People are so offended by the Glock19 replacing the MK25. Sig and Glock fans argue whether the Navy SEALs are stupid or smart for hours. I doubt this is going to be an argument that will cease any time soon. I want to add my 2 cents on what might be going on here. Our military has held its current standard weapons inventory for a couple decades with very little deviation. The only change I observed in my time in the Marine Corps was an introduction to the full-auto capable MK12 with delicious OTM rounds. Times were changing fast, but I got out before the next shifts came in the form of the IAR to replace the SAW in some units, and even the Colt M45 to the Glock19. MARSOC was the first to take the path to the Glock publicly, if I remember correctly.
I personally don’t care what the military or SF use for their pistol or rifle. Most of the time it is political in nature, as well as being budget based. If the entire military chooses the Glock19 for their sidearm, just to skip the trials since it’s already NATO approved, so be it. The end fact is that the pistol, no matter the model, is going to get abused, neglected, and broken. But people put too much stock into the military selection. We civilians are not in the military and when we purchase a gun, we are not getting a used and neglected gun. But let’s just look at the two pistols that are the head of this debate, shall we?
MK25:
The MK25 is a very big deal, even today, for the metal framed lovers. Now this pistol has been around for decades and has seen plenty of changes, but it is still pretty much the same. I like this pistol for its easy to use controls, and how easy it is to work on for being a DA/SA pistol. The controls on this pistol are a little spread out and are pretty simple in their uses:
The grip on this pistol is actually pretty fat, and it isn’t great with gloves on if you’re vertically-challenged like me. The trigger on this pistol is undoubtedly a good trigger and a standard for other pistols on the market in the DA/SA configuration to look up to. The mag capacity is a little strained at 15, but 18rd mags are available aftermarket. If you prefer the popular thumbs forward grip with gloves, you may hold down the slide stop on the last round.
Glock19 Gen3:
The Glock19 needs no introduction. It is the envy of a lot of pistol companies that have followed it into the polymer striker fired world. Anyways, all the controls are tight together and completely unobtrusive and dehorned. You have to mean to use them in order for them to work:
This pistol is the perfect size, has a size to capacity ratio that other pistols try to match. It takes little training to learn and has a simple manual of arms. It is easy to work on and replacing a part can be done in less than a minute. But this system does have its problems. The mags don’t fall out easy without a flick to encourage it, and the pistol does need sights replaced almost right away due to the cheap stock sights that are very easy to deform.
Final Impressions:
I like the Sig MK25 and I like the Glock19. Both pistols are good, but they are from two different worlds and time periods. Their triggers and their purposes are night and day different. I see the MK25 as a home defense and duty pistol, while I see the Glock19 as a carry pistol. The debate about the switch to the Glock 19 will continue forever, just as the Beretta vs Sig debate still lingers. Some people will never accept this switch. In my opinion, you should just go out, get whatever pistol you like and enjoy shooting it. I don’t really put much stock in military decisions, as I am no longer a part of that gun club. Seriously, I don’t see the point in using their choice as being a standard for your choice since the military doesn’t always make the best choices for its troops. But the only thing I am going to be watch is what parts on the Glock19 will break constantly. What do you think?
I have both pistols and love them both. Sort of like having two kids. You love them both the same, yet differently according to their personalities. Same with the G19 and the Mk25. I bought the MK25 first, loved it and swore I’d never forsake it for another.
Then the news came up regarding the G19’s possible adoption by NSW and other branches. Well, I was never too keen on a pistol that had its safety on the trigger, but I bought one anyway, and I’ll admit, for its ‘tacticoolness’.
I’ve not had any problems with either pistol in any fashion.
And as a matter of fact, I put my 16 year old male offspring on the MK25 and at 15yds he was on a 6 inch plate in 4 shots!
Same with the G19.
The Sig is a full half pound heavier than the Glock, and I don’t know how much difference that makes to the marine operator who has to swim with it.
Both the factory mags and aftermarket Magpuls drop quite freely when I press the mag release button. Same with the Sig.
Cosmetically, the Sig says ‘I’m a badass military pistol’, it is machined to buttery smoothness has agressive lines and is tougher than chinga leather. Easy to take down and clean.
The Glock is smooth and refined too, also very easy to take down and clean.
I have the tendency to agree with the author that the MK226 with a Streamlight is an excellent HD pistol (to back up your Rem or Mossy), while the G19 functions well as a sleek, light carry pistol. Coupled with a Safari retention holster, I don’t see how anything else could be better.
The 9mm is not enough power to do sh*t.
Go find you a Bren 10 Model L
or Model D in 10mm or 45 cal. In 1984 the U.S. gov’t bought 50,000 of
them for Seal trials. The Beretta 92 was a real piece of sh*t. The lite
weight 45 cal. Glock is the only to go. The only reason people like 9mm
is because ammo will be anywhere.
(recent email exchange with my friend Michael, a 1962 minted SEAL)
There is no significant difference between handgun wounds from 9, 40 or 45 calibers. Don’t believe me? Listen to the Doctor…
https://youtu.be/3PAHu-5-aUM
Discounting wound channels in ballistic gel, which doesn’t have bones or different tissue densities, I would logically conclude that the .45cal would be more effective just by the fact that it delivers more kinetic energy into the target. I think what we are looking at here is the same argument originally made for the adoption of the 5.56mm. You can carry more ammo in 9mm (per weight) than you can in .45. I’m pretty sure the DoD will stay with the 9mm also because it is the round adopted by NATO. And this conversation has been had at least a million or more times.
There is a difference, it is just so small that it is insignificant.
If you are can’t expect one round to “knock down” and “incapacitate” anyone. That’s why you should shoot them more than once. Because of that, most people, police departments, and federal agencies are staying with or moving to 9MM. It simply holds more ammo.
The challenge to the military as a whole is that it has to take a group of people with zero knowledge of firearms and teach them all of the intricacies of the issued weapon systems. For that reason, the Glock platform is perfect due to its idiot proof design. You want the gun to fire? Pull the trigger.
Civilians do not suffer from that drawback. We have variety in our gun choices. We can shoot it as often as we can afford ammunition. It is easy to get acquainted with our personal firearm.
For that reason, we shouldn’t exclusively look at military small arms as the best available for us as individuals. We can craft our gun wish list off of our own specific mission requirements as opposed to the military’s often compromised decision (the Glock is less than half the price of the SIG). Do you need a gun for concealed carry? Look at a S&W Shield. Do you want something that looks different? Try a Chiappa Rhino. Do you want a full size frame? Get an H&K VP9.