The Gun That Replaced the 1911 - VIDEO

[ptmccain]

I enjoyed pulling together this video providing a fairly thorough overview of the history, feature, functions and, yes, controversy surrounding the Beretta 92 platform. It features accuracy demonstrations and shooting demonstrations. Hope you like it. Let me know what you think and please chime in here or on the channel with any stories of your personal experiences with the Beretta 92, or as it is known in the military, the M9. As always, I welcome your constructive criticism.

[azeriosu85]

very good work!

[ptmccain]

Thanks, bro. Appreciate it.

[ralph]

Good Vid..
I had a couple of Beretta's..A commerical copy of the M9, and a older compact..Both were decent pistols, But, IMO they have a few drawbacks..
The slide mounted saftey/decocker..This was probably the worst possible place for this..why Beretta did'nt keep the frame mounted saftey I'll never know. It's all too easy to flip the saftey levers down when racking the slide, I myself did this too many times to mention. Maybe this was a great idea in the 80's But, it needs changed..

The locking block..This is the weak link in the Beretta 92/96 series..They are supposed to hold up for about 20,000 rnds before needing replaced, But some have broke in as little as 5000 rnds, of course, locking block life depends heavily on regular recoil spring changes, change the recoil spring when it's needed, and you should'nt have a problem. I'd inspect the block regularly for cracks, especially when the round count gets above 5k,
Sights;
I see on yours that Beretta finally got smart and started dovetailing the front sight,That's a big improvement, Before, on my M9, and compact, the front sight was milled into the slide, there was no changing it, and with older Beretta's, this means there are no real sight options.
Beretta's are decent pistols,Very reliable, Like any other pistol they have some drawbacks, I would'nt use one as a CCW, But, that's me. There too many better options out there, for a CCW. If I was going into harm's way, and my choices were limited to between it, and say, a XD, I'd take the Beretta every time..

[ptmccain]

I do not EDC a full size firearm, period. I can't given how I must dress at work, etc. Oh, that's right, my work doesn't permit me even to have a firearm in my car on the property.

[HackerF15E]

It may have gone into service with the military after the 1911 was retired, but it will never "replace" the 1911! haha

I own 'em both, and love 'em both.



Thanks for the vid!

[ptmccain]

Glad you liked it. I am an equally opportunity gun lover myself. I've got 1911s, Glocks, Rugers, and now Berettas and Benellis.

[ralph]

I do not EDC a full size firearm, period. I can't given how I must dress at work, etc. Oh, that's right, my work doesn't permit me even to have a firearm in my car on the property.

Don't feel bad..mine dosen't either, for that matter, just about any place I go to work, (I work construction, mostly power plants) dosen't allow it..

[ptmccain]

Thanks, bro. +1

[brickboy240]

Nice film!

I still own a 40 caliber version of this platform, although I am not a total fan of this design. The 96F is still one of the softest recoiling 40s out there, next to the full size USP40.

For a 9mm, the 92F is huge, compared to other "service" sized 9mms.

The safety is awkward and way up on the slide and hard to get at, without shifting the pistol in the hand.

If you have medium or small hands, this pistol seems huge, compared to some other double stack 9s. It is too fat and thick and too heavy.

The trigger is long and creepy, too.

On the plus side, the 92/M9 is reliable and accurate and the long sight radius is a plus on the range. It is also a soft kicker and pretty well made.

So I really think the 92FS is a mixed bag. We certainly could have picked a worse service 9mm, but I would have rather seen us adopt the SIG P226, because it has a better grip and the controls are easier to get to than the 92FS.

- brickboy240