Service Guns-THEORY
Mr Henderson
Posts: 16MI6 Agent
Their have been many discussions of the Bond guns, but few people really have the experience to take a look at what is out there and to specifically look at the most modern technology when it comes to what is operationally attractive for the newest weapons, let's change that, now!
The classic of both Bond and service weapons have revolved about many options, caliber, concealability, suppressor (silencer) use, accuracy, and the truth is, there are a lot of really good choices for specific needs, but how about an overall SERVICE model?
Caliber. If we use the criteria of what is available worldwide, we eliminate many good rounds, but what remains is a selection which includes the .32, .380 (9mm short), 9mm, and .45 auto.
Thirty years ago and before, the decision of what was used as a STANDARD weapon was chosen for the use, operational demands and feasibility of suppression, concealability and round volume. The .32 was most easily suppressed, having a sub-sonic velocity which suited it to use with a silencer, the .380 more concealable, and the 9mm was far and away the most common round to come by. Given that round breakdown, the Walther PPK was by far the easiest to conceal and to have available in .32 and .380. The accuracy was fair to above average, and for it's weight, it was heavily favored for every need. Being the compact model of the Walther PP, which was common as far back as the 1920's, the PPK (K designation standing for KURZ, or compact model).
Over time, we have seen highly advanced weapons, such as the Heckler and Koch P7-P8 models arrive, with compactness and accuracy beyond what should be expected from such a small arm, but the COMPLEXITY of the firearm is seen as a weight against it. Personally, I carried one of the first 9,000 imported into the US for nearly 3 years, and found it nore than adequate in every category, and especially in durability and accuracy. The one factor I found to be a hindrance was the weight of the arm, which is nearly four times that of the PPK, but with my large hands, the substantial volume of the grips made it for me a VERY comfortabl pistol to shoot, with significant accuracy out to seventy YARDS (210+ feet). My practice target in those days was a 4 inch wide, 16 inch tall chainsaw blade painted to show up against the backdrop, and I could easily hit 6-7 of the eight rounds consistently offhand with this pistol. at shorter range, 3 inch groups of a full magazine were standard and common even with mixed rounds of ball, hollowpoint and varied weight projectiles. The heavier bullets tended to produce better groups, but the weight of the gun and gas-retarded blowback tended to absorb all movement and felt recoil. With over 10,000 rounds and decent care, that particular arm has been semi-retired now to use by another family member as a carry in rugged neighborhoods. It has NEVER malfunctioned in over 22+ years of carry.
The other arms I trusted and carried for longer periods were a Steyr GB, which was treasured as both extremely accurate and dependable until the company stopped producing them, in 1988, and a friend offered me a collector price for a cherished sidearm. I let it go, with regrets, and moved on to another 9mm that I felt was trustworthy, durable and accurate, the Walther P5, which was produced in both a full size and compact model in 9mm, the compact being a rarity today, and which had been the standard Service pistol for special operations SAS units until 1992. No new P5's are sold in the US, and used police issue models, which are of dubious condition, having not been sent back to Walther for reconditioning, are driving prices down to unbelievable lows. The majority of these Walthers were not issued in Germany, but Spain, so there is little record of how they were maintained. It is my understanding that Walther is at this time standing behind any guarantees that are implicit with sales, and as with any really good company, if you ask for help, you get it. Twelve years ago I wrote to Walther with a question about a 1972 PPK magazine, and within 3 weeks, they had sent me a new magazine and instructions to destroy the old one. At this time, it is impossible to locate new magazines for the Walther P5, and I am happy being stuck with it.
The Glock came out in the mid 1980's as a simple arm, which most better gunmakers had to deal with
and many really good shooters abhorred, myself included. The problems and fallacies surrounding the Glock and it's company, which was never very supportive of individual shooters or any but the largest contracts, such as the New York Police and FBI, are best referred to by the nickname given the company and the arm, the "Glitch."
A number of supremely accurate Browning-based models, the Colts, ParaOrdinance, Kimber and others have driven the popularity, and the hype about the .45 to new heights, and with good reason. You can purchase a decent cost model, and then add and modify a bit at a time to greatly increase the accuracy, function and smoothness of the fiream as your needs and skills increase. These weapons have really added to the shooting sport in a good way, but are not service arms, to be taken out of the box and trusted as one would some of the supremely expensive models which were purposefully designed to be be out-of-the-box ready. Although I will not denigrate the quality, accuracy and fine function of these arms, they don't serve the rugged and operational arm, rather, they are "personalized" to fit a function and the hand of the shooter. They have, however, increased the demand of the shooting public into high-capacity, high accuracy and high reliability demands, which has been surpassed of late in a number of specialty arms, which began with the replacesments for the Walther P5, the P99 and P2000. These were transition arms, and good up to a point, but by 2003, a new set of standards and designes were being set upon for the demands of Special Forces units which demanded extreme accuracy, unquestionable durability and extreme use.
This brings up the next generation of weapons, the Heckler and Koch SOCCOM and Mark 23, which, to my knowledge, were the only arms ever to be tested by the military that not only passed, but surpassed the demands of the military. Based upon a target model and high capacity magazine model, the SOCCOMS were .45 that had newly designed and modern suppression systems (in the old days you custom underloaded rounds to use a supressor, you did not use full-tilt military hardball). The models were set up to be in a number of configurations that had to be changed BY AN ARMOURER, not an amateur, and these systems would be operationally obvious to the user by the layout of the weapon once you were used to it. The Mark 23, which was considered the civilian model, was so accruate that rapid shots were often in groups that touched, or in the case of one 3 magazine (36 round) test firing I did in 17 seconds, the 36 rounds were in a just under 6 inch ring at 40 feet, with a lot of the rounds either touching or actually in the same holes 5 rounds were dead center 6 o'clock and clustered in a group 1.75 inches across. This was from a now decommissioned mark 23 that had spent over 2 years in Iraq before being replaced by a Heckler and Koch USP, which is the shorter replacement for the Mark 23, which is no longer produced.
The H&K USP is also produced in a compact version in both 9mm and .45, but after firing the USP and the Mark 23 in .45, my longstanding preference for the 9mm is ended, and will remain with my loyalty to the Walther P5, which although I consider outdated and underrated, well, even an old dog can leqrn new tricks occasionally, if the skills that back up that trick are attention to detail, target and trigger discipline and patience.
In all, the idea that the Bond guns should "stick" to the PPK which is now superceded in both accuracy and durability, or to retain the Walther P99, which has also been surpassed in a big way by the modern suppressed and compact models is truly absurd, along with any notion that an old "custom" such as the Asp, which was a stripped and heavily reworked rendition of the S&W 59, well, nonsense has been plowed under over the last ten years by progress and knowledgable shooter demand.
At one time, the .45 was seen as an "American" round, both too heavy and noisy for concealed carry, between the designers at H&K which has created a line of unsurpassed quality and accuracy, thy will undoubtedly be driving to a new leading edge for the concealed and mission-related weapons of the future. I would like to see the Bond guns advance into this new era of equipment, at the present time, it seems that the discussion is not being driven by shooters and those knowledgable about weapons, but by desk jockeys and theorists. The practical experience is out there, and people such as myself have been keeping up with the latest stuff. Use it or be outdated.
The classic of both Bond and service weapons have revolved about many options, caliber, concealability, suppressor (silencer) use, accuracy, and the truth is, there are a lot of really good choices for specific needs, but how about an overall SERVICE model?
Caliber. If we use the criteria of what is available worldwide, we eliminate many good rounds, but what remains is a selection which includes the .32, .380 (9mm short), 9mm, and .45 auto.
Thirty years ago and before, the decision of what was used as a STANDARD weapon was chosen for the use, operational demands and feasibility of suppression, concealability and round volume. The .32 was most easily suppressed, having a sub-sonic velocity which suited it to use with a silencer, the .380 more concealable, and the 9mm was far and away the most common round to come by. Given that round breakdown, the Walther PPK was by far the easiest to conceal and to have available in .32 and .380. The accuracy was fair to above average, and for it's weight, it was heavily favored for every need. Being the compact model of the Walther PP, which was common as far back as the 1920's, the PPK (K designation standing for KURZ, or compact model).
Over time, we have seen highly advanced weapons, such as the Heckler and Koch P7-P8 models arrive, with compactness and accuracy beyond what should be expected from such a small arm, but the COMPLEXITY of the firearm is seen as a weight against it. Personally, I carried one of the first 9,000 imported into the US for nearly 3 years, and found it nore than adequate in every category, and especially in durability and accuracy. The one factor I found to be a hindrance was the weight of the arm, which is nearly four times that of the PPK, but with my large hands, the substantial volume of the grips made it for me a VERY comfortabl pistol to shoot, with significant accuracy out to seventy YARDS (210+ feet). My practice target in those days was a 4 inch wide, 16 inch tall chainsaw blade painted to show up against the backdrop, and I could easily hit 6-7 of the eight rounds consistently offhand with this pistol. at shorter range, 3 inch groups of a full magazine were standard and common even with mixed rounds of ball, hollowpoint and varied weight projectiles. The heavier bullets tended to produce better groups, but the weight of the gun and gas-retarded blowback tended to absorb all movement and felt recoil. With over 10,000 rounds and decent care, that particular arm has been semi-retired now to use by another family member as a carry in rugged neighborhoods. It has NEVER malfunctioned in over 22+ years of carry.
The other arms I trusted and carried for longer periods were a Steyr GB, which was treasured as both extremely accurate and dependable until the company stopped producing them, in 1988, and a friend offered me a collector price for a cherished sidearm. I let it go, with regrets, and moved on to another 9mm that I felt was trustworthy, durable and accurate, the Walther P5, which was produced in both a full size and compact model in 9mm, the compact being a rarity today, and which had been the standard Service pistol for special operations SAS units until 1992. No new P5's are sold in the US, and used police issue models, which are of dubious condition, having not been sent back to Walther for reconditioning, are driving prices down to unbelievable lows. The majority of these Walthers were not issued in Germany, but Spain, so there is little record of how they were maintained. It is my understanding that Walther is at this time standing behind any guarantees that are implicit with sales, and as with any really good company, if you ask for help, you get it. Twelve years ago I wrote to Walther with a question about a 1972 PPK magazine, and within 3 weeks, they had sent me a new magazine and instructions to destroy the old one. At this time, it is impossible to locate new magazines for the Walther P5, and I am happy being stuck with it.
The Glock came out in the mid 1980's as a simple arm, which most better gunmakers had to deal with
and many really good shooters abhorred, myself included. The problems and fallacies surrounding the Glock and it's company, which was never very supportive of individual shooters or any but the largest contracts, such as the New York Police and FBI, are best referred to by the nickname given the company and the arm, the "Glitch."
A number of supremely accurate Browning-based models, the Colts, ParaOrdinance, Kimber and others have driven the popularity, and the hype about the .45 to new heights, and with good reason. You can purchase a decent cost model, and then add and modify a bit at a time to greatly increase the accuracy, function and smoothness of the fiream as your needs and skills increase. These weapons have really added to the shooting sport in a good way, but are not service arms, to be taken out of the box and trusted as one would some of the supremely expensive models which were purposefully designed to be be out-of-the-box ready. Although I will not denigrate the quality, accuracy and fine function of these arms, they don't serve the rugged and operational arm, rather, they are "personalized" to fit a function and the hand of the shooter. They have, however, increased the demand of the shooting public into high-capacity, high accuracy and high reliability demands, which has been surpassed of late in a number of specialty arms, which began with the replacesments for the Walther P5, the P99 and P2000. These were transition arms, and good up to a point, but by 2003, a new set of standards and designes were being set upon for the demands of Special Forces units which demanded extreme accuracy, unquestionable durability and extreme use.
This brings up the next generation of weapons, the Heckler and Koch SOCCOM and Mark 23, which, to my knowledge, were the only arms ever to be tested by the military that not only passed, but surpassed the demands of the military. Based upon a target model and high capacity magazine model, the SOCCOMS were .45 that had newly designed and modern suppression systems (in the old days you custom underloaded rounds to use a supressor, you did not use full-tilt military hardball). The models were set up to be in a number of configurations that had to be changed BY AN ARMOURER, not an amateur, and these systems would be operationally obvious to the user by the layout of the weapon once you were used to it. The Mark 23, which was considered the civilian model, was so accruate that rapid shots were often in groups that touched, or in the case of one 3 magazine (36 round) test firing I did in 17 seconds, the 36 rounds were in a just under 6 inch ring at 40 feet, with a lot of the rounds either touching or actually in the same holes 5 rounds were dead center 6 o'clock and clustered in a group 1.75 inches across. This was from a now decommissioned mark 23 that had spent over 2 years in Iraq before being replaced by a Heckler and Koch USP, which is the shorter replacement for the Mark 23, which is no longer produced.
The H&K USP is also produced in a compact version in both 9mm and .45, but after firing the USP and the Mark 23 in .45, my longstanding preference for the 9mm is ended, and will remain with my loyalty to the Walther P5, which although I consider outdated and underrated, well, even an old dog can leqrn new tricks occasionally, if the skills that back up that trick are attention to detail, target and trigger discipline and patience.
In all, the idea that the Bond guns should "stick" to the PPK which is now superceded in both accuracy and durability, or to retain the Walther P99, which has also been surpassed in a big way by the modern suppressed and compact models is truly absurd, along with any notion that an old "custom" such as the Asp, which was a stripped and heavily reworked rendition of the S&W 59, well, nonsense has been plowed under over the last ten years by progress and knowledgable shooter demand.
At one time, the .45 was seen as an "American" round, both too heavy and noisy for concealed carry, between the designers at H&K which has created a line of unsurpassed quality and accuracy, thy will undoubtedly be driving to a new leading edge for the concealed and mission-related weapons of the future. I would like to see the Bond guns advance into this new era of equipment, at the present time, it seems that the discussion is not being driven by shooters and those knowledgable about weapons, but by desk jockeys and theorists. The practical experience is out there, and people such as myself have been keeping up with the latest stuff. Use it or be outdated.
Comments
http://www.mark23.com/web/index.html
And to further put money where my mouth is, come to Austin, Texas and shoot with me so I can show you what I mean by EXTEME ACCURACY, we will go and fire up some guns that you won't even find outside a museum!
What I am trying to point out is that with all the Gee-whiz stuff Bond uses in the movies, the basic trend for the last 10-12 yeas has NOT reflected the newest and best technology that is now out there in the choice of firearms, and it is beginning to become more and more obvious to a growing number of combat, police and firearms experts out there (US ARMY Sniper, Infantry officer, Armourer with 9 years of police, security and weapons experience, including teaching, range control operations, testing, ballistics and published writing about handguns, I also helped get the teaching of hand-to-hand combat with tomahawks placed into Ranger and Special Forces training, and I design and make knives. I was avoiding touting my own experience and will probably erase this personal information in a few days) It is galling to see such a sad, outdated representation of reality when there is so much new information and knowledge out there, both online and in military forces.
Please, don't take my word for any of this, I am just pointing out that there is a lot of REAL information out there, if you just take time to look. Here is a good place to start
http://www.shadowspear.com/main.htm
I confess to a certain emotional attachment to the PPK, as it relates to Bond and the history of the character---I own a .380 PPK, one of the Interarms-manufactured ones from the early '90s. I target shoot with wad-cutters, and load it with hollow-points for a home defense situation which I hope will never arise, but I'm obviously one of the desk jockeys (writers) to which you referred,
Since Bond switched to the P99 in TND, Eon have obviously chosen not to spend any screen time on how and why 007 uses what he uses, which is a shame. If the H&K USP (particularly the compact version, for obvious concealment needs) is what Bond should be shooting, I'd love to see that discussed, at least in passing, as many fans of the character also are fans of weaponry in general, however casual and pedestrian that fandom may be...
Then, let the character move on with his new weapon---and a better-grounded rationale for its use, which I think would serve the New Era quite well.
Once again, welcome to AJB---from one of the resident Desk Jockeys
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I am fast becoming a desk jockey myself, have written three articles in the last week, and been to 3 meetings and taught 2 classes in dealing with museums, history and shooting (blackpowder). I was gratified to shock the
naysayers at one of the meetings over at the college where I teach recently, who had written up a safety checklist (less than a half page) to be followed to cover them for insurance, so I handed her the Army FM Manuals (4 books) covering range safety, briefings, personnel and safety, then showed her my paramedic card, first responder certif, and surgical technician papers, along with the remainder of my state and federal firearm training documents. I noted that particular staff member did not attend the second meeting. It's good to have a bit of field experience in anything, even if it does lead to wading into too much paperwork at times.
But remember, Bond was just issued thse P99 (yeah I know he took it in TND, but since it has been part of his issued equipment). I think the the P99 fits Bond perfectly. Good stopping power, lightweight, easily concealed, and it accepts a silencer. Unless he's going to go with a Colt 45, then IMO he should keep the P99.
Edit: Also remember that Miranda Frost carried the P99 in DAD. Therefore I would almost consider it a service/standard issue weapon. I guess it would help if we saw what other agents used along side Bond.
Justification of use of any service arm has to be based on a THEORY of how it fits and represents the current operational needs, not rationalized as what other movies are utilizing. That premise not only makes no sense, it clearly demonstrates a complete case of denial towards researching the best equipment for operational needs.
I don't think the average moviegoer cares if Bond's gun is among the most accurate handguns with enough firepower on the market. It should look good, be fairly consealable and made by Walter. The end!
I also think the idea of a standard service gun for an inteligence agency (or at least for the field agents) is strange. I think there is a Bond film or two were 007 looks at a gun and says something like "Ah, a Colt ????? xmmm. The standard pistol of the CIA. How is the agency involved in this?". Silly, isn't it?
Have to disagree with you there. Bond should always be on the cutting edge, and if that means abandoning the precious P99, then so be it. However, it should still look cool, but that isn't exactly hard to find, especially among H&K.
I would suggest that anyone who holds such ideas to go find a competition shooter and ask them to describe the reason they have what they have, or a weapons trainer, or anyone who makes a living using, not collecting, weapons.
Let's make this easy, I own a Walther P5 in 9mm
A HK USP in .45, A S&W 29 in .44 magnum, and two Walther PPK (non interarms) in .380 and .32. That is the extent of the modern guns I own, and I doubt I will buy more unless I find something exceptionally cheap. Give me an instance in which one of these is not adequate for carry.
The point is there HAS to be valid reasons to choose one handgun over another, other than the use of one of them in a movie or because it is "stylish." Whether you are a movie fan or not, you should be familiar enough to know what the good points AND bad points of a weapon are if you want to give a reason for one over another.
Negative batman...No H&K....
<<<The Walther, and only the Walther.:)
Although I have nothing against H&K(cause personally I think they kick ass) Bond has used the Walther forover 40 years, with the exception of the Berretta that was replaced in DN, and I think he should keep with the Walthers. A different model? Yes. Different brand? No.
Or a villan who isn't a fighter (like Le Chiffre)threatening Bond by saying "This is my friend NN".
Bond draws his gun and replies:" ...and this is my friend Walter!". Nice...
They used the 9 milly for decades and still do, then switched to Sig. Very set in their ways and not a Regiment for 'keeping up with the Jones's'.