Quote:
Originally Posted by HorseSoldier
This doesn't really belong in a "really bad weapons" thread, as there was nothing wrong with the weapon itself -- which was a dramatic improvement in ergonomics and functionality over the Single Action Army. The problem was that the .38 caliber cartridge in question was extremely anemic -- loaded weaker than modern .380 ACP, which most experts either consider to be the bottom end for serious defensive/fighting pistol calibers.
Anyway, the Moro story is primarily myth -- at least the idea that the 1911 fixed the problem. There were lethality complaints concerning 30-40 Krag rounds as well, and if a full power rifle round couldn't get the job done no handgun round could. The 1911 is a great design (I carry one as a duty sidearm), but the Philippine Insurrection stories are enshrined legends rather than reality.
|
LOL...The Philippine Insurrection saw the replacement of the .38 revolver by the reissue of the old thumbbusters. To the best of my knowledge, no M1911 ever served in the Philippines until after the end of the Insurrection. So that famous print of a soldier shooting a Moro that hangs in the Army Heritage Museum is based on the popular myth, not reality.
The reason I added the M1895 pistol, is it failed the acid test of combat. In contrast, the M1894 Krag-Jorgensen was noted for several deficiencies that led to its replacement by the Mauser-based M-1903 Springfield rifle. But it was never considered to be a failed design.
I certainly don't consider myself to be the guru of military weapons, the weapons that I have added to the list are based on my research and are my personal opinion. I stand by my opinion of the Colt M1895 Revolver.