Army says new war-ready M17 pistol will change modern combat

[Divine_Wind]

The problem with owning a large gun collection is having to keep them clean.

Agreed. The primary reason for me to downsize.

 

[SLC]

A .30 bullet has more mass than a 6.5mm.

Which has more kinetic energy at 1000 yards a .30 round or a 6.5 creedmore round?

I don't want to get hit with either one.

Most people don't

 

[Divine_Wind]

Which has more kinetic energy at 1000 yards a .30 round or a 6.5 creedmore round?...

I don't know but it's also a matter of transferring energy which is why hollow points make bigger holes than FMJs.

 

[SLC]

A Mosin would certainly do the job all the way out to 500 yards. Is it scoped?

I don't know anything about the Creedmore. I know it's all the rage right now and skimmed over the chit-chat on it, but, as stated earlier, I have enough guns including a couple of Mosins, a Mauser and a DPMS .308. I doubt I'll get rid of those, but have some smaller calibers I don't need.

My two Mosins:

Yes he put a scope on it. He had a hard time due to how the bolt is made. Have you seen the coffee table some guy made out of Mosin packing crate. It had a glass top and some Mosins in the crate. It was in his man cave. I have never seen a mosin sniper rifle before. Pretty cool

I recently went to the Civil War museum on 820 have you ever been there.

 

[Divine_Wind]

Yes he put a scope on it. He had a hard time due to how the bolt is made. Have you seen the coffee table some guy made out of Mosin packing crate. It had a glass top and some Mosins in the crate. It was in his man cave. I have never seen a mosin sniper rifle before. Pretty cool

I recently went to the Civil War museum on 820 have you ever been there.

No on the museum but I've passed it several times back and forth to Abilene. Is it worth a visit? I was at Gettysburg in the early 70s and want to go back.

 

[apdst]

Which has more kinetic energy at 1000 yards a .30 round or a 6.5 creedmore round?





Most people don't

If kinetic energy is the only deciding factor, then there's no way a 45 acp can be more lethal that a 9mm Luger.

Earlier in the thread the .45 was the baddest mother****er around and the 9mm was *****. According to your logic, they run neck and neck.

 

[SLC]

No on the museum but I've passed it several times back and forth to Abilene. Is it worth a visit? I was at Gettysburg in the early 70s and want to go back.

I was surprised at how good it was . It has a lot of firearms and the museum is bigger than it appears from the road. And also it has a dress section from that period if you have a wife. They say it's the largest civil war museum west of the Mississippi. You should try to see it if you are interested in firearms.

 

[SLC]

I forgot to mention they have a Whitworth sniper rifle with hexagonal rifling they cost $1000 back then. Major General Sedgwick was shot below his left eye at 1000 yards with a Whitworth. His last words were: "Why are you dodging like this? They couldn't hit an elephant at this distance." Anyway you would probably find the museum interesting.

 

[SLC]

If kinetic energy is the only deciding factor, then there's no way a 45 acp can be more lethal that a 9mm Luger.

Earlier in the thread the .45 was the baddest mother****er around and the 9mm was *****. According to your logic, they run neck and neck.

Nope

Foot pounds of Kinetic Energy

135, 22 LR
245, 17 HMR
324, 22 WMR
362 ,9mm
420, 40 S&W
432, 45 ACP
624, 357 Magnum

I CC a 40 Glock a lot for that reason.

 

[apdst]

Nope

Foot pounds of Kinetic Energy

135, 22 LR
245, 17 HMR
324, 22 WMR
362 ,9mm
420, 40 S&W
432, 45 ACP
624, 357 Magnum

I CC a 40 Glock a lot for that reason.

Depending on the round, 9mm and 45 acp can have identicle levels of kinetic energy.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/9×19mm_Parabellum

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/.45_ACP

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

I was talking about the .223 round apdst questioned its lethality. Post some gelatin tests of a ,223 round.

Although deliberately designing a round to be more damaging but less lethal is prohibited by the Geneva conventions, it is OK if that was not the deliberate intent when designing the round.

In a military situation, a living but incapacitated (and preferably conscious enough to be screaming with pain) member of the opposition force is MUCH preferable to a dead one. Of course both are preferable to an uninjured and fully functional one.

The 5.56 round, while it may well not tear the arm off of a member of the opposition force, is likely to produce more painful wounds than the 7.62 on an AGGREGATE basis.

PS - The last time I looked into it, the Swiss military was the only force that actually uses a 5.56 round that is specifically designed to minimize fragmentation and tumbling after impact. Of course, the Swiss also teach their soldiers how to shoot and not to waste ammunition.

 

[SLC]

Depending on the round, 9mm and 45 acp can have identicle levels of kinetic energy.

But that is not what you said. You said

If kinetic energy is the only deciding factor, then there's no way a 45 acp can be more lethal that a 9mm Luger.

Earlier in the thread the .45 was the baddest mother****er around and the 9mm was *****. According to your logic, they run neck and neck.

Compare Apples to Apples. Compare Hornady's best 9mm to their best .45 round the .45 will win every time. I didn't even look before writing that. But a I checked and I was right. Here is a site that should help you. 45 ACP Ballistics Chart | Ballistics 101

 

[apdst]

But that is not what you said. You said



Compare Apples to Apples. Compare Hornady's best 9mm to their best .45 round the .45 will win every time. I didn't even look before writing that. But a I checked and I was right. Here is a site that should help you. 45 ACP Ballistics Chart | Ballistics 101

Sure, you can rig the comparison. If we're going to do it like that, let's compare a 6.5 CM with a 143 gr bullet to a 300 Win Mag with a 200 gr bullet. The CM can't even come close. At 1,000 yards, the CM has a little over half the energy of the WM.

I'm going to restate this,

If kinetic energy is the only deciding factor, then there's no way a 45 acp can be more lethal that a 9mm Luger.

...If kinetic energy is the only deciding factor, a 9mm Luger can be every bit as effective as a 45 ACP.

 

[apdst]

Although deliberately designing a round to be more damaging but less lethal is prohibited by the Geneva conventions, it is OK if that was not the deliberate intent when designing the round.

In a military situation, a living but incapacitated (and preferably conscious enough to be screaming with pain) member of the opposition force is MUCH preferable to a dead one. Of course both are preferable to an uninjured and fully functional one.

The 5.56 round, while it may well not tear the arm off of a member of the opposition force, is likely to produce more painful wounds than the 7.62 on an AGGREGATE basis.

PS - The last time I looked into it, the Swiss military was the only force that actually uses a 5.56 round that is specifically designed to minimize fragmentation and tumbling after impact. Of course, the Swiss also teach their soldiers how to shoot and not to waste ammunition.

The United States didn't sign on to that treaty, if that's the same agreement that bans hollow point ammunition, fragmenting ammunition, etc.

 

[SLC]

Sure, you can rig the comparison. If we're going to do it like that, let's compare a 6.5 CM with a 143 gr bullet to a 300 Win Mag with a 200 gr bullet. The CM can't even come close. At 1,000 yards, the CM has a little over half the energy of the WM.

Stop trying to move the goal posts.

I'm going to restate this,



...If kinetic energy is the only deciding factor, a 9mm Luger can be every bit as effective as a 45 ACP.

That isn't what you originally said. Not when you compare Apples to Apples. When you cherry pick the best 9mm against not the best .45 yes your current statement might be true. But that is a Apples to Oranges comparison. Hornady is a reliable manufacture so again look at their highest preforming 9mm+P [369 ft lbs] and their .45+P [494 ftlb.] The highest kinetic energy of a 45+P that I can find is made by RBCD and it is 828 ftlb. The highest kinetic energy in a 9mm+P that I can find is made by Magsafe and it is 540 ftlb.. So if you compare best to best the .45+P ACP has more kinetic Energy than the 9mm+P has.

 

[Mr Person]

Why would a pistol change modern combat?

Aren't those more of a last-resort weapon, unless you have a knife or bayonet in which case second-to-last?




Article also says:

The new handguns are built with an external safety, self-illuminating sights for low-light conditions, an integrated rail for attaching enablers and an Army standard suppressor conversion kit to attach an acoustic/flash suppressor, service developers said.

I'm confused here. What do they mean? If you're in low-light conditions, not being seen is a plus. How are they illuminating the sights such that it doesn't reveal your position?

 

[Divine_Wind]

...I'm confused here. What do they mean? If you're in low-light conditions, not being seen is a plus. How are they illuminating the sights such that it doesn't reveal your position?

The sights glow softly from the view of the shooter, but not any other angle or very far.

 

[Mr Person]

The sights glow softly from the view of the shooter, but not any other angle or very far.

But wouldn't it reflect on the polished black portions of it? I was looking at pictures. They seemed to be mostly matte-brown (a light brown), but there were definitely polished black sections on the top

 

[Divine_Wind]

But wouldn't it reflect on the polished black portions of it? I was looking at pictures. They seemed to be mostly matte-brown (a light brown), but there were definitely polished black sections on the top

I’m guessing the final product will all be matted because you are correct; shiny surfaces reflect light.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

The United States didn't sign on to that treaty, if that's the same agreement that bans hollow point ammunition, fragmenting ammunition, etc.

Why not go and look it up for yourself?

You appear to be thinking of

"The Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects as amended on 21 December 2001(CCW)"
​

and, the US agreed to that convention on April 8, 1982 (when Ronald Reagan was the President of the United States of America) - but didn't actually get around to ratifying it until March 24, 1995 (when William J. Clinton Jr. was the President of the United States of America).

Thank you for, once again, confirming that you don't know what you are talking about.

BTW, did you know that "the United States didn't sign on to that treaty" does not, in the least, diminish the truth of what I posted. Of course you did, you just hoped that others would be so stupid as to think that it did.

 

[apdst]

Why not go and look it up for yourself?

You appear to be thinking of

"The Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects as amended on 21 December 2001(CCW)"
​

and, the US agreed to that convention on April 8, 1982 (when Ronald Reagan was the President of the United States of America) - but didn't actually get around to ratifying it until March 24, 1995 (when William J. Clinton Jr. was the President of the United States of America).

Thank you for, once again, confirming that you don't know what you are talking about.

BTW, did you know that "the United States didn't sign on to that treaty" does not, in the least, diminish the truth of what I posted. Of course you did, you just hoped that others would be so stupid as to think that it did.

I was referring to this:

In a significant shift, the military told industry representatives last week that it’s considering switching from full metal jacket to hollow-point rounds for its standard-issue sidearm ammunition. While hollow points are commonly used by police and civilians, they are banned in international warfare under the 1899 Hague Convention‘s early laws of war that the United States has followed even though the U.S. government never ratified the agreement.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&sou...aw08_gH538zmbAq3lAMBommn&ust=1544402429852998

Looks like you aren't as smart as you thought. How's that 455 norma express working out for you?

 

[apdst]

Stop trying to move the goal posts.

That isn't what you originally said. Not when you compare Apples to Apples. When you cherry pick the best 9mm against not the best .45 yes your current statement might be true. But that is a Apples to Oranges comparison. Hornady is a reliable manufacture so again look at their highest preforming 9mm+P [369 ft lbs] and their .45+P [494 ftlb.] The highest kinetic energy of a 45+P that I can find is made by RBCD and it is 828 ftlb. The highest kinetic energy in a 9mm+P that I can find is made by Magsafe and it is 540 ftlb.. So if you compare best to best the .45+P ACP has more kinetic Energy than the 9mm+P has.

I'm merely pointing out that a 9mm can be just as lethal as a 45 ACP.

 

[TurtleDude]

Logistics are ALWAYS a part of military.

Unless, of course, you are Sgt. Rock using the "John Wayne Special" (which can be fired, in full automatic mode, with one hand and has an infinite supply of cartridges - all of which are capable of penetrating a tank's armour).

You must have been watching a MSNBC report on why "assault weapons" need to be banned!

 

[TurtleDude]

I'm merely pointing out that a 9mm can be just as lethal as a 45 ACP.

yep, the argument is stopping power=not killing power.

 

[apdst]

yep, the argument is stopping power=not killing power.

The argument that was presented is that kinetic energy is the primary deciding factor in regards to a round's leathality and if that's the case, the 9mm can be just as lethal as the 45 ACP. It was in response to the hype surrounding the 6.6 CM.