to what you the shooter, have the most confidence in.

pmulcahy11b

08-05-2011, 01:50 PM

Having never fired either an M9 or an M1911A1 at an actual person, all I can work on is range work and "war stores" of vets. As far as the range, both have comparable accuracy, and the M9 is better in quick reloads. The M1911A1 has better natural pointing qualities and just has a more solid feeling that inspires confidence in your weapon

I've heard stories out of Iraq, Afghanistan, and the local Air Force SPs and the MPs on Ft Sam who say that it's nice to have double the rounds, but you're more likely to need them since the 9mm round doesn't have the stopping power of the .45 and more insurgents, Taliban, and Al-Qaida these days are wearing body armor. It can take three or four rounds sometimes to take down an insurgent who's full of adrenalin -- more to inflict enough blunt trauma damage to stop someone who's wearing body armor (or, if you're good and lucky, aimed shots to the head or extremities). A .45 will inflict more blunt trauma damage on a person wearing body armor -- the game rules really don't do it justice -- if you get hit by a 9mm and you're wearing body armor, you will probably get away with a giant bruise. After a hit with a .45, you'll have a giant deep-tissue bruise, and bruised or possibly cracked ribs, and you'll get the wind knocked out of you.

The MPs also tell me that the .45 round is much more likely to bring down someone who is hopped on drugs, even those on PCP or meth.

One of my ROTC instructors, MSG Chinn, remembered an incident when he fired an M1911A1 at a Vietcong. He almost missed, but got him in the right hand. The hit from the round knocked him down, with his hand leading the way, whereupon MSG Chinn (then SGT Chinn) shot him one in the body and that was that.

It might be telling that our special ops troops are getting new .45 handguns, and have taken the M1911A1s out of storage until they have enough. They have more confidence in the .45 round to put someone down.

The .45 ACP also has another advantage -- it does not require an overly-complicated silencer if that sort of work is needed, and is quieter than most rounds in this role. It also doesn't lose much power when fired through a silencer. The .45 ACP is already subsonic, and it fires a big, heavy bullet.

95th Rifleman

08-05-2011, 03:53 PM

There is a big difference between law enforcement and military.

In the military your pistol is a last resort weapon if you somehow don't have a nice, nasty assault rifle/SMG to hand.

In law enforcemeny the other guy isn't a combat trained, battle armour wearing soldier (you hope!) so I'd imagine a heavier calibre, man-stopper would be much more favourable. I don't understand why so many American plice departments went 9mm when the .45 is allot better in police engagements.

Military requirements are so very different afterall.

B.T.

08-06-2011, 10:33 AM

In the German media there are reports from time to time, telling about incidents, where evil-doers could not be stopped by 9mm pistols, because the opponents were, as Paul and several others have mentioned, full of adrenaline and did not fall in the moment, when they were hit. Some pals of mine, that are police members, know about such incidents. But you do not read about it in the media all to often.

Another thing to mention: The .45 ACP is an option, that seems to be increasingly important in the world-wide Special Operaton branches. The Hecker & Koch USP is available in .45 ACP. Here in Germany we are not well informed about the situation of our troops in A'stan, but it is rumoured, that the KSK (Kommando Spezial Kräfte) use the HK USP in .45 ACP.

The .45 pistols were not in widespread use in Germany, but the police agencies in the parts of Western Germany, occupied/controlled by the US*, used them in the years after WW II. As far as I know, most of them were replaced in the 50ies.

*No offense intended! How do you call the "Besatzungszonen"? Is "occupation zone" the correct term?

bobcat

08-06-2011, 02:55 PM

occupation sounds about right historically. the U.S tends to stay in places we invade fair and square. but hey at least we don't bill for the rebuilding.(still not sure if thats a good thing or a bad thing being a tax payer...)

Mohoender

08-06-2011, 03:58 PM

Am I wrong or isn't the US army using an european designed handgun as its regular handgun? A beretta's crap of sorts.

bobcat

08-06-2011, 08:00 PM

Am I wrong or isn't the US army using an european designed handgun as its regular handgun? A beretta's crap of sorts.

yes the berretta is crap and yes we are stuck with it thanks to some crooked politics.

Panther Al

08-06-2011, 09:40 PM

Ooookay.

The Berretta 92 is actually one of the better pistol designs out there. Its reliable, durable, and fairly accurate. As far as the competition for the M9 contract, it was bettered by the P226 from SiG, but Berratta won it because they was willing to take a hit on cost of support, which made the overall cost per weapon cheaper than the others. Honestly, I don't like the Berretta, the SiG is much better, but it was a fair competition that was won on cost basis, not performance.

All that said, it shouldn't have won. The 226 was the better pistol in every category save cost. Now, I can't really fault the Army for saving a buck, its a habit the government needs to get into, but it is what it is.

Now to the issues bandied about regarding the M9.

Slide separation. In September of 87, a civilian 92B pistol being tested by the SEAL's did have frame separation at where the locking block slips into the slide. It did launch off the back, and hit the guy in the face. The Army, when testing, again, civilian 92SB's, had 3 do the same thing. This time, we have round counts: 23,310, 30,083, and 30,545 on the last. The failures was in the same place, and after testing, it was discovered that the metal used in the Italian slides did not meet the specs of the M9 Contract. Now, the M9 contract stipulated that all M9's have to be built in the US, and the US Slides are made of a metal that does meet the specs, and no failures of US Built slides have ever come up.

Magazines. Now this is a valid issue. The original specified coating for the mags was spec'd out with Europe in mind. Phosphate coatings, while good for that environment, don't react well with dust and sand. The original production batches was made in Italy by Mec-Gar. Oddly enough, it proved to be cheaper for them to produce the magazines with a more expensive coating, one that held up well against dust and sand. But the ones made by Checkmate are Phosphate coated as the spec requires. And thats where the mag issue comes up. Now, the Army saw the problem, and has addressed it. Currently, Airtronic has the contract for (I am not sure on this number, but I know I am close) a million new ones, made to the specs that Mec-Gar used. And those that have arrived have proven to be as good as the originals.

dragoon500ly

08-07-2011, 07:25 AM

It always seems to boil down to the quality of the magazines, even the much beloved .45 has problems with crappy magazines. And going by my own experience in the green machine as well as watching the local shooters, most people never bother to clean or maintain their magazines.

I remember one civilian shooter with a Kimball .45 having issues with jamming, his round would fail to chamber and be stuck, rim still in the magazine. His issue was shooting Winchester .45 ammo (how a company so famous in American history produce such lousy ammo is beyond me) and an utter failure to maintain his mags (bent feed lips).

When I looked over his mags every one had bent or otherwise deformed lips. Poor guy was flabbergasted when I disassembled his mags, did a little surgery with a pair of pliers, cleaned the things of the carbon build-up and then reassembled and fired a string. Almost every problem that I've seen with semiautomatic pistols can be traced to magazines or poor ammo.

headquarters

08-07-2011, 03:49 PM

Kind of an impossible question to answer really - yes some are crap either in design, production quality or both - some are not. This goes for any product anywhere - the US included.

Think of the vast number of clones available out there. Also think of the kinship many - if not most modern handguns share. ( Much like bolt action rifles and the Mauser system)

Many designs are copied /licensed abroad. Take the CZ75 ,made in China as well as in the US by Springfield.

The M1911 too - in Norway we made them under license from 1914 - 1947 or so. ( Yes - some were made by the nazi occupation forces and have the nazi markings and all.I dont know about operational service-probably little as .45 was not in the logistics systems in quantity in the Wehrmacht). HP35s were used in numbers by Germans as well as other nations during WWII , the TT33 Tokarev takes a leaf out of Brownings book bearing some kinship to an earlier Colt automatic - the model 1907 I believe. I also read that a British horse regiment was issued Lugers in 1909. The C96 Mauser pistol was reportedly used by US troops in the Phillipines in the early 1900 rebellions there.)

Anyways - the role of the handgun in combat has differed over the ages, military tactic has changed over time and along with technological advances. Normally all modern armies have adopted tactics used by others if found to be efficient -be it US or European.

Sometimes the technological development caught the decision makers unawares. The 9x19 mm is an efficient combat round and today its maybe the most common caliber. The .45 was more popular before - the tendency has been going towards lighter calibers in small arms over the last 100 - 75 years though. That said - highly trained professionals may have preferences towards this or that caliber. Many shooters have such preferances.

Also it should be considered that economy plays a role. A handgun doesnt give the same bang for buck as a rifle. So if arming a force on a budget - rifles will be bought.

I carried a Glock for app 2 years as a service weapon. Never had a problem even though I did let it suffer some mistreatment from time to time.Mud,dust,water,snow - as long as the barrel was free it went bang. Some stoppages occurred. Hardly any automatic has never jammed be it ammo,mag or fingers the culprit. Perfectly safe to carry loaded in the proper holster. Of course teaching the index finger were to stay until it was time to fire is paramount. No finger operations to botch getting of a shot in a stressed situation -just draw find the trigger and let loose. Saves time and effort when training people to use it.

The CZ75 is reliable and sturdy in my book-not as user friendly as the Glock though.

It is always going to be a trade off between the properties of the cartridge/projectile and the other stats on your gun. You can get a single shot Thompson Contender in .30-06. You can get a FNfiveseven with a 21 round mag or so.

HorseSoldier

08-07-2011, 05:05 PM

In the German media there are reports from time to time, telling about incidents, where evil-doers could not be stopped by 9mm pistols, because the opponents were, as Paul and several others have mentioned, full of adrenaline and did not fall in the moment, when they were hit. Some pals of mine, that are police members, know about such incidents. But you do not read about it in the media all to often.

People can be hard to kill when it's all said and done. I know of various law enforcement involved shootings where an armed bad guy took multiple rounds of rifle fire to stop/drop. I can think of at least one where a guy was still fighting after catching most or all pellets from two 12 gauge 00 buckshot rounds and a couple 5.56mm rounds from a patrol carbine. Bad guy in that case did die, but was able to return fire after multiple hits from long guns before bleeding out.

Panther Al

08-07-2011, 07:26 PM

People can be hard to kill when it's all said and done. I know of various law enforcement involved shootings where an armed bad guy took multiple rounds of rifle fire to stop/drop. I can think of at least one where a guy was still fighting after catching most or all pellets from two 12 gauge 00 buckshot rounds and a couple 5.56mm rounds from a patrol carbine. Bad guy in that case did die, but was able to return fire after multiple hits from long guns before bleeding out.

Not to mention the occasion when a perp took a .45 soupbowl to the centre chest - and asked to keep it as a souvenir when he ran to the hospital after running away from the homeowner. A metal button on his jean jacked filled the hollowpoint, and between what *has* to have been a light load and the thick jean jacket, thick sweater under, and the button itself, slowed the round enough for him to get back up and run like hell. Cops didn't let him keep it and sent it to Federal: this is one time I'll have to side with a perp, he earned the right for that souvenir.