View Full Version : Beretta
I've been reading the forums here for a few months now, and have finally made it around to this section. One of the first things I noticed was the multitude of posts regarding Glock pistols...and hardly any that have to do with Beretta. Among a few other pistols, I have a 96 and love it. My dad has a few Glocks, and I enjoy shooting them, but mentally, I can't get over the lack of a true safety.
I know Glocks are fantastic firearms, but why no love for Beretta? Please keep this as factual as possible, as it is not my intention to stir the pot.
For the record, I'm not LE, nor do I carry the 96 except to the range. The LCR is my carry weapon.
Many are not a fan of the size/weight, slide mounted safety, or the DA/SA trigger. Sight options are also limited on the models with the silly fixed front sight.
They are reliable well built, guns however. I think everyone without a bias acknowledges that. However the big three here (Glock, M&P, P30) do things either the same, or better, and in a more compact package.
I enjoy my 92FS, and have no intentions on selling it. However, my M&P9 is my current go to gun, and the one I spend the most amount of time training and shooting.
***Edit***
I noticed your location. I doubted I'd ever encounter another user on this sight from Mobile.
Also, I should note that my experience and comments are chiefly with regards to the 92FS/M9. I have no firsthand experience is the 96's, PX4's, etc.
They are serviceable arms. They are reliable, but not durable. They have their own idiosyncracies in maintenance, training, and deployment, some of which are more significant than their competitors. They are heavy and lack size efficiency, especially as compared to their competitors.
40SW is hard on the 96, especially in volume.
Not a turd, just not a favorite.
I have a 92 INOX and I love it. I also have a beater Italian 92 at Robar getting some TLC. I can't wait until that gun comes back.
So yes, I love Beretta.s they're great pistols. But I'll take my HK(s) first.
Well, technically, I'm across the bay...but who's counting.
I agree with what has been posted, especially the weight aspect. If your vehicle's parking brake ever stops working, you can always throw the 96 on the hood as a paperweight.
Skintop, can you explain what you mean when you say the 40SW is rough in volume? Just curious.
The .40 round beats the crap out of the 96s, causing all kinds of issues.
I know of a major LE agency that dumped the 96 after only 2-3 years of use due to the constant breakdowns.
I have and love a Beretta 92fs. In fact I just put 100 rds through it this evening. Prior to getting my Glock 19, it was my primary HD pistol. In fact, I would still say I shoot it better than my Glock (in single action) but then again I've put over 3000 rounds through the Beretta and being new to Glocks, have only fired about 700 rounds with it. I decided to practice more and shift over to the Glock as my primary HD over the Beretta for a couple reasons.
(1) Most important, I don't want to have to deal with the multiple functions of the Beretta. From the slide safety that may accidentally be engaged if I have to rack the slide to the first HEAVY double action pull when its in ready mode at HD. I train to simply pull the slide on the reload to chamber the round and I have experienced at the range where I accidentally put the gun on safe. The first double action pull at the range can be accurate, but I really have to concentrate on it...reacting to a bad bump in the night...probably not so focused on steady sights and trigger control.
(2) I don't have the M9A1 (which I think looks kinda fugly), so the weapon mounted light makes the Glock a much better HD gun.
(3) While both guns have run flawlessly, the Beretta definitely requires a bit more TLC after a day of training. Needs a cleaning and a lube after about 300 rds (would run well beyond that as torture tests have shown, but for my peace of mind that's where I set my cleaning schedule to). The Glock can take a bit more neglect and still be reliable (haha...I still clean it every 300 rds, but if I was really tired after a day at the range and didn't give it some TLC, I'd still sleep ok)
(4) My weakest point, but IMO is still a point for me. My Beretta, new was a $700 gun. Glock, was new $550. If my gun ever has to do its most important and dreaded duty, it's going off to the evidence bin destined to have an electric pencil mark it and getting it back would even be a question. The cost of replacing the Glock would be a bit less.
In the end, I love my Beretta. It has given me a relaxing good night's sleep for the past year and a half. I would have no problems relying on it again. And I can still make 1 ragged hole with it at 15 yards.
kalikraven
06-05-10, 01:16
I'm an AF Security Forces Member aka MP and we dont even use the safty on the M9. We use the decocker when we need to, but we carryw ith a round in the chamber and the safty off.
I carried my 92F for years. I had no problems with it. But after I bought my P30. That became my number 1 carry.
For me, the slide mounted safety and the difference between first trigger pull (the most important) and the all of the following pulls removed it from the option pool for me.
Note: I came to the M&P line from a steel single action. MY BHP is retired and might be on the chopping block.
My recollection is that Beretta introduced refined 92s and 96s at the 2010 SHOT show. I've heard nothing about them since. The 96 now has a buffer, I think. Anyone have experience with the latest versions?
Pumpkinheaver
06-05-10, 12:24
One of the things that hurts the 92/96 series is the fact that they are big. People with small hands or women can sometimes find them challenging.
I have noticed a few comments in the slide safety being an issue. Blackboar touched on it briefly, but could someone please elaborate? I use the safety (when on fire) to rack the slide by wrapping my index finger and "bird" finger on each side of the selector, but I get the feeling that may cause issues.
On a completely different note, Pumpkinheaver, you just gave me a good chuckle. I read your handle and pictured this big man-gorilla holding a pumpkin...then I read your comment. No disrespect intended, as you are correct.
Beat Trash
06-05-10, 13:13
The Beretta 92 series is a good gun. Accurate and reliable.
You must remember that guns for some are toys. Nothing wrong with that.
For some, guns are tools. Some are issued their tools, and have no say in the matter. I am in that boat as a LEO. Over the years, I've been issued crap (not so much any more, thank God!) Your best option is to train and make due with what you have.
For those who carry their pistols as tools, and have a choice, such as many on this board, they seek the best option available to them.
This is why you will see so many topics and posts about various guns, but not so much about the Beretta. While it is a good gun, there are guns out there that do the same function, but better.
While the Beretta is a functional gun (I own a 92fs, and have no intention of selling it) you can find several guns that are more size efficient, more durable, as accurate or more so, and easier to shoot due to a consistent trigger pull vs. the DA/SA. Guns that come to mind are the Glock 19/17, M&P 9mm, HK P30.
If used for recreational shooting and kept in the nightstand for home protection, the Beretta 92 can serve an individual well, and I would not have issues if it was my only gun in the house for this roll.
But if I had to carry it every day concealed, I feel there are several better options out there. For me, my issued M&P does every thing the Beretta can do, and then some. My personally owned Glock 19 that I've carried off duty for over a decade also trumps my beretta for a daily carry gun.
Before all those Beretta owners start burning up the keyboards, yes I am sure you can conceal a Beretta efficiently with the proper holster. But I offer that you could do it even more efficiently with a Glock 19. Both are 15 shot 9mm's...
I have noticed a few comments in the slide safety being an issue.
Most people advocate racking the slide using something similar to this method. It puts the most amount of flesh possible in contact with the slide, helping to prevent slippage. This isn't me in the photo BTW.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/0603/ButchG17/Glock%20pics/pic002.jpg
Doing so on the 92FS can result in inadvertently activating the safety. If you're performing a tap rack bang to quickly bring your weapon back up to operation, engaging the safety isn't something you want to happen.
Also, the activation and deactivation of the safety is less intuitive than if it were frame mounted. However, I find the 92FS less offensive than some others as the shape and spring assist mean you can deactivate the safety by sweeping your thumb forward and downward.
As far as the trigger goes, dropping in the hammer spring from the DAO models is one of the best things you can do for these.
My personal experience with Berettas has been mixed. My first LE duty weapon was an early Italian manufactured 92F. Although it was large, and the sights were not ideal, the finish was beautiful with no rust occurring in use at the Academy and several years of patrol use, the action was very slick, and the mediocre trigger pull had been improved by an LAPD gunsmith. The most impressive characteristic of this pistol was that it was EXTREMELY reliable--there were NO malfunctions in 25,000+ rounds of Winchester and Federal 147gr JHP's over 5 years. I had a different experience with Beretta's when I went TAD to a Marine unit which had M9's. The U.S. made Berettas were far different than the one which I had used at the PD: the finish was horrible, the trigger pull was agonizing and L O N G, the pistols were not accurate, and they were prone to broken parts and rust--in short the U.S. made Berettas were garbage. As can be discovered in many accounts, the M9 has had issues with broken locking blocks and other problems. I also agree with Beat Trash, the Beretta is very large, has poor ergonomics, and limited durability compared to modern, ergonomic 9 mm pistols like the G19, P30, M&P, etc...
As noted above, most of the LE agencies around here that unwisely adopted the 96 had significant durability issues with them, even more so than with the 92F and M9...I think just about every agency has switched to the Glock or M&P.
My 92F was Italian made. Build like a tank and fun too shoot. From what I've read these are the best Berettas.
My fiancé is gonna be pissed at you guys when she finds out I got a new gun. Ha.
In all seriousness, thanks for the productive responses. Ignorance is bliss, and I have been fortunate enough to have never encountered the issues mentioned. However, as I know a large majority of this site uses their weapon for work, it makes sense to not take a gamble when there are so many great options, especially if you are putting your life on the line.
The Beretta sure is sexy, though. Ha.
Whiskey_Bravo
06-05-10, 15:40
I have been seriously considering the M9A1 but it seems a lot of people would recommend something else over the Beretta, so I have been hesitant. The dealer I use has a few in stock for $640, but I haven't pulled the trigger on it yet. I hate to spend that kind of money and then not be happy with it.
I am in the market for a full size 9mm as I have several compact 9mm and .40 pistols.
GLOCKMASTER
06-05-10, 15:42
What has turned off a lot of people with Beretta is their lack of customer support/service in the LE community as well as several things that Doc mentioned above.
Georgia_Boy
06-05-10, 16:55
I guess I'm the odd ball. I disliked my G17 for its looks. I tried a G27, too small for my hands. I liked the M9 so I bought the Beretta 90-two. My 90-two fits my hand just right and shoots as smooth as glass. Unfortunately guns, like calibers, evoke alot of emotion. My 6920 is my choice also but my AK friends like to hoot about that also.......https://www.m4carbine.net/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif
variablebinary
06-05-10, 17:22
I like Beretta. Though, I do not like how fragile they are.
First hand, the M11's took a ton of abuse and kept on trucking. The M9's were a complete pain in the ass. Several M9's were so locked up it took two people to get them open. Not a good thing.
Most of the points have been hit. I carried one on three deployments and CCW'd one for a while for commonality's sake. If you baby the mags, keep it cleaned and lubed you have a solid service pistol, that will function in some pretty bad conditions. That said, it is far from ideal. The M9 will be with us for a loong time. In the grand scheme of military acquisitions, pistols are not that high on the list and the M9 is "good enough" to fill the bill.
Good gun? Yes. My pick if I could pick my service pistol? No way.
In an academy setting, Berettas (92/96 in F models) are near to being extinct. When seen the users struggle with the long initial trigger pull, the inadvertant "safety" issue as well as a trigger pull length that makes safe and effective use of this pistol difficult for a large number of the general population (Hand Size Counts in Safe Handgun Use by Hebert).
There is a work around for the trigger pull distance and weight, but it is frowned on by the factory and most trainers.
Beretta has all but run itself out of the LE market in the US, losing many large agencies merely from lack of customer service response.
There are so many better choices these days.
I guess I'm the odd ball. I disliked my G17 for its looks. I tried a G27, too small for my hands. I liked the M9 so I bought the Beretta 90-two. My 90-two fits my hand just right and shoots as smooth as glass.
Love mine too, buddy. Been absolutely flawless so far.
http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b32/Safetyhit/P4070482.jpg
To the OP, some of the issues mentioned with the 96 are supposed to have been addressed in the 90-Two's. Specifically they have added a frame recoil buffer as well as a captive recoil spring assembly.
How effective they are over time seems to have yet to be determined. Haven't heard a credible report yet, but when I get up past 2,000 rounds maybe I will offer some feedback for comparison.
tracker722
06-06-10, 16:09
***********************
My complaint about the Beretta 92 series is that they are too big for the caliber, be it 9 mm or .40 S&W.
As for Beretta service, I am a Beretta armorer and I am still trying to get someone there to help me get one little part to repair a gun after 3 weeks of effort.
As much as I like both my new Beretta and a 92 that I shot often, I was heavily considering a USP in either .40 or possibly .45. But while I knew of some issues with Beretta's service lately, those with HK
seemed to be even worse. Not a good thing for either's sales apparently, especially considering the current popularity of the M&P.
Keep in mind the only HK I have extensive, first hand experience with was a long ago sold HK 91 back in the late 80's and early 90's, so my assessment is clearly not first hand. But what I have read over the years is not all that complimentary.
Either way, I'd really like to see both they and Beretta step up to the plate a bit more and do away with these issues.
I own a Brigadier 92 that has the heavier and more beefed up slide. Do any armorers have comments about this version?
Beretta's customer service issues remind me of Colt's during their heyday of M16 manufacturing during the 1960 and 70s. Military contracts and not civilian and le sales were their concern. This mindset continued to dominate throughout following decades.
We should remember that the type of customer service that we like is expensive, and some of our favorite handguns from Smith, Glock, Browning, and Ruger are really good deals for the consumer when customer service is considered.
williejc
John_Wayne777
06-06-10, 17:09
As much as I like both my new Beretta and a 92 that I shot often, I was heavily considering a USP in either .40 or possibly .45. But while I knew of some issues with Betetta's service lately, those with HK
seemed to be even worse. Not a good thing for either's sales apparently, especially considering the current popularity of the M&P.
The whole H&K "Because you suck and we hate you" thing really isn't true of the company, at least not anymore. H&K USA under their current management has tried very hard to be good in the customer service/support areas even if they have to get in a bit of a tiff with H&K home base now and then to get stuff done. I would have zero trepidation about purchasing an H&K handgun right now, although I wouldn't consider the USP since the P30 and HK45 now exist, both of which are superior to the USP line of pistols.
The quality of a company's support waxes and wanes over the years just like the quality of their products. Beretta USA, for instance, used to offer excellent service. I literally sent them a 92FS in pieces once (after a local "gunsmith" had completely screwed it up) and they sent it back to me assembled with all the correct parts (some were missing) and in perfect working order in less than 10 working days...and free of charge. It appears that level of service may no longer be the norm for Beretta USA...but given the brain drain they've had over the years it's not surprising. Ever notice in a reasonably sized town how restaurants are really good for a while and then start to suck after a certain point after a new restaurant opens? A lot of it is because the top talent that makes the food and service at a restaurant good is highly mobile and often votes with their feet when better opportunities present themselves. The same is true in the gun industry. The people who make service and support really good generally have no problem finding other offers from companies who want their input/help and so they leave...and so does their influence on the support process. The fact that gun companies often employ people in management positions that literally chase off talent doesn't help either. I've spoken about the level of dysfunction extant in the gun industry many times, but I'll say again that it's hard to think of an industry that is as full of bad business, bad behavior, and severe personality disorders than you see in the gun industry...except, perhaps, government.
You also need to figure in H&K's size of the market. H&K makes up a fraction of the firearms market in the US because of how expensive they are. That means that there are relatively few people with significant experience with them...but the internet being what it is, there's no shortage of people who will mindlessly parrot what they heard somebody else say, and that's why everybody who has been on a gun forum for more than 10 minutes has heard "because you suck and we hate you." Now some people can legitimately claim that. The USMC, for instance, had MP5's that H&K didn't support because some nitwit high enough in the food chain at H&K decided that the USMC should be using their new plastic SMG that sucked donkey water instead of the MP5 that didn't suck. Thus certain segments of the USMC learned an institutional hatred for H&K...which is why I was surprised to see that they won the IAR competition. Gun companies do that kind of stupid stuff ALL THE TIME, I'm afraid. One assclown in a high enough position in a company who gets a visit from The Good Idea Fairy can royally screw the reputation of that company for good. The current management of Sig, for instance, seems to be trying hard to accomplish that. So the USMC's experience wasn't really "you suck and we hate you" it was "hey, we want you to buy this new plastic thing because we think it is more better than the existing weapons we sold you and because we want to make more money. We don't care if you think it sucks, we say it doesn't and we still want you to buy it, so ha-ha no spare parts for the guns you already own."
Most of what you hear on the internet, however, is overblown. If you actually ask most of the guys repeating "you suck and we hate you!" how many times they actually tried to deal with H&K's support, you'll probably get crickets. I've done that a few times and it turns out that the dudes hadn't actually ever owned an H&K or even fired a round through one.
I find myself one of the last Beretta aficionados around. I got into them because Dad was on the Beretta IDPA team in the 90s and early 2000s, so naturally I shot Berettas as well (once I got over the whole "9mm are for girls" silliness). I got one of the early 92G Elites, worked over by Ernie Langdon, and I've carried it as a CCW gun ever since about 2002 or so. I've put thousands of rounds through it in practice, training, classes and matches. It shoots better than I do, and it's boringly reliable.
The last four classes I've been to, I've been the only Beretta shooter in a crowd of Glocks, Sigs, M&Ps and 1911s. The gun just works for me. I don't have to deal with crappy sights (the Elite comes with good sights), a crappy trigger (Ernie took care of that; the SA pull and reset is virtually identical to a good 1911), or the safety issue (it's a G-model, decocker-only). With the addition of the 400-series CT Lasergrips, it does everything I need at the moment. It is big, but I have a Threat Solutions 'UCR' inside-the-waistband holster for it that hides it under an untucked shirt. It fits my hands, points naturally, goes bang when I press trigger, and puts bullets where I want.
That said, I'm starting to think it's heading towards obsolescence. It doesn't have a rail for a weapon light, and I don't think I can get it milled out to take a mini-red-dot (and even if I could, it's got enough sentimental value to preclude it). Parts and service are not as plentiful, and if I do have to use it for defense, a gun that carries significant emotional attachment will be in a police evidence locker for years. I'm really leaning towards a pair of M&P9c compacts for my defense rotation. When I finally retire the Elite, it will be a sad day, but such is life. Evolve or get left behind.
I was issued a 96D once, twice actually. The first one had to be replaced, broken frame with less that 5k rounds. As soon as I could get a POW to replace it, I did. I will say that it was accurate and easy to shoot at 25 yards and beyond. I found that it soaked up 155gr. HP's pretty well as far as muzzle flip and felt recoil were concerned, at least until the frame failed. Bad, the trigger pull should have measured in inches instead of pounds. Good, the slick slide was much easier to deal with than the 92/96 FS. Bad, 11 round magazines for a pistol the size of a micro Uzi; WTF?. Good, I'll have to think up a few more. It is an old design that time has passed by, there are better options out there for the money.
I think the Beretta is a very poor military pistol. As many parts as a 1911, bulky, goofy manual of arms, a DA/SA trigger, poor manual safety design in shape location, and function. I think the locking block design sucks. It is also not a pistol that I would want to have in difficult conditions. Complexity breeds failure. I really see nothing to like about it at all.
I was around when it was chosen and when most of the Marine Corps was finally forced to take it by DOD. Fortunately not all units were and some still don't issue it. I was never issued a Beretta and was glad of it.
The only thing I can figure is that the story about wanting to base cruise missiles in Italy at the time was true and was a factor, and that the military wanted a 'safe' pistol that would require minimal training and run less risk of AD's that could impact someones career. Anyone who as spent much time in the military know that selection of equipment often has little to do with choosing the best quality item.
Perhaps it is or was a good LEO pistol at the time, I wouldn't know, but it has no business as the primary firearm of our Armed Forces. It is certainly outdated now but I would imagine there is little appetite for a costly and time consuming selection of another pistol and switching over everything in the TO&E for it.
I've been reading the forums here for a few months now, and have finally made it around to this section. One of the first things I noticed was the multitude of posts regarding Glock pistols...and hardly any that have to do with Beretta. Among a few other pistols, I have a 96 and love it. My dad has a few Glocks, and I enjoy shooting them, but mentally, I can't get over the lack of a true safety.
I know Glocks are fantastic firearms, but why no love for Beretta? Please keep this as factual as possible, as it is not my intention to stir the pot.
For the record, I'm not LE, nor do I carry the 96 except to the range. The LCR is my carry weapon.
John_Wayne777
06-06-10, 23:13
The 92 series pistol is a reflection of what people thought a handgun was at the time, folks. Prior to the Glock if I had gone around to PD's or the military with a plastic gun with a 5 pound trigger and no manual safety, I would have been laughed out on the street. 5 pounds was too light of a trigger, and everybody knew it.
...and a plastic gun? Har-dee-har.
It had to have a heavy DA trigger and a manual safety or people would shoot themselves. You sure as hell can't have a cocked pistol with a four pound trigger and two safeties! That's way too risky! Just look at that cocked hammer!
When the Glock showed up and was a hell of a lot cheaper then suddenly police administrators reevaluated the risk really posed by guns with 5 pound triggers and no manual safeties. It's not all that unsafe if it's a hell of a lot cheaper, it seems. Our concept of what a service pistol should be has changed considerably since the M9 adoption.
All true of course but I think the Sig 226 would have been a better choice in the long run. There are a few things I don't like about the 226 but nothing like the Beretta. Plust the 226 and 228 combination would have made a lot of sense.
I just saw a Beretta 85 Cheetah at the store. In .380 and .22. I wanted them so bad, but couldn't bring myself to spend that kind of money on a gun I'd never use. But it's nice to dream, right?
All true of course but I think the Sig 226 would have been a better choice in the long run. There are a few things I don't like about the 226 but nothing like the Beretta. Plust the 226 and 228 combination would have made a lot of sense.
The M11/P228 was an afterthought to the M9 program. A smaller Beretta pistol was also entered in the competition and the Sig won this one for the same reason the Beretta one the first - it was the lowest bid.
landrvrnut22
06-07-10, 07:32
I guess I am one of the odd balls, and love all of my Beretta's. I shoot my 96 75% of the time, and it has yet to let me down. When I don't shoot the 96, it is either the Cougar 8000, or my SA 1911.
I compete casually at my local club, and at the recent IDPA match, I was of 2 with a DA/SA pistol, the other being a SIG 22X. Everyone else was some form of striker fired DA plastic fantastic. I really think it is a sign of the times.
The Beretta 90 series is a 40+ year old design, and people have taken to the latest and greatest. Gun magazines, pro shooters, pro trainers, all tout the latest as being the best. While innovation brings great change, there certainly isn't anything wrong with Beretta's in general.
I like mine for the weight, and the grip size. I have big hands, and long skinny fingers, and the 96 fits my hands like a glove. I like the recoil pulse of the 40. I feel the sights are decent. The one thing I really like is the trigger. The DA is smooth, the travel is a bit long, but the break is crisp. The SA is short crisp light, with a short reset. I find the slide safety to be a non-issue. I carry and use mine just like a 96G. I do practice the DA/SA transition quite a bit, as I did struggle with it at first. The gun is certainly more accurate than I am.
The negative's are the capactiy, 11+1 isn't great for a full size. Accessories are becoming harder to find, but holster selection is very good.
I love the Beretta line, and the reliability and durability. Unfortuneately, it is a dying breed, and newer, better designs have come out.
I am planning to purchase an M&P 9 in the future, but the 96 will always be my go-to gun.
I think the Beretta is a very poor military pistol...I was never issued a Beretta and was glad of it...Perhaps it is or was a good LEO pistol at the time, I wouldn't know...
You can not like the design of the pistol, that's fine. We are all entitled to our opinions of course.
But you seem to have a strange degree of almost hatred for something that you seem to admit you have almost no relevant dealings with. Not saying you haven't probably shot one before, but shouldn't such a die-hard bashing come from someone with a bit more experience with the weapon?
And really, "complexity breeds failure"? Flip up the decocker (safety) and pull the trigger. No discernible complexities involved that I can see. Yes, not all of todays newer designs have safeties nor hammers, but should a DA/SA now be regarded as complex?
tracker722
06-07-10, 08:44
*****************************
I have one of the civvie M9's. Fit and finish were indistinguisable from an Italian 92FS that I examined side-by-side with it. Maybe Beretta pays more attention to those qualities in weapons intended for the civilian market?
It is an old design that time has passed by, there are better options out there for the money.
i cant tell you the # of times i have heard that about the 1911 but people keep buying them.:D
i have a 92fs and i must say there are better pistols out there. like others have said bad trigger, bad ego's, lousy/expensive mags, and and it weigh's a ton.
glock was my first pistol and ill probable stick with it till the military adopts it
I also have a civlian M9 myself..Thank God I haven't needed Beretta's C.S. All one has to do is go over to the Beretta forum, and look around, Folks there are always complaining about Beretta's CS, or lack thereof, I remember awhile back a number of people there were complaining about the PX4..they all were having problems with trigger slap..some could'nt go more than 50 rnds without having to stop because their finger hurt too badly to continue, One person did call and complain, Beretta's response was to "wear gloves". Beretta denied there was a problem, and at one point there was a petition up on that board for PX4 owners to sign if you were having trigger slap problems..I'm sure that alot of folks promply sold their PX4's and will probably never own another Beretta again..I could'nt blame them..
The lockng block design of the M92 series is, old, and frankly, not much can be done with it,It has advanced little in 50yrs. If anything, the ninty-two, is the final evolution of the locking block design, And I'd be willing to bet a failure in the sales dept. It's big, ugly, clunky, and more expensive,and offers nothing in the way of real advancement.They retained every undesirable aspect of the m92 series,and expanded on it. If Beretta was smart, they'd start thinking about something more in tune with what's going on in the world of defensive, CCW pistols, Maybe a striker fired, polymer pistol about the size of a G19, with a conventional barrel/slide locking system, no rotating barrel/barrel locking block nonsense, But, that's just a pipe dream, Beretta's not going to do anything like that until the cash flow from Uncle Sugar stops..Then reality will set in...
NCPatrolAR
06-07-10, 10:36
I carried a M9 in addition to a M4 for several years while on active duty with no complaints. Currently I carry a 92FS Centurion quite often while offduty with complete confidence in it's ability function when needed
My first firearm ever was a Beretta 90-Two .40 and I love it. Though I think I may be more accurate with my Mom's H&K UPS Compact in 9mm or the Glock19 I just got for the GF I doubt its the gun's fault. Its probobly because I am a scrawney bitch [5'-10" 130lbs] and the Beretta is anything but light.
I still love it though. Fit and Finish is second to none of anything else I have seen. I am a total noob so I am not sure how much any of this counts, but in nearly 2 years of use and close to 200 rounds I have had zero failures. In the meantine, my mom's H&K fails to eject occasionaly [maybe not broken in yet] and the G19 failed to feed at least 3 or 4 times the first time we took it to the range [also may be a breaking in issue] Having witnessed those two pistols fail at least once, and knowing that my 90-Two has not failed at all sicne day one, I am more confident in having my Beretta on the night stand than the Glock or a H&K.
I know I am only a sample size of 1, but its just what I have seen in my short time owning firearms.
GermanSynergy
06-07-10, 16:05
I know Glocks are fantastic firearms, but why no love for Beretta? Please keep this as factual as possible, as it is not my intention to stir the pot.
For the record, I'm not LE, nor do I carry the 96 except to the range. The LCR is my carry weapon.
There is virtually nothing that the Beretta does that the Glock doesn't do better. The Glock is a very safe pistol, provided the end user utilizes a quality holster and keeps his/her finger off of the trigger until they are ready to engage a target.
I carried an M-9 in the Army for 8 years, and I witnessed many ND's as a result of soldiers being reliant on the "safety", and not paying attention to what the hell they were doing. Overall, I was not impressed with the M-9 and was glad to be issued an M-11 later in my career.
All of the safeties in the world are a very poor substitute for professional, comprehensive and hand on training with your chosen platform.
These are just my two kopecks.... :)
My first pistol was a Beretta M92. When I first shot it, it was a blase gun because I could not appreciate the finer points. However, as my shooting has evolved, my opinion of the 92 has changed.
Pros:
Smooth action
Good trigger (maybe I got a fluke, the but DA pull is *very* smooth on my M92).
Reliable (as far as I have witnessed. My M92 has yet to choke. May be a different story if it's in the sandbox).
Ergonomic. Gun fits my hands well.
Cons:
Hate the slide mounted safety. I freaking accidentally engage it all the time. Also requires a bigger thumb movement to disengage.
Large gun.
Controls make me inadvertently trip the slide release when shooting thumbs forward.
All in all I do like the M92, but really prefer something like a USP.
tracker722
06-07-10, 19:02
***************************
If you have a frame mounted safety, you have a Taurus.
Or do you mean slide-mounted safety?
Thanks for catching that. Meant the slide mounted safety. Not a big fan of that at all.
The very earliest B92s in addition to having a frame mounted safety also had the mag release located in the bottom left side of the grip. If you have wondered why some 92 magazines have a cutout on the bottom right side rear surface, the reason is to accomodate this particular mag retaining mechanism.
The 92 was designed in 1972, and only about 5000 of this variant were produced by 1975--when positions of safety and mag release button were moved.
variablebinary
06-07-10, 22:52
I have no love for the frame mounted safety.
It would be nice if Beretta sold more decocker only 92FS models. I personally have no need for a lever safety on a DA/SA pistol
My personal opinion is the Beretta 92(G) is one of the finest 9mm handguns ever created.
That said, the problem with the 92 is Beretta.
* They discontinued the Compact/Centurion models in the increasingly CCW-friendly world. The standard 92 is just too big for a practical carry weapon.
* Instead of modernizing the 92 more than the 92A1/M9A1, they pushed out the abortion know as the PX4.
* Limited availability of the G models.
* Cheesy limited edition stock 92FS models instead of the Elite models.
I think Beretta has gotten too comfortable with having the M9 contract, and has drug their feet to bring the 92 up to speed against the competition. For a dedicated range gun, I think the Beretta can't be beat...... but for all other purposes there are better choices.
* Instead of modernizing the 92 more than the 92A1/M9A1, they pushed out the abortion know as the PX4.
Wouldn't the modernized 92 be the 90Two?
The PX4 was really a more modern Cougar, which was shuffled off to Stoeger.
My personal opinion is the Beretta 92(G) is one of the finest 9mm handguns ever created.
That said, the problem with the 92 is Beretta.
* They discontinued the Compact/Centurion models in the increasingly CCW-friendly world. The standard 92 is just too big for a practical carry weapon.
* Instead of modernizing the 92 more than the 92A1/M9A1, they pushed out the abortion know as the PX4.
* Limited availability of the G models.
* Cheesy limited edition stock 92FS models instead of the Elite models.
I think Beretta has gotten too comfortable with having the M9 contract, and has drug their feet to bring the 92 up to speed against the competition. For a dedicated range gun, I think the Beretta can't be beat...... but for all other purposes there are better choices.
I will agree with pretty much everything here! The 92G (especially the Elite series) addresses pretty much all the gripes that most people have about the Beretta (grip size, safety, slide life, front sight). It does seem that Beretta is their own worst enemy and the military contract is a double edged sword in terms of them remaining viable in the LE market.
I do think the PX4 has merit however, at least in the 45ACP offering.
All of the safeties in the world are a very poor substitute for professional, comprehensive and hand on training with your chosen platform.
These are just my two kopecks.... :)
I couldn't agree more with this statement. But as an Army vet yourself, you know that "professional, comprehensive, and hands on training" with a pistol will never reach the rank and file of the Armed Forces. The brass was looking for a mechanical solution to the problem and I seriously doubt that the rate of NDs would go down if a Glock style pistol was issued to the troops at large. Heck, the specifications for .45ACP replacement to the M9 called for a mechanical safety on the M&P, so there is still a fear in the upper ranks of a striker fired pistol sans safety.
The M11 is in its own little world as it is by and large, issued to troops who have received better handgun training than those issued the M9. Comparing the ND rate among CID warrant officers to that of MPs or worse yet Field Officers is comparing apples to oranges.
I really wonder how the Sig P226 or any pistol would fair as the general issue 9mm pistol? The Sig and Glocks do see limited issue, but that is to much more specialized troops that have far better small arms training, maintenance, and support.
Wouldn't the modernized 92 be the 90Two?
The PX4 was really a more modern Cougar, which was shuffled off to Stoeger.
Yes, but the 90Two really isn't that modernized IMO. The internal recoil buffer, rail, & interchangeable grip while improvements aren't revolutionary. Plus the 92A1s are right around the corner with the same things except the grip.
Basically Beretta is offering 3 "improved" models of the 92FS: The M9A1, 92A1, and 90two. Its still pretty much the same gun. A better idea would have been maybe just making the 92A1s, then a 92A1 Compact, and a 92A1 Sub-Compact with G capabilities to really shine instead of offer 3 full sized models with pretty much the same features.
As for the PX4, it is more of a modern Cougar, but Beretta seems more determined to push that instead of their flagship model. The Cougar was a failure for many reasons, and going back to a failure of a design over the proven 92 system is horrible decision making.
Of course, this is all my humble opinion :)
I go thru my Beretta phases. I'm into one of my phases again, so I am reacquiring different models. I plan to buy a 92A1 when they come out.
My 92FS is my CHL gun, and has been for about a year now. I really like it.
I did have issues with the grip screws rusting - but now I have 4 NP3 coated screws - so its a non issue now.
I love the feel of the gun in my hand with Hogue grip panels (not the wrap arounds). Wtth the undercut trigger guard, I prefer the feel of the gun in my hand to my 1911s at the moment...
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g320/mistershipwreck/group1-92s.jpg
My personal opinion is the Beretta 92(G) is one of the finest 9mm handguns ever created.
That said, the problem with the 92 is Beretta.
* They discontinued the Compact/Centurion models in the increasingly CCW-friendly world. The standard 92 is just too big for a practical carry weapon.
* Instead of modernizing the 92 more than the 92A1/M9A1, they pushed out the abortion know as the PX4.
* Limited availability of the G models.
* Cheesy limited edition stock 92FS models instead of the Elite models.
I think Beretta has gotten too comfortable with having the M9 contract, and has drug their feet to bring the 92 up to speed against the competition. For a dedicated range gun, I think the Beretta can't be beat...... but for all other purposes there are better choices.
That's why I stayed with my old 92F made in Italy until I sold it after I bought my P30. I didn't want it for a range toy. They need too get back on the ball. Not live on the US Military deal. When that goes.
I really enjoy my Beretta 92FS models. The grip to me is very comfortable but my experience is related to the latter models which feature a more comfortable redesigned grip(near the beavertail).
I would echo the comments on the slide safety going to the on position when racking the slide. When you rack the slide quickly it can be engaged quite easily. In that regard I would also be weary of relying on it for any serious use.
However, the Beretta outshines most other 9mm's for me when you actually start shooting it.
related to the latter models which feature a more comfortable redesigned grip(near the beavertail).
In 2000, Beretta changed the back strap radius by 2mm.
Have you tried a P30? I thought my 92F was great. But once I started shooting my P30. That's all it took. I've since sold my 92F.
noted some things in the above posts-
1) 1911 has fewer parts than a beretta
2)the "old" locking block method of closing breech originated in the walther p38 about 30 years AFTER the browning tilting barrel so it is more modern than the browning design- not saying better just newer
3) in 1983 or so when testing and adoption started many of the guns now suggested as better were not around.
4) have owned and carried both sig and beretta including 2 deployments and can't say the sig (the only real competition at the time) is significantly beter than the beretta. I do perfer decokcers to safety however
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.