Posted: Feb 2nd 2010, 11:40 PM
The 45 vs 9 debate goes on and on. I own both calibers, as do most that are serious into firearms. They each have their purpose, as do the other calibers. I think it comes down to who is making the decisions every 5 years or so and what they focus on.
Just a point to make; it's only Navy
SOCOM, not general Navy that made the switch. They moved off the
HK Mk 23 45ACP several years ago when they went to the Sig 226 in 9mm. Now they are jumping back, but in a more compact package than the Mk23 was.
The Mk23 was a behemoth, especially with the Go Go Gadget attachments.
The Sig was a nice compact platform that just got under bid by
HK
when they decided they wanted 45 again. I wouldn't doubt if it ping
pongs back next time around. Both are great pieces, but the take down
is stupid simple on the
HK, and the release is much easier to manipulate with gloves on.
Splat,
The HK45 is a sweet piece. Quite frankly, the HK45C is a better package unless you are competing with it. I carry the European brother to the HK45C, the
HK USP-C 45. Same gun, but with a std rail instead of the picatinny and fixed vs
adj sights. The HK45C wasn't available when I bought mine, or I would have gone with it. I like the fixed sights and smooth rail better for concealed holster carry anyway. Other than that, same gun.
