View Full Version : S&W M&P versus Beretta 92A1 for old noob
Although I've been a shooter since the age of ten, I've only recently obtained a CCW permit - and with it, a focus on semi-auto hand guns. Will be seventy years old in October.
The purpose of having a gun is carry for personal defense and also for home defense.
Yesterday I practiced with a rented Beretta 92fs. I've shot that model before, firing initial shot DA and then continuing in SA. Yesterday I decided to de-cock and fire five shots at a time in DA. Although SA shots are not bad, DA was HORRID.
The shop guys all concealed carry striker fired, and they are recommending I do the same. Obviously, that takes DA out of the picture. Previously I was afraid to due to lack of any safety. Now, though, there's a full size S&W M&P 9mm with a frame mounted thumb safety.
The Beretta guys tell me to practice and learn to shoot DA so the first shot will be of some use. The striker guys find DA/SA useless and advise I go with that Smith.
Your thoughts will be appreciated. I am only posting to discuss the DA/SA aspect versus striker fired, so any other features of the guns mentioned won't impact on whatever I decide. I'm prepared to carry either one.
The Beretta 92 is probably my favorite handgun, but I would recommend the M&P if its going to be a carry weapon. I do carry a 92FS IWB with no issue, but its not as easy as carrying a G17 or G19 all day.
If you do prefer the 92A1, the DA on the 92 can be significantly reduced by installing a "D" Spring for $5. It drops the DA from about 12lbs to roughly 8lbs, and is very easy to install.
As far as DA/SA vs. Striker..... its really just your preference. If you don't mind a heavy trigger, and then a light trigger, go DA/SA. If you want the same trigger pull every time, go Striker.
Nephrology
05-15-11, 17:42
I personally prefer the consistency of striker-fired handguns. I like glocks but M&Ps are just fine. Of the 2 listed, I would get the M&P. The Beretta also loses points with me because of the slide mounted safety - I find them to be slow and unnatural to deactivate, but my first shooting experiences were on 1911s so your mileage may vary.
The 92 is a solid piece but fighting handguns have evolved beyond it. Glock, Smith M&P, and HK all offer better choices.
Okie John
I've never understood nor agree with the mind set that the first/DA shot is a throw away shot:bad: You already mentioned this would be for CCW, to 'throw away' a shot in a public setting is an unbeliveable and irresponsible mindset. For ease of use the consistent trigger pull of striker fired handguns seem to be a better fit for most people. I also have been carrying a G19 for the last few years. Because I have not been shooting as much as I did in the past I find it is easier to maintain skills with the Glocks when shooting less often and with lower round counts. However if you want to carry a 92 or any other DA/SA handgun, the DA pull can be mastered easily with practice. In fact, when I was shooting high round counts and often, my DA/first shot was just as good and sometimes better than my SA shots. It is all about practice and it is all your choice. Just realize a DA/SA is going to require more practice, but that could also be a good thing.
Practice = confidence
Good luck
Also, I personally would be more concerned about the size of a 92 than the DA/SA trigger. Another reason I carry the G19 and may eventually add another light weight snub for summer carry.
Also, I personally would be more concerned about the size of a 92 than the DA/SA trigger.
The problem with the 92 is not the size, mostly the weight. Its really not as big as it seems to be.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v108/Avtomat/IMG_0013Small.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v108/Avtomat/IMG_0002Small.jpg
92FS
G17
M&P9
The problem with the 92 is not the size, mostly the weight. Its really not as big as it seems to be.
I agree to a point. While the 92 is quiet heavy, all three in the pic are the full size versions. Some people don't have much problem CCWing the full size verions and I used to as well but it is more of a problem for me than it used to be. In fact, I at one time I CCWed a 92fs. But now the G19 is just much easier for me and with the heat of summer getting closer a lightweight snub would be nice. I would rather carry a snub than leave my Glock in the truck on those 95+ degree days.
Oh, another pick on the 92 has been the trigger reach. Although I would consider that a personal issue. I never had a problem with it but I can understand that many people would, my wife can't manage it unless it is in SA mode.
But all said I still have somewhat of an affection for the 92, they are so smooth in operation.
Have concealed carried Glocks, 1911's and Beretta's, I'd choose a striker fired pistol and the M&P is a good one.
I like Beretta's and carried one initially over a striker fired weapon for just the reason you stated. But once I was issued a Glock and had to carry it, I quikly got over the initial uneasiness from not having a manual safety. I feel certain you would too. I would not want a striker fired pistol with a manual safety.
The striker fired pistol to me is lighter and more comfortable to carry, and I find the consistant trigger pull hands down better over the DA/SA trigger of the Beretta. No if there was a Beretta 92 Elite with an integrated rail, frame mounted safety, and and SA trigger or at least "cocked and locked" carry, I'd pick one up.
I have a 92FS. I never got good with the SA/DA. I considered doing the Israeli thing. (Not chambering a round until needed)
Then I shot a glock. Problem solved.
I have both and like both. Despite what some say, the Beretta is a great gun. Mine indexes with my hand reasonably well, is very controllable in rapid fire, and has been 100% reliable. It actually has a fantastically smooth trigger that is quite manageable with or without a D spring. I would dare say that it is better than any *out of the box* Sig trigger that I have ever tried. This result might not be typical...
While the Beretta is very good and I would not be disappointed if issued one for self defense, I still think the M&P is better.
-better and more adjustable ergonomics
-lighter
-more compact
-better balanced
-handles better engaging multiple targets in rapid fire (for me)
-easy to install night sights
-simpler to work on
-more durable
-more tolerant of fouling and suboptimal lubrication
-better positioned and easier to manipulate safety (the Beretta's slide mounted safety is a liability in a CCW, as very experienced people still occasionally set the weapon to safe during the draw)
-M&P with a drop in apex trigger is still easier to use than a 92fs.
I carry and primarily shoot the m&p myself.
I really do appreciate these replies, and I thank you. At the moment, I'm thinking [and asking you all] that if the striker fired is easier, then what does the Beretta 92 have over it? In other words, if I were experienced and knowledgeable and chose to carry the 92 over the M&P - why would I rationally do that?
Kuro Ookami
05-15-11, 21:05
what does the Beretta 92 have over it? In other words, if I were experienced and knowledgeable and chose to carry the 92 over the M&P - why would I rationally do that?
If you like the 92, are familiar with it, and are willing to carry it, why not? I like the sights on the Beretta better than the M&P.
If I were to CCW, I'd choose M&P because it's what I'm familiar with, trigger pull is consistent, and I like the small grip insert.
Nephrology
05-15-11, 21:11
I really do appreciate these replies, and I thank you. At the moment, I'm thinking [and asking you all] that if the striker fired is easier, then what does the Beretta 92 have over it? In other words, if I were experienced and knowledgeable and chose to carry the 92 over the M&P - why would I rationally do that?
I think you have answered your own question here. There isn't a terribly convincing reason to choose the Beretta over the S&W. It seems to me you obviously prefer the consistency of the striker-fired M&P. I would look into purchasing one. The stickied threads at the top of this forum should provide you with more information that you've ever needed to know about the M&P line of handguns and which one would be best for your needs.
then what does the Beretta 92 have over it?
The 92 has the following advantages over the M&P:
* CHEAP & widely available magazines
* Better trigger (especially with a $5 D spring)
* Lower Recoil
* There are more issues with the M&P since its a much newer design (Sold mine due to this)
* Tend to be very accurate
* Chrome-Lined Bore
Other than, nothing really. The M&P is really better suited for your needs, and I say that as a admitted 92 Fan-Boy. I shoot the 92 better than any other handgun, but I carry my Glocks far more than I do my Beretta.
Oboe, my father is also 70 was definitely in the "I have to have a safety on my pistol" camp, coming from 1911's and CZ-75's.
I got him to try a Glock 19, and take a defensive/concealed carry class from Dave Pennington, and he's a believer now.
Safe, reliable, compact and dirt simple.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v613/Tim_Orrock/Range%201-11-09/P1010436.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v613/Tim_Orrock/Range%201-11-09/P1010441.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v613/Tim_Orrock/DP%20Concealed%20Class%2021-22%20Feb%2009/P1010699.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v613/Tim_Orrock/DP%20Concealed%20Class%2021-22%20Feb%2009/P1010696.jpg
You can definitely learn a new system and have faith in it. I've owned several Beretta 92's over the years, and S&W M&P's, but I can't recommend the Glock 19 3rd Generation highly enough.
Give it a try.
I'm a "younger" shooter, but was raised on revolvers. Shooting "skipped" a generation in my family so i was taught by the 1920s to 1950s crowd. I've probably related this story before.
I was a big fan of the safety on the firearms. I bought into the "Glock's aren't safe because they don't have an external safety" with Glock being the only common striker fired pistol at the time (circa '98 or so). I was commenting on that one day to my wife in the gun store and the guy behind the counter knew I was a revolver fan.
he asks me
"Would you carry a revolver?"
"Yup"
"please show me the external safety on it"
"DOH!"
A lot of the things we are hesitant about are just what we've been told or picked up over the years.
That being said, the 92 is a good quality firearm. The DA/SA can be mastered, in fact I'm better with the DA pull than the SA because I "slap" the trigger on SA (I'm working on it--we can't all be Seal Team 6 members). That's definitely a product of shooting a lot of DA revolvers. So if you have mastered the 92 or another DA/SA in the past, that muscle memory will return, and it can be a fine pistol. Especially if you already own one. Plus racking the slide on a Beretta just makes me purr. Its sooooo smooooooooooooooooooth.
I wouldn't recommend a Beretta to a brand new shooter, but I carry and shoot one for IDPA. Mainly because it was what I had. But I am moving to the "dark side" of no safety/striker fired hi-cap 9mm. My pocketbook has thanked me and my 1911 pistol smith has cancelled me from his Christmas card list. If you are looking to buy a new pistol. Glock or M&P: Both affordable and reliable. M&P can be had with a safety. I think the XDs also have a safety but the feeling on the forum is those are 2nd class to the Glock/M&P. Also you can get DAO pistols if you really like the beretta (or say a H&K--the only knock on an HK is price). The trigger pull can be modified from "herculean" to "Appropriate" depending on your tastes.
BrigandTwoFour
05-16-11, 11:20
I'm a fan of the 92A1. It was most recent purchase, and I've been shooting the piss out of it since. I only use the safety as a decocker and leave it off the rest of the time. I also practice my malfunctions enough that I no longer activate the safety when clearing them. I love the way the gun handles.
All that being said...it IS a 30 year old design. There are simpler, lighter, and more consistent shooting pistols out there. I'll admit that I've got zero trigger time on the M&P, but I've shot plenty of Glocks, XD's, USPs, 1911s. and others to get the idea of other designs. I really like the consistent trigger pull of a striker fired pistol. I like the weight and ease of care on the polymer guns. And, frankly, I can't see a reason not to go with them unless you are just set on the 92. The biggest contributing factor to me getting the 92A1 was that, being in the military, I would most likely be handling a M9 and wanted to be very proficient with the manual of arms. If that wasn't a factor, I might have very well ended up with something else (I am particularly fond of the new FNX).
Beat Trash
05-16-11, 14:00
I really do appreciate these replies, and I thank you. At the moment, I'm thinking [and asking you all] that if the striker fired is easier, then what does the Beretta 92 have over it? In other words, if I were experienced and knowledgeable and chose to carry the 92 over the M&P - why would I rationally do that?
If I were issued a Beretta 92/M9 pistol, then it would make sense to carry the same type of gun on my own time. (Example would be active duty military back from a deployment, getting ready to deploy again.) If you spent a large amount of time training with a particular system, then stick with what you know.
I carried DA/SA guns for years. I could shoot them well. I can shoot striker fired guns better. It's due the consistency from shot to shot.
My current issued gun for the last 5+ years is a 9mm M&P (W/O thumb safety). Excellent gun.
With that said, my favorite ccw pistol is still the Gen3 Glock 19. To me, it is the perfect size. It's small enough to conceal well, yet it's large enough to shoot effectively.
If a thumb safety is a deal breaker for you then go for an M&P. If not, then consider the Glock 19.
No matter what gun you choose, please strongly consider using a good holster, vs. stuffing the gun into your pants.
mike benedict
05-16-11, 14:14
The 92 is a solid piece but fighting handguns have evolved beyond it. Glock, Smith M&P, and HK all offer better choices.
so true
I never recommend DA/SA pistols to novice pistol shooters The modern striker fired pistols are so much easier to train people with.
Mike
I only use the safety as a decocker and leave it off the rest of the time.
I don't know why some people make a big deal about using the manual safety on a 92FS. It isn't like Beretta doesn't make the 92G, which was designed to be used that way.
The funny thing is some of those same people would have absolutely no problem carrying a SIG... :confused:
Jay
I don't know why some people make a big deal about using the manual safety on a 92FS. It isn't like Beretta doesn't make the 92G, which was designed to be used that way.
Actually the 92G has not been made for years, and I think Beretta requires a minimum order of 100 92Gs to do a production run. :(
The problem with the 92FS/M9 is the safety/decocker can be activated using a overhand grip to pull the slide. It locks via a detent, and won't pop back under spring pressure like on the 92G. Its really more of a theoretical problem since I've never seen it happen with any 92FS shooters, and have never done it myself.
That said, it CAN happen. Probably more of a issue with people with large hands.
Actually the 92G has not been made for years, and I think Beretta requires a minimum order of 100 92Gs to do a production run. :(
The problem with the 92FS/M9 is the safety/decocker can be activated using a overhand grip to pull the slide. It locks via a detent, and won't pop back under spring pressure like on the 92G. Its really more of a theoretical problem since I've never seen it happen with any 92FS shooters, and have never done it myself.
That said, it CAN happen. Probably more of a issue with people with large hands.
While I agree that it could happen, I think it is highly unlikely. I use the overhand grip you mentioned to cycle the slide on my Beretta. My thumb and index finger come in contact with the safety and apply direct pressure in the same direction I pull the slide (i.e. BACK). It's not foolproof but it definitely negates me inadvertently pushing the safety DOWN.
LanceOregon
05-18-11, 06:17
Although I've been a shooter since the age of ten, I've only recently obtained a CCW permit - and with it, a focus on semi-auto hand guns. Will be seventy years old in October.
The purpose of having a gun is carry for personal defense and also for home defense.
Yesterday I practiced with a rented Beretta 92fs. I've shot that model before, firing initial shot DA and then continuing in SA. Yesterday I decided to de-cock and fire five shots at a time in DA. Although SA shots are not bad, DA was HORRID.
Try the newer Beretta PX4 Storm instead. Mine has both excellent DA and SA trigger pulls on it that are very smooth and break clean. It is also much lighter than a 92FS, if weight is a concern for carrying. Although a S&W M&P would still have an edge for both size and weight. But you would have to learn to live with the striker type trigger pull.
While I don't carry my PX4 Storm, I do keep it loaded here inside my home for protection. The only thing that I did to mine was to make it totally corrosion resistant, by sending it to Robar Guns to have their NP3 PLUS finish put on it. Cost is $200 to $250.
It also makes the pistol the cat's meow.
http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s272/lanceJOregon/guns/_DSC6783b.jpg
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.