Instagram
FULL30 Blog
Member Map
FULL30 Store
Giveaway Page
Ammo.com Gift
Tactical Reviews
SOG Donations
being a more than 8 rounds old school (BHP) I am leaning towards the M9
I’ve never shot a Sig, but I regret selling my 92FS. It was easy to field strip and clean, never jammed or malfunctioned, and very accurate.
The beretta with some threads is on my 2019 list of needs
I had to turn in many units 1911s for those 9mm crap. Tho I own a Sig 45, which is the best handgun Ive ever shot. They dont use the P220, only the cops, so I have to stay with the 1911.
Beretta 92FS is one of my all time favorite pistols. I have more than one now… the ones I carry all have been converted to the G model.
Sure they have some down falls, but I can shoot them. Great to suppress too.
While I love Sig… and own quite a few of them, I do not like the 320
I only own one 1911…
Give me that M17. M9 is a big clunky boat anchor that hates it’s own locking block. I absolutely love my P320.
M9A3 with the G-kit. If we have more options than my answer would be different.
If only between those two? The M9. The 1911 gets my vote if we opened up the options.
Glocks are clunky,
M9s are huge and clumsy.
I vote for the 1911.
If the troops had been taught how to properly use them, they’d never been replaced.
Perhaps if the designers had smaller hands or did not seem to add much more ammo capacity, it may have been a more universal application. Same guys were doing pretty well with Brigadier/Helwan as more easily used. I will not disparage Beretta, they have made elegant firearms in all areas of use. My opinion is for the 1911 basic design that has over a 100 years of a success rate that I have difficulty ignoring. They also are especially able for varying personal modifications. Just a thought.
I would take that 92S over the new Sig.
Now I can agree with that.
funny
going over this after “time”
have a M9, have a R9 (Turkish Army version of the M9A3), have a M17 (not a 320), even have Beretta APX (early version and milspec) and quite a few FN/Browning/Inglis HiPowers.
would still take the Hipower with the more modern magazines but would have the APX as my second choice.
the common element is that they are all 9mm, and it has been discussed in exstenso that it is better to put smaller and more holes in something than a little more than 1/2 dozen next to it.
it is cost that rules military sidearms not stopping power or muzzle energy. Besides that a great man once said you use your sidearm to fight to get to your rifle.
Yep I’m old. 1911
Yep that seems to be the view all of the worlds militaries too. I will be drifting that way myself I guess. First by getting alternate caliber setups to 9mm for the 40’s. The new tech bullets and to a small degree powders, have made that a acceptable move.
Not sure who said this but it made sense to me and sounded like he was a smart guy:
Paraphrasing:
'You use a pistol to fight your way to the rifle you shouldn’t have left. You use rifles to slow 'em up for the artillery to pin them down so air support can kill ‘em.’
My Marine father in law disagreed. His opinion is “that scenario is a fuck up start to finish.” 
Clint Smith
Bahahahahaaaa
In reality… from my experience…
If I had them all lined up on a table… ALL of them…
#1 would be a Glock (I know it didn’t make the trials, but the 19X is my favorite)
#2 would be the Sig Sauer (I forget the name of the P226 the Navy picked up… MK25? )
#3 is the Beretta M9
#4 Hi-Power (Browning or FN)
#5 1911 (and that would be an act of defiance LOL)
Well, neither of those since I doubt that they would fit my hand. My choices would be either a M&P, Walther PPQ or the later version (I have CRS), Or the H&K VP9 (again CRS, I think that’s the name). But the reality is that I too believe they’re for fighting my way to a rifle and I would take my SBR into the shower with me so I’d never be able to justify the additional weight.
I also like the 1911 in .45ACP flavor and I have 5 decades of experience with it. While it doesn’t fit me well, I have learned to accommodate it.
