I watched it about a week ago, good video. In my opinion the M17/18 is better for general issue but I personally prefer the M9. I really wish the M17 thumb safety was larger. If it was I might favor the M17.
Originally Posted by MattyD380
Who cares what these guys think? According to some Colonel in the Army - the M17 has changed the face of modern land warfare
In reality - thanks for posting.
Who cares what these guys think? According to some Colonel in the Army - the M17 has changed the face of modern land warfare
In reality - thanks for posting.
Changed the face of his personal warfare now that him and several of his peers will never have to pay for another Sig product again. /s
“Thanks Bob, here’s your free Cross and a number if you want anything else to show up at your FFL.“
While I am an unabashed M9 fan, I do intend on picking up an M17 as soon as I can after I leave this accursed state. For better or worse it is the military’s new sidearm and in my mind is something I should be familiar with in my journey as well as something my boys should be familiar with as they may someday be carrying one.
As an infantry soldier I really never had to deal with the M9 very much. The little that I did, I did not think much of it. I could not reach the trigger very good in DA, the DA pull was heavy and the mags we had were way beyond service life. After getting out of the Army many years later I picked up a 92FS, just to have. As i figured out it could be modified very easily with WC thin grips, a D spring and WC short reach trigger, I started to like it. Then when the Elitee LTT came out and I got one from Ernest with trigger job, I fell in love with the 92.
Now for general service for the Army, I think the M17 is going to be better based on the fact that the trigger reach in DA on the M9 was an issue for many soldiers. To top that off the training for handguns was garbage at best. So striker fired will just be easier for soldiers to learn with little training.
Now as it stands today, give me a Beretta 92/M9 any day over the M17. However, I did purchase a commercial M17 a while back just to have one.
I was an MP who shot the M9 a pretty decent amount. I carry a 92 as my civilian concealed pistol of choice. I own a USGI decomissioned M17.
I think the M9 is a better shooting gun. I think it's marginally more difficult to train for big Army - but they aren't going to really teach how to shoot the M17 either. The nuance of DA/SA is largely ignored and soldier simply cocks the hammer of M9s. That might not be how the block of instruction goes, but thats what a safety on an M9 qual will tell the soldier to do. M17s will be largely the same as the M9 because M9s were never taught properly anyway.
M17's might be easier for maintenance, simply less nooks and crannies. The polymer frames will either be a massive benefit, or hinderance. Joe will either break them doing dumb stuff... or they'll be easier to maintain. I'm not certain.
Overall I distrust Sig and the P320. I strongly perfer my Berettas. I do however hope that the M17 turns out to be an absolute workhorse - like the Beretta has been. I am not against technological advancment for our guys weapons. I do worry about the quality however.
When you carried the FS version, were you able to consistently deactivate the safety?
Yeah, but that wasn't needed often. The qual doesn't require drawing. In fact, I do remeber ever specifically being trained or training others on the draw or safety deactivation techniques. Usually with my non dominate hand thumb to swipe it off. Thats the way I normally did it two handed. The single time I brought it to bear with intent (kinda dramatic to me but an overall nothing burger) i deactivated the safety strong hand only without conscious thought.
Well, I owned the M9A3G and the Sig M18. Now I fully admit to sucking at TDA. And I also admit that the operation of the M9 is way different than what im used to. But so is the M18. Im a 1911 and LEM guy. So in picking these two up, both were differnt for me. I could not get along with the M9! The wierd wide beavertail gave me hot spots in odd places and i just didnt shoot it well at all. The sig on the other hand, despite feeling a little chubby, was right there. I was clearing the plate rack quickly and accurately with little time behind the pistol. The M9 felt like it took a lot more effort for me even in sa mode. I sold the M9 off. The Sig may go too but not for how it shoots. I went M18 because as a 1911 guy the safety is a non issue for me but I thought it would make it immune to uncommanded firing issues but apparently it does not.
Reply With Quote
