Comments by "" (@neutronalchemist3241) on "Why Did the Military Replace their Official Pistol?" video.

  1.  @Thes4LT  There had been two different questions about the reliability of the M9. The first one was the supposed fragility of the slide, with several reported cases of it cracking. The second ones were jamming issues in desert environment. For the first one, after the US Army blamed the tellurium used in the steel alloy of the slide, and requested, and obtained, modifications to the alloy and the construction of the slide, Beretta tecnicians discovered the problems (that only seemed to happen in US Army pistols) was due to a defect in Winchester made M882 ball cartridges that produced pressure in eccess of proofloads. The real wonder was that the handguns tested resisted to that beating for many thousands of rounds anyway first to crack. Beretta sued the US government for the bad press, the unnecessary modifications required to the design and the delays, and the question was settled with the Government paying Beretta further $12m for the inconvenience. The second was due to aftermarket parkerised magazines purchased by the US Army instead of original Beretta ones.
    11
  2. Apart from the fact that the 357 SIG is practically a dead cartridge already, and the M9 can shoot it anyway, no regular GI (special operators carry the handgun they want) will ever been issued with other than 9mm cartridges. To provide two new cartridges (a ball and a special one) for the new gun was part of the bid, and both SIG and Glock submitted 9mm ammos. SIG won not because of a supposed superior modularity but because the Army requested an external safety, and the one added on the Glock was considered to be a patch of substandard quality. Only nuts consider the 1911 to be a "superior pistol".
    1
  3. The XM9 program was for SA/DA pistols. FN submitted a SA/DA Hi-Power, the BDA, but it didn't pass the early stages of the selection. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browning_Hi-Power_BDA
    1