Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: Kuato
More gov't waste, they'll want to replace all the "old" pistols on a two year schedule at our expense.
Any issues with supply or performance of the old? No? Then stop. wasting. money.
Big issue with supply of the old (the M92) - they're WORN OUT. The Beretta became the Army's gun in 1985.
I'm a Beretta fan. I've carried guns in the USN, my wife owns one, but the simple fact is: After 35,000 rounds, the guns are simply worn out. Add the abrasive element of sand over the last few years, and those with far fewer rounds are worn out too.
So, the Army has to start buying guns...why not consider other options besides the Beretta?
I have a friend that does a lot of Ipsc and he says he goes through a gun a year, but what he does is gets a new barrel, spring and sometimes a trigger assembly. I assume you can do that with a beretta?