Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sinister
Chindo, we put together the prototype guns based on what USASOC asked for. The idea for an "A2" was to get it adopted and issue M1911A1s immedaitely as an "In lieu of" item.
Springfields fell out because there's no North America production base for the frames and slides. Caspians will come with frontstrap checkering already done, and slides won't have front striations. You won't need a bushing wrench. It'll be throated and ported for GI Ball and Winchester 185 +P (per spec).
There isn't a barrel maker in the United States who makes a stainless .45 barrel, hammer, or other internals who can meet Army production demand and maintain MILSPEC or better accuracy. Period.
There is no out-of-the-box production M1911A1 made in the United States that produces X-ring accuracy. M9 E-type, yes -- X-ring, no.
USASOC asked for Gucci colors.
|
Sinister: All Good Points! Did not understand the USASOC proponency for your project. Thought you were trying to convince THEM to buy a bottom generated proposal. Alles klar... I think I know some of the folks responsible. That explains the fashion finishes. One of my current projects is to generate Co/Bn level user feedback to USASFC concerning proposed specs for the M-9 replacement. They are asking all Groups for input NLT EOM November.
Re: Stainless barrels & parts; agreed. Don't particularly care a hoot about them. Nor stainless frame/slide. Nice to have but not necessary.
Re: "X-ring". All right, I'm not a competitive shooter. I'll agree. But...I have SEEN arms room issue 1911A1s, fired by expert shooters (former AMU, Camp Perry competitors, etc.) put all rounds inside the 10 ring (with most clustered on/around the x) at 25M slow aimed fire. Most GI guns can produce 3-5 inch groups (mechanical accuracy). Down at team level, this translates into 1) all rounds COM chest at combat firing distance (1M-15M) or 2) controlled pairs (aimed) to the head of E-type at 25M. Been there, done that, repeatedly, and with SOT classes which included previous non-shooters (after 2 - 3 weeks of training). Accuracy has never been the issue. 1911 or M9...both are accurate enough. If you guys can make it work reliably w/ the NM parts (and a bit more accuracy), I'm definitely for it. Sights will really make the big difference.
I really like the idea of breaking out the 1911A1s. Armory refurbished, with new commercial sights, and some decent grips...that would be a 90% solution that would blow away the M-9 right now.
Just out of curiosity, I'm assuming Govt Model Frame/Slide & 5" barrel?
Your prototypes sound good. Hope I didn't sound like I was trying to teach anyone to suck eggs. I get a little passionate about the topic and find it easy to climb onto my soapbox. Again, good luck.
Jatx: Sorry to hear about your HK. Honestly, it sounds like you got a lemon (every manufacturer makes them). I have the same gun. Runs like a champ. I'm still waiting for the first malfunction. I just simulate malfunction drills with that pistol. I usually hate over-hyped, over-priced, overblown hardware, but have to admit, HK makes a fine pistol in the USP series. Thinking seriously about getting the .45 Compact version.