On the Beretta M9...

**Slater** · 04-02-15, 22:24

Going back years (decades, actually), one of the familiar knocks against the M9/92 series was "it's just too damn big for a 9mm". Fast forward to 2015, and is this still seen as an issue with the M9?

**Kain** · 04-02-15, 22:40

Too big how?

Grip? I don't find it to be too big, fits my hand in the standard configuration well. And while I do not have massive hands I can reach and actuate all the controls, including the safety without issue. if you have small hands it may be an issue.

Width? Maybe a bit, but not unmanageable.

Height? About the same of most full sized service type pistols.

Length? Okay, it is long, but length isn't something that makes concealment a huge issue, generally that is width and height of the grip so again not that much worse than a lot of other options. Also, with the addition of weapon lights I think this argument and width are pushed to the side by some.

To me, for a full sized service pistol that is carried in an OWB type holster, or retention type duty holster I do not find it to be a massive pistol, if anything the size makes shooting it fast and accurate very easy and will generally say the M9/92 series is underrated for what it is. Also, something that is worth noting, for a range gun I find women will take to shooting my 92 over the smaller glocks in 9mm because it is very soft shooting, easy to shoot, and the size is not something of an issue. Now for concealed carry it is not ideal, but can be done, but again not ideal.

**echo5whiskey** · 04-02-15, 23:20

I have short-wide hands, and I learned on a M9. Maybe that makes it easier for me, I don't know. I have never had an issued with them as long as they didn't break...but that's another topic.

**ramairthree** · 04-03-15, 00:21

It is a full sized service pistol with excellent reliability, accuracy, and little recoil.

The lack of a dovetailed front sight is horribly outdated.

Ergonomics are not optimal.

It does have an above average grip size that a percentage of shooters find too large. The newer radius in the back strap ameliorates this, and should be the norm in my opinion. Even better are the EII and M9A1, etc. frames with this radius and also checkering and beveled magwell. The Vertec frame makes it even smaller, but I do not prefer it.

The magazine release is very "stubby"
and much better options are available.

The slide mounted safety was dictated. A frame mounted safety/decocker would have been better ergonomically.

That and the SIG were excellent choices for a NATO round service pistol at the time it was adopted. I do not dislike them.

**Straight Shooter** · 04-03-15, 07:03

Im a tall, bigger fella and Ive NEVER thought it too big. I CC'd mine for years. Love the gun still.

**Col._Joe** · 04-03-15, 08:13

I am average size. And weight
5ft9 and 185. I find that the 92 conceals fairly easy with an old Blade Tech IWB holster I have for it. It's not as easy as my Glock 19 but it wasn't to bad.
I do like the Beretta a lot. I am looking at those 92G-SD very tempting

**Firefly** · 04-03-15, 08:29

I challenge people who make such complaints to put a 1911 and a Beretta side by side.

Personally I don't think the grip is too fat. Likewise I don't think the Sig is any "better". A double stack 45 has quite a girthy grip in comparison to the Beretta. I think the hate just comes from people wanting to be different.

That said, the Vertec grip felt soooo good

**19852** · 04-03-15, 08:35

I've been shooting the 92 for years and I have owned several. For the short time I didn't have one I kept my mags because I knew I would getting another. The 92 is my full size service pistol of choice. Used to carry one but now I carry something a little smaller and lighter.
High quality magazines are inexpensive and plentiful.