I just hope the DoD doesn't make the same mistake it did with the M9, by forcing it to be built in the US in a brand new factory Beretta had to build just for that purpose, only to have the government refuse to pay the extra cost of U.S. labor. This forced Beretta to take some major cost cutting measures that made the M9 a far inferior cousin to the 92F namesake.
The only difference between the M9 (92FS) and the 92F is that the M9 was slightly re-engineered to prevent the slide from hitting the shooter if it cracked, not only that but the 92FS eventually got a stronger and more reliable locking block as well. The M9 is
superior to the 92F.
The first instance wasduring the Philippine Insurrection when the Colt Single Action Army .45 Colts were re-issued to replace the sorry .38 Long Colt revolvers that wouldn't stop the Moro Juramentados. Then later Browning developedthe .45 ACP to go along with his handgun designs. IMO, the 9mm is another sorry round in the same class as the .38 Long Colt, and it should never have been adopted either. It was donejust to keep the NATO countries happy. How many Americans have been killed because of THIS POLITICAL decision who would still be alive if they'd had a Model 1911A1 instead of that Beretta??
Except the 9mm is at least twice as powerful as the .38 long colt so the analogy doesn't wash unless you want to take it all the way to the limits of absurdity and claim a .357 magnum is also in the same class as the 38 colt and is inferior to the .45 ACP.
How many Americans might have died if they were saddled with 50 year old worn out colts instead of a new reliable pistol?
Adoption of the 9mm to replace the .45 ACP is just another example of the triumph of politics over practicality.
Practicality? Since when has the military been practical? How many more train loads of powder/brass/lead would be required to make a billion rounds of 9mm vs a billion of .45ACP?
On a serious note, I've always wondered why the military has stayed with the 9mm for so long. Most LE agencies have switched to a .40 with very good results and a significant improvement over the 9mm. A .40 gives you most of the terminal performance of a .45 with less recoil and muzzle climb.
True that, but there's a reason why soldiers are issued rifles to fight with rather than pistols. When it comes right down to it, there isn't a whole lot of difference between a .45, 40 S&W, or 9mm. The differences between them is far smaller than the differences between any one and the 556.