M9 over the 1911

Discussion in 'General Military Arms & History Forum' started by hogger129, Feb 25, 2010.

  1. hogger129

    hogger129 Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Messages:
    4,152
    Why exactly is it that the military switched to the M9 over the 1911? I have heard people say things like the 9x19 round was more accurate, when I have heard many experienced shooters say based on personal experience that the .45ACP round is far more accurate. Some say it was because of ammo capacity. Some say it was just an old design. I work with people who are former military and all of them say the 1911 was a better sidearm. They told me that the 9x19 is the least accurate round there is, that the Beretta's slides broke, that the Checkmate magazines the military switched to were poor quality, that the gun was just not a good design, the trigger pull was too heavy, that the gun is just too big, that they could not shoot the M9 accurately, or that they could shoot extremely accurately with old rattlebox Colt 1911s, that the grip is too big because it's a double-stack. I think alot of the negativity about the M9 came out when it was first introduced. Sort of like the M16A1 when the M16 was first introduced. I am a .45ACP/1911 man and I feel that the 1911 and .45ACP round - based on lots of information- are both better than the Beretta M9 or the 9x19 round, but I think the Beretta M9s have gotten better as the bugs were worked out over the years. What do you guys think? I want to hear it from someone who has had experience in shooting both guns.

    Also, what pistol do you think would be the best for a military sidearm? Pick anything and state your reasons why.
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2010
  2. Agentwil

    Agentwil New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    Messages:
    264
    When I came into the Border Patrol they had just switched from the S&W 686 to the Beretta Brigadier 96D. We all hated them; we called it the Italian Tomahawk. Beretta took a 9mm and made it into a 40 cal so it was prone to stress fractures and breaking. The Navy Seals have a saying, “You aren’t a seal unless you have been hit by Italian steal. They slide would fly off and hit you in the face. In the time I carried the Beretta I had three break on me. The trigger was horrible and the BP was always experimenting with new springs and parts to try and fix the deficiencies.
    I can just imagine the problems the military is having with their Berettas. I do think the military would have done better with an updated 1911.
  3. Alpo

    Alpo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2007
    Messages:
    11,200
    Location:
    NW Florida
    There were more women going into traditional men-soldier's roles, and "puny women can't handle that hard-kicking 45".

    45 only held 7 rounds, and that was just waaaaay too few for a truly defensive sidearm (don't forget, this was the age of the wonder-nine, among the cops)

    Single action was just too dang slow for a truly defensive sidearm, and cocked-and-locked was just too dangerous a way to carry a gun.. Double action for the first shot was NEEDED.

    And last but not least, we were the only ones using 45. In an emergency we would not be able to use ammo from our English/French/German/Whoever-the-hell allies. We NEEDED to switch to 9mm.

    Those were the main reasons. They were garbage then, and they are still garbage, but those were the main ones.
  4. RJay

    RJay Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    4,317
    Location:
    Goodyear, Arizona
    I agree that the military made a mistake when they switched from the 45ACP to the 9MM. In fact they should have never switched from the Single Action in 45 Colt to that new finagled, prone to breakage, 45 automatic. that they did. It's all political, that's why we did not stay with a proven 45-70 cartridge that had real knock down power..I really think it is a conspiracy to overthrow the freedom loving countries of the world. By the way , there was a very good write up about the Beretta M9 in the American Rifleman, of course if you're not a member of the NRA, well shame on you.:mad:
  5. Old Grump

    Old Grump New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2010
    Messages:
    2,320
    Location:
    Little hut in the woods near Blue River Wisconsin
    Women, fewer marksmen in the military exposed to handguns before the military and the old, 'if you can't hit them shoot more bullets at them', philosophy developed with the ramrodding of the M16 down our throats.
  6. wpage

    wpage Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,486
    The M9 over the venerable 1911. Gets blood pressures up on many a good man. The track record on the 1911 being 100 years now and going strong speaks volumes...
    The marketing department of Beretta Inc speaks somehow better to politicians and certain decision makers.
  7. islenos

    islenos New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2004
    Messages:
    1,244
    Location:
    West Texas
    It was a couple of factors

    The supply of M1911A1's were dang near all worn out.

    Women were gaining new roles in the military in which they needed a sidearm. The ol' .45 was just to big for their small hands.

    The M9 had a smaller grip and kicked less which worked well with the female and don't-ask-don't-tell males
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2010
  8. FTK87

    FTK87 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2009
    Messages:
    481
    Location:
    Chouteau, Oklahoma
    The main reason was the same to switch to a nato round. and the M9 are cheaper than the old 1911. It wouldn't have been my choice to switch, but the M9 has been performing its duties for close tyo 25 years now, I'd say its getting the job done.
  9. Old Grump

    Old Grump New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2010
    Messages:
    2,320
    Location:
    Little hut in the woods near Blue River Wisconsin
    Good thing the ammo is lighter, smaller and cheaper. You have to carry more of it to do what a single round of 45 caliber in 230 grains could do. Also easier for smaller weaker people to shoot it without having to put in as much range time, nothing but good.

    Where is that tongue in cheek smilie?
  10. wpage

    wpage Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,486
    :D:DYou said it grumps we need more women and gays in the service;)
    Maybe the luger will stage a comeback.
    John Wayne liked the 1911...
    The kid says Whos John Wayne?
  11. Trouble 45-70

    Trouble 45-70 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Messages:
    2,703
    Location:
    NE Ar. W. of Black River
    My #2 son didn't like the M9 while he was in the 25th ID. He had several break on him and the field fixes were not often effective. By the time he made 1st Sgt., he said the breakage rate was unacceptable among the troops.

    Italian tomahawk. I like that.

    Truth in advertising, I'm a wheel gun guy but for autos I would pick the 1911 and cartrige.
  12. jim brady

    jim brady Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,395
    Oh Boy - I'm gonna get jumped on big time for this. I went back on active duty for a little while in the early 1980s - when the change-over was made. Just about everybody here is at least a little right. More women in the military with smaller hands, and the fact that our NATO brethren used the 9mm as a standard.

    All of the issue .45s we had were old. They were reliable - maybe TOO reliable - so they were just plain getting old. From the comments I've read here, that won't be a problem with the M9.

    I have a 92FS (identical twin of the M9) and a 1943 Colt 1911A1. The Beretta is a good sidearm. I prefer the power of the .45ACP, but I carry the Beretta as a working sidearm. I have fired a couple thousand rounds thru it and it is a reliable weapon. The only real advantage of the Beretta over the Colt is that it is faster to get into firing configuration. But my .45 is still one of my favorites.
  13. FTK87

    FTK87 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2009
    Messages:
    481
    Location:
    Chouteau, Oklahoma
    What do you mean faster to get into firing configuration? My 1911 its drop the safety and go, don't get much quicker than that.
  14. jim brady

    jim brady Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,395
    Here's the 'jumping on' part I mentioned: With the beloved 1911A1, if it's carried "locked and cocked" (I don't like to carry it like that - and that was also against Army regulations as I recall), you are right - just dis-engage the safety and it's ready to go. With the Beretta, it can keep one in the chamber and just give that first one long squeeze on the trigger. That's what I meant by being faster to get into firing configuration. I'm sure the Regulations have been re-written over the years, but I think with the M-9 that it is now carried with one in the chamber.

    Just for information, I like the military M7 shoulder holster. On my farm I carry the Colt or the Beretta (or sometimes even the P-38) in it while tractoring or repairing the fence in those holsters. They are out of the way, protected, and always there if needed.

    I'm gonna put on a steel pot, duck down and get ready for getting nailed for this........
    Last edited: Mar 18, 2010
  15. Alpo

    Alpo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2007
    Messages:
    11,200
    Location:
    NW Florida
    The question was for military use, not civilian. Carrying a 1911 cocked and locked was forbidden, as far as I know, in our military. It was carried with a full mag, and hammer down on an empty chamber, so to put it into action, you must pull back the slide. Even in the field, you carried condition three. The Beretta is carried hammer down and a live round, right? Just point and pull. That is much quicker.
  16. FTK87

    FTK87 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2009
    Messages:
    481
    Location:
    Chouteau, Oklahoma
    I see, that way it is much quicker, I forgot all the political crap involved.
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
General Military Arms & History Forum tracing my 1944 remington rand 1911 a1 May 13, 2012
General Military Arms & History Forum 1911/.30 Cal Carbine paperwork Aug 21, 2011
General Military Arms & History Forum WW II Commemeratives .45 1911's Apr 29, 2009
General Military Arms & History Forum AH: need to know about first generation 1911 ACPs Oct 21, 2007
General Military Arms & History Forum Should we go back to the 1911? Sep 8, 2007

Share This Page