View Full Version : Is the Army replacing the M9?

Jody Holeton
11th November 2006, 15:55
Dear all,

Is the Army replacing the M9?

I heard from that it might be replaced with an H&K .40 or .45?


12th November 2006, 13:40
yes, yes it is, this was first announced over a year ago, that the USAMU would start testing various models to determine who would ultimately get the contract. Although hotly debated in the Military, it will still be a few years before anything gets done. Same with the M-4 which the army is also testing to get rid of. Oddly enough our enemies weapon of choice the AK-47 has stood the test of time, while we have gone through 5 service rifles.

Jody Holeton
18th November 2006, 18:06
Replaced with what?

I was told by a weapons repair guy that the Army will replace the M16 and the M4 with some plastic, transformable, rifle.

Any truth to that?

George Kohler
18th November 2006, 19:04
Oddly enough our enemies weapon of choice the AK-47 has stood the test of time, while we have gone through 5 service rifles.

We have actually have gone through more than 5 service rifles, but I'm sure you are referring to the M1 and M14 and the many variants of the AR15 (in production since 1959). The rifles/carbines from the AR15 family includes:
and many more

The AK has been in production since 1947. So really it is only been 3 since the AK has come out; M14 (1954), M1 (1936), and AR15 (1959).

The M14, as the official rifle of the US military, was short lived, but it (and its variants) is still in service with the US military.

I should also point out the the AK-47 has also multiple variants throughout it's life.

19th November 2006, 06:02
Replaced with what?

I was told by a weapons repair guy that the Army will replace the M16 and the M4 with some plastic, transformable, rifle.

Any truth to that?

I know from what I heard the army was looking to get rid of the M-4 and wasn't impressed with the Marines XM-29 OICW that they were working. The Army's project was the XM-8 which looked like a fantastic rifle and the test reviews i saw were amazing but for some reason it's been placed on indefinate hold the last I read anything on it. For a link check this out:


As for our enemies weapon standing the test of time technically that's true. However if you want to look at it it's been changed too. The Russians in the 70's came out with the AK-74 (AKS-74 & AK-74U) which fired a 5.45x39mm round. They have also designed, I don't know about used the AK 101,102,103,104,105,107 and 108 which very in caliber from 5.45, 5.56 and 7.62. However the 47 is still widely available and a rock solid gun minus some accuracy issues.

20th November 2006, 03:33
Yes, clearly the M-16/M-4 Variants I included as one, as those in the know would know, and those not in the know could care less what the difference is between the M-16A2 and the M-16A4
I was going more along the lines of the M1 to the M14, M16, to the M4 with the M-14 now being assigned for the Squad Designated Marksman,
As the M16A3 sees very little life in most units as the Army essentially went from the A2 to the A4, and most units went straight from the A2 to the M4A1. It is like the variants of the M240 and the M249, to the non military type it is still referred to as the "sixty" The military is big on variants within the same line of weapons which usually denote either selector switch or flat top vs. carrying handle configurations. Although in the early M16/AR-15 there were many more modifications. The Big green machine is slow to change and the .45 vs. 9mm debate is proof of that. Just like the current IBA vs. Dragon Skin controversy.

George Kohler
20th November 2006, 06:07
I remember the day my unit received the M16A3 to test back in 1992 or 1993. Only 4 or 5 were given to the whole company. I wasn't too worried about it back then since I was a team leader and had a CAR15 with a modified remington 870 underneath (kind of like the M203). :) It was nice being in a unit that had a good budget back then, even though the government was trying to downsize.

Joseph Svinth
20th November 2006, 06:30
Back in 1989, my National Guard unit got M16A2s with which to replace its M16A1s.

Somebody set off the alarm while the entire battalion was unloading rifle racks. So, this meant that two Seattle cops drove up while there were between 400 and 800 automatic rifles in full view.

Seattle's Finest not only didn't stop, they actually sped up. My guess is that they figured that either we were who we were supposed to be, in which case the alarm was no big deal, or we weren't, in which case stopping to talk was a really good way to end up getting shot a whole bunch of times, with bullets that really didn't care if you were wearing a Class 3 Kevlar vest...

20th November 2006, 09:41
I got to see and handle the XM-8, likely slated to be the next-gen combat rifle for the Army, about a year ago. It is modular, light, easy to shoot and very accurate. How sturdy is it? Time'll tell ...

With a very minimum of orientation to the XM-8, troopies were putting rounds on target like flies of crap. The sighting system is pretty freaking hi-speed.

It's pretty, sleek and fancy, but my concern is old-school: the fancier it is, the more bells and whistles, the more there is to go wrong. Also not so sure it would successfully deliver a butt-stroke if necessary ...

Here are some pix:




Juan Perez
21st November 2006, 01:09
Dear all,

Is the Army replacing the M9?

I heard from that it might be replaced with an H&K .40 or .45?


My unit has worked with the availability of both the M9 and the Mk 23. I tend to choose the M9 because it's more compact. The Mk 23 was much more bulkier and unwieldy on an angled chest holster. The FORCEMOD folks in our unit have been working steadily on the research and development of the next secondary weapon (as the Mk 23 is greatly handicapped in this regard as per our specific requirements in this aspect). The H&K and SIG variants have been mentioned. We expect a decision soon (months, or at least two years). For us, if the need is critical enough for a .45, we can get our grubby hands on either H&Ks or Glocks (G21) for that matter. As for my own experience, the secondary weapon is an "in extremis" tool after the primary weapon and, the primary weapon is usually a tool to get one to the nearest crew-served weapon. Now, for CQB, that's a different story all together. In that case, our secondary weapon requirements are a bit different.

John Lindsey
10th December 2006, 17:45
I think the AK47 is the weapon of choice for Iraqis (good and bad) because it doesn't take much to keep it running, and they normally don't like to clean and oil them. It has been part of their culture for a long while.

I liked what HK was going to do with their new 45, but I heard it was cancelled. Anyone know for sure?

Glock has a new 45 coming out soon with a thinner grip, ambi mag release and other things to make it eligble for the US Army. I love Glocks, but only totally trust them in 9mm.

17th December 2006, 02:17
The military is slowly but surely returning to the venerable M1911 .45ACP, primarily for it's phenomenal stopping power. Marine Corps units have selected a modified Kimber clone of the M1911 as well as other elite units (Navy SEALs, etc.) are going back to that weapons system or variants such as the H&K MK 23 SOCOM pistol. The M9 is a well made and sound weapon but didn't have good stopping power as it is chambered for 9 x 19mm cartridge.

Mr. Kohler, actually the AK-47 assault rifle was evaluated by the Soviet Army in 1947 but was turned down pending improvements to it. It wasn't accepted until 1949 when it went into mass production. Also, the actual AK-47 only stayed in service until 1959, when it was replaced with the AKM, a derivative of the original that used a receiver made from stamped steel as opposed the the AK's forged steel receiver. This facilitated the production of these guns at a lower cost. In 1974 the AKM was rechambered for the new Soviet 5.45mm cartridge and this became the AK-74.

What has kept the Kalishnikov so popular is the incredible stopping power of the 7.62 x 39 mm cartridge fired from an affordable, ultra-reliable battle rifle designed for ease of training, operation, and maintenance by a third world conscript who likely cannot even read or write. This makes it both an ideal primary weapon for armies with limited budgets as well as rebel or guerrilla units who need superb firepower and minimal instruction on operation.

The H&K XM-8 assault rifle program was officially discontinued in August 2005. In the time since then, the Army has, in fact, adopted a new assault rifle, but only for SOCOM units, the FN Special Forces Combat Assault Rifle (SCAR). The weapon comes in 2 variants the MK-16 SCAR-L chambered in 5.56mm NATO and and the MK-17 SCAR-H chambered for the harder hitting 7.62mm NATO round. The SCAR is replacing the MK11, MK12, MK14, M24, and M4 weapon systems for the US Army.