New MARSOC gun?

[BLR]

http://soldiersystems.net/2012/07/16/sources-report-marsoc-purchase-1000-colt-1911a1-rail-guns/

Hardly significant when compared with the 450k M9s, but an interesting data point non the less.

I have to be honest, this has even me scratching my head. I really think they'd be better off with the M9A1 or P226 or whatever. Of all the arguments made against the 1911, the big one that simply cannot be countered - you give up a lot of rounds compared with the 9mm hi caps.

[Jay Cunningham]

There's no doubt that Todd's current endurance test heavily influenced their decision.

:cool:

[JHC]

I don't know how they justified that. But then I don't understand how they justify a 3rd air force either.

[ToddG]

There's no doubt that Todd's current endurance test heavily influenced their decision. :cool:

906

[BLR]

http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gearscout/2012/07/16/rumint-marsoc-selects-colt-railgun/#more

The "real" one is one ugly, ugly gun. Looks like a Desert Warrior to me.

[TCinVA]

I can't say I'm surprised to see the contract go to Colt. I'd trust them before a lot of other makers.

...but that being said, if it were me I'd probably just go the way that the FBI did. That seems to be working fairly well for them.

[BLR]

I'd trust them before a lot of other makers.

That is a very popular stance, and one that I share.

[ToddG]

...but that being said, if it were me I'd probably just go the way that the FBI did. That seems to be working fairly well for them.

Just to repeat something SLG pointed out to me: the FBI has done more real world in-the-field "testing" of their 1911s, by more guys (there are about 1,200 FBI SWAT personnel), in more types of terrain, than just about anyone.

[Default.mp3]

Well, one of the guys on LF has expressed doubts:


Originally posted by Capt_M:
After seeing the results of the phase II, 12000 round per gun firing tests, with 197 instances of failure, 4 out of 10 guns completed destroyed and MORE SIGNIFICANTLY an original letter of non-acceptability. I would almost be willing to call shenanigans on the whole thing.
http://i841.photobucket.com/albums/zz337/R0N_photos/slidecrack1.jpg
http://i841.photobucket.com/albums/zz337/R0N_photos/slidecrack2.jpg
http://i841.photobucket.com/albums/zz337/R0N_photos/slidecrack3.jpg
http://i841.photobucket.com/albums/zz337/R0N_photos/slidecrack4.jpg
http://i841.photobucket.com/albums/zz337/R0N_photos/lowercrack.jpg


http://i841.photobucket.com/albums/zz337/R0N_photos/springplug.jpg

[JHC]

And that's with the winning gun? O M G.

And the SEALs had already done that good work sorting out of the HK45C. That, or M&P, or G21 SF. Crimony.

[orionz06]

Why have a gun that works when you have tradition to uphold?

[ToddG]

I'd be very interested in seeing what their firing schedule was like for that test.

It's amazing that anyone would sign off on guns with that high a breakage rate.

[Wes Peart]

Well, one of the guys on LF has expressed doubts:

Wow. I always would have said Colt made the best "base" gun out there but that is some downright shameful performance.

With that being made public I bet there's some screaming going on at Colt right now :eek:

[TCinVA]

Wowsers...what the hell?

Ah. Ok...it reads to me like somebody on a blog just said Colt got the contract award. That doesn't appear to be an official announcement...and the post on LF, if true...and it certainly seems to be legit...would seem to indicate that the blogger doesn't really have the final information. Somebody at Colt may think it's a done deal and may have said so to the blogger, but it appears that the somebody at Colt wasn't really communicating with the USMC about it.

Cautionary tale, it seems, about trying to break news first.

Edit -

Out of 10 weapons 4 of them completely destroyed? In a 12,000 round test? Did they make the bloody things out of zinc or what?

[fuse]

Dear firearms industry,

Please develop new space age steels, like the ones used 50 years ago. We are willing to pay somewhat more for them.

Rainbows and unicorns,

fuse

[orionz06]

Edit -

Out of 10 weapons 4 of them completely destroyed? In a 12,000 round test? Did they make the bloody things out of zinc or what?

Needs moar 9mm!

[Kyle Reese]

Wowsers...what the hell?

Ah. Ok...it reads to me like somebody on a blog just said Colt got the contract award. That doesn't appear to be an official announcement...and the post on LF, if true...and it certainly seems to be legit...would seem to indicate that the blogger doesn't really have the final information. Somebody at Colt may think it's a done deal and may have said so to the blogger, but it appears that the somebody at Colt wasn't really communicating with the USMC about it.

Cautionary tale, it seems, about trying to break news first.

Edit -

Out of 10 weapons 4 of them completely destroyed? In a 12,000 round test? Did they make the bloody things out of zinc or what?

I was wondering the same thing, TC. 12,000 rounds is nothing, and if these guns are in such a state of disrepair I'd hate to think what would happen if they were used operationally.

[ToddG]

Again, without knowing the details of the testing protocol it's hard to jump to conclusions. Were all 12,000 rounds fired in a single day without any parts (spring) changes, without lube, etc.? What ammo was used? What if anything was hanging off the frame rail?

I agree the results seem abysmal but it would be nice to understand them in context.

[Al T.]

I believe that would be 12k per each gun. Suspect someone either got the context wrong or mis-read the round count. 1,200 rounds per pistol is a weekend class, not a test.

[TCinVA]

I believe that would be 12k per each gun. Suspect someone either got the context wrong or mis-read the round count. 1,200 rounds per pistol is a weekend class, not a test.

I figured it to mean 12,000 rounds per pistol, not in total.

Even so, a 1911 should be able to do 12,000 rounds without breaking major components.

[ToddG]

I understood it was 12k per gun. My question is whether each gun was shot all 12k in a day, under what conditions, with what lube/cool/clean schedule, with what preventative maintenance, what ammo, etc.?

[Jason F]

I understood it was 12k per gun. My question is whether each gun was shot all 12k in a day, under what conditions, with what lube/cool/clean schedule, with what preventative maintenance, what ammo, etc.?

Agreed.

Until there is an official word from the USMC about the status of the testing, conditions of the testing, and any results and decisions made from the testing... well, it's all going to be either conjecture, speculation, or at worst a WAG.

Though I know there's a bunch of folks who are curious about this. Including myself.

[JMS]

...and the post on LF, if true...and it certainly seems to be legit...would seem to indicate that the blogger doesn't really have the final information.

The dude that made that LF post is completely legit, and thankfully the bloggers were at least responsible enough to note that they haven't received confirmation.


Why have a gun that works when you have tradition to uphold?

I'd make this my company-email signature, were it not for the fact that 1) it's profoundly accurate (M27 notwithstanding), and 2) I have to communicate with folks that are stuck in that Matrix.

EDIT: Update, supposedly confirmed, though I couldn't find it on BizOps when I looked. Bloody hell....

http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gearscout/2012/07/19/m45-marsoc-pistol-contract-is-done-deal/#more

[BLR]

Never mind.

[JAD]

Needs moar 9mm!
As I say constantly to my operations people, the best way to make the thing work better is not to ask it to do less.

[TCinVA]

Further information from the aforementioned individual at LF:



There have been 14 vendors that over the years submitted for this program. Of those 14, 2 made it to the end testing, Colt and Springfield. I don't know why the Springfield didn't make it to phase II testing. But the only pistol tested during PII was the Colt and initially it didn't pass the testing. Due to cracks which developed in the pistol slides during Reliability Testing, the test was not able to be completed as planned. Originally planned for 15,000 rounds per pistol, but stopped early at 12,000 rounds. With 1 of 10 guns unable to complete testing (recoil spring binding to the point the slide could not function) and 4 of the remaining 10 unserviceable because of cracking.


Ummm...

Admittedly I'm not an expert in weapons procurement (Todd is) but it looks to me like that sequence of events would be...I dunno...a sign or something.

[JSGlock34]

I can't say I'm surprised to see the contract go to Colt. I'd trust them before a lot of other makers.

...but that being said, if it were me I'd probably just go the way that the FBI did. That seems to be working fairly well for them.

Actually, I am somewhat surprised to see Colt win. Springfield Armory has a solid track record providing the Professional Model to the FBI (as well as other Federal law enforcement)...and the USMC. The Marines purchased at least 200+ Professional Models in 2003 and 2005. These are small procurements to be sure, but enough for Springfield to designate a Professional Model variant (PC9111MC) to reflect the USMC specifications of Pachmayr grips and a lanyard loop mainspring housing.

Furthermore, the Marines purchased another 250 factory Springfield 1911s (these appear to be Custom Carrys with a Nowlin barrel and a USMC prefix serial number) a few years ago. Not to mention thousands of Springfield Armory slides used by PWS to rebuild the MEUSOC pistols.

Meanwhile, when was the last time Colt won a pistol contract?

As for the reported performance of the test pistols, I found the minimum requirements listed in the CQBP solicitation (https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&mode=form&tab=core&id=b363ec929bda1631f9d80eebb9335f36&_cview=0) to set a fairly low bar by most modern standards.

The pistol can demonstrate reliability of an average minimum of 300 rounds between stoppages and 5,000 rounds between parts failures.

[ford.304]

The pistol can demonstrate reliability of an average minimum of 300 rounds between stoppages and 5,000 rounds between parts failures.

Heck with modern standards... that sounds worse than the standard set when the 1911 was originally adopted.

[Mjolnir]

According to Pat Rogers (or it was a side bar in an article written by Pat - I don't recall now), the FBI Springfields did NOT test well; too tight.

[JSGlock34]

Sure, I remember that article (here it is - SWAT December 2003 (http://www.ar15.com/content/swat/200312-SOCOM.pdf))...The Pros were bought as a COTS solution for USMC SOCOM Detachment One training. But the Pros were found wanting, so Det One bought 100 Kimber 'ICQB' pistols made to their specifications.

And after that article came out, the Marines bought another 150 Pros in 2005. And then another 250 Springfield Custom Carry pistols made to their specifications...

About the only consistency I see is that the Corps appears to ignore their own test data...

I couldn't help but recall this excerpt from Kyle Lamb's Stay in the Fight...

"When the Marine Corps tested the Glock 21, several trigger pins broke, the weapons never stopped firing, and the broken parts were only detected during routine cleaning and maintenance. This story is often told, but those opposing modern weapons that contain polymer parts, routinely leave out the part about the weapon continuing to function. It seems the pistol did extremely well, passed the test with flying colors, but the Commandant of the Marine Corps at the time decided he knew better and didn't want his Marines to have a plastic pistol. This has been the case in many arenas, hard line, and anti anything new and improved. The old way is not always the best way." (p. 170)

Seems about right.

Interestingly, those Pros are still in the inventory, though they've got a bit of mileage...I'm guessing these slides have seen over 12,000 rounds without cracking though...

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e131/akim85/M45%20CQC/USMC1911MEU8.jpg
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e131/akim85/M45%20CQC/USMC1911MEU6.jpg

[F-Trooper05]

Todd's gun will look like that by September.

[ToddG]

Man, why you gotta do me like that?

[MikeO]

Here's the Military Times article:

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2012/07/20/marines-pick-colt-for-new-pistol.html?ESRC=eb.nl

[F-Trooper05]

Some of the comments in the Soldiersystems post say that they are going to be off the shelf (non custom), sub-$1,000 guns. Can that possibly be true?

[Tamara]

Some of the comments in the Soldiersystems post say that they are going to be off the shelf (non custom), sub-$1,000 guns. Can that possibly be true?

As long as they're not looking to win bullseye matches, sure. ;)

You could probably turn out pistols built to the original government drawings, but with beavertails, real sights, and useable thumb safeties, for somewhere in the $800 range. They wouldn't shoot sub 2" groups or have "glass rod" 4# triggers, but they'd run just fine.

Of course, at that point, why not just get a Glock 21 or M&P 45? I mean, other than institutional inertia?

[orionz06]

As long as they're not looking to win bullseye matches, sure. ;)

You could probably turn out pistols built to the original government drawings, but with beavertails, real sights, and useable thumb safeties, for somewhere in the $800 range. They wouldn't shoot sub 2" groups or have "glass rod" 4# triggers, but they'd run just fine.

Of course, at that point, why not just get a Glock 21 or M&P 45?

You mean to tell me great grampa went to war with something that did not resemble a 2 year wait $4000 1911?!?!?!

[JSGlock34]

Here's the Military Times article:

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2012/07/20/marines-pick-colt-for-new-pistol.html?ESRC=eb.nl

Hmm...

MARSOC operators stay on a rigorous deployment cycle, "so they fire a lot of rounds. It's a 15,000-round plus [training] work-up to a deployment," Clark said.
"It's more efficient to replace the guns over time instead of attempting to completely rebuild them."

But, um, didn't 4/10 test guns die at 12,000 rounds...?

[TCinVA]

Posted by Hilton Yam over on LF:



Having been around quantities of issued 1911s for some time now, I can say that I do not envy the personnel who are charged to care for these guns. If we remove the discussions of caliber, weight, construction, and expense, and only look at the level of maintenance required, it is a less than ideal situation. Fixing or tuning one extractor is not the end of the world for a single user. Fixing a whole team's worth of extractors becomes a headache. Chasing a variety of parts wear/breakages in conjunction with the ever changing extractor issues as the guns age, that's an adventure. Tuning extractors on new(er) builds is not nearly the same as troubleshooting them on guns with extensive slide wear after 20-40k rounds.

Consider that the secondary weapon system will require more maintenance time than the primary weapon system, and more training required for the armorers providing that maintenance. A 16 hr school will get you pretty far on an M16, it just barely gets you through the front door on a 1911.

While I really love the 1911 for what it is, it is not currently the best choice for a unit issue service pistol. The advent of lightweight, polymer framed, high cap pistols where all the parts totally drop in and DO NOT REQUIRE tuning makes them a much better choice.

[LittleLebowski]

Todd's gun will look like that after he disassembles it and cleans it for the first time.

Fixed that for ya :D

[NickA]

Fixed that for ya :D

Trade "if" for "after" and I think you've got it :)
ETA : does anyone know about how many "operators " MARSOC has? Just curious how many guns per guy it takes to keep them running.
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk 2

[Ed L]

The question seems to be why a 1911, and people point to other modern .45 caliber handguns (S&W M&P45, Glock 21, HK45).

One issue is feel. The 1911 has a slim grip that really feels good in your hands, especially if compared to something like the Glock 21.

Another issue that is very important is that many people find it easier to shoot well with a 1911 with its trigger that slides in a track with minimal movement, minimum pre-travel, minimal over-travel; a trigger which is more unforgiving of a bad trigger pull.

In comparison a stock M&P45 has a horrible trigger. If it were not for the Bowie Trigger job, I would have never bought one.

When I first got the Kimber Warrior I was amazed at how much better I shot with that gun than any other gun that I had owned up to that point. This included shooting tighter groups and knocking down plates faster with less rounds fired. In the end, the gun had reliability issues mentioned elsewhere that ultimately led me to sell it, but only after I bought a used Springfield Professional which proved far more reliable.

As I took a lot of classes and practiced what I learned in those classes over several years, the gap between what I could do with a 1911 and what I could do with a Glock 17 or 19 narrowed considerably.

If I am shooting my Springfield Professional side by side with my HK45, I can shoot almost as tight of a group with the HK45, but I really, really have work at it and hyperconcentrate with each shot more than I do with the 1911.

This is an attraction with the 1911, as well as the tradition and history. I realize that the Marines who get these guns will practice a great deal.

Easier to shoot is easier to shoot. But it may not outweigh maintenance, reliability, and durability issues.

I certainly understand the logistical problems in keeping a fleet of 1911s running may outweigh all other aspects.

I'm not saying that I support the decision, especially in light of the breakage issues with the Colts that won the contract. I have to wonder if there is something wrong with the metalurgy or the machining that would make the guns fall apart like this.

I'm just providing some reasons why the 1911 has remained popular over all these years.

[DocGKR]

M&P45 w/small grip insert feels smaller to me than a 1911.

I like the M&P trigger; it is my second favorite trigger after the 1911.

The M&P45's I've shot are nearly as accurate as a custom 1911.

[Tamara]

The question seems to be why a 1911...

Are you replying to me, or the quoted statement from Hilton Yam? 'Cause either way, it's pretty funny, actually... :p

[Ed L]

Are you replying to me, or the quoted statement from Hilton Yam? 'Cause either way, it's pretty funny, actually... :p

Nah, I'm just musing in general.

DocGKR, I guess either the M&P45 trigger has gotten much better over the years or the first one that I handled a few years ago had a really bad trigger. I bought mine with the Bowie trigger job from the get-go after shooting another that had his trigger job.

I remember in 2007 or 2008 when I shot a friend's M&P9 side by side his Series 80 Colt. We were shooting at steel plates, and even though the M&P9 had better sights vs the small Colt factory standard sights on the Colt, I shot the Colt infinitely better because it's trigger was much better than the M&P9's factory trigger. That was before I had taken a lot of handgun specific classes, so perhaps I am better now at managing triggers than I was when I first fired factory M&Ps in 2007 or 2008.