Thoughts/Opinions H&K USP vs. Beretta 92 Series

[davidjinks]

One of these will be a "do-it-all" gun. Range, HD, the evil and ever present SHTF/TEOTWAWKI (sarcasm of course), future competition.

I'm set on my EDC. I've been focused on my Glock 17 for that purpose. It gives me everything I need in the size/capacity that I want. S&W 642 for those times I need smaller.

I'm looking for "different" in terms of shooting.

I've narrowed it down to these 2 manufacturers and these 2 particular "platforms". I've owned both at various times. Slide mounted/frame mounted safety, polymer/metal frame has no real bearing in my search. I'm experienced with both and am comfortable with both.

What are some of your thoughts/opinions of one vs. the other? Pros/cons, likes dislikes, is one superior to the other for my intended purposes?

[SomeOtherGuy]

I like the reliability and aftermarket support of the Beretta 92, but I dislike the super-high bore axis. For HD I imagine you'll want a pic rail, which limits you to certain models (A1 and A3 in current production, I think).

Personally I think some version of the CZ-75 is better than both of those options. But between those two only, I'd go with a 92.

[KCBRUIN]

USP but only if you turn it into a Combat Competition clone.

Edit: why? Because the combat competition is rare, they look cool and because I like the USPs safety location better than the beretta's, which wouldn't really matter if you went Combat Competition.

[davidjinks]

I wish the CZ pistols worked for me. Unfortunately the levers are in the wrong/difficult locations for me to properly manipulate. Which for me is weird because I have large hands.

I like the reliability and aftermarket support of the Beretta 92, but I dislike the super-high bore axis. For HD I imagine you'll want a pic rail, which limits you to certain models (A1 and A3 in current production, I think).

Personally I think some version of the CZ-75 is better than both of those options. But between those two only, I'd go with a 92.

[Tomahawk_Ghost]

Personally I think some version of the CZ-75 is better than both of those options.

My vote goes here. I've owned both the H&K and Beretta. Now I own a CZ75. Much better gun.

https://www.tombstonetactical.com/ca...-9mm-fde-18rd/

[Coal Dragger]

For strait up durability and longevity the HK USP will be tough to beat. The last USP I owned was freakishly accurate too as an anecdotal data point of one example. The downside to this is the out of the box USP will not have the most refined trigger in the world, particularly the DA trigger. The SA is workable, but the DA is horrid on standard USP's. The LEM trigger is pretty damn good though, and the Combat Comp clone version of the LEM is supposed to be very good. The USP Expert and Tactical will also have a good trigger, with the DA being decent, and the SA being quite good. Some USP's like the Expert and Tactical will also have good adjustable sights out of the box. One other issue to note is that HK never updated the dust cover rail to standard Picatinny style, so you'll need an adaptor or accessories with USP mounting hardware included. Magazines are more expensive and less readily available, but the factory mags do tend to be well made and very durable.

The Beretta is still plenty durable, and has a better trigger out of the box. A worked over Beretta trigger like that in the Wilson Combat Brig Tac is awesome. Beretta uses a standard dust cover rail so accessories are easy to mount. Magazines are plentiful and cheap compared to the HK, but good factory mags are the way to go along with Mec-Gars which are less cheap. The Beretta in my experience is a smoother shooting pistol that a easier to track the sights with.

You won't go wrong with either one, I'd have a tough time deciding one way or another myself.

[SomeOtherGuy]

I wish the CZ pistols worked for me. Unfortunately the levers are in the wrong/difficult locations for me to properly manipulate. Which for me is weird because I have large hands.

Obviously choose what works for you. For me, CZ's slide release lever so far forward means I don't worry about accidentally holding it down with my thumb. I find it difficult to shoot a Sig P226, for example, without holding the release lever down, and the Beretta 92 and some others are a little better for this but not perfect - although I find the 92 almost a happy medium in that I can reach the release lever but don't usually hit it by accident. On the CZ-75 I do have to change my grip to reach the slide release lever. The standard 1911 slide release lever is in roughly the same forward position. However, all the other controls on a CZ-75 are in locations that are fairly typical and work fine for me. YMMV of course.

[Pilot1]

I've had an HK USP, .45 Tactical with the goal of adding a can. I never could warm up to it, so I sold it. Good reliable gun, but just not my cup of tea. I still have the Beretta 92FS, and I do like it, but prefer all my CZ's over both. I currently have a 75B, 75 Pre-B, 75D PCR, and 97B. The 75 series accepts the wonderful .22 Kadet Kit conversion which I also have. I could sell all my other pistols, and keep the CZ's and be happy.

[MegademiC]

Which one do you shoot better? The 92 is one of the flatest shooting pistols I've ever shot, so that's what id go with. You might prefer the other.

[Ron3]

For me neither.

Otherwise easily the Beretta IF it's not too big for your hand. Both need aftermarket help badly. Far More support and options for the beretta, excellent, inexpensive flush fit 18 rnd mags too.