Been catching a lot of references lately to upcoming military trials, and all the manufacturers are introducing a new pistol with all the things the army likes to see- DA/SA, manual safety, high capacity. The S&W M&P15 and Taurus 24/7 OSS are getting a lot of press for percieved awesomeness, but I blame that more on the fact that these companies advertise heavily and therefore the gun writers whore their stuff.

I don't really see a problem with the Beretta 92, but I suppose the most important thing about the gun isn't if it works or not, but if the soldier thinks it works well... it's a golf-game mental sort of thing, I suppose. If having a .45 hole instead of a .357 hole makes the soldiers feel more confident, then great.

Anybody have any ideas or suggestions for what they would like to see in a new pistol for adoption by the military? I know some people are pushing the 1911A1 again, but high capacity black plastic mega-blasters are all the rage nowadays.

i've always wanted the revolver to make a comeback, maybe its becuse i like webley revolvers. .455 packs one hell of a punch but its so hard to get .

Aimsurplus has it for not so bad of a price. I believe Fiocchi also makes it regularly.

They never should have left the 1911.

The whole thing is yet another stupid waste of taxpayer dollars anyway. They don't need a new pistol. They should take the price of implementing the program, divide by the number of American citizens, then stroke each citizen a check for that amount.

The fucking m9 sucks. You'd be amazed how many bullets it takes to kill a haji. I saw a guy get show in the face with a .50cal from an m2 and live.

I've shot the m9 plenty of times, it's not horrible inaccurate but it sucks. I'd must rather have a 1911. The only thing the m9 is good for is to carry around on the fob or to put in your rucksack for a jump.

The 1911 is great, but it is so old, and only carries 7 bullets (or 8, cant remember). Rather some newer colt thats based on the 1911.

I'm willing to bet the US is going to adopt the HK 45. It's based on a proven design, the US already bought a similar pistol (Mk23 Mod 0), and it says "HK" on the side in big letters.

I don't see S&W getting the contract, even if they are an American company, and Taurus certainly isn't going to get it. Not only are they foreign, they're not a NATO member.

Besides, anything that says HK on it must be more tactical and deadly somehow...

I'm quite surprised glock was never contracted to supply pistols for American armed forces. Especially considering they have a huge law enforcement market in the states and provide the firearms at next to nothing (LE COST).

After the speculation that the Beretta beat the Sig due to cost differences, you really think an HK could ever get a contract that size? Special Forces get whatever gun they want, but the average grunt gets a sidearm as a matter of protocol, not practicality.

The military really, REALLY, likes manual safeties, so Glock is a no-go.

IDK, Hifh. The military could have gone for Sig in the past, but went Beretta for cost reasons. Unless HK can tone down the price a bit, I don't know if they can get the contract.

I do think that if they do adopt a new pistol, it WILL be .45. I like the .45 a lot more for shooting purposes, but when it comes to hitting someone with it or a 9mm, it really won't make much difference.