Bassoneer

Sill in way over my head...but I think that procurement started with the evaluations in 2005. Later, B

I found this on another forum...but they are referencing a 2006 American Rifleman article. Sounds like they have some information about the reported safety also. I'm in way over my head...I was never in the army and only have an interest because I like the .45's and XDm's. A .45 XDm would be cool. Let me know if you guys know this is wrong or something else is happening. Thanks, B The companies that are listed as interested in the contract are as follows: Beretta USA: They are holding their cards close to the chest so there arn't many details about exactly what they are planning. SigArms: Most likely they will present a version of their P220. A very accurate gun. Glock: Probably a variant of their G21. Taurus: Just coincidentially developed their 24/7 pistol in .45 ACP. Perhaps they caught wind of this potential contract a little early. Springfield Armory: Most likely they will advance a version of their new XD. From what I have heard it is a pretty sweet gun. Smith & Wesson: Their entry will be one of the new M&P designs. FNH USA: They say that their entry will be a completely new gun. Para Ordnance: They aren't saying much either but it's likely that their entry will be a version of the successful Light Double Action (LDA) pistol. Heckler & Koch: They may have a leg up since they are already producing the SOCOM Mk 23. Their entry will likely be a version of their USP design. Apparently one of the specs for the pistol is that it be capable of double action or single action fire. That would preclude any of the versions of M1911 that are out there. But there are rumors that that spec might be dropped which could mean a return to an M1911 variant. The requirements also call for a gun with a bare minimum magazine for 8 rounds but 10+ are prefered. The requirements call for a gun that can be produced either with or without an external manual safety. All the above data was taken from the July 2006 issue of the American Rifleman.

I just did a quick internet search and found this request from the military for commercial companies to develop a new .45 pistol, but it was about four years ago. https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=9f67b094636a104ae0bd1068f6ca672a&tab=core&_cview=1

You guys probably know more about this stuff than I do. The friend is the manager of the gun department in a regional store and got his information from the 2009 Shot Show. I thought it was common knowledge that a good part of the military was going away from the M9's and going to the .45. Seems like I read that several months ago. I didn't even ask my friend about that, I just asked if he knew which .45 they were going to and he said he did. I personally thought they would to go .40, but sounds like they didn't. My only question was what was the new gun going to be, and the Springfield rep at the Shot Show reportedly told this gun department manager that the Army placed a very large order for the XDm .45 (customized with the lock) and a good part of the Marine Corps also placed an order. He said he thought it held either 12 or 14 rounds but couldn't remember...I asked him the same question since my XDm .40 held 16 + 1. Later, B

A friend of mine got to shoot one at the 2009 Shot Show this year and said that the US Army and part of the Marines were going to the XDm .45, but with an additional safety. I don't think the ones that we will be buying have the extra safety, but I could be wrong. He also said it was deadly accurate. That's what I was told anyway, and this guy is very reliable. I expected it would be coming out soon anyway, but he said he should have them in his store in a couple of months. I know the XDm .40 was a good gun and I hated selling it, but I wanted to go to fewer calibers and chose .45 over .40. If I can get the XDm in a .45 ACP then I will probably get one. Springfield is right up there at the top of my list regarding reliability. Later, B

Don't know if I'll ever have the $$ to buy any of these, but they are some of my fav's... 1. Springfield 1911 loaded 2. Kimber CDPII lightweight 4" barrel 3. Bill Wilson 1911 (model ?) 4. 44 Mag blued S&W Mtn Gun w/ Ahrend Grips 5. Springfield XDm .45 (not available yet, but coming soon) maybe I should get another job...

Thank you guys!!! B

I ate lunch at a restaurant yesterday that still had the old red-letter sign up by the front of the establishment...the one that says it is a misdemeaner punishable by 11 months and 29 days if you carry a handgun where alcohol is served. However, there was no posting that said "handguns not allowed", no red-slash over a gun, and certainly no "official" posting. So, I just ate and left, thought about saying something to the waitress but didn't. Why do you think they still have that out-dated sign up? B

I have a question on magazine fit-up. My series 70 Colt Combat Commander is at the gunsmith's shop, but he recommended I start using Wilson Combat magazines. I ordered two of them from Midway and they are already here. Model 47DC, sized for the commander, but since my gun is at the shop I can't try them in it. I'm looking at the base pads, and even though they are called the slim base pad, it appears there is a section of the black base pad material going up the front edge of the magazine tube, and while I recall the Colt magazine having a little thin metal flat strip that stuck out right there, this looks thicker. Do you guys think this will actually fit in the notch at the bottom/front of the frame? Or will the Wilson Combat magazine stick out too far with the stainless steel tube of the mag showing? Sorry, it's hard to explain, I just don't know if the mag will go up into the mag well far enough because of the base pad projection on the front side. Any experience with this? Thanks guys! B

Thanks! That explained a lot. B

I recently purchased my first .45 ACP, a series 70 Colt Combat Commander in Satin Nickle. I love this gun - shoots great and is very accurate. I sold my .40 XDm to partially fund this purchase, and wanted to keep my number of calibers down to a reasonable number. My question...the .40 XDm had a match grade barrel, and the wall thickness of the barrel appeared quite thick. The .45 barrel appears to have a thinner wall thickness. Is this my imagination or is it really thinner? How do the internal pressures compare between .40 and .45? Does anybody know what the material properties would be on the two guns (i.e., yield stress, ultimate stress)? Are all .45's similar? The XDm had a steel barrel with black coating, but the .45 Colt has a silver (Stainless?) barrel. Any ideas why it appears thinner? And is this typical? Thanks, B

When I clean my shotgun, I use a 12-gage tam-poo0n

Just stopped by Dick's sporting goods in west Knoxville. They appeared to have some of most ammo sizes. Several 50-round boxes of .40, but I'm fully stocked now and Dick's doesn't have the best prices. I even made the comment it was good to see some ammo returning to the shelves. If anything, I am still not seeing much .38. Later, B

Wow, I didn't know they had the same parent company. Then, maybe the Walmart dude knew his stuff. Thanks guys!! B

I went by Walker Springs Walmart this morning and found another box of .40 S&W Federal Champion 180 grain, FMJ, 50 rounds for $12+/-. I thought this was a great price, and I've been getting it every time I see it...I've got several boxes now. Well, this morning the cashier in sporting goods said that they are speculating that this Federal stuff is really Blazer Brass. I disagreed with him, but his reasoning was that they weren't getting any Blazer Brass anymore, and that both the 9mm and .40 were the exact price (to the penny) as the Blazer Brass. I wouldn't personally base any speculation on the price of a product...they are probably being competitive with each other. If Federal knew how much Walmart was selling the Blazer for, then they would want to compete with that, right? I have never thought very highly of Blazer Brass, and wouldn't knowingly purchase any, although I know some folks have had luck with it...my concern is that some people are thinking the Federal ammo is the same as Blazer. Didn't Blazer have silver aluminum casings (even though it was called "brass"? This Federal casings says "Federal". Do you think this guy was just wrong? Thanks, B

Very good ballistic tests. I've done the same thing with lots of rounds, but never added newspaper to the water jugs. Thnaks, B

XD's are generally good, you just had the lemon. I think the bigger problem, in general, is that when you purchase a new gun nobody wnnts you to try it out first. You are taking all the risk and liability. I learned that lesson the hard way when I bought a cheap gun one time - EAA Windicator revolver. I took it back to Gander Mountain jammed after 1/3 of a box of cartridges. They had all fired, but it wasn't going to open up - the gunsmith took it in the back and beat on it with a brass mallet and said "good as new". I would not take the gun home, and THEN is when I find out that you can't return a handgun. They bought it back at a huge loss, then (in front of me) put another price tag on it and put it back on the shelves for some other poor sucker to buy. I don't know how to fix this, unless its a 100% retund of the gun is found to be faulty. That way, I would feel much more comfortable buying a gun. B

I carry .38, .357 Magnum and .40 S&W. The bigger calibers are more destructive, but 90% of the time I carry a S&W 638 .38 special +P with a 1 7/8" barrel. It is not fun to shoot because it kicks like a mule, but I've done enough testing of the defensive ammo in water jugs to know it is extremely powerful and I would not want to get shot with it. If I were going to carry a .22, I would want to be a much better shot than I am right now. I would love to have a .45 1911, but again, you give us a lot in weight and size when you start carrying something like that. Probably that 638 is about the most perfect carry gun I've got. B

Now it is 64 to 36...usually when the Republicans come home from WORK their votes will offset those made during the day.

+1 I hate shooting my 638 with the factory grips, but I carry it more than any other gun. I have a set of Pachmyr Decelerators on it now that make it much, much easier to shoot and control. However, it ain't no 686 fun target gun for the range. Likewise, I don't like carrying around the heavy 686 in a holster under my shirt. So, I go with the 638 and hope I never need to shoot it. B

I have tested most of these rounds in water to check penetration, expansion, fragmentation, but did not evaluate muzzle flash or accuracy. The Remington Golden Saber you mentioned did very, very well in the ballistics, along with Speer Gold Dots. The Gold Dots I tried were not the short barrel version, and I may try to test some of those in the future if they make it in .38 +P. The Buffalo Bore LSWCHP +P did something strange and the whole section that mushroomed simply sheared off, turning the bullet into an under-sized non-hollow-point center section (cylinder) that went very, very deep, but was very light and little. The Hornady Critical Defense is one of the finest looking and most consistent mushrooms, just as advertised, but it is a little bit on the small size when expanded. The very best, as far as penetration and expansion that I have tested so far is the new bonded Winchester PDX1 +P. Ask around, but it may advertise something about having less flash...I'm not sure. You might pick up a box of that and see how the flash compares to the Golden Saber...I am carrying Golden Saber in several other guns, but in my snubbie .38 I carry the Winchester bonded PDX1 +P. Later, B

I got the Browning Buckmark target pistol and it shoots well. I think if I had it to do over again, I would still choose the Browning Buckmark. No matter which gun you select, you are most likely going to have misfires, not because of the gun, but because the .22lr ammo just isn't quite up to par with normal centerfire pistol cartridges in my opinion. Good luck, B

I rented a CW9 at CCA when I was first looking at guns last year. Of all the guns I tried, it was my favorite, and I still would like to get one, even though I found a Springfield that ended being my first pistol. What I liked about it, besides the fact that it didn't jam, was that it was accurate, I could get my whole hand on there to grip it, and it was small enough that I could us a pocket holster and just put it in my pants pocket. I still might get one of these guns one of these days...you made a wise purchase. B

I know of people in Oak Ridge that have collector's guns stored in the safe deposit boxes at the bank - and the people at the bank know it.

I carried mine a couple of times using an IWB holster - not too comfortable. However, I picked up a nice Don Hume OWB holster at a recent gun show and I have been carrying it once or twice a week with that big ol XDM 40. Very comfortable...and I've gotten used to my pants hanging a little lower on the right side (ha). No kidding though, I have been carrying it if I have one of my big summer shirts on to cover it. B