Home Main Category Personal Defense

Possible new life for 9mm

104RFAST104RFAST Senior MemberPosts: 1,281 Senior Member
http://bearingarms.com/caliber-will-army-choose-xm17-modular-handgun-system/?utm_source=BearingArms1_7&utm_medium=story&utm_campaign=BearingArms1

Looks like the Military my give the 9mm a second chance or develop a new 9x23 mm round. Gee, if they come out with a 9x23
(38 super) auto I may go broke,know what I mean!!

After posting I googled 9x23, to my surprise,I discover Winchester already manufactures a 9x23 round
that closely matches 357 performance. Aside from the double stack magazine the 9x23 would offer
it seems a 10mm would accomplish the same results
«1

Replies

  • HvyMaxHvyMax Senior Member Posts: 1,826 Senior Member
    38 Super has been around since the 30's. I can't imagine why it has not always been the go to round. Except for IPSC in the 80's I hardly ever see it.
    Wal Mart where the discriminating white trash shop.
    Paddle faster!!! I hear banjos.
    Reason for editing: correcting my auto correct
  • 104RFAST104RFAST Senior Member Posts: 1,281 Senior Member
    Like I said in my Thread, after surfing the net I discover the pistol/ammo in 9x23 already exist. However, with Pistol's going for $2000. + and ammo
    @$1.50 a round for SD, looks to me the 10mm is more affordable than I thought.Besides, the pictures of some Pistols make Glock's look slim
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 25,146 Senior Member
    Well, has anybody used 180 gr 9mm?
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    Article says military now freed to use Hollow Point ammo..........????? When did that happen or is that just for special Ops???? They don't issue it far as I know to regular troops. FMJ/Hardball is the norm.
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • Fat BillyFat Billy Senior Member Posts: 1,813 Senior Member
    The problem with the .40 is too much penetration which leads to collateral damage. The "new" 9mm ammo is very effective and doesn't have the over penetration issue. The 38 Super is a great round and is one of the few handgun ammos allowed on many countries where military calibers aren't allowed in private owned handguns. The 9mm +p has the same over penetration problem as the .40 and 357 mag. The new 9mm ammo is good if you tag 'em they stay tagged. :guns: Later,
    Fat Billy

    Recoil is how you know primer ignition is complete.
  • 104RFAST104RFAST Senior Member Posts: 1,281 Senior Member
    Big Chief wrote: »
    Article says military now freed to use Hollow Point ammo..........????? When did that happen or is that just for special Ops???? They don't issue it far as I know to regular troops. FMJ/Hardball is the norm.
    I believe they lifted the restriction on hand guns only
  • zorbazorba Senior Member Posts: 25,036 Senior Member
    9mm Largo and 9mm Steyr are 23mm long, among others:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9_mm_caliber
    -Zorba, "The Veiled Male"

    "If you get it and didn't work for it, someone else worked for it and didn't get it..."
    )O(
  • TugarTugar Senior Member Posts: 2,435 Senior Member
    Why not make some new loads for the .357 Sig which already exists? Seems like a good round, just needs a bit more variety.
    Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
    Winston Churchill
  • shushshush Senior Member Posts: 6,259 Senior Member
    104RFAST wrote: »
    Looks like the Military my give the 9mm a second chance or develop a new 9x23 mm round..........

    Why?

    I always thought, in the military, a pistol is not an assault weapon but a last ditch defence.

    If you allow yourself to be in a situation where you are in need of a .38 Super Trooper, you are carrying the wrong bang stick.
  • TugarTugar Senior Member Posts: 2,435 Senior Member
    Been looking at Ballistics between the .38 Super, 9x23mm, and .357 Sig. I don't see any advantages in not getting the .357 Sig over the others as the Sig round has the highest velocity AND a smaller length.
    Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
    Winston Churchill
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,887 Senior Member
    The SIG, like the .40 S&W, has a bit of a reputation for more rapid wear on firearms and higher recoil that's going to lead to longer training/harder qualification.

    The whole issue's likely a non-starter. Handguards are a distant secondary feature for most folks, and with lower budgets something like adopting a new rifle will likely take precedence.

    And the new rifle's been bandied about for .... how long?
    I'm just here for snark.
  • EliEli Senior Member Posts: 3,074 Senior Member
    The SIG, like the .40 S&W, has a bit of a reputation for more rapid wear on firearms and higher recoil that's going to lead to longer training/harder qualification.


    :that:


    The .357 sig, much like the .40 S&W, is a very pointless, and stupidly overpressured cartridge. One of the issues with "issuing" it is simply the wear and tear on a gun. The Beretta 92 is built like an absolute tank, every major part of it is over engineered and it is designed to put forth a lifetime of service (with regular maintenance).

    However, talk to 100 folks who've carried one into battle and 97 of them will tell you what an old, worn out, piece of $#!+ it is. Cracked frames, failures to eject/extract/feed, magazines that either won't feed ammo, or that jettisoned the floorplate and defecated all the rounds into the dirt, etc...

    Adopting a sidearm that runs at a HIGHER pressure than the 9mm is a seriously poor idea.
  • BAMAAKBAMAAK Senior Member Posts: 4,484 Senior Member
    Everyone I know that has carried a 92 (and this is an army town) loved the weapon and hated the round.
    "He only earns his freedom and his life Who takes them every day by storm."

    -- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, German writer and politician
  • KSU FirefighterKSU Firefighter Senior Member Posts: 3,249 Senior Member
    Comparing sidearms that have been "rode hard and put up wet" for several decades to the performance from a brand new one is never a good idea either. Worn out 1911's and worn out '92's both suffer from the same problem, they weren't replaced when they got used up.
    The fire service needs a "culture of extinguishment not safety" Ray McCormack FDNY
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,887 Senior Member
    The thing is, both platforms lasted a fairly long time before they were used up. A Sig or a Short and Weak may not give the handgun that sort of service life.
    I'm just here for snark.
  • TugarTugar Senior Member Posts: 2,435 Senior Member
    Having been a unit armorer, I have a rather more unique perspective. We had half dozen 1911's in our armory. Servicable but not much else. This was 1988 and the last time the US Army had purchased 1911's was around 1945.....so 43+ years of service took it's toll. Rare for one to go down. I will admit to drifting the Major's rear sight on purpose once.

    They would go bang and if you did your part, you could qualify. Not tack drivers to be sure.

    Personally, I think the 1911 is easier to hold than the M9. I'd like to see an improved model. Of course this would be sacriledge to some, but something like a .400 Corbon. Not a high pressure round. Ton's of velocity and easily swappable to .45acp. A para-ord model LDA.
    Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
    Winston Churchill
  • EliEli Senior Member Posts: 3,074 Senior Member
    Comparing sidearms that have been "rode hard and put up wet" for several decades to the performance from a brand new one is never a good idea either. Worn out 1911's and worn out '92's both suffer from the same problem, they weren't replaced when they got used up.

    I agree 100%.
    I was simply pointing out that the military is a "ride hard and put up wet" industry when it comes to tertiary tools. How many years did it take the low pressure 92s and 1911s to get f.u.b.a.r. vs how long it will take something running a much higher pressure cartridge to get to the same point?
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,428 Senior Member
    Didn't the early-issue 92's have a problem with launching the back half of the slide toward the shooter's face with some degree of regularity?
    Jerry
  • TugarTugar Senior Member Posts: 2,435 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    Didn't the early-issue 92's have a problem with launching the back half of the slide toward the shooter's face with some degree of regularity?
    Jerry

    From what I understand, it was a case of Navy SEALS using 9mm SMG only ammunition which is much hotter than normal 9mm Para.
    Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
    Winston Churchill
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 9,390 Senior Member
    Tugar wrote: »
    Having been a unit armorer, I have a rather more unique perspective. We had half dozen 1911's in our armory. Servicable but not much else. This was 1988 and the last time the US Army had purchased 1911's was around 1945.....so 43+ years of service took it's toll. Rare for one to go down. I will admit to drifting the Major's rear sight on purpose once.

    They would go bang and if you did your part, you could qualify. Not tack drivers to be sure.

    Personally, I think the 1911 is easier to hold than the M9. I'd like to see an improved model. Of course this would be sacriledge to some, but something like a .400 Corbon. Not a high pressure round. Ton's of velocity and easily swappable to .45acp. A para-ord model LDA.

    The answer here is really pretty simple - the 1911 in the original .45 ACP with a 185-ish grain flat-nosed FMJ running at 1100 or so FPS. Tissue disruption is retained by the flat nose, sufficient penetration and Hague compliance is maintained by the FMJ, weapon durability is maintained by the low pressure nature of the .45. Safety and sufficient capacity is maintained simply by not giving pistols to troops that can't shoot one.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • 104RFAST104RFAST Senior Member Posts: 1,281 Senior Member
    Tugar wrote: »
    From what I understand, it was a case of Navy SEALS using 9mm SMG only ammunition which is much hotter than normal 9mm Para.

    Special Opps types probably use what ever pistol/ammo combination they see fit to use. Wouldn't surprise me to find a some 10mm stuff
    being used from time to time.
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    The repair teams sent to Afghanistan I talked to located near me on the same compound said the 92s had issues and especially the ones fired a lot by the SFs types. Cracked slides. I don't know of any special 9mm ammo or subgun ammo besides standard NATO spec 9mm they were using.
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 25,146 Senior Member
    A lot of military pistols last a long time because they only get 40 rnds shot in them a year.
  • shushshush Senior Member Posts: 6,259 Senior Member
    NN wrote: »
    A lot of military pistols last a long time because they only get 40 rnds shot in them a year.

    :agree:

    In January 2013 the MoD swapped out our Browning L9A1, which had replaced Inglis variants in the late 1960's, for the Glock 17

    Before the Blue on Blue came along in Afghanistan, they did not get used over much.
  • DoctorWhoDoctorWho Senior Member Posts: 9,496 Senior Member
    Fat Billy wrote: »
    The problem with the .40 is too much penetration which leads to collateral damage. The "new" 9mm ammo is very effective and doesn't have the over penetration issue. The 38 Super is a great round and is one of the few handgun ammos allowed on many countries where military calibers aren't allowed in private owned handguns. The 9mm +p has the same over penetration problem as the .40 and 357 mag. The new 9mm ammo is good if you tag 'em they stay tagged. :guns: Later,

    Besides anecdotal evidence, where is the objective evidence that such a statement is fact ?
    Over penetration is over stated, know your target and what is beyond it !
    How do You shoot a rifle ?
    Any round may or may not over penetrate, depending on your target or if you miss the target completely.
    "There is some evil in all of us, Doctor, even you, the Valeyard is an amalgamation of the darker sides of your nature, somewhere between your twelfth and final incarnation, and I may say, you do not improve with age. Founding member of the G&A forum since 1996
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,887 Senior Member
    I really doubt that overpenetration is even an issue in the general military.
    I'm just here for snark.
  • Diver43Diver43 Senior Member Posts: 12,188 Senior Member
    I really doubt that overpenetration is even an issue in the general military.

    It never came up in the entire time that I was in
    Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,887 Senior Member
    Considering EVERYTHING is FMJ and most fighting is done with rifle ammo, saying one caliber is better/worse based on overpenetration potential is.... illogical.
    I'm just here for snark.
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 12,616 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    Didn't the early-issue 92's have a problem with launching the back half of the slide toward the shooter's face with some degree of regularity?
    Jerry

    Early on, if a bad guy grabbed hold of the pistol, he could push the right buttons and pull the slide forward and disasemble the pistol in one fast movement. I've seen it demonstrated at LE schools. But I think Beretta addressed this a long time ago.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 25,146 Senior Member
    Gene L wrote: »
    Early on, if a bad guy grabbed hold of the pistol, he could push the right buttons and pull the slide forward and disasemble the pistol in one fast movement. I've seen it demonstrated at LE schools. But I think Beretta addressed this a long time ago.
    The 92 clone I had was like that. push the barrel back a little and flip the take down lever and pull the slide off
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement