Army Rejects M9A3 Proposal, Opts for New Pistol

[Bama.45]

lol

[Tru-Heathen]

Need to correct my earlier post . It's FN that has the contract for M-4's not HK. (Brain F*rt )

[Morne]

Then we would all start buying Taurus.

What do you mean, "Start?"

[WY_Not]

Hey now, I resemble that remark. I may be the odd man out but the three Taurus firearms that I own have all functioned flawlessly and accurately with lots of rounds downrange and many types of rounds downrange. Only reason I don't carry my PT145 is because I've never been able to find a really good holster for it (haven't tried too hard either) and because of the it weighs so much more than my 1911.

[Javelin Man]

Hey now, I resemble that remark. I may be the odd man out but the three Taurus firearms that I own have all functioned flawlessly and accurately with lots of rounds downrange and many types of rounds downrange. Only reason I don't carry my PT145 is because I've never been able to find a really good holster for it (haven't tried too hard either) and because of the it weighs so much more than my 1911.

I've carried my PT145 in the winter and I read "Springfield XD" on the back of the holster that came with it. Fits nice. And it might be heavier only because it's carrying more ammo, but I think it's lighter than a 1911.

[Klingon00]

I also feel a Glock with modern 9mm expanding ammo would be best but the reality of the matter is, the military seems to think the Hague Convention means that proper self defense ammo has no place on the battlefield. How sporting of them.

Add to this that the military seems to be adverse to anything without a safety and there's still much resistance to use of better materials (polymer).

Since S&W seems about the only manufacturer who's pushing a polymer handgun in the MHS trials, they are my second favorite choice that I'm rooting for.

[carmen fovozzo]

For shame on us if we should shoot Isis with a hollow point...that would not be civilized....give me a break Geneva..

[WY_Not]

There is always the argument that the Geneva convention doesn't apply to them or the other terrorist groups as they are not a uniformed army associated with a recognized government.

For shame on us if we should shoot Isis with a hollow point...that would not be civilized....give me a break Geneva..

[Klingon00]

It does seem a little silly that we have cluster munitions, atomic bombs, calymore mines and all sorts of other horrors of war but we get our underwear in a bunch over using hollow point bullets in a primarily self defense pistol.

[Brian D.]

These trials have been as much circus as science over the years. Whatever they end up with won't be the best choice at the best price or anywhere too close.

[CCIman]

Just using Taurus as a a specific example of an unpopular brand that everyone like to spit on, even though they have never owned one. Guns are like a religion: make derisive remarks and owners get up in arms like you just insulted their mother.

I have had several taurus' myself (including a PT1911 ).


te="Morne"]

Then we would all start buying Taurus.

What do you mean, "Start?" [/quote]

[Bama.45]

I've owned a few Taurus revolvers... Never had a problem with them either... I also owned a Rossi .357... That was a sweet shooting revolver... Had the 4"ported barrel...wish I had it now lol.

[JediSkipdogg]

I say they just go with Hipoints.

[Bama.45]

Hipoints are some of the ugliest guns I think I have ever seen.

[WY_Not]

Nah. I've got a couple of them and plenty of other brands/models. By no means a fanboy of Taurus or any other brands. I'm a fanboy of what I have that WORKS well for ME. Everything I own was bought for a reason; price, performance, fun, or some combo of those. I just hate seeing them, or other brands, lambasted without some opposing viewpoints. If I get a firearm that is a lemon or a pain, I have no qualms about pointing it out. Example: My Rugar LCP. It isn't fancy, it isn't some piece of eye candy, the sights are very basic, and it can be abusive to shoot it for extended situations. But, I love being able to carry it in my back pocket looking like a wallet for those situations when I can't carry the 1911. It has its purpose and within those limited situations it works well. If I ever choose to buy another Taurus and it lives up to its internet reputation I'll gladly {inappropriate language} and moan and complain.

Like I said, regardless of their reputation, I've had good luck with the ones I have. That and I'm a curmudgeon.

Back on topic, I can't wait to see what the Army picks as a replacement. Never liked the looks of the M9s and the when I shot them during SAFS they were a rattletrap. Of course those CMP M9s have probably seen a LOT of use.

Just using Taurus as a a specific example of an unpopular brand that everyone like to spit on, even though they have never owned one. Guns are like a religion: make derisive remarks and owners get up in arms like you just insulted their mother.