Graduation Gift. Beretta Px4 Storm & 200 Winchester full metal jacket rounds

[Fragony]

Just curious, what handgun does the military use and why?

[Kralizec]

The USA uses the Beretta 92 IIRC.

If I were to ever get a gun it would be a (copy of) their previous handgun, the M1911. Just because having the same kind of gun used by American troops in WW1, WW2 and the Vietnam war is pretty cool. And my interest in guns largely stops after the "coolness" factor.

[Major Robert Dump]

Just curious, what handgun does the military use and why?

Right now the standard sidearm for the combat zone US Army is the M9 (Beretta), aka the 92 . Obviously, MPs and SF may have different options due to mission requirements. Cannot speak for the other branches.

15 round magazine and incredibly dependable in foul conditions. However, it is also rather heavy for a pop gun and pretty inaccurate past about 30 meters. This is not due to some scientific study on my part, just first hand experience.

[Major Robert Dump]

As a Tanker, we got issued Berettas even when we were in an Infantry role and they were some of the worst peices of junk i've ever seen--worse than the ones they used in Basic. The one I had in Iraq had an inoperative safety and a barrel that was years over-due for a refit. Wasn't good for anything but carrying to the porta-john at night in your boxers so you didn't have to lug your rifle.

That's sucks to hear.

And mine saved my life.

I saw some pretty ratty M9s being carried out there, looked like they were in the first batch from 85, discolored, rattling etc. Ours were all brand new. Had a couple of good 92s on my team.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I can use the main gun on a Challenger II MBT - I'm not very good though, I found the laser rangefinder too fiddly.

How cool does that make me.

[Vladimir]

I can use the main gun on a Challenger II MBT - I'm not very good though, I found the laser rangefinder too fiddly.

How cool does that make me.

Almost as cool as Richard Hammond.

[Fragony]

What is your guys opnion on this one http://www.google.nl/search?num=10&h...ac.weqzsC3P_pg

It's going to replace the guns our special forces are using, they are supposed to cost a fortune is it any good or is it a waste of money?

[Vladimir]

Don't know anything about it other than it's an HK, so I wholeheartedly support it.

[PanzerJaeger]

What is your guys opnion on this one http://www.google.nl/search?num=10&h...ac.weqzsC3P_pg

It's going to replace the guns our special forces are using, they are supposed to cost a fortune is it any good or is it a waste of money?

Eh, it's just an AR with a piston - which theoretically gives it far more reliability than a direct impingement AR. However, anecdotal evidence seems to suggest that the guns H&K enters in competitions are of a different quality than the guns H&K delivers to customers once they have secured contracts, as many failures have been reported. It is impossible to judge the authenticity of internet static, of course. What is more certain is that it is very heavy and not as modular as some other choices.

That being said, it is a quality weapon on paper with a strong operational record and heavy adoption among first world special forces.

If I had the budget to buy a third gen assault rifle, though, I would probably go for one built from the ground up around a piston system like the SCAR instead of an old system with a piston stuffed in it. Many believe that working within the AR framework led to a lot of compromises. Whereas guns like the SCAR and ARX160 are truly next gen, the 416 is somewhere in the middle.