Army wants a harder hitting pistol


FN's SS190 FMJ (steel penetrator + aluminum core) has been classified by the ATF as an armor piercing handgun round. It is restricted. FN's SS196 (lead-based FMJ) and SS198 (aluminum-based FMJ), as well as, American Eagle's TMJ are not restricted as they are not armor piercing. In fact, there are piles of American Eagle's 5.7x28mm TMJ at my local Gander Mountain.
 

From the bearing guns article it was said the army is looking for an all metal modular pistol in a caliber that is easy to handle and won't beat the hell out of the gun that a myriad of hand sizes could be accommodated. A Detonics MTX seems to fit the bill and can be had now. Nice looking pistol too.

Link Removed
 
Since when? I only ask because they sell that pistol at my local GS, not that I can afford one!


Sent from behind enemy lines..
The ammo is banned, not the gun. New ammo from FN does not have the blue tip either for the civilian rounds that are non-AP rounds.This is the sort of thing that happens when somebody thinks it is a good idea to make a handgun that shoots a rifle round. Next thing you know, the ammo gets banned because it can be used in the handgun. Watch and see if the same thing doesn't happen with the 5.56x45 ammo sooner or later.
 
The obsession should be with training, NOT caliber. Caliber is not relevant until the intended target is hit. Arm someone with a .44 Mag, 460, 500 S&W, and if they miss, the effectiveness of the round is zero. Pick a round and train folks how to use it. Current training in many cases is simply annual qualification against a piece of paper. That will not produce proficiency... in any caliber.
 
If I'm not mistaken they must use FMJ rounds designated by UN...
Oh by the way the UN SUCKS!


However, think of it a little differently...If you kill a man he is out of the fight. If you wound him, it takes two men to care for him and remove him from the battle field...
 
If I'm not mistaken they must use FMJ rounds designated by UN...
Oh by the way the UN SUCKS!

You are mistaken in the sense that the FMJ requirement has nothing to do with the UN. Read my earlier posts in this thread.
 
Just to throw another caliber into the fray; perhaps they are looking at a rifle cartridge that could be used or modified for use in a handgun? 5.7 or other?

That certainly shouldn't be dismissed?
 
Just to throw another caliber into the fray; perhaps they are looking at a rifle cartridge that could be used or modified for use in a handgun? 5.7 or other?

That certainly shouldn't be dismissed?

5.7 has all ready been brought up.

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app
 
HP bullets have been used by Marine Snipers for years. We have no treaty to not use HP ammo....The M118LR is a 175 gr BTHP in .308.
 
If the Army is looking for a highly modular pistol, they should consider the SIG P250. That pistol is perhaps the most "modular" in the world. It can shoot 9mm, .40, .45, or .357. It can be had in full size, compact, or subcompact models. The grip, too, can be changed from small, to medium, or large. All these changes can be made in seconds. But if the Army should settle on one combination that it considers ideal, that model could become standard throughout the service: such as the full size .45.
 
If the Army is looking for a highly modular pistol, they should consider the SIG P250. That pistol is perhaps the most "modular" in the world. It can shoot 9mm, .40, .45, or .357. It can be had in full size, compact, or subcompact models. The grip, too, can be changed from small, to medium, or large. All these changes can be made in seconds. But if the Army should settle on one combination that it considers ideal, that model could become standard throughout the service: such as the full size .45.

I haven't read into it much but from this thread it seems they don't want any polymer...which disqualifies the P250...unless Sig comes out with a metal frame for it.

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app
 
I haven't read into it much but from this thread it seems they don't want any polymer...which disqualifies the P250...unless Sig comes out with a metal frame for it.

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app
Correct, they don't want plastic. That said, I do own a Sig P-250 in the compact size in .40S&W. My intention was to buy the full size in .45ACP X-change kit and the 9mm X-change kit in sub-compact. I think that the .40 would do better in a full size as the felt recoil is a bit high. But it gets the job done. And I can skip the 9mm as I now own a Sig P-228 along with the Sig P-226 MK25 in 9mm.
 
Many have had some good suggestions for the US Army on existing hand guns. But if the military stays true to form it will cost us, the US Taxpayer, a ton of money to come up with a new gun and to arm our troops with it. In a way I have no problem with trying to make sure our troops have the best equipment. I just hope this is not a way to waste our money. If the gun and ammo manufacturers can come up with a new gun and ammo to meet the Army's specs, that could be very nice.

We will have to wait and see what comes out of this!
 
Perhaps this is the gun that the Army needs. It could be loaded with body armor piercing and hollow point! I would love to shoot it once!

Link Removed
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,544
Messages
611,260
Members
74,959
Latest member
defcon
Back
Top