@@romanace3432 Yes, but the M&P9 M2.0 more than meets the requirements for military and LE use. There is no reason for the US military not to issue the M&P. It is far and away a better choice than the P320.
Too bad we can't say that with US soldiers. I hear they lowered their athletic standards to allow for more "lower tier" recruits. Guess beggars can't be choosers.
@ To the contrary, they PT test is more difficult; however, the program is more focused on social issues than operational readiness. Conventional troop ranks are pitiful.
BINGO!!! And as a result, Sig has fallen sharply. They have had more recalls and issues with more guns than all other top tier manufacturers combined since 2006. This is an irrefutable fact, yet there is no shortage of Sig fans ignorantly laughing at anyone who dares speak the truth.
@@oleboy7615 Wrong, S&W continues to lead the firearms industry in # of recalls issued. Just visit their recalls page. I love how misinformation spreads.
When I transitioned from a revolver to a semi-auto duty handgun in 1986, I chose the Beretta. Mine is the 92F. In 1990, I went into plainclothes work and chose a SIG P228 for my duty handgun, which I carried for the next 19 years. The Beretta was my 'backup' handgun, which I used for some duties, such as warrant service, etc. Both were great. I still have both. I have owned both for over 30 years, the Beretta for almost 40 years. Neither has malfunctioned with any ammo I used in them. I still shoot both of them frequently, but they are not my EDC choice. I chose the Beretta over the SIG P226 _because_ it had a manual safety, which I preferred for uniform duty (open) carry. For plainclothes work, (mostly concealed carry) I preferred the slightly smaller P228 and preferred that it had _no_ safety, decock only.
@@terrarecon I was in a very large city department, we also had to buy our own duty handguns from an approved roster. We were not allowed to carry semi-autos on duty until 1986. Until late 1991 new officers had a choice of revolver or semi-auto. After 1991, new officers could only carry semi-autos. Those of us hired before 1991 (I started in 1973) had the option to carry revolvers until we retired. I retired in 2009. By that time, very few officers still carried revolvers. I carried revolvers throughout my career as off duty handguns, and still have 2 revolvers in my concealed carry rotation.
I remember back in Desert Storm, when the USAF didn't have enough M9s to go around and had to issue M15 revolvers to pilots, we just flew back to Europe and bought Glocks. We also didn't adopt the M16A2 until the late 1990s when M193 ammo ran out. We knew our old Colt 604s were superior to the Army's M16A1 & the A2.
1911 is adopted: "ugh I want my revolver back." M9 is adopted: "ugh I want my 1911 back." M17/19 is adopted: "Ugh I just shot myself in the leg. And want my M9 back."
@@markanthonypar-wise1499 Sig fan boys to your comment/response: "tHe sIg hAs tHe m0dUlAr sYsteM! iT caN sH00t tHree fifTy 7, four-Dee N nine mini meter!".
He did another video on that, and it’s pretty good. The USA violated its own selection protocols to select the P320, but nothing to see here. The Army always picks the best gun available. 😂
I shot M9s quite a bit and they are great guns. Like the video states, I only saw problems with guns that were clearly worn out after decades of use. I do not care for the grip of the M9 but the M9a4 recontoured the frames and I am sure they would have preformed excellent.
3 дня назад+40
I'll go to my grave firmly believing that someone was bought off is why the Sig Sauer P320 was chosen over the Beretta M9.
John McCain. He went in and said we didnt need to do any high round durability testing and claimed it was a waste of money and time. The xm17 wasn’t completed and Glock tried to sue but got shut out. John McCain got paid
Another superb quality show with rich content as usual. Sincere thank you Chris. Been a fan since I was an NFA dealer from 2007-2013, had your books, but customers bought them from me when they saw me reading them with much enthusiasm.
Great Video! Both the M9 and the Sig P226 are excellent firearms! Both incredibly reliable and if properly maintained will continue to function as intended. These things are tanks .
@@jeffersondaviszombie2734 "coruption" possibly but the primary reason is whatever the Military/Federal Government orders Law Enforcement/Civilian market buys. This is why companies sell Military/Federal Government for $175. & Civilians pay $600. or more for the same product, just look at the price for the Magazines, $9 to $11.00 compared to $30 or more for Civilian market.
Lowest bidder. If an agency wants a new pistol, and SIG meets their requirements and gives them the best bid, it's pretty hard to convince the book keepers to let them pick something else instead.
Fact is, folks need to see that government is supposed to be a responsible steward of the tax dollars you pay. Also, remember, that in a military sense, a sidearm not only is not a secondary weapon, it is almost always tertiary...a weapon of desperation much like an e-tool or K-bar. Even as an NCO (USMC; mortars) I kept my sidearm in a plastic baggie and always, and I mean always, carried my M16 though I didn't "have to." In law enforcement it's different. The sidearm is primary, odds are that when you get involved in a shooting, it'll be with your sidearm. Having had careers in both, my first concern with a personal weapon was not the "finer points" but will it function in every condition that I can function in?
Love these deep dive types of videos on military procurement. The 80’s action movie fan in me loves the M9 but if I personally had to choose one, it would be the 226.
Largely thanks to your channel I’m probably going to buy an M-9A4 once the gun market crashes a little bit more. When the time came years back about a CZ 75 instead. Just to clarify no regrets in that choice
Great take on the XM9 Program! Thanks! The first pistol I ever bought was in 1986, and it was a Barretta Model 92F (M9). I still have that pistol, and if something goes bump in the night, it continues to be my go-to pistol. It was good enough for Bruce Willis in “Die Hard”, and it’s good enough for me. 😂
Looking for a new rifle platform. Air force is first to push for the AR15. Looking for a 9x19 handgun. Air force is already eying up the M92. I think the ordinance core should be the air force's responsibility at this point.
Brings to mind...even a broken clock is correct twice a day. No thanks. Not that I have so much faith in the US Army on making the choice, it's that relying on the USAF for the best infantry or ground combat arms weapon is essentially just hoping to get lucky.
@@donwyoming1936remember two things..."substitute" and that procurement with an eye for non-combat arms personnel in very limited quantities is VERY different than selecting a weapon that'll work for a Marine at -40f while visiting Norway or a GI under the muck at Jungle Warfare School. Why stop at small arms? Why not have the USAF select warships and landing craft too? Maybe they'll get lucky there also.
I remember the stories here on Holland about how bad the beretta was and that it broke all the time. The 92 had a bad reputation in the late 1990's here, caused by the stories from the US
That's because of 2 reasons. One, they didn't regularly clean and maintain their M9s and let them get beat up. Two, the ones the military got were of a lower quality standard than the commercial variants.
Thank you for this. I knew a lot of it but not a few of those finer details. It makes a lot more sense now. Especially the +P+ issue. Thanks for the video. M9/92FS best and coolest looking handgun probably of all time imo.
This was very well presented. I recently had a chance to handle and shoot a new commercial beretta 92 and loved it. It was smoother and had better balance than I remembered the older pistols to be. I'd own one again if I could afford one, but my budget is tight again thanks to Bidenomics.
I was stationed at Roosevelt roads, PR from 1986-8. Used to have SEALS come thru. They had the S&W 9 mm guns, they hated them due to breakage of slide and frame, believe this maintenance info was used in court cases. The Barrettes had been stress tested by Conn State troopers, they found problems and improved. After they were purchased and several other states went with them, believe this helped getting the contract. Several other changes had been made, but with these contracts, manufacturering was moved to US sooner then originally planned. A small portion would be assembled here til factory built.
None of these guns were built to take the punishment of +P+ ammo, so a lot of problems related to firearms failure can be traced back to ammo selection, not the gun itself. That particular S&W has been used by numerous military and LE agencies all over the world with no issues. Use proper ammo. Funny how that works.
@chrisragone8785 no they were S&w, bought outside of regular procurement, aluminum and steel, the slide would come back and slice top of arm. The SEALS were used to it occurring.
My guess was inconsistency in metallurgy of aluminum alloys back in those days, especially ones which were machined. The beretta had an advantage because the locking block would translate a lot of the force which could be imparted against the frame into rotational force, whereas the sig and S&W would have almost all of the force go straight into the takedown pin and thus the frame at potentially a weakened point. That’s what SIG and S&W get for not inspecting their trials examples throughly enough. Mistakes can happen.
@@FirstLast-ff7qx well now it’s just my best guess, I don’t really know for certain… only people working at smith and Wesson or SIG back in those years who were involved would know for sure. Hopefully that story comes out one day, from both sides.
I like Sig, but not a huge fan of the P320, especially as a "duty" tool with the many issues noted. I like the P229/P226 line. The original use M9's were very well built, but for me they are too grip chunky. The M9A4 is one of my favs with the Vertx style grip. I hope to pick up a LTT version some day.
IIRC the P226 was using scalloped frame rails at the time that accelerated the frame cracks, especially the SEALs guns. You’re not a real SEAL until you’ve eaten Italian steel.
The new SIG 320-ish.... it has full modularity that will be ignored because each unit will order it, configure every pistol to one standard configuration, and then put all the extra parts on a shelf never to be seen again. All for a pistol that doesn't work right. Wonder how many officers got golden parachutes to ram that through. I was a fan of the M9A3, myself.
Where do you get your information, the military has been ordering the small and large grip modules for the M17/M18 for years. It's even a cheap route to go, if a frame cracks or gets abused so badly on a traditional pistol like the M9 or even a Glock, the gun is scrapped, if the same thing happens to a P320, a $40 grip module fixes the issue.
@@great_deception ordering VS using are two different things. They ORDERED alot of left and right M16a1 handgaurds, but somehow i can still find cases of left handgaurds that have not been made since the late 70s at surplus auctions but right handgaurds are hens teeth
@ it’s needlessly big and heavy. You’re torturing yourself hauling that thing around. It’s 2024 not 1985. Did you walk barefoot to school uphill both ways?
19x would have probably been the safest bet for an upgrade. Glock has been widely proven reliable for decades. Given the gov was offered the M9A3 for the same contract price as the original M9, that was their best option.
One thing I never liked about the Beretta when shooting them in the Coast Guard was the slide mounted safety. I picked up a SIG 226 at a gun show and liked the frame mounted decocker a lot better. The CG later switched to a SIG but it was double action only, which I also disliked. I think the SEALs went the the better pistol.
After all said and done, the Glock, as little I like them, has proven more durable, reliable, with half the number of parts used, and more than suggests that IT remains the most proven concept over fifty years.
Great video Chris! Personally I always preferred the Beretta 92S with it's frame mounted safety like my 1911's. The Taurus PT99 with it's frame safety and magazine at the trigger guard instead of on the heel was a real Home Run. I've owned them since the 1980's and All of them have been running with no problems or failures. Just spring replacement's so far. Keep up the good work Chris.
I use a Langdon Tactical 92G RDO for limited optics and a Girsan Regard (Turkish 92G clone) for production, but I carry a SIG 226 in .40 S&W when I’m in bear/mountain lion territory hunting, fishing, camping, etc. In other words, the 92 shoots great, but I trust my P226 more and the decocker placement and blocky slide make clearing malfunctions and avoiding malfunctions easier than the open top slide with slide-mounted safety that the 92 features.
Changing from Beretta to any other 9mm was pointless except for making it more simpleton to operate and cheaper. Since mere mortals can't buy thousands of guns and could, at some point, have to pick only one to last them their lifetime I will take the M9 or 226 and you can keep the plastic stuff (even though I have those too). YMMV.
I have always hated the feel of the Beretta and never had any enthusiasm for its exposed trigger bar. However the trajectory of Sig-USA in its race to the bottom may prove the Beretta a better choice.
We had bad reliability with the M9, until they updated the ammo. It had more stopages than my clapped out ithaca 1911 during familiarization and subsequent qualification. It was a big let down for us. As MPs we were never allowed to carry with mags in the weapon in USAREUR, so it didnt matter much anyway . It would have been the pretty pistol that stayed in the holster as we got dusted .
My first pistol was a 92FS that I bought post Desert Shield/Storm in 1991. I still own it, and have no idea how many rounds I've put through it. With the exception of a crap off brand "high capacity" magazine I bought (that I ended up throwing away), it' been 100% reliable. I might end up wanting that pistol to be buried with me. PS: I'd love it if the US Military ended up with a M9 variant based on a 92G Centurion Vertec (with the exchangeable grip).
I absolutely agree that the US should use domestic produced firearms. The best part about our country however is that nowadays, we will use non-domestically produced equipment. The fact that we can make everything here, but sometimes find something better in a NATO country has allowed us to use very effective equipment.
I have to say that was an outstanding discussion on the two pistols that were involved in the trials back then. I agree, I really wish they had gone with the upgraded pistol As a way to save so much money It's not even funny.
*The Beretta is by no means a bad gun, if anything it’s equal to the Sig.* *But one must remember that prior to taking cost into consideration the Sig was in the lead pointwise. Beretta gave the Army an offer they couldn’t refuse.* *So for all intents and purposes the TESTING, as in all things the Army did BEFORE the price was brought up, suggested that the Sig was the better gun FOR THEIR NEEDS.* *Not to mention the SEALS got the Sig. And the SEALS budget is basically unlimited.*
Thats not how it worked. Sig was no more less better for the Army needs. The testing drones not show this anywhere. The testing showed both pistols met and exceeded the requirements. The pricing on the guns, Beretta was more expensive. The magazine and spare parts package is what decided the final winner by saving the government over $3mil. You totally dont get this process. You dont get the testing results either. The Army got a pistol they met and far exceeded their needs. The Army would have done well either way they tests and final bidding could have fallen.
@@chairzombie8378 Both guns far exceeded the requirements set. Both are excellent guns. But if we only look at the score we see that with all the PRACTIAL testing done the Sig was in the lead. That's why i specified FOR THEIR NEEDS. I don't know the EXACT MINUTE detials of how these test were preformed but if the Army's scoring says "Sig is in the lead" then Sig is in the lead. There is not much to it. The price for the packaged deal with magazines and spare parts is what gave the win to Beretta as was said in this video. I don't see how you can get away from this video thinking anything else. The SEALS used the P226 becauce they were afraid of cracking slides on the Beretta. These cracks were becauce they shot ammo that was too hot.
While I was a Marksmanship instructor at Stone Bay NC rifle range USMC. Secretary of the Navy Ball came to SB to fire/check out the M9 when they reopened competition, in the late 80s. I gave him a class on the XM4 rifle and the M16A1, A2, To show the differences. I’m not sure if we had any effect on out comes. He was a good student and attentive.
Having used both, both are good pistols. The Sig feels better, I can't explain exactly why, but the Beretta felt fine. The S&W lost because they simply didn't know how to make a decent semi-auto in the 80s. Back to the winners, both work very well. The Sig simply looks and feels cooler. Having also used Glocks extensively, I would put them in the middle of the other two. I would not hesitate to carry any of them into a gunfight. The Border Patrol has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Beretta is combat capable.
For me, the biggest problem with the 92FS/M9 was that the grip/length of pull was insanely big. We'd had 1911s in my unit, and I was able to use it effectively and it fit me remarkably well. For the M9, the grip width was just stupidly wide, and the length of pull on top of that made it virtually impossible for me to shoot effectively. I understand what you're saying about the M17 (I have a Sig P320 that I wouldn't DARE carry). But leaving out the M17's autostart issues, the concept of allowing a soldier with large (or small) hands to swap the grip for something that fit better? Yeah.. I'd have been up for that in the M9.
An LAPD officer was able to shoot a charging knife suspect with his Beretta 92 F in 2024. Just to prove that those officers who were issued the Beretta are still using them. I know the original 147 grain hollowpoint ammunition had a terrible reputation for over penetration. An LA County Sheriff Deputy shot a robbery suspect and the bullet went through the bad guy and through the glass striking the store employee killing him. The longer barrel of the Beretta pistol is optional for most 9mm ammunition.
When it comes to the m17 and p320's we know they're perfectly safe as they were upgraded many years ago now to receive the lighter trigger package so that when being dropped at a -30 degree angle on the back of the pistol they don't discharge due to the momentum of these parts. It's a well known fact that even before this it passed all of the drop test safety testing because that specific drop angle is not in any standard drop test anywhere both the m17 and p320 passed all of the standard drop test because of this. Which is why this issue was not found until later. For the holster discharges as far as I know there has not been a single case where it was not a user error aka not putting on the safety and not keeping your finger off the trigger. Also it's important to look at the most basic and obvious fact when we look at m9 and it's derivatives vs m17/18/p320 almost no one's adopting m9 and it's derivatives, not just the military but police and citizens too, m9's simply aren't nearly as popular anywhere. Plus to add it all up when we do see m9a3 vs m17 reviews and differences we can see each handgun has it's pros and cons but honestly the main factor of which is better is personal preference but with all of them noting how many more options there are for the P320 series pistols in terms of customizations. Also from what I understand most people really don't like how optics mount onto m9's which certainly hurts it's modularity score especially with the military buying the very well fitting Romeo m17's making the m9’s sight mounting system look dumb.
I've always been a 226 fan, never cared for 92 until I actually fired it. I'm a fan now. I've generaly been wrong about Beretta pistols. I've learn my lesson.
The M9 was in service throughout my entire career. I first qualified with it in as a LCpl in 1994 and continued to do so until I retired in 2012. I never experienced any failures that were pistol related. A couple stove pipes here and there. And I had one once that from time to time fire a 2 rnd burst. Which once you got used to worked great for the 2 shot drills at 7 yds in the USMC Pistol Qualification. These were all issued pistols from the armory that were used and abused hard by Marines. Hard to tell how old they were. I know some of them were damn near silver from the finish being nearly worn off. Id love to have the newer M9A4 but the price is ridiculous compared to the M18.
Regarding the Beretta slide failures. Richard Marcinco said in his book Rouge Warrior that it was Seal Team 6 that had the slide failures because they were running 90,000 rounds a year through them and they were using the same Hirtenburger 9mm SMG ammo in their MP-5's. He said that after the failure's Beretta basically supplied them with Custom built gun's for replacement's.
Beretta designed the Brigadier slide around 1994, long after the SEAL problem. There is no record of the SEAL teams ever getting that slide. Phobis created a slide as well designed for SMG ammo but never went into production. It’s interesting, but according to Beretta, they never made a COTS slide for the US govt.
@SmallArmsSolutions all of the replacement slides that I have seen were made by US government Sub contractors not Beretta. Neither my Beretta 92's or Taurus PT99 have shown any signs of cracking slides or locking blocks. But there again I replace my springs when they start to get weak with High Quality premium American made springs. I'm currently trying to wear out Wilson Combat springs in two of my 1911's and it's going to take a while.
About 20-25 years ago I bought a lot of surplus at a auction and in that lot was 24 M-9 slides in the USGI Wrapping and the only marks were on the right side of the slide. It was a Assembly #. They were not Beretta manufactured slides. I took a few around to every Gun shop and Gun Smith in Central Texas and nobody knew who made them but everyone agreed that it wasn't Beretta. I ended up selling them at the Gun Show in Austin for $100 each. I should have kept at least one just for curiosity.
Ya, I agree. Because Beretta could have sued the government for violating the license agreement on that. The cage code would have told everything. Perhaps the parts were bought, caught and got out of the government system before they were found.
I made a mistake of using my Beretta to test reloads. Turns out it will eat and spit out anything bad or not. Ended up with several thousands rounds that only worked in that gun.
It's been rumored that the USA went with the Berretta as a political deal where Italy would USA's allow nuclear weapons to be stored/transported through Italy. Back end deals like that often don't get written down to history though. Out of the four choices, it was easily the best choice at the time. But a question arises as to what other pistols should have been submitted for testing at the time?
Where can information on the M17/18 failures be found. I have looked all over the internet and have not found anything. Is this a case of the Govt hiding info or is it just that hard to find?
If I remember correctly, the Beretta had some issues with Suppressors being used those and causing the same type breakage. Maybe their answer was switching to the Brigadier slide.
@SmallArmsSolutions 20:27 Absolutely true. I served as an S-4 officer in the Marines and the armory fell under my responsibility. I can attest that the lack of preventive maintenance claims at the armorers level are true. Springs and the like were not replaced on a regular basis in either the weapons or magazines. Round counts were not even kept. The weapons would be fixed when they broke. The Beretta was a great pistol. The Marines failed Beretta and not vice versa. We should have adopted the M9A3.
How can you make the case to adopt a metal framed, hammer fired DA/SA 92 as the best choice for our troops in the 2020s over anything from H&K, Glock, or Sig Sauer? Usage and adoption of the 92 floundered these past few years for many reasons. Their peak was a long time ago.
@@great_deception Very easily. First, there is nothing wrong with a DA/SA system on a weapon. For military use it should be preferred simply because it is safer. Carrying a gun in the civilian world is far different from in the military. Second, the supply and logistics chains were already established. They were up and running. We had parts from the previous M9 that were interchangeable with the M9A3. Why would anyone want to just throw that away? Third, there would be no need to rewrite the operation and training curriculum for the weapon. It was already in place. The amount of taxpayer money that could have been saved was substantial. The U.S. military made a bad choice, and I am sure it had more to do with K street than sound judgment.
This is about the 1985 XM9 trials, not the XM17. As far as the XM17 program, if they were staying with a 9mm pistol, none of the current ones offer suck an increase in capability that the M9/A1/A3/A4 could not do. You would be able to use a majority of parts already in inventory and update existing pistols. Unfortuanly, the XM17 program was a colossal failure resulting in a new pistol which would not even be as good as what it replaced let alone better.
@@DV8-q6n Never said anything was wrong with DA/SA. I have DA/SA and striker designs and enjoy all of them. Careful with your definition of safer, because now some people will say a manual safety is safer, and now someone will jump in and say carrying without 1 in the chamber is safer. Safety is 99% user-based, I wouldn't depend on a firearms operating system to define safety of a weapon. As far as continuing with the same weapon system as a cost saving or logistics argument, then we can easily make that argument for continuing with the 1911 design for over 100 years, but obviously we moved on in search of better weapons. Perfect example is SOCOM's Glock adoption beginning way back in the 90s. Pistol procurement is cheap compared to our jet contracts, missile systems, and all the weapons going to Israel, so I wouldn't worry too much about the costs on pistol procurement.
@@great_deception You are conflating civilian carry with military carry. They are very different things. A manual safety is absolutely necessary for a standard service pistol. I'm not talking about SOCOM or any other special operations group. Those are a different beast. I'm talking about a pistol that the average Marine carries. A manual safety is a must for these people. Not because they are incompetent but because the 99% user based safety you speak of gets easily compromised when you have a hundred pounds on your back and walk 20+ miles a day and are in firefights and then have fire watch. It's called being infantry tired and if you haven't lived it you wouldn't understand but trust me a manual safety is essential. Pistol procurement is also not cheap, and a taxpayer penny saved is efficient government. That is how government should be. You don't justify wasting tax dollars by saying we spend more on other things so why not waste money on this.
I agree with this quote you said “I think we should use American guns if they meet the requirements we shouldn’t lower the standards”
@@romanace3432 Yes, but the M&P9 M2.0 more than meets the requirements for military and LE use. There is no reason for the US military not to issue the M&P. It is far and away a better choice than the P320.
Too bad we can't say that with US soldiers. I hear they lowered their athletic standards to allow for more "lower tier" recruits. Guess beggars can't be choosers.
@ To the contrary, they PT test is more difficult; however, the program is more focused on social issues than operational readiness. Conventional troop ranks are pitiful.
The current CEO of Sig was previously the CEO of kimber during it’s worst years of quality control.
That's the (((Cohen))) way. Low cost, high mark up!
BINGO!!! And as a result, Sig has fallen sharply. They have had more recalls and issues with more guns than all other top tier manufacturers combined since 2006. This is an irrefutable fact, yet there is no shortage of Sig fans ignorantly laughing at anyone who dares speak the truth.
@@oleboy7615 Wrong, S&W continues to lead the firearms industry in # of recalls issued. Just visit their recalls page. I love how misinformation spreads.
if it is not a 226 series ... the rest are crap
@@xusmico187 Even the classic P series guns produced today have Sig outsourced MIM parts, and bc of this are suspect.
When I transitioned from a revolver to a semi-auto duty handgun in 1986, I chose the Beretta. Mine is the 92F. In 1990, I went into plainclothes work and chose a SIG P228 for my duty handgun, which I carried for the next 19 years. The Beretta was my 'backup' handgun, which I used for some duties, such as warrant service, etc.
Both were great. I still have both. I have owned both for over 30 years, the Beretta for almost 40 years. Neither has malfunctioned with any ammo I used in them. I still shoot both of them frequently, but they are not my EDC choice.
I chose the Beretta over the SIG P226 _because_ it had a manual safety, which I preferred for uniform duty (open) carry. For plainclothes work, (mostly concealed carry) I preferred the slightly smaller P228 and preferred that it had _no_ safety, decock only.
When I was an LEO of a smaller dept we had to provide our own side arm. I also selected the Berretta 92FS in the 90's. I still have it to this day.
@@terrarecon I was in a very large city department, we also had to buy our own duty handguns from an approved roster.
We were not allowed to carry semi-autos on duty until 1986. Until late 1991 new officers had a choice of revolver or semi-auto. After 1991, new officers could only carry semi-autos.
Those of us hired before 1991 (I started in 1973) had the option to carry revolvers until we retired.
I retired in 2009. By that time, very few officers still carried revolvers.
I carried revolvers throughout my career as off duty handguns, and still have 2 revolvers in my concealed carry rotation.
Its wierd how the Air Force always seems to make the right decisions regarding Small Arms while Big Army/Marines get it wrong more often than right.
ARMY has that mindset that they can save more by buying a bundle of cheap firearms rather than quality but expensive firearms
Air Force can afford to think creatively with small arms. They purchase relatively small numbers and small arms are not integral to their operations.
I remember back in Desert Storm, when the USAF didn't have enough M9s to go around and had to issue M15 revolvers to pilots, we just flew back to Europe and bought Glocks.
We also didn't adopt the M16A2 until the late 1990s when M193 ammo ran out. We knew our old Colt 604s were superior to the Army's M16A1 & the A2.
I disagree that the xm9 test were done right the sig 226 is better but not expensive.
Air Force has higher mean IQ than the others
1911 is adopted: "ugh I want my revolver back."
M9 is adopted: "ugh I want my 1911 back."
M17/19 is adopted: "Ugh I just shot myself in the leg. And want my M9 back."
😂😂😂😂
😅😅 pretty much. Or they could have gotten with glock or Beretta's entry with the new pistol program
@markanthonypar-wise1499 i bought an a3 and it's like a work of art
@@markanthonypar-wise1499 Sig fan boys to your comment/response:
"tHe sIg hAs tHe m0dUlAr sYsteM! iT caN sH00t tHree fifTy 7, four-Dee N nine mini meter!".
@@wizard_of_poz4413 nice 👍. I've got the Beretta 92a1 love it.
By far the best and only credible video on this topic.... Not sure the most recent selection of the Sig 320 was nearly as clear as this selection...
He did another video on that, and it’s pretty good. The USA violated its own selection protocols to select the P320, but nothing to see here. The Army always picks the best gun available. 😂
@ Do you really believe that?
"trigger of a stanley staple gun" lmao😂
Came here for this 🥰🤣
As the owner of a VP70, that is an insult to staple guns.
M9 saved my life in the War I bought one for home defence right after I got out…
Oh wow? What happened? If you don't mind saying?
@@markanthonypar-wise1499 Ran out of Ammo and had to use my pistol (I had 2 extra clips for that!). Bad guy walked right out of an abandoned building!
@@TheSpritz0 did you shoot him or did he leave once seeing your pistol?
These are my absolute favorite videos from you Chris. Thanks for these!
I’d love to see the M9A4 go up against the Sig p320, Glock and Smith and Wesson in the same type of trials.
@@secretsquirrel3711 now that would be entertaining for sure! I would watch that on Sports Center any day.
I shot M9s quite a bit and they are great guns. Like the video states, I only saw problems with guns that were clearly worn out after decades of use. I do not care for the grip of the M9 but the M9a4 recontoured the frames and I am sure they would have preformed excellent.
I'll go to my grave firmly believing that someone was bought off is why the Sig Sauer P320 was chosen over the Beretta M9.
It's very likely, one of the generals involved in the MHS trials joined the SIG board of directors right after the 320 was formally adopted.
John McCain. He went in and said we didnt need to do any high round durability testing and claimed it was a waste of money and time. The xm17 wasn’t completed and Glock tried to sue but got shut out. John McCain got paid
neither the glock or the sig met the requirement. should have been cancelled.
Another superb quality show with rich content as usual. Sincere thank you Chris. Been a fan since I was an NFA dealer from 2007-2013, had your books, but customers bought them from me when they saw me reading them with much enthusiasm.
Great Video! Both the M9 and the Sig P226 are excellent firearms! Both incredibly reliable and if properly maintained will continue to function as intended. These things are tanks .
Agreed.
Yup. You would think they would come to the same conclusion especially since it malfunctioned the Beretta and Sig 226.
West German girls were hot.
totally random comment...but I like it!
@@michaelclausen9331 P226 100% w/German in the day.
Were?
The Sig fiasco extends to LEO as well. It's beyond me why the Sig 320 is awarded so many govt. contracts.
Corruption
@@jeffersondaviszombie2734 "coruption" possibly but the primary reason is whatever the Military/Federal Government orders Law Enforcement/Civilian market buys. This is why companies sell Military/Federal Government for $175. & Civilians pay $600. or more for the same product, just look at the price for the Magazines, $9 to $11.00 compared to $30 or more for Civilian market.
(((Cohen))) people type corruption
Lowest bidder. If an agency wants a new pistol, and SIG meets their requirements and gives them the best bid, it's pretty hard to convince the book keepers to let them pick something else instead.
@DK-gy7ll that's what they want you to think.
Dude, you make the best gun videos I've ever seen, thanks
I was issued both the Beretta & Sig during my career. Neither ever failed me. I really enjoy hearing how indepth the testing was.
Fact is, folks need to see that government is supposed to be a responsible steward of the tax dollars you pay.
Also, remember, that in a military sense, a sidearm not only is not a secondary weapon, it is almost always tertiary...a weapon of desperation much like an e-tool or K-bar. Even as an NCO (USMC; mortars) I kept my sidearm in a plastic baggie and always, and I mean always, carried my M16 though I didn't "have to."
In law enforcement it's different. The sidearm is primary, odds are that when you get involved in a shooting, it'll be with your sidearm.
Having had careers in both, my first concern with a personal weapon was not the "finer points" but will it function in every condition that I can function in?
Love these deep dive types of videos on military procurement.
The 80’s action movie fan in me loves the M9 but if I personally had to choose one, it would be the 226.
Largely thanks to your channel I’m probably going to buy an M-9A4 once the gun market crashes a little bit more. When the time came years back about a CZ 75 instead. Just to clarify no regrets in that choice
Great take on the XM9 Program! Thanks! The first pistol I ever bought was in 1986, and it was a Barretta Model 92F (M9). I still have that pistol, and if something goes bump in the night, it continues to be my go-to pistol. It was good enough for Bruce Willis in “Die Hard”, and it’s good enough for me. 😂
Looking for a new rifle platform. Air force is first to push for the AR15.
Looking for a 9x19 handgun. Air force is already eying up the M92.
I think the ordinance core should be the air force's responsibility at this point.
💯 I've been saying this for years. The USAF was also the 1st to adopt the Glock 19 as a substitute standard in 1991.
Brings to mind...even a broken clock is correct twice a day.
No thanks. Not that I have so much faith in the US Army on making the choice, it's that relying on the USAF for the best infantry or ground combat arms weapon is essentially just hoping to get lucky.
Real
@@donwyoming1936remember two things..."substitute" and that procurement with an eye for non-combat arms personnel in very limited quantities is VERY different than selecting a weapon that'll work for a Marine at -40f while visiting Norway or a GI under the muck at Jungle Warfare School.
Why stop at small arms? Why not have the USAF select warships and landing craft too? Maybe they'll get lucky there also.
@@JD-tn5lz Check out how serious the Air Force takes Air Base Defense and protection of assets.
I remember the stories here on Holland about how bad the beretta was and that it broke all the time. The 92 had a bad reputation in the late 1990's here, caused by the stories from the US
Funny how we're seeing the same thing with the P320 now...
@@GrumpyNCO Not really the P320 problems were known way before the Army selected it.
@Andrew_NJ so did the beretta
That's because of 2 reasons. One, they didn't regularly clean and maintain their M9s and let them get beat up. Two, the ones the military got were of a lower quality standard than the commercial variants.
@@dogwoodhillbilly They got cheapo mags and they were beat to shit
Fantastic, really enjoyed , love them both. Thanks
I always liked the p226 more
Thank you for this. I knew a lot of it but not a few of those finer details. It makes a lot more sense now. Especially the +P+ issue. Thanks for the video. M9/92FS best and coolest looking handgun probably of all time imo.
This was very well presented. I recently had a chance to handle and shoot a new commercial beretta 92 and loved it. It was smoother and had better balance than I remembered the older pistols to be. I'd own one again if I could afford one, but my budget is tight again thanks to Bidenomics.
I was stationed at Roosevelt roads, PR from 1986-8. Used to have SEALS come thru. They had the S&W 9 mm guns, they hated them due to breakage of slide and frame, believe this maintenance info was used in court cases. The Barrettes had been stress tested by Conn State troopers, they found problems and improved. After they were purchased and several other states went with them, believe this helped getting the contract. Several other changes had been made, but with these contracts, manufacturering was moved to US sooner then originally planned. A small portion would be assembled here til factory built.
None of these guns were built to take the punishment of +P+ ammo, so a lot of problems related to firearms failure can be traced back to ammo selection, not the gun itself. That particular S&W has been used by numerous military and LE agencies all over the world with no issues. Use proper ammo. Funny how that works.
BERETTA
@chrisragone8785 no they were S&w, bought outside of regular procurement, aluminum and steel, the slide would come back and slice top of arm. The SEALS were used to it occurring.
The frame and slide breakage at a very low round count on a bunch of those pistols is a head scratcher.
My guess was inconsistency in metallurgy of aluminum alloys back in those days, especially ones which were machined. The beretta had an advantage because the locking block would translate a lot of the force which could be imparted against the frame into rotational force, whereas the sig and S&W would have almost all of the force go straight into the takedown pin and thus the frame at potentially a weakened point. That’s what SIG and S&W get for not inspecting their trials examples throughly enough. Mistakes can happen.
@ChristopherGoydich-cb6bd thats wild they didnt have quality assurance down before goin for a military contract.
@@FirstLast-ff7qx well now it’s just my best guess, I don’t really know for certain… only people working at smith and Wesson or SIG back in those years who were involved would know for sure. Hopefully that story comes out one day, from both sides.
@@ChristopherGoydich-cb6bd id love to see it. Im a nerd for that type of stuff.
OG
Facts base only channel.
My two favorite handguns, the Sig P226/229, and the Beretta 92X. My favorite carry gun is my Sig P229 Legion.
I like Sig, but not a huge fan of the P320, especially as a "duty" tool with the many issues noted. I like the P229/P226 line. The original use M9's were very well built, but for me they are too grip chunky. The M9A4 is one of my favs with the Vertx style grip. I hope to pick up a LTT version some day.
I have subbed to Small Arms Solutions for 8 years. I still don't get notifications when new vids drop. Bell clicked. Great stuff per usual CB.
I've always loved the M9, but this channel setting the record straight is what made it my all time favorite pistol.
IIRC the P226 was using scalloped frame rails at the time that accelerated the frame cracks, especially the SEALs guns. You’re not a real SEAL until you’ve eaten Italian steel.
Thank you very much we love all of em
The German Bundeswehr also cracked their slides of the strong build USP "P8". They used very hot over pressure loads that were designed for MP usage.
The new SIG 320-ish.... it has full modularity that will be ignored because each unit will order it, configure every pistol to one standard configuration, and then put all the extra parts on a shelf never to be seen again. All for a pistol that doesn't work right. Wonder how many officers got golden parachutes to ram that through. I was a fan of the M9A3, myself.
Where do you get your information, the military has been ordering the small and large grip modules for the M17/M18 for years. It's even a cheap route to go, if a frame cracks or gets abused so badly on a traditional pistol like the M9 or even a Glock, the gun is scrapped, if the same thing happens to a P320, a $40 grip module fixes the issue.
@@great_deception Easy. I was an 0311. I know exactly how this works.
@@lowellhouser7731 Then you should know....
@@great_deception ordering VS using are two different things.
They ORDERED alot of left and right M16a1 handgaurds, but somehow i can still find cases of left handgaurds that have not been made since the late 70s at surplus auctions but right handgaurds are hens teeth
The M9A1 is my CCW choice everyday to protect my family and myself. I can listen to the history of the 92FS all day. Thanks.
This is like using a dumb truck for a daily commuter.
@@star9732 No it isn't.
@@star9732Overly reliable and you can push the other competition out of the way? Horrible analogy!
@ it’s needlessly big and heavy. You’re torturing yourself hauling that thing around. It’s 2024 not 1985. Did you walk barefoot to school uphill both ways?
@@star9732 Okay boomer
Great insight! Happy Vets day to you!
I remember being at NSWC Crane for an armorers course, and Paul Hill told us about some of this.
D, wazz up? Yup, much respect to Mr. Hill and company.
Got both, 92X RDO Compact and P220 Legion 10mm SAO.
Good video Chris. Thanks for sharing.
Surprised to hear about FN voluntarily withdrew the HP-DA considering the Finnish adopted it and have used it for decades
19x would have probably been the safest bet for an upgrade. Glock has been widely proven reliable for decades. Given the gov was offered the M9A3 for the same contract price as the original M9, that was their best option.
I always enjoy the information I get from this channel. Thank you.
Excellent, thanks! I have experience with both these excellent pistols however, when given a choice, I will stick with the USP40.
One thing I never liked about the Beretta when shooting them in the Coast Guard was the slide mounted safety. I picked up a SIG 226 at a gun show and liked the frame mounted decocker a lot better. The CG later switched to a SIG but it was double action only, which I also disliked. I think the SEALs went the the better pistol.
DAO is so stupid. Imagine the SIG P250 as DA/SA, would have been so much better than the P320 trainwreck.
A DA/SA with a manual safety is such overkill and redundancy. The 22x was so much better though out, just a point and shoot pistol. They are awesome
Another great presentation from one of the best, thank you for putting out this type of content.
After all said and done, the Glock, as little I like them, has proven more durable, reliable, with half the number of parts used, and more than suggests that IT remains the most proven concept over fifty years.
Great video Chris! Personally I always preferred the Beretta 92S with it's frame mounted safety like my 1911's. The Taurus PT99 with it's frame safety and magazine at the trigger guard instead of on the heel was a real Home Run. I've owned them since the 1980's and All of them have been running with no problems or failures. Just spring replacement's so far. Keep up the good work Chris.
I use a Langdon Tactical 92G RDO for limited optics and a Girsan Regard (Turkish 92G clone) for production, but I carry a SIG 226 in .40 S&W when I’m in bear/mountain lion territory hunting, fishing, camping, etc. In other words, the 92 shoots great, but I trust my P226 more and the decocker placement and blocky slide make clearing malfunctions and avoiding malfunctions easier than the open top slide with slide-mounted safety that the 92 features.
I once owned a S&W 659, it was not a handgun I’d bet my life on.
mine too. TOO much galling between slide and frame..
What problems did you have with your 659?
@ It was a jamomatic.
Changing from Beretta to any other 9mm was pointless except for making it more simpleton to operate and cheaper. Since mere mortals can't buy thousands of guns and could, at some point, have to pick only one to last them their lifetime I will take the M9 or 226 and you can keep the plastic stuff (even though I have those too). YMMV.
I have always hated the feel of the Beretta and never had any enthusiasm for its exposed trigger bar. However the trajectory of Sig-USA in its race to the bottom may prove the Beretta a better choice.
We had bad reliability with the M9, until they updated the ammo. It had more stopages than my clapped out ithaca 1911 during familiarization and subsequent qualification. It was a big let down for us. As MPs we were never allowed to carry with mags in the weapon in USAREUR, so it didnt matter much anyway . It would have been the pretty pistol that stayed in the holster as we got dusted .
you included a photo of the vp70 again instead of the p7m13
Failed:(
He showed the P7M13 later on in the video
The upgraded M9 is sick. The army really fumbled this one
Always informative and unbiased breakdowns. Thanks Chris.
Stanley staple gun 😂. Great video as always.
My first pistol was a 92FS that I bought post Desert Shield/Storm in 1991. I still own it, and have no idea how many rounds I've put through it. With the exception of a crap off brand "high capacity" magazine I bought (that I ended up throwing away), it' been 100% reliable. I might end up wanting that pistol to be buried with me.
PS: I'd love it if the US Military ended up with a M9 variant based on a 92G Centurion Vertec (with the exchangeable grip).
Special operations troops have their own budgets to use preferred weapons. As they should. The SEALS want the P226, no problem
I absolutely agree that the US should use domestic produced firearms. The best part about our country however is that nowadays, we will use non-domestically produced equipment. The fact that we can make everything here, but sometimes find something better in a NATO country has allowed us to use very effective equipment.
Me lookin at my m9 n sig m11a1
"Now you know i love you both the same. You are my children i dont have a favorite."
Your videos are the highlight of my week!
I have to say that was an outstanding discussion on the two pistols that were involved in the trials back then. I agree, I really wish they had gone with the upgraded pistol As a way to save so much money It's not even funny.
*The Beretta is by no means a bad gun, if anything it’s equal to the Sig.*
*But one must remember that prior to taking cost into consideration the Sig was in the lead pointwise. Beretta gave the Army an offer they couldn’t refuse.*
*So for all intents and purposes the TESTING, as in all things the Army did BEFORE the price was brought up, suggested that the Sig was the better gun FOR THEIR NEEDS.*
*Not to mention the SEALS got the Sig. And the SEALS budget is basically unlimited.*
Thats not how it worked. Sig was no more less better for the Army needs. The testing drones not show this anywhere. The testing showed both pistols met and exceeded the requirements. The pricing on the guns, Beretta was more expensive. The magazine and spare parts package is what decided the final winner by saving the government over $3mil. You totally dont get this process. You dont get the testing results either. The Army got a pistol they met and far exceeded their needs. The Army would have done well either way they tests and final bidding could have fallen.
@@SmallArmsSolutions Then explain it to me like i am five and tell me why prior to price being a factor the Sig was in the lead?
@@ReboyGTRDude he explains it like you're five in the goddamn video
@@chairzombie8378
Both guns far exceeded the requirements set. Both are excellent guns. But if we only look at the score we see that with all the PRACTIAL testing done the Sig was in the lead. That's why i specified FOR THEIR NEEDS. I don't know the EXACT MINUTE detials of how these test were preformed but if the Army's scoring says "Sig is in the lead" then Sig is in the lead. There is not much to it. The price for the packaged deal with magazines and spare parts is what gave the win to Beretta as was said in this video.
I don't see how you can get away from this video thinking anything else.
The SEALS used the P226 becauce they were afraid of cracking slides on the Beretta. These cracks were becauce they shot ammo that was too hot.
I have already explained all of this in the video.
While I was a Marksmanship instructor at Stone Bay NC rifle range USMC. Secretary of the Navy Ball came to SB to fire/check out the M9 when they reopened competition, in the late 80s.
I gave him a class on the XM4 rifle and the M16A1, A2, To show the differences. I’m not sure if we had any effect on out comes. He was a good student and attentive.
Having used both, both are good pistols.
The Sig feels better, I can't explain exactly why, but the Beretta felt fine.
The S&W lost because they simply didn't know how to make a decent semi-auto in the 80s.
Back to the winners, both work very well. The Sig simply looks and feels cooler. Having also used Glocks extensively, I would put them in the middle of the other two.
I would not hesitate to carry any of them into a gunfight.
The Border Patrol has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Beretta is combat capable.
I appreciate the intro is nice and not fluff.
For me, the biggest problem with the 92FS/M9 was that the grip/length of pull was insanely big. We'd had 1911s in my unit, and I was able to use it effectively and it fit me remarkably well. For the M9, the grip width was just stupidly wide, and the length of pull on top of that made it virtually impossible for me to shoot effectively.
I understand what you're saying about the M17 (I have a Sig P320 that I wouldn't DARE carry). But leaving out the M17's autostart issues, the concept of allowing a soldier with large (or small) hands to swap the grip for something that fit better? Yeah.. I'd have been up for that in the M9.
Thanks Mike
Who is Mike?
Langdon tactical has a few berettas with 50k rounds on them. Paul harrels m9 was over 6 figure round counts lol
As much as I love the m9 platform, have a sig 226 would’ve been sweet
Any chance of a review of 7.62x51mm M80A1 round? I'd like to hear your thoughts on it.
Very hard to get ahold of
Ten dollars a round easy.
Thanks for info.
And bringing facts about testing process!
Carried a M-92FS for 12 years no issues and always relighable.
An LAPD officer was able to shoot a charging knife suspect with his Beretta 92 F in 2024. Just to prove that those officers who were issued the Beretta are still using them. I know the original 147 grain hollowpoint ammunition had a terrible reputation for over penetration. An LA County Sheriff Deputy shot a robbery suspect and the bullet went through the bad guy and through the glass striking the store employee killing him. The longer barrel of the Beretta pistol is optional for most 9mm ammunition.
Good video, as usual!
When it comes to the m17 and p320's we know they're perfectly safe as they were upgraded many years ago now to receive the lighter trigger package so that when being dropped at a -30 degree angle on the back of the pistol they don't discharge due to the momentum of these parts. It's a well known fact that even before this it passed all of the drop test safety testing because that specific drop angle is not in any standard drop test anywhere both the m17 and p320 passed all of the standard drop test because of this. Which is why this issue was not found until later. For the holster discharges as far as I know there has not been a single case where it was not a user error aka not putting on the safety and not keeping your finger off the trigger. Also it's important to look at the most basic and obvious fact when we look at m9 and it's derivatives vs m17/18/p320 almost no one's adopting m9 and it's derivatives, not just the military but police and citizens too, m9's simply aren't nearly as popular anywhere. Plus to add it all up when we do see m9a3 vs m17 reviews and differences we can see each handgun has it's pros and cons but honestly the main factor of which is better is personal preference but with all of them noting how many more options there are for the P320 series pistols in terms of customizations. Also from what I understand most people really don't like how optics mount onto m9's which certainly hurts it's modularity score especially with the military buying the very well fitting Romeo m17's making the m9’s sight mounting system look dumb.
Excellent video. I love the trial videos. The M7 rifle is the worst thing that happened
The m17 shoots well, It shoots so well infact It wants to shoot even when you don't want to
I’m sure it had nothing to do with our bases in Italy……………
I've always been a 226 fan, never cared for 92 until I actually fired it. I'm a fan now. I've generaly been wrong about Beretta pistols. I've learn my lesson.
The M9 was in service throughout my entire career. I first qualified with it in as a LCpl in 1994 and continued to do so until I retired in 2012. I never experienced any failures that were pistol related. A couple stove pipes here and there. And I had one once that from time to time fire a 2 rnd burst. Which once you got used to worked great for the 2 shot drills at 7 yds in the USMC Pistol Qualification. These were all issued pistols from the armory that were used and abused hard by Marines. Hard to tell how old they were. I know some of them were damn near silver from the finish being nearly worn off. Id love to have the newer M9A4 but the price is ridiculous compared to the M18.
Christ, I was born and graduated from high school in those years.
What surprises me is the Glock 17 never was considered for the tests.
Would not meet the specs for that program.
It was a little late IIRC.
Where can I find the full test results?
When did the hk usp come into play i know couple guys tell me they had an hk usp
Regarding the Beretta slide failures. Richard Marcinco said in his book Rouge Warrior that it was Seal Team 6 that had the slide failures because they were running 90,000 rounds a year through them and they were using the same Hirtenburger 9mm SMG ammo in their MP-5's. He said that after the failure's Beretta basically supplied them with Custom built gun's for replacement's.
Beretta designed the Brigadier slide around 1994, long after the SEAL problem. There is no record of the SEAL teams ever getting that slide. Phobis created a slide as well designed for SMG ammo but never went into production. It’s interesting, but according to Beretta, they never made a COTS slide for the US govt.
@SmallArmsSolutions all of the replacement slides that I have seen were made by US government Sub contractors not Beretta. Neither my Beretta 92's or Taurus PT99 have shown any signs of cracking slides or locking blocks. But there again I replace my springs when they start to get weak with High Quality premium American made springs. I'm currently trying to wear out Wilson Combat springs in two of my 1911's and it's going to take a while.
The slides, frames and barrels were never subcontracted out. All other parts could be.
About 20-25 years ago I bought a lot of surplus at a auction and in that lot was 24 M-9 slides in the USGI Wrapping and the only marks were on the right side of the slide. It was a Assembly #. They were not Beretta manufactured slides. I took a few around to every Gun shop and Gun Smith in Central Texas and nobody knew who made them but everyone agreed that it wasn't Beretta. I ended up selling them at the Gun Show in Austin for $100 each. I should have kept at least one just for curiosity.
Ya, I agree. Because Beretta could have sued the government for violating the license agreement on that. The cage code would have told everything. Perhaps the parts were bought, caught and got out of the government system before they were found.
Thank you. 👍
I'd choose an old M9 or P226 over an F'd over a rebuilt P250 every time, regardless of the shoddy QC and safety issues.
I made a mistake of using my Beretta to test reloads. Turns out it will eat and spit out anything bad or not. Ended up with several thousands rounds that only worked in that gun.
SIG not getting the contract fas fortuitous. It opend up capacity for a whole range of US police departments.
It's been rumored that the USA went with the Berretta as a political deal where Italy would USA's allow nuclear weapons to be stored/transported through Italy. Back end deals like that often don't get written down to history though. Out of the four choices, it was easily the best choice at the time. But a question arises as to what other pistols should have been submitted for testing at the time?
Was a false rumor. It was an open competition for anyone to submit as long as they met the criteria of the program.
I wouldn't trade a used M9 or 226 for new M17/ M18. I agree they should've just updated the Beretta
I love my M9A3 . Army would have had a great upgrade option
Where can information on the M17/18 failures be found. I have looked all over the internet and have not found anything. Is this a case of the Govt hiding info or is it just that hard to find?
You know where this goes in the URL, right? mtzPvJiuCL8
There's a video called How the P320 Cost Sig Millions but RUclips is eating my comments again.
If I remember correctly, the Beretta had some issues with Suppressors being used those and causing the same type breakage. Maybe their answer was switching to the Brigadier slide.
Never heard of suppressor issues, that would not effect the slide life anyway. Many wives tales out there
What about the star 28
@SmallArmsSolutions
20:27 Absolutely true. I served as an S-4 officer in the Marines and the armory fell under my responsibility. I can attest that the lack of preventive maintenance claims at the armorers level are true. Springs and the like were not replaced on a regular basis in either the weapons or magazines. Round counts were not even kept. The weapons would be fixed when they broke. The Beretta was a great pistol. The Marines failed Beretta and not vice versa. We should have adopted the M9A3.
How can you make the case to adopt a metal framed, hammer fired DA/SA 92 as the best choice for our troops in the 2020s over anything from H&K, Glock, or Sig Sauer? Usage and adoption of the 92 floundered these past few years for many reasons. Their peak was a long time ago.
@@great_deception Very easily. First, there is nothing wrong with a DA/SA system on a weapon. For military use it should be preferred simply because it is safer. Carrying a gun in the civilian world is far different from in the military. Second, the supply and logistics chains were already established. They were up and running. We had parts from the previous M9 that were interchangeable with the M9A3. Why would anyone want to just throw that away? Third, there would be no need to rewrite the operation and training curriculum for the weapon. It was already in place. The amount of taxpayer money that could have been saved was substantial. The U.S. military made a bad choice, and I am sure it had more to do with K street than sound judgment.
This is about the 1985 XM9 trials, not the XM17. As far as the XM17 program, if they were staying with a 9mm pistol, none of the current ones offer suck an increase in capability that the M9/A1/A3/A4 could not do. You would be able to use a majority of parts already in inventory and update existing pistols. Unfortuanly, the XM17 program was a colossal failure resulting in a new pistol which would not even be as good as what it replaced let alone better.
@@DV8-q6n Never said anything was wrong with DA/SA. I have DA/SA and striker designs and enjoy all of them. Careful with your definition of safer, because now some people will say a manual safety is safer, and now someone will jump in and say carrying without 1 in the chamber is safer. Safety is 99% user-based, I wouldn't depend on a firearms operating system to define safety of a weapon. As far as continuing with the same weapon system as a cost saving or logistics argument, then we can easily make that argument for continuing with the 1911 design for over 100 years, but obviously we moved on in search of better weapons. Perfect example is SOCOM's Glock adoption beginning way back in the 90s. Pistol procurement is cheap compared to our jet contracts, missile systems, and all the weapons going to Israel, so I wouldn't worry too much about the costs on pistol procurement.
@@great_deception
You are conflating civilian carry with military carry. They are very different things. A manual safety is absolutely necessary for a standard service pistol. I'm not talking about SOCOM or any other special operations group. Those are a different beast. I'm talking about a pistol that the average Marine carries. A manual safety is a must for these people. Not because they are incompetent but because the 99% user based safety you speak of gets easily compromised when you have a hundred pounds on your back and walk 20+ miles a day and are in firefights and then have fire watch. It's called being infantry tired and if you haven't lived it you wouldn't understand but trust me a manual safety is essential. Pistol procurement is also not cheap, and a taxpayer penny saved is efficient government. That is how government should be. You don't justify wasting tax dollars by saying we spend more on other things so why not waste money on this.
I've often wondered how a CZ75 would have faired in those trials. . .
Should do fine. The p01 is nato certified.
Wouldn’t have happened since it was being made behind the iron curtain
@@ChristopherGoydich-cb6bd Indeed, and it's funny how now I consider the Czech Republic to be a rather "Western nation"