M9 vs M17

[HKGuns]

I took my M18 to the range last week for its first outing and it was a horrible experience.

Ejection was erratic, went from dropping weakly beside me, barely getting out three inches, to straight up, to properly ejecting.

Stovepipes every 5 or 6 rounds as well. I was not impressed and am hoping it is simply break-in. These reloads run in every other 9mm I own, functioning 100%.

Going to bring some 124 gr NATO rounds with me next time to hopefully speed the break-in process along.

[Wake27]

Something I found interesting when I was competing with Berettas was that the factory M9a1 (USMC model has a relief at the top of the backstrap) with a set of thin grips (you can use the factory A3 grips to really cheap out) and a “D” spring just completely woke up the gun. Much easier for pretty much anyone to shoot. Ignited .mil ammo reliably. This was around the same time the Army was testing the potential replacements. The Army handicapped that gun by not updating it. I of course realize that there are a lot of other factors in play, just seemed interesting.

I have heard lots of people say that just bringing the M9 into this century makes a tremendous difference. I love my Glocks so M9Awhatever or M17 makes no real difference to me. Either way, the upgrade helps non-shooters use it better from what I’ve seen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ST911]

What will not do, is the totally inadequate amount of pistol training the military does.
They should have spent the new gun money on authorizations to train each soldier issued a pistol with 500-1000 rounds of ammo annually, and developed a training program that got troops hands on the issued pistol regardless of what it is, on at least a monthly basis, if not weekly.
Adopt much more intensive training and competencies in pistol marksmanship and handling ( plenty of decent civilian and law enforcement programs you could borrow from)
Better fundamental training, not new equipment is what pays dividends

I fully agree on the training. I always thought it was backwards in the GWOT that the military gave everyone the hardest weapon out there to use, did a basic qual, and then called it good because they had weapon and it cut down on the amount of M4s that needed to lugged around VBC, BAF, KAF, and all the other mega-FOBs. I like the Sig, and considering the price I think it supports your argument we can spend less on the gun and more about making sure the people that carry it can use it.

If it’s one or the other, then no. Hardware can absolutely solve problems. While I wouldn’t by the M17 or 320, it is far more shootable between the smaller grip and better trigger. You can train around a double action trigger pull that’s heavier than the gun itself but it isn’t easy and you don’t have to with the Sig. You can’t train around a grip that’s so fat that a significant minority have trouble handling it.

Better training is optimal, but it's not coming for most. There are good folks doing decent unit level training and making a difference.

I don't think much of the 320/M17/M18, but it's helped less effort produce better results. It's more ergonomically compatible, with fewer control variables, and more in common with guns in other unit and personal armories. Watching groups transition from M9 to M17/18, the results are almost immediate.

[1168]

I took my M18 to the range last week for its first outing and it was a horrible experience.

Ejection was erratic, went from dropping weakly beside me, barely getting out three inches, to straight up, to properly ejecting.

Stovepipes every 5 or 6 rounds as well. I was not impressed and am hoping it is simply break-in. These reloads run in every other 9mm I own, functioning 100%.

Going to bring some 124 gr NATO rounds with me next time to hopefully speed the break-in process along.

Did you have any fail to go into battery? When you say M18, you mean the commercial version, correct?

[Slater]

I know that a lot of the Turkish guns are so strongly sprung that they need to be broke in with something stronger than 115 grain. Wouldn't have thought that was true of the M17/M18 though.

[HKGuns]

Did you have any fail to go into battery? When you say M18, you mean the commercial version, correct?

Yep commercial M18 and yes there were failures to go into battery as well.

Never had a new pistol perform so piss poor on its first outing.

[Straight Shooter]

Arent they making 115gr ammo specifically for this gun?
Ive been shooting and have now about 1,000 rounds of Winchester.I THINK..M118 or something like that..its in the safe And I dont feel like diggin it out to look.
But it is HOT 115..over P+, and Ive read it was made and is now being issued for that pistol specifically.
CORRECTION: M1152 is the ammo I was thinking of. Dont have my chrono notes handy...but it definitely smoking. I dont ever shoot 115gr...but this is different.
Also- slight thread drift, but whilst on the subject..what happened to the military going to Gold Dots? There were threads here on that awhile back..is that over & done or what?

[1168]

Yep commercial M18 and yes there were failures to go into battery as well.

Never had a new pistol perform so piss poor on its first outing.

Thanks. I’d very much appreciate updates as you deal with that. Sorry its not working for you.

[sinister]

Interesting to note, some 320 users want the aluminum X grip to give the feel, heft, and balance of a 226 or 228.

So you get a striker-fired 226 or 228 with a shit trigger.

[opngrnd]

Has anyone done significant accuracy comparisons between the 320 line and the .mil M17 or M18? A call to the factory leads me to believe the .mil versions are much more durable and accurate.