Greatest 9mm Ever Made
- Thread starter Glenn R. McMannly
- Start date
I own a number of the pistols being discussed here. They all have their +/-.
I go with what fits my hand best as I have large hands with short stubby fingers. I can only shoot my CZ75 Military accurately in SA, C&L carry. Not to mention the weight factor. Carrying something that heavy I prefer the stopping power of 45acp. I have never shot/owned a M9 or variants due to the size of the gun. A BHP is a perfect fit for me, I own a few. I've never had a issue with Glocks. G22 was our dept issue for years. I find nothing wrong with .40S&W and carry my G23 often in the rotation with UDR Xtreme Defense in the mag & pipe. I do absolutely love 1911's, prefer 45acp. Would have been my choice if we could have carried our own pistol. Now a confession. Less than a year ago I bought a LE trade in G30SF. Uhm, I love the damn thing. Fits me almost perfect and I shoot it quite well. Used it for HR218 quals. With 10-13 45acp rounds aboard its my go to travel gun.
I go with what fits my hand best as I have large hands with short stubby fingers. I can only shoot my CZ75 Military accurately in SA, C&L carry. Not to mention the weight factor. Carrying something that heavy I prefer the stopping power of 45acp. I have never shot/owned a M9 or variants due to the size of the gun. A BHP is a perfect fit for me, I own a few. I've never had a issue with Glocks. G22 was our dept issue for years. I find nothing wrong with .40S&W and carry my G23 often in the rotation with UDR Xtreme Defense in the mag & pipe. I do absolutely love 1911's, prefer 45acp. Would have been my choice if we could have carried our own pistol. Now a confession. Less than a year ago I bought a LE trade in G30SF. Uhm, I love the damn thing. Fits me almost perfect and I shoot it quite well. Used it for HR218 quals. With 10-13 45acp rounds aboard its my go to travel gun.
Puller
Member
Glock leg was actually created by 1911 shooters handling a Glock without proper supervision. You know, kind of like taking the training wheels off a bicycle.
OK, maybe they aren't the 'greatest'....
...but I'm a 3rd gen fan. They seem to be the equal of the Sig P250 I have (I know it's not the most popular model). I wouldn't have qualms about getting into a firefight with them. With decent ammo they are as reliable as the day is long.
...but I'm a 3rd gen fan. They seem to be the equal of the Sig P250 I have (I know it's not the most popular model). I wouldn't have qualms about getting into a firefight with them. With decent ammo they are as reliable as the day is long.
Well Armed
Member
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2014
- Messages
- 1,101
- Reaction score
- 1,358
...but I'm a 3rd gen fan. They seem to be the equal of the Sig P250 I have (I know it's not the most popular model). I wouldn't have qualms about getting into a firefight with them. With decent ammo they are as reliable as the day is long.
Glock, Sigs (except the P320), M&P 2.0s, Berettas, CZs, HKs, FNs, Springfield XDs and XDMs, Walthers, and the like. They're all reliable, and I wouldn't have any qualms defending myself with any of those polymer wonders. It comes down t o a matter of preference with brand, ergonomics, looks, and the like and not necessarily reliability amongst the aforementioned.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2012
- Messages
- 3,345
- Reaction score
- 5,562
Just curious- why do you "x" out the 320?
I can’t speak to why he crosses it off the list but I do because:
- They tend to choke on steel cased ammunition, and while I rarely shoot steel cased ammunition it’s an option that should still be on the table.
- They have a reputation for poor reliability with some shooters. Other shooters think they are just fine. The reality however is that whether it’s due to limp wresting, improper cleaning and lubrication, narrow parameters for ammunition, or a fundamental design flaw, it’s not very reliable for a fair percentage of shooters.
- The P320 was basically a P250 with a striker firing system and as such was a rather cobbled together design. That led to a “voluntary upgrade” program. There were issues with the original trigger not being drop safe, and there were issues with the lack of a mechanical disconnector. The design of the safety lever and sear spring was such that the safety could be left disengaged with the sear not fully engaged, which could cause the pistol to fire if it suffered an impact. It’s been corrected, but there are still un-upgraded examples out there.
Glock leg was actually created by 1911 shooters handling a Glock without proper supervision. You know, kind of like taking the training wheels off a bicycle.
I’ll need to see a credible source for that.
It’s a training issue. Glocks were marketed with the sales pitch that they would require very little training to transition police officers from DA/SA or DAO revolvers to a Glock as all of the safeties were tied to the trigger and thus there was no need to learn to use a safety lever or decocking lever.
It’s partly true as far as using a Glock in a duty holster. However if you’ve been around long enough you’ll recognize that the advent of striker fired pistols precipitated duty holsters that started being much farther away from the shooter. Those holsters literally helped provide more space to prevent “Glock leg” incidents:
- when an excited officer (especially when using a retention holster with a release near the trigger) got overly exited and got their trigger finger inside the trigger guard before the pistol was pointed down range and/or
- when an excited officer tried to reholster the pistol without taking their trigger finger out of the trigger guard.
It’s even worse for concealed carry where an IWB or OWB holster worn close to the body creates potential conflicts with shirt or jacket material, draw strings, etc, that may get between the trigger and the edge of the holster.
It can be remediated with proper holster design, where the holster can be readily removed to reholster the pistol out in front of the shooter where he can clearly confirm there are no obstructions, or at a minimum with a holster deign and location that allows the shooter to visually confirm the lack of obstructions.
Unfortunately, some shooters (the moron) will use things like those clips that attach to slide so they can stuff a striker fired pistol in their waistband with nothing at all protecting the trigger.
The Glock also has to fired before it can be disassembled, which requires the person cleaning it to fully understand how to clear it before attempting to disassemble it. You’d think that would not be an issue, and yet officers have a depressing number of NDs doing exactly that. Most of them after all are not “gun people”.
——
In short the Glock did not in fact require less training. It required different training in how to safely handle the pistol.
That’s not much different than a 1911, where officers were taught to not disengage the safety until the pistol was pointed down range, and to a) apply the manual safety, b) place their thumb between the hammer and slide, which c) also lifted their hand off the grip safety, when reholstering the pistol. An officer would have to forget all three, plus have his finger on the trigger to have an ND when reholstering.
Well Armed
Member
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2014
- Messages
- 1,101
- Reaction score
- 1,358
I think he was simply being facetious, and not seriously. Everyone knows 1911 shooters wouldn't be caught dead with a Glock.
Being single-action and by military rules, having to carry it with an empty chamber, the Browning is out for the count. The best military pistol is the current one, the Sig M-17 and M-18.
Nope. We purchased 160 M-18s for the Somali Police Force - 2 wouldn't fire and were cut up to BATFE standards because of the difficulty in returning firearms to the US. Some SPF members preferred to retain their older Masada 9mms (a Glock knockoff) after qualifying with the M-18. These people really need their pistols and used them in Mogadishu often. This information is 34 days old.
I agree it is the greatest 9mm ever made but the HP went through a lot of changes I was not happy with. I was not happy with the later addition of the passive firing pin safety which results in cracked slides. I was not happy when they went to a cast frame which fattened the grip circumference. I was not happy when they went to cast parts like the manual safety being made of a casting.
My understanding from what I have read is that Browning went from a forged frame to an investment cast frame after they started offering the HP in .40 caliber. Pistols were coming back in with frame failures due to the additional horsepower of the .40 caliber rounds.
The investment cast modified frame ended those failures, resulting in standardizing those frames across all HP production.
I also read that Browning could have made the same engineering changes and still forged the frame, but that would require expensive additional machining, thus driving up cost.
I realize that the opponents to investment casting are equal in intensity to the opponents of all things Glock, but it would appear that Browning did not share the same dim view of investment castings as do some of the experts hearabouts. Imagine that, all that expertise, available for free on the internet, and still ignored.
I have not read of this for a while, so if anyone can update this information, please do so.
Disclaimer: I own Smith & Wesson, Ruger, Colt and Glock (just listing handguns here). I like them all, otherwise I would not own them. So I don't have a dog in the apparently permanent investment cast vs forged debate.
My Browning HP MkIII in 40 is as accurate and reliable today as it was when I started carrying it in '93. Investment casting made Ruger's rep for sturdy firearms.
If people are worried about investment casting's strength, they should think about the fact that the engines on the planes they travel on are made of mostly investment cast parts.
Hoosierville IRN
Member
I do believe that was exactly the OP's intention!
Having said that, I'm a BHP fan also, but I don't EDC it. Don't want my BHP sitting in an evidence locker somewhere. That's what Glocks are for.
Bumpus13
Member
Could be because none of those other manufacturers are quite arrogant enough to call their products “perfection”
The greatest 9mm pistol is the one that kept you alive
during bad encounters.
The Smith M59 gets my vote.
Still my main 9mm carry when necessary since '81.
Sig 239 9mm is great except for only 8+1.
If I carried my BHP, I would swap the thumb safety for one
that can be seen without a microscope.
Crisp trigger at a tad over 7lbs.
Accuracy wise:
1. BHP
2. Sig 239
3. M59
during bad encounters.
The Smith M59 gets my vote.
Still my main 9mm carry when necessary since '81.
Sig 239 9mm is great except for only 8+1.
If I carried my BHP, I would swap the thumb safety for one
that can be seen without a microscope.
Crisp trigger at a tad over 7lbs.
Accuracy wise:
1. BHP
2. Sig 239
3. M59
Attachments
Last edited:
Aukula1062
Member
Aukula1062
Member
Hard to name just one. I'm just happy to have such a wide variety of pistols to choose from.
Similar threads
