Gives them a reason to grow a beard, wear 511 pants and desert tan combat boots.
What was the purpose of Close Quarter Battle Pistols?
- Thread starter Alex Inman
- Start date
Gives them a reason to grow a beard, wear 511 pants and desert tan combat boots.
suckersrus
Member
I have a 640 PC that I call my "close quarters battle" revolver.
Because, with it, it is impossible to hit a human-sized target anywhere past arm's length.
Because, with it, it is impossible to hit a human-sized target anywhere past arm's length.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2003
- Messages
- 871
- Reaction score
- 234
Standard vs better
I understand even the standard 3rd Gen 45ACPs shoot well and basically are just plain special. The CQB versions, as posted above, were Performance Center designed and manufactured, and to arguably better performance. There should be plenty of pics here in this forum; if I remember there was more than one finish on the CQBs.
Did some have alloy frames? If so, that usually makes them easier to carry.
And, sometimes S&W makes a gun just because they can.
As far as the name, heh. Have you ever heard of the snubby Terminator? A different company...
Just my opinion and worth what it cost.
I understand even the standard 3rd Gen 45ACPs shoot well and basically are just plain special. The CQB versions, as posted above, were Performance Center designed and manufactured, and to arguably better performance. There should be plenty of pics here in this forum; if I remember there was more than one finish on the CQBs.
Did some have alloy frames? If so, that usually makes them easier to carry.
And, sometimes S&W makes a gun just because they can.
As far as the name, heh. Have you ever heard of the snubby Terminator? A different company...
Just my opinion and worth what it cost.
Last edited:
Jeff Cooper once remarked that handguns were never intended to be offensive weapons - they should always be considered defensive in nature.
The word "battle" implies that certain pistols are capable of offensive use - for example, clearing a room of bad guys quickly and decisively. To my mind, short-barreled assault rifles or submachine guns would be ideal tools for tasks like that.
But we are picking nits here. My only knowledge of U.S. forces specifying a particular handgun for offensive use was when Special Operations Command put out a call for an "offensive handgun" and gave various manufacturers the specs for what they thought would be ideal.
The winner of the competition was the Heckler and Koch Mk 23 Mod 0 SOCOM pistol. So officially, the only "close quarters battle" pistol can only be rightfully claimed by H & K. The pistol is impressive - same weight as a 1911, but with increased magazine capacity and capable of firing .45 Super rounds as issued. It's also suppressor ready. The Navy SEALS have them in inventory. This is the nearly identical civilian pistol, the Mark 23.
I still agree with Cooper - there are better tools for offensive use than handguns.
John
The word "battle" implies that certain pistols are capable of offensive use - for example, clearing a room of bad guys quickly and decisively. To my mind, short-barreled assault rifles or submachine guns would be ideal tools for tasks like that.
But we are picking nits here. My only knowledge of U.S. forces specifying a particular handgun for offensive use was when Special Operations Command put out a call for an "offensive handgun" and gave various manufacturers the specs for what they thought would be ideal.
The winner of the competition was the Heckler and Koch Mk 23 Mod 0 SOCOM pistol. So officially, the only "close quarters battle" pistol can only be rightfully claimed by H & K. The pistol is impressive - same weight as a 1911, but with increased magazine capacity and capable of firing .45 Super rounds as issued. It's also suppressor ready. The Navy SEALS have them in inventory. This is the nearly identical civilian pistol, the Mark 23.
I still agree with Cooper - there are better tools for offensive use than handguns.
John
Last edited:
I think it was because They need the room to make 'Major" in IPSC with a 147 grain bullet. After that NFI.
HardToHandle
Member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2016
- Messages
- 625
- Reaction score
- 886
Royal Robbins rocked as did the early 5.11 pants. Then they went Bangladeshi cheap.
My opinion was CQB was heavy on marketing with a dash of incremental improvement.
As for the opinion on no role for a offensive handgun in battle? The last 18 years of war seem to strongly dispute that.
Last I knew, US Army 11C mortarmen were issued an M9 as a personal weapon.
Bradley Kasal didn't emerge from some Iraqi urban renewal with the musket length M16A2, he was thoroughly offensive with a pistol - https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/more-iraq-veterans-deserve-the-medal-of-honor/2018/03/23/c29e6e0c-2dd5-11e8-b0b0-f706877db618_story.html
The other place for pistols are trains, planes, buses and ships. Climbing, clambering, pushing non-combatants out of the line of Fire is easier with a freehand.My personal experience is mostly confined to school/active shooter response. Opening doors, room clearing and other associated tasks is generally easier with a handgun.
This picture caught me as a great example - assaulting a plane. Pistols seem to rule. Andrews EST brings organized chaos to the force Geisselle even builds a Glock only scope mount called the Six Second Mount - ALG 6-Second Mount - T1
I was seated next to a young lady who did security as a USAF Raven a few years ago. They provide inflight and on the ground security for VIP aircraft and certain unmentionable missions. Needless, the Ravens get some really interesting flights to interesting places. The young lady was demur on lots of details, but she had seen a lot of AfriCom and CentCom. That would be very offensive in the defensive realm.
My opinion was CQB was heavy on marketing with a dash of incremental improvement.
As for the opinion on no role for a offensive handgun in battle? The last 18 years of war seem to strongly dispute that.
Last I knew, US Army 11C mortarmen were issued an M9 as a personal weapon.
Bradley Kasal didn't emerge from some Iraqi urban renewal with the musket length M16A2, he was thoroughly offensive with a pistol - https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/more-iraq-veterans-deserve-the-medal-of-honor/2018/03/23/c29e6e0c-2dd5-11e8-b0b0-f706877db618_story.html
The other place for pistols are trains, planes, buses and ships. Climbing, clambering, pushing non-combatants out of the line of Fire is easier with a freehand.My personal experience is mostly confined to school/active shooter response. Opening doors, room clearing and other associated tasks is generally easier with a handgun.
This picture caught me as a great example - assaulting a plane. Pistols seem to rule. Andrews EST brings organized chaos to the force Geisselle even builds a Glock only scope mount called the Six Second Mount - ALG 6-Second Mount - T1
I was seated next to a young lady who did security as a USAF Raven a few years ago. They provide inflight and on the ground security for VIP aircraft and certain unmentionable missions. Needless, the Ravens get some really interesting flights to interesting places. The young lady was demur on lots of details, but she had seen a lot of AfriCom and CentCom. That would be very offensive in the defensive realm.
Similar threads
