Which handgun do you think will replace pic-related POS? Which do you hope does?
Sig P320 is the only one that meets requirements.
>>28877376
>beretta
>pos
it's okay, we were all noguns at some point.
sig will probably get the contract.
Seems like a big deal for a firearm that won't be used 99% of the time.
>>28877376
>think
Well, honestly probably with the way politics are going if it's replaced either a S&W M&P, or a One of those new striker fired SIGs whose name escapes me right now.
>want
Well, completely out of left field, but one of those full auto CZ-75s, or a Jericho/Tanfoglio handgun.
But that'll never happen.
>>28877423
I use mine all the time in pistol only matches.
>>28877415
Really the biggest problems the M9 faces are age and capacity.
Why don't they use 10mm glocks?
>>28877449
>capacity
yeah, 15 round standard capacity, or 17 round with more modern mags, is pretty bad. the m9a3 would have done the military just fine, especially seeing as how they wouldn't have to change training at all. but a new handgun won't really affect much anyway.
>>28877457
don't expect a caliber change anytime in the next few decades.
All the former warsaw coutnries that joined nato, just changed to 9x19 pistols in the last decade or so.
>>28877376
The Marines have already done it. Back to the reliable Colt 1911.
>>28877449
The biggest problem it faces is dipshits that think it's primary use is to hammer in tent stakes.
>>28877545
its primary use is to hammer in tent stakes though. who the fuck actually uses their sidearm?
Couple thoughts:
-Apparently 9mm was getting shit reviews from the ME. And this is why its open caliber competition.
-The US military seems to have it out for the Beretta. The m9a3 could've been introduced seamlessly. US still noped without really saying why.
>>28877376
Glock already got a contract for MP's and SOF use in all 5 branches. US SF and Army MP's are getting Glock 19's (SF have had them as an option for 10 years now), Navy SP's and SEALs are getting Glock 19's, USAF SOF (PJ's, CCT's) are getting Glock 17's, MARSOC is ditching their 1911's for Glock 19's, and USCG is switching branch-wide to Glock 17's.
It's literally a matter of time til they change the criteria for a service-wide standard issue pistol and do away with the manual safety.
>>28877501
I thought they wanted something with more oomf, and were eyeing up .45acp again.
If they're sticking with 9mm, why not glock 17L with the 33 round magazines. Could they not perform as a service pistol? I'm only familiar with glock and sig s>>28877501
>>28877415
>slide mounted safety
>completely non-adjustable sights, not even drift adjustable
>still required to use the 15rd mag
The civilian 92FS and 92G are fine pistols. The military M9 and M9A1 are giant pieces of shit that only superficially resemble civvy-available models.
>>28877602
>The civilian 92FS and 92G are fine pistols.
I fucking hope so since I just got one.
Srs tho, I love my 92FS already.
>>28877565
This, handguns have barely changed since the 80s and they're probably the least important weapon fielded.
>>28877577
>without really saying why
It's heavy, still absurdly low capacity for its bulk and weight (the government bid for the M9A3 still had the 15rd mag from 1986 and the government would be contractually prohibited from using aftermarket mags), literally nobody likes a slide-mounted safety, and the grip was big enough around that the females couldn't hold it properly much less comfortably.
All of that came from official DoD statements.
>>28877577
>US still noped without really saying why.
It was because of the fucking stupid slide mounted safety that no one likes, but beretta still uses for some unknown reason.
if they just went back to the actually good frame safety, it would have probably been accepted.
the army said soldiers engaged the safety during malfunction drills. beretta made it so the safety could just be a decocker instead, but ultimately it probably would have been better to change the design completely.
>>28877642
>literally nobody likes a slide-mounted safety
It's literally not even that hard to manipulate..
>>28877602
>slide mounted safety
It was required by the Army and it's not really a big deal. You're sweeping your thumb down in the same motion you use for a frame safety either way.
The only difficulty with it is accidentally engaging the decocker/safety when you charge the slide, and it's really not like it happens super easily even if you do.
>completely non-adjustable sights
Only the front sight is machined into the slide, the rear sight isn't, and no other service pistols have adjustable sights, nor would they be necessary as long as the pistol is factory zeroed, which virtually all decent ones are.
>still required to use the 15rd mag
No.
>The military M9 and M9A1 are giant pieces of shit that only superficially resemble civvy-available models.
Please stop posting.
>>28877602
>The civilian 92FS and 92G are fine pistols. The military M9 and M9A1 are giant pieces of shit
they're literally the same fucking gun. military m9s are just in horrible condition from retards bashing the shit out of them for 30 years.
>>28877597
They are wanting something with more oomph, but are most likely either going to change the NATO pressure requirements for a higher grain weight bullet at similar velocities (perhaps a 135 or 147gr supersonic load), or do away with ball ammo for combat use just like they recently did with 5.56 (brown-tip mk262 is a Barnes TTSX expanding bullet).
>>28877656
you have to take into consideration the caliber if retards the military has enlisting.
the 92 with a frame safety is much nicer to use though.
The only people who complain about the M9 are manlets who can't get their munchkin hands around the grip.
>>28877694
>you have to take into consideration the caliber if retards the military has enlisting.
I learned it. Are they really that stupid?
>>28877698
ya.
ya.
>>28877709
>ya.
>>28877698
>Are they really that stupid?
>>28877656
>it's literally not even that hard to manipulate...
Until you have to do it with the hand holding the fucking gun because it sits a full inch above the tip of most non-ET-handed people's thumb.
>>28877658
>the only difficulty with it is accidentally engaging the decocker/safety
Don't forget reaching it, since it sits so fucking far above the grip. There's a reason almost everybody has to use their off-hand to manipulate the safety.
>only the front sight is machined into the slide
True, but every military M9 I ever touched had the rear sight pinned in place so it couldn't be drifted side to side in its dovetail. Furthermore some of them were pinned so far off zero they were hitting several YARDS to the side of a fullsize silhouette at 25 yards.
Find me one single instance of a military organization issuing a 17rd Beretta mag. Please. I beg you.
And until you do, sit down and STFU.
>>28877663
No they're not. They're similar. They use a different (weaker) locking block and the safety is somewhat difficult.
>>28877773
>most non-ET-handed
>MFW I forgot I have larger hands than most people
Oops.
>>28877773
I can flick the safety on and off without adjusting my grip. if you cant do that (seems a lot of people cant?) then I wouldn't carry the thing
>>28877773
>There's a reason almost everybody has to use their off-hand to manipulate the safety.
You're so painfully nogunz it hurts.
Just admit it, you've never been in any military and you've never touched a Beretta.
>>28877773
>There's a reason almost everybody has to use their off-hand to manipulate the safety.
you're a manlet, right? I'm completely average height with small-medium gloves, and I have no problem working the safety.
>>28877642
>All of that came from official DoD statements.
>> Read: Whiny pussy political appointees
>>28877449
No the biggest problem is the slide-mounted safety, then the capacity, then the weight/grip width, and finally the trigger. Other than those things it's a good gun.
![34751boy-large[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/7jShnn9.jpg "34751boy-large[1].jpg")
>>28877773
>No they're not. They're similar. They use a different (weaker) locking block and the safety is somewhat difficult.
except you're wrong, and just proved how fucking stupid you are in this entire post.
christ, I bet even this kid could reach the safety no problem one handed.
>>28877866
why is everyone bitching about capacity? when did 15-17 rounds become low capacity?
>>28877773
are you confusing the slide stop with the safety? I have to adjust my grip a little bit to hit the slide stop one handed. but I can't imagine anyone can't reach the safety
>>28877866
>the biggest problem is the slide-mounted safety
>>28877834
>>28877904
For the size and weight, you could easily have a handgun with 20+ rounds in it.
>>28877698
Worse.
>>28877773
I do agree the slide safety is not as good as a frame safety.
They just need to use a low-profile safety, and that pretty much solves the problem.
>Don't forget reaching it, since it sits so fucking far above the grip
Not even my 5'5" cousin had any trouble reaching the safety lever...
>Furthermore some of them were pinned so far off zero they were hitting several YARDS to the side of a fullsize silhouette at 25 yards
.... no, whoever were shooting are just bad shooters with terrible skills.
Also, you need to provide several pictures to prove you handled a real military M9 at a military base, and that the rear sights are off.
>Find me one single instance of a military organization issuing a 17rd Beretta mag
It is very difficult to say none of them are using the 17rd mag since there are a lot of mil-organization using Beretta 92/M9
>>28877925
>20+ rounds in it.
No, you couldn't.
But you could have 18rd. flush or 20rd. with slightly chunky baseplates, both of which are commonly available for Berettas and have been for a long time.
The military just hasn't bothered to upgrade.
>>28877943
>People trained to work tanks, artillery, missiles, and god knows what else are too stupid to figure out an M9's slide safety
>>28877925
what side arm has 20+ rounds as standard capacity? there are flush 18 round beretta mags.
>>28877904
>>28877925
15rd is fairly low cap for current standard.
However, Mec-Gar does sell 18rd flush fitting mag for the M9/92, so I don't see the problem
>>28877834
>>28877906
Not that guy, but that picture implies that you need to flick the safety down to take it off, when it's the other way around. And his hand is still off the grip. It's just extremely awkward and unergonomic unless you've got thumbs like E.T. This is why the 92G is the best of the line.
>>28877986
the m9a3 ships with 17 rounders, doesn't it?
>>28877992
dude, stop. the problem isn't that the safety is hard to use. it's that people sometimes have a problem with engaging it when clearing a malfunction.
>>28877984
To answer your question, the FiveseveN. But of course if you wanted it to be 9mm you would have to use aftermarket mags.
>>28877992
> but that picture implies that you need to flick the safety down to take it off
No, it implies you need to move your thumb in a forward and down motion to take the safety off, which is the proper way to deactivate the safety.
>It's just extremely awkward and unergonomic unless you've got thumbs like E.T.
I have absolutely dead center of average size hands if Google is to be believed, and it's not even remotely a stretch for me to use the safety with a full grip, I could still hit it if it were even higher and further forward.
You haven't held or shot a Beretta, this much is obvious from your posts.
>>28877992
Have you handled a 92/M9?
You barely have to change your grip to engage or disengage the safety.
The tension of the safety lever is very weak, hence why it is easy to engage or disengage it unintentionally.
The best solution for a standard model is to have a low-profile lever.
Or, like you said, a G model. But with a standard size safety, it is still easy to engage it, having a double stage trigger when you don't want it to. (of course, it is better than a dead trigger)
>>28877376
>pic-related POS
Fuck you. The 92 was _never_ the problem. The training and management by the DoD was, has, and always shall be.
>>28878055
or just mount the safety on the frame like it used to be. beretta already made the frame safety a decocker on the m9a3, and the army still rejected even considering it.
>>28877984
I have 'almost' flush fitting 20 rd mags in my Px4
When will the meme end? Use a slide mounted safety sometime. There is literally no difference. Holy shit.
>>28878021
M9A3 pistols do come with 17rd mags.
In the civilian world, having that option had long been a possibility.
However, that is the very first time Beretta ships their pistol with them.
After all these years Beretta finally decided to add 2 extra rounds, and proposed to the Military their 'new upgrade'.
On the side note, it was the military that decided to cheap out on the M9 mags which caused many failures and stirred up a bad rep for the M9
>>28878030
But I have. My dad owns an early 92f and I've shot it countless times. You can like it all you want but you'll never be able to convince me that the safety isn't slow clunky aids.
>>28877524
LOL no. They only bougot a few and dumped them on POGs. Marsoc and some other high speed marines are using something else now, in 9mm.
>>28878055
That's only true if you're supporting it with your off-hand. It is undeniably slower than a frame-mounted safety. You simply need to move your thumb further. And if it's coming out of a holster, it's even worse. I would also disagree with you on how easy it is to flick on/off. The one I've shot was fairly stiff.
>>28878096
Yeah the same at the range maybe. Unless you want to be able to shoot your gun quickly that is.
>>28878086
I really like the frame mounted safety.
I've handled a 92 Billennium and a 92 Steel II.
Beretta did the right thing on their original M92, but like you already know, it was the military contracts that called for a slide safety.
They should really just put a low-pro safety on the pistol... that would solve the biggest issue with the M9/92
>>28878058
I love the M9/92 and I like the PX4... but damn is the APX ugly looking holy shit.
>>28878111
>M-m-my dad's gun!
That's what I thought.
>>28878134
> It is undeniably slower than a frame-mounted safety.
>s-s-so slow!
God you are an unbearably petulant faggot.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTkjlKyPKqs
>Oh no, I have to move my thumb fractions of an inch more!
Doesn't seem to be an issue if you're even remotely competent.
>>28878089
that's not standard capacity, and berettas have 20 round mags too.
>>28878110
>After all these years Beretta finally decided to add 2 extra rounds, and proposed to the Military their 'new upgrade'.
they didn't just slap two more rounds in and send it in. you get a lot of gun for the money really.
>>28877969
You assume bubba and fudd actually know what they're doing behind the fancy and powerful tech. There's a reason dod wants it all to be push button these days.
>>28878147
Still no difference.
Everybody carrying a pistol in a holster should be able to draw and disengage the safety in one smooth motion, regardless of type.
>>28878134
>You simply need to move your thumb further
To engage the safety, yes.
To disengage the safety, no.
There is a moderate amount of force from the spring that helps to spring back the lever to the fire mode. It is extremely easy to put it to fire.
Not going to argue anymore since obviously you still need to learn more about the M9/92
>>28878180
So what? Does it make you upset that I shoot with my dad? Want me to take a picture of my guns?
>That video
You can't even tell if his safety is on to begin with faggot
>>28878188
I was talking about the mag only, not the entire package. I do like the M9A3 package available to the civilian market.
>>28878243
>d-dad? Can I take a picture of your guns? Someone on the internet is bullying me :(
>>28878243
go to 1:03 and see how amazingly difficult it is to disengage the safety.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0NGti6yX18
>>28878188
the Px4 _is_ a Beretta, nogunz
'standard capacity' is a moving target. Police carrying brand Z are going to get the magazines that fix the need best. Trying to apply the same logic to the us military is useless.
>>28878303
Kek.
>>28878272
How am I getting bullied? Your're the only one butthurt about your gun's terrible safety design. I don't even dislike the gun overall, but autists like you who go out of there way to defend their purchase from any insult are a pitiful spectacle.
>>28878303
What is this meant to disprove? The only time he disengaged the safety one handed, he had to change his grip.
>>28878243
No, it's just obvious you've never shot a Beretta, so unless your pictures prove otherwise, no. Really, just stop trying.
>You can't even tell if his safety is on to begin with faggot
Stoeger and Langdon both ran 92fs when they won USPS championships.
Stop trying so hard.
>>28878362
>You need to own a gun to prove that it has undesirable qualities! Firing one simply won't do!
>Stoeger and Langdon both ran 92fs when they won USPS championships.
Am I supposed to care? I said the safety was bad. I didn't say you couldn't shoot paper with it.
>>28878358
>he had to
you're really fucking stupid.
here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0VxLkqm--U
this guy made a video just for people as dumb as you.
notice how he doesn't change his grip at all to disengage the safety, regardless of the way he disengages it.
he even wrote it out for you.
>The fastest, most positive way to disengage the Beretta slide mounted safety. Summary: Center the pistol in the web of your hand, ie assume the correct grip. The thumb starts up high, bumps the safety forward with the first joint, and finishes in a down and forward motion.
.>YFW it's replaced by Hi-Point
>>28878404
That's the point, you've never fired one and it's obvious.
Again, stop trying so hard.
>I didn't say you couldn't shoot paper with it.
>shoot paper
Oh boy, please tell us all about how you know which guns are good for TACTICAL FIGHTING COMBAT.
>>28877613
One of these days I'm gonna get a 92fs and channel my inner Martin Riggs
>>28878469
>YFW the one carrying the .357 Smith calls the Beretta 'some serious hardware'
>>28878406
That's cool. The one my dad has either isn't spring loaded or it's sticky. You can't move it unless you sweep up. You're still a faggot though.
>>28878528
this is the problem with pretending you're an expert on a gun when you've only seen your dads maybe once or twice.
>they never went with pic or at the least the m11
Whatever, as much as slide mounted safeties are shit, there is literally no real reason to replace the m9 at this point.
>>28878469
Be like me and find an early '92 inox basically new in the box and live out all of your '90s action movie fantasies in style.
>>28878555
>90s
>>28878465
>There's simply no way someone could fire the same gun as me and dislike what I like!
How do you function with autism this severe.
>Oh boy, please tell us all about how you know which guns are good for TACTICAL FIGHTING COMBAT.
The ones with no safeties are ideal. Other stuff can be good too, but I don't think that it's as good.
>>28878555
Mid/late '80s through '90s, either way works really.
The inox always reminds me of "Rush Hour."
>>28878576
>Get called out for blatant lies
>Muh muh dad owns one!
>Y-y-you're an autist!
Reaction images next?
>The ones with no safeties are ideal. Other stuff can be good too, but I don't think that it's as good.
Obviously opinions formed under extensive combat experience.
>>28878541
>pretending you're an expert
Lmao I said that I thought the safety was bad. Why do people not troll berettafags as much? The butthurt is unreal.
>>28878647
you said the safety was bad, having no real experience using it. I prefer 92s with frame safeties. I don't really like the slide safety. but you went full retard and claimed you need huge hands to use it without changing your grip.
>>28878576
Any gun safety be it on the frame slide or non existing is really preference. If you have a firearm , any firearm you stake and will trust with your life then you will know how to draw it and aim in fire condition.
In all if it's a range toy then it dosent matter and you can bitch about it but it dosent mean that the gun is in any way bad or inferior. If it's a CCW or a HD gun then it goes without saying you better know that gun better than your own cock and train with it.training , training and training will eliminate the whole "slide safety is shit " crap and will perform the same as a gun without it. Again , training is key and muse be done with all guns , but extra training must be done ontop of that if it's a gun you will stake your life on. Goes the same with the whole striker/DA/SA crap to.
>>28878703
>better than your own cock
what if your cock is your ccw or hd weapon?
>>28878727
Then know it better , train your cock to ejaculate within a second and also train it to have a backup cumshot. Range is always a issue so kegals.
>>28878660
I already told you I did though. You said that I was lying because I have a negative opinion of it. Literally worse than glockfags and czfags combined.
I can't manipulate it one handed without changing my grip. But as I discovered in an earlier post, some others have safeties that are apparently spring loaded which seems to help that problem. I still think it's retarded to have the safety go up to fire.
>>28878703
I don't disagree with any of that. But it's still an additional thing to train for if you choose a da/sa or gun with a safety (not that they can't be as good).
>>28877960
The CZ P-09 is lighter and holds 19 + 1 you stupid bitch.
>>28878762
>that are apparently spring loaded
you mean like literally every single one of them?
you can't manipulate it one handed because you've probably used it maybe one time and never tried to manipulate it one handed. fuck, even if you disengaged it the wrong way that most people use, it's easy to do one handed.
>>28878809
Bro, just let it go.
The kid has been backtracking and tripping over his own posts for the last 30min. now trying to save face.
Just let him go back to CoD or whatever containment board he came from.
![courtesy-smith-wessonforum.com_1[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/ArlVRCv.jpg "courtesy-smith-wessonforum.com_1[1].jpg")
>mfw my carry gun does require you to push up on the safety, and I still have no problem with it because I'm not a little bitch nigga
>>28878809
>you mean like literally every single one of them?
No, since the one I fired doesn't disengage when you flick down like in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0VxLkqm--U
>you can't manipulate it one handed because you've probably used it maybe one time and never tried to manipulate it one handed.
I said I couldn't manipulate the safety one-handed without moving my grip. You don't need to make things up, my earlier posts are right there.
>fuck, even if you disengaged it the wrong way that most people use, it's easy to do one handed.
I disagree.
>>28877400
You really think that they will adopt a plastics frame pistols
>>28878891
yes
>>28878876
you're just a really weak bitch then. not even a weak bitch is that weak actually. maybe you're just a toddler?
>>28878829
>>28878829
My fuckin nigga
I fucking love my p64. I don't EDC it but it is by far my favorite pistol. I bought an extra set of used grips just so I could mess around a little bit and paint it dark green. Shit is cash
>>28878898
I don't think you're old enough to own guns. Your big brother probably showed you an old John Woo movie and you decided you liked the Beretta because it looked cool. Now here you are shitposting on /k/ about your favorite movie gun. Guess what? There's better stuff in real life.
>>28878820
basically this, yeah.
>>28878949
What does /k/ think of CZ's submission?
![5462793+_d41dea25add997c877454e9c18ced60c[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/m8VEIe6.jpg "5462793+_d41dea25add997c877454e9c18ced60c[1].jpg")
>>28878998
who jizzed in the ejection port?
>>28877602
>>28877613
>tfw have owned a stainless 92fs for a few years now
feels gud man
>>28878998
>serial number has USxxxxx
Are CZs made in the US now?
>>28879034
US means Ugo Slavia.
>>28879034
That's the serial for their MK27 series of pistols. The MK27 is the replacement for the Sig Sauer P226 Mk25 which has been dumped by the Navy Seals due to reliability issues.
>>28879075
What the fuck happened to the MK26?
>>28877376
Genuinely, I think a high-capacity .45 would fill the void pretty well.
>>28878120
you're a funny guy.
1911 is a great design, and .45 is definitely not off the table, although the same can't be said for the 1911 design.
Genuinely thinking a decent modern .45 offering could take the cake if anyone bothers to enter one into the running.
I love my 92fs. I was shooting a glock the other day and realized how inferior it is. Plus, I know everyone is tacticool, but the 92fs is the best looking 9mm there is bar-none.
>>28879075
>MK27
That's not even a thing, you idiot.
>P226 Mk25 which has been dumped by the Navy Seals due to reliability issues.
They haven't dropped anything, the 226 is just slowly being phased out because it's old and if you're going to carry a sidearm it might as well be light, proven, and already in the system, which is why they're sticking with the G19 and Mk.24 for the handful of times it's necessary.
>>28879093
Yeah, I agree. Even though I don't shoot as well with it and I wouldn't trust the reliability as much as a glock or something, I think it looks way better than any other 9mm pistol besides maybe the p210.
>>28879160
That's fair. I would agree with that.
>>28878469
Do it.
I got a 1991 ex police 92fs in a Galco Miami shoulder holster.
I channel my inner Riggs and McClane a lot at the range.
>>28878030
>t implies you need to move your thumb in a forward and down motion to take the safety off, which is the proper way to deactivate the safety.
You mean "forward and up."
>>28879377
you don't move your thumb forward and up. you move it forward and down.
>>28877376
>Beretta
>PBS
I bet you shove a dildo up your assistance and call out Gaston's name, huh?
>>28877376
They will run through all the testing, spend millions, find the cheapest candidate, and then scrap the whole program because the gun they chose is shit.
>>28877773
>Don't forget reaching it, since it sits so fucking far above the grip. There's a reason almost everybody has to use their off-hand to manipulate the safety.
The fuck. If you can't reach that safety you won't be able to reach a frame mounted one either. You've obviously never held the gun. Stop posting.
>>28880409
Fuck Beretta, fuck Glock.
Fuck you.
>>28880623
Fuck everything!
>Goddamn nihilists.
>>28880681
I vill cut off your johnson!
>everything
>Beretta and Glock are the only choices BRUH!
Fuck me running I hate this site.
>>28880695
You know I've seen a shitton of Glock, Beretta, and Sig threads.
I almost quit this site. Almost. I was a year sober. And then I thought, "Hey, one more time won't hurt."
You can check out anytime you like, but you can never leave.
>>28880710
>You know I've seen a shitton of Glock, Beretta, and Sig threads.
Fuck Sig too, not even the same company that churned out high quality P210s.
>>28880728
You know what I like? Walther. They okay.
>>28880736
Stop posting.
>>28880740
No u.
>>28880746
4u.
>>28880751
This is how I feel right now
>>28880754
Welcome to the club.
>>28880763
Seriously tho, fuck Glock
>rename /k/ to /g19/
>>28880766
Fuck everything in the handgun world except KRISS, they're just too expensive for this application though.
>no 10mm Sphinx 3000
>life is suffering
>>28880778
>nihilism
>>28880784
You know it to be true.
>>28878762
>I can't manipulate it one handed without changing my grip
Manlet detected.
I think all of us are forgetting the obvious solution.
>>28880867
Goddammit you're going to attract the muh 9mm polymer crowd.
>>28880885
>mfw it works
>>28880897
>>28877986
Am I the only one who thinks that a three round difference from 15 to 18 really isn't a big deal?
>>28880923
No.
>>28880970
It's good to not be alone.
>>28880923
To me it isn't either, but it is still good to have 3 more rounds in the mag. And with a little bit more protrusion under the grip, you can get a 20rd mag, so that is 5 extra more rounds.
A lot of people agree jumping from a 8rd 1911 mag to a 12rd USP45 mag is a big deal, and that is 4 additional rounds.
>>28881083
>A lot of people agree jumping from a 8rd 1911 mag to a 12rd USP45 mag is a big deal, and that is 4 additional rounds.
As if that matters, you capacity faggots will never quit, just develop a belt fed pistol and fuck off already.
>>28881083
Well between capacity and these fags circle jerking each other about how nonleathal pistol cartridges are makes it seem more like a moot point.
>>28877449
>capacity?
U wot m8?
I owned one and it held 17+1, how is there a capacity problem? The only thing I didn't like was it was too big for my bitch mits.
The m9a3 toned down the grip and magwell and is a much more comfortable gun.
>>28877642
>and the grip was big enough around that the females couldn't hold it properly much less comfortably
yeah but when it comes to big black dick they grip that just fine
fucking unbelievable
>>28881156
What are you even talking about?
This right here is the winner.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygMFIyC4Ihw
>>28881156
>>>/pol/
We're here to talk about guns.
>>28878465
...tactical fighting combat
>>28878202
>play original insurgency mod
>muhreen brings up his M9
>uses left hand to disengage safety
>cringe
>realize it would probably be done the very same way irl by a muhreen with short fingers
>>28877415
It's a piece of shit.
Source: Infantry M240B gunner
>>28881388
Like that gives you any credibility.
Also, your M9s are fucked up because grunts don't give a shit about them and the armorer gives even less of a shit.
>>28881163
female service members should be an afterthought considering they dont actually enter combat, which is the only place a sidearm will be used even if its extremely rare.
>>28878891
Seals are using a glock now. Or it's option at least.
>>28881388
>Enlisted scum
>Thinks his opinion matters
Don't you have some fat whore to marry or something?
>>28881730
The accepted term is "dependapotamus".
This is now a dependa thread
>>28881712
Show me a picture of a SEAL using a Glock.
>>28877597
>I thought they wanted something with more oomf, and were eyeing up .45acp again.
that's what .45 fags want to believe, but that's not going to happen.
>>28878058
>tfw no centurion size 9000S
>>28878134
You disengage the safety on the draw stroke bro, when you drive your hand down along the gun you push your thumb forward and the spring tension helps flick it off. The people that hate the gun are actively trying to do so. It's not my personal preference either but it's nowhere near as big of a problem as people make it out to be
>>28878576
>the ones with no safeties are ideal
Tell that to all the enlisted that manage to ND with a DA/SA with a safety, decocker and lci
Behold, the hardest safety to manipulate of all time.
But seriously, I don't get the hate. And much like this anon said >>28884032
generally speaking, you disengage the safety as you reach down to unholster the pistol, or as you bring it up. It takes absolutely no time at all and is quite fluid.
>>28884134
Holy shit, I forgot to change the resolution. Ha.
