M9 vs M1911A1

[Glenn R. McMannly]

Below is my Tisas GI edition .45 automatic along with WW2-based pistol belt gear. Below that is my Beretta M9 with a similar setup based on Desert Storm or early GWOT.



I love shooting them both and have a hard time picking which would be the one I'd want to carry in combat.

For me, the M1911A1 is a hard hitting classic and harkens back. But the M9 is a smooth shooter with benefits in capacity and (for me) shootability. It's a very tough choice!

What are your thoughts on the matter? Which one do you think was the better military sidearm?

-Glenn

 

[Rocketmedic40]

The m9, and it's not particularly close.

The service pistol is intended to be as broadly useable and accessible and maintainable as possible, and as "safe" as possible, for the largest majority of users possible. By this very definition, it will not be the **most** of anything. For every soldier who instinctively knows the secrets of the barrel bushing, there's four more who struggle; for every soldier who can beast-mode the .45ACP, there's another who struggles with recoil management; for everyone comfortable with Condition 1 carry, there's someone who isn't.

The M9 is a potent, accurate, reliable, easily-maintainable handgun that has proven itself useful in many, many, many hands and circumstances.

Both pistols are very well-proven, very reliable and have been lambasted and controversial since they were introduced. Plenty more 1911s were bought, traded, dropped, lost, sold, made, etc, as weapons accountability wasn't the same back in the day, but both designs had massive civilian exposure too. The m9 had far more media discussion.

At the end of the day; the M9 does everything a sidearm needs to do and does it well, well enough that the negative attributes of the older 1911 are greater in most given circumstances than the negative attributes of the M9.

 

[VaTom]

Each pistol has its pros and cons. Hard choice but in today's environment the M9 would be the choice. Only carried S&W K frame revolvers and Glock 23 in my working career so no war time experience. I enjoy shooting both. My military contract WWII 1943 Ithaca 1911A1 and 1985 Beretta 92F. (92f is the original design chosen by US military in 1985 to become M9).

 

[sceva]

Which one was the main service pistol the longest?

Which one came back AFTER a switch to the other?

Nuff said

 

[Sevens]

Generally speaking the 1911 is better than the Beretta, IMO.

With FMJ required ammo, .45 does a better job than 9mm.

If I were sent in to harm's way and I had to pick one of the two, that's a slightly different answer. If I had the chance to have a range day with each, I would choose whichever of the two performed best for me after getting to know both for a couple hours.

If it was a blind pick, I would probably grab the 1911.

 

[Muley Gil]

I carried a 1911 for most of a 25 year police career here in the States. I carried a Beretta for 5 years as an international police officer and police advisor in Kosovo and Afghanistan. The Beretta was too big for a 9mm, IMNSHO, and it didn't fit my hand well. That said, I shot 100% with it on every qualification I shot.

I love my 1911s, but I think there needs to be a lot of training done before you should carry one on duty. The Beretta isn't dummyproof either. I saw several folks carrying one with the hammer cocked!!!

Considering most G.I.s won't use a handgun as their primary weapon, I would suggest the Glock Model 19 as a better choice.

 

[rockquarry]

I'm not going into combat, but I've been shooting both for more than thirty years. The only negative aspect of the Beretta is the 9mm cartridge. The only negative aspect of the 1911 is it's lack of a single-action/double-action design.

With only one negative each, it's a tossup; both good pistols.

 

[Rocketmedic40]

**stares in Beretta 96/Taurus PT101

 

[rockquarry]

**stares in Beretta 96/Taurus PT101

What does that mean?

 

[Rocketmedic40]

What does that mean?

Those are the 40 caliber Smith & Wesson variations of the Beretta 92 design. Exact same function in economics, but chambered in 40 Smith & Wesson for that little extra punch. The size of the 92 relative to most 9 mm makes them a perfect host for the 40.

 

[65-2x2]

Below is my Tisas GI edition .45 automatic along with WW2-based pistol belt gear. Below that is my Beretta M9 with a similar setup based on Desert Storm or early GWOT.

View attachment 791072

I love shooting them both and have a hard time picking which would be the one I'd want to carry in combat.

For me, the M1911A1 is a hard hitting classic and harkens back. But the M9 is a smooth shooter with benefits in capacity and (for me) shootability. It's a very tough choice!

What are your thoughts on the matter? Which one do you think was the better military sidearm?

-Glenn

Is the M3 knife original?