Hoo-rah. About time the military went back to the reliable 45.

About f***ing time. How many times do we have to relearn this lesson? Interesting that the .45 was adopted the last time we fought Muslim fanatics in the Philippines.

My vote is for something in the Para Tac series -- DAO and 14+1 rounds of .45 ACP. I have a small Para and love the trigger. Okay, it's Canadian -- so what?

http://www.paraord.com/product/product.html?id=49

I don't have any experience with the P345, but I do have an older-model Ruger .45 auto, the P90. Built like a tank, eats anything I feed her and begs for more. I wouldn't flinch taking it into battle. I might get another one...just because it's that good.

I have a couple of Rugers in the lighter weight 9mm (P89 and P95) and have never had one jam, fail to load, anything. Pull the trigger, it goes bang. They seem to make a reliable weapon.

.45 shmortifive. If you want a pistol cartridge with STOPPING power you settle for nothing less than a .44 mag. The .475 or .500 Linebaugh would be even better but would require a revolver. Even the .44 mag requires a revolver, as a reliable auto hasn't come along yet (Desert Eagles are too persnickety). Figuring the services won't go back to revolvers (although I don't know why) the next best thing is a .400 Corbon. Any auto that shoots the .45 ACP could be rebarreled to .400 Corbon. (It's a .45 ACP necked down to .40.)

A 1911 type auto probably isn't in the running, but there are some really accurate pieces out there from great makers like: Les Bear, Kimber, Para Ord, as well as some others.

I agree, woodchuck season is over, it's time to put the .223 away and pick up a real rifle cartridge. The 7.62 is still a hard utility round to beat. The .300 Winchester Short Magnum would be a great replacement, but that would entail a commitment to change the crew served weapons as well. It may be time for a complete overhaul. What do you think?

If they would let the troops use Federal's Hydroshock ammunition in the 9mm (jacketed and not a hollowpoint)none of this would be necessary, IMHO.

They, the military, could do worse than bring back a variant of the famous M1, the rifle that won WWII. The 30-06 had plenty of stopping power and range, and if you ran out of ammunition it made a handy club or spear (with bayonet).

Old Soldier,

I gotta disagree with you here. Power is useless if it can't be expended in the target, and a .44 Mag using FMJ overpenetrates, and has no more effective stopping power than a .45ACP, while being much harder to shoot (at least for those who don't handle recoil well), requiring a much larger weapon, and being able to carry fewer rounds for the same amount of weight.

I don't know about the .400 Corbon. If I'm going to have a cartridge the same size and magazine capacity, I'm in favor of a bigger bullet and larger hole instead of more velocity. More velocity also translates into more wear, shortening the life of parts.

The 7.62 is a great round and so it the .30-06 , but neither is practical in a true assualt rifle-sized package. I'm sure more competent minds have though about it, but what about simply taking the existing 5.56MM, necking it out from .223 to .250-.270, and using a heavier 80-120 grain bullet with a more modern powder?

You could still use the same size rifles and SAWs that we use now, but you'd have a more potent round that is as accurate and more powerful than a 5.56mm, but has less kick than a 7.62mm and can carry more ammo.

Anyhow, those are my thoughts.

CY, that's a good idea, we could just issue new uppers and mags to existing M-16's to at least make them a deer rifle! The late Col. David Hackworth, who was in Vietnam when the M-16's were first issued, never quit hating the "toy rifle" as he called it, despite all the upgrades through the years.

CY, I think there is a bit of confusion between us. I’m not advocating for the .44 magnum for military applications. Believe me I understand the military requirements for carrying more ammo which seems like a wasted trade off to me. If I fire one round and take out my target FOR SURE, then why do I need all the other rounds? M9s fit a requirement for people that can’t shoot very well – at least they have a lot of ammo – maybe one round will be a winner. I own a Beretta 92S, Italian made stainless automatic. Nice gun for euthanizing dogs and cats, but not an adequate combat piece. The military M9s are terribly inaccurate as compared to my Italian made 92. Mass production, I guess.

Oh, by the way, there’s no such thing as “over penetration” when you are trying to kill an enemy combatant. The .45 does not have that great a ballistics/energy table either. Neck it down to .400 and speed it up and the energy delivered to the target is better than a .45 and significantly better than a 9mm. It’s kinda like a .38 compared to a .357.

Necking the 5.56 out almost returns it to its routes, the .30 Carbine cartridge – a useless round. No, if you’re going to give an infantryman a suitable tool to be used in the open at range as well as shoot through wooden doors and walls, it really needs to be at least .30 caliber pushed by a lot of propellant. That’s why I favor the .300 Winchester Short Magnum. It has better ballistics than the old standard .30-06. There are many new technological ways to control recoil in an assault weapon; gas ports, buffers, etc. At a minimum, return to the 7.62.

In Vietnam, I carried an off the books M14 as my individual weapon when I flew. I wanted commonality with my M60s and I wanted a reasonable chance of taking out an enemy at a range that was in my favor. I didn’t want to be shake-hands close to be effective with the old 1911’s we were issued. My back up short range gun was a Winchester 1895 pump action 12 gauge riot gun with OO Buck. Yeah, I’m the type guy that brings his .44 to a knife fight.

In my book, harder hitting at longer range is the only way to go. My home defense gun is a .44 Magnum Super Black Hawk. I don’t expect to be in a fire fight; I expect to kill an intruder with one round – even through walls and doors.

Nice gun for euthanizing dogs and cats...

Somebody just got cross off PETA's Christmas card list. :-)

Yes, I was referring to military applications.

There are substantial differences between the .30 carbine round and what I was thinking of with a hot .50-.270 round using a necked-out .223 case.

First off, the .30 carbine was essentially the ballistic cousin of a .357 Magnum. Impressive enouhh as a pistol round, at rifle ranges it is inadequate, and the stable roundnose FMJ bullet of the .30 carbine didn't help.

I'm thinking (and I may be wrong) that with the modern propellants that make rounds like the Super Short Magnums possible, you could have an assault rifle size similar to 5.56mm firearms (instead of .308 battle rifle sizes) using the same 30 round magazines, shooting a cartridge the equivilent of a .240 Weatherby Magnum.

A custom 6.8 SPC M16 variant currently being used by some of our Spec Ops guys that can only fit 18 rounds in a similar magazine and generates 2,002 ft/lbs of energy at 100 yards, and 1,307 ft/lbs of energy at 200 yards.

My hypothetical round (if possible) would use a standard 5.56 casing, giving you 12 rounds per magazine more than the 6.8 SPC, equal to what we have now. It would also be more powerful, generating 2,576 ft/lbs of energy at 100 yards, (more than double that of the older 5.56mm loading) and 1,844 ft/lbs of force at 200 yards.

The round would have just 300 ft/lbs less energy than the 150 grain .30-06 at 100 yards, but would have just a tad more energy (17 ft/lbs) at 200 yards.

It would be the ultimate assault rifle hybrid round, like a skinny '06 in power with a lot more rounds per infantryman, on par with what they carry now, or perhaps slightly less.

What I'm essentially advocating is the revisiting and moderization of the Enfield EM-2 program, a British bullpup utilizing a .280 catridge that was far more powerful than the 5.56mm, while having less recoil than the .303 and .30-06. While the EM-2 failed to catch on, it led to programs like the FAMAS and the AUG.

It's worth looking at again.

Welcome back to combat to the venerable .45. I have a Colt M1991A1 on my nightstand for unexpected visitors. What a nice piece, and it really packs a wallop.

PS to Old Soldier_ if you use that .44 in your house at night, be prepared to go temporarily deaf and blind. Make sure the intruder is down when you do.

Barry, you over rate the .45 auto. Just for comparison...

Caliber Bul Wt Vel / Enrgy (at muzzle)
.45 Auto 230 890 / 404
9 MM 147 1000 / 326
.44 Mag 240 1210 / 780
.400 CorBon 135 1450 / 630

Now if you rebarrel that Colt .45 auto for the .400 CorBon, you've got a respectable shooter.

It doesn't matter if you shoot a 9 MM; at night inside it will disorient you. You better be one shot minded with a .45 auto as well.

I carry a Colt defender .45 ACP and it is the best pistol I have ever carried, as far as accuracy it kicks straight up and back instead of torgueing to the side a little like most short .45's do, at 15 yards or less the accuracy is as good as any longer barreled gun which is the range most handguns are used in.

My main concern shooting indoors is situational awareness and overpenetration. If you, like many folks, live in an apartment or a home in a neighborhood (which is most folks I know), even a directl hit has a good chance of going through the suspect and multiple interior walls when using most certerfire ammunition. You run a real chance of hitting someone other than the person you meant to shoot, which is every responsible gun owner's nightmare.

For that reason, I highly recommend frangiable ammunition. It blows apart on contact and reduces overpenetration through structures, while hitting the target like a contact shotgun wound, causing massive trauma.

Some years ago, someone ran a series of tests of handgun stopping power, trying many calibers and many different loading on sheep, which have a chest cavity roughly the size of a human. I think it was called the Strassbourgh Tests, but I might have the name wrong.

They would shoot the sheep through the chest, and see how long it took for the sheep to drop, and they would them perform a post-mortem forensic analysis of the damage as well to see how rounds performed on real flesh and bone.

I recall the MagSafe Defender and Glaser Blue frangiables in .45 ACP being the most deadly handgun bullet avialable at that time, out performing all FML, RNJ, semi-wadcutter, and hollowpoint ammunition under the typical home invasion scenario of an unarmored target at close range.

I'm sure the .400 CorBon is a hot little round with plenty of energy, but I'll keep my customized Sistema M1927 .45 stoked with Glasers for now.

CY,
I use Federal Hydra-shok 185 grain for defense when I carry in out in public. Target practice I use 230 grain FMJ. I load Glazers when at home. You are correct I would not use a heavy load in a .45 if I lived in an apartment or any other type of home connected to another for that scenario I would use glazers only, my house is standalone on 1/3 acre and is brick.

Look around for some pictures of the Brits trying to shoot that bullpup design of theirs while prone. Look at where their head has to be.

I'll pass on the bullpup for a combat arm, thank you.

The M16A2 weighs as much as an FN Para FAL, and for all intents and purposes is single fire. Noone bothers using the malfunctioning 3 round burst. Why not just adopt a modern FAL?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1986/MVT.htm

The 5.56 was adopted because of a logical decision based on fundamentally flawed data. More ammo is nice, but pointless when you need to fire 3 or more times as many rounds to penetrate barriers and kill people at long range. USE ENOUGH GUN! If that means having an overpowered cartridge 75 percent of the time, fine, it will save your ass when the guy is behind a palm log or cinder blocks.

If it were my decision I would go back to using a shortened FN FAL, possibly with folding stock, and rifle grenade attachment on the front. Then switch to using either a Vektor SS77 or MG3 as the machinegun and completely scrap the squad automatic concept, you can do the same thing with a drum mag for a GPMG, which the Germans made in WW2 for the MG 38.

.44mag? Yeah, because there is a gun that can be handled by the average 18 year old. And when he does touch off that round, heart pumping, sweat from his eyes, and he MISSES the bad guy, who is not standing still, but has a less powerful, higher capacity weapon, that he can shoot quickly, our hero gets pinned down. Then the enemy's buddy advances on our hero and kills him. That's called SUPERIOR FIREPOWER.

The good thing about extra rounds... IS EXTRA ROUNDS!!!! I can shoot at five hundred yards in the prone, calm heart beat, at a steady target, that I have figured the wind for. After a run? NO! Best I can hope for is to keep rounds on him so he can't acurately shoot back, or engage with an RPG, then I call for a more precision weapon... LIKE A TANK!!! .300 WSM? Guys who hunt with them don't even like to shoot more than 20rds at a sitting. Who wants to fight with 300 rds through one??? And how well will they shoot it after 50 rds from the recoil pounding their shoulder????

The gun to go with is the one the most soldiers can shoot well, and that has high capacity with good accuracy. Then you get most of your people, inflicting lots of hits or suppresion fire, and having the ability to do so for a relatively long period of time. Then you can MANEUVER and KILL THEM.

Yeah and the M1 garand? We used muzzleloading rifles during the American revolution. We don't need to go back to that either. The M1 is heavy, (remember 150lbs of gear approx total) It only holds 8 rds at a time, it can't easily be topped off, You go in with one or two rounds when you should have done a tactical reload... Technology progresses for a reason. And it's long!!!! Not so good for room clearing..._

Oh CY, I'm pretty sure its 28 rounds not 18 for the 6.8 SPC in a standard 30 rd M16 mag. That would be a good round to go with. Improved ballistics, low recoil, high capacity, that is the right direction.
http://www.defensereview.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=383