Beretta vs Glock.


March 23, 2003, 11:31 PM
I know that has been posted before. but I would like to know. Which do you think is the better handgun? Both are excellent guns I already know. But which is best?

If you enjoyed reading about "Beretta vs Glock." here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
March 24, 2003, 12:02 AM
"Best" is purely subjective in this comparison.

Some criteria give the not to Glock, and others give it to Beretta.

I give it to both.

March 24, 2003, 12:08 AM
quote: "I give it to both."

Dang Blackhawk, sound like a politician [kidding, got too much respect for you]

Beretta's fit me better, Glocks don't like me. I take a new glock out of a box and the trigger is gun . Open another and the nightsight falls on the floor...I can take a hint, and they don't fit my hand...when I can get that far with one


March 24, 2003, 12:10 AM
Both are very good guns-but I'm partial to Berettas!:D

March 24, 2003, 12:26 AM
I'm in the "both" camp.

A flaw of the Beretta is that it's too big and too heavy for a 9mm, though that helps felt recoil. The F model has the safety/decock lever that is easy to leave on "safe."

Glock has the love/hate trigger feel, a potential for more NDs, and no second strike capability.

Both are reliability champs.

Beretta has more easily available (and cheaper) full caps.

Buy one of each. I did.

March 24, 2003, 11:28 AM
I prefer the Beretta 92 series to the GLock 9 mm's. THey just feel more natural in my hands & point a lot better. YMMV

March 24, 2003, 11:33 AM
i have a 92 and 17. the beretta has more appeal (cosmetically and tactile-wise) but im comfortable with either.
neither is "best" but if forced, id choose beretta b/w the two.

March 24, 2003, 11:41 AM
The Beretta is one of the best feeders ever. Period. And has a very safe, yet smooth trigger. It is huge, heavy and has a lower life expectancy than some of the competition. At over 70 parts, it is arguably the most complicated fighting handgun available.

The Glock is more corrosion resistant, space and weight efficient. It can digest a huge number of bullets with little wear. It has 30 odd parts. The trigger reset springs tend to break and the light trigger gives you little room for screwups. Both problems are addressed when you put in a NY1 trigger. The feed reliability is very good, but the Beretta's is probably better (a gnat's behind).

March 24, 2003, 12:07 PM
Glocks fit my hands ;) much better than Beretta's. Accurate, reliable, easy to maintain, and they have the best size to caliber to capacity ratio out there.

Neither is as good as the HI POWER though :neener:

March 24, 2003, 12:15 PM
I agree that they are both superb handguns. My preference is for Glocks. YMMV.

March 24, 2003, 12:25 PM
I can't STAND the ergonomics of a Glumk... and the "gas pedal on top of the brake pedal" type safety is just WRONG...

I DO however carry a Beretta as a daily-carry piece (even though I'm a lovewr of Smith & Wesson Auto's)

my vote is for the Beretta...

March 24, 2003, 01:13 PM
I own a Glock, but I've fired a 92F. I really liked the 'heft' of the 92F for recoil and shooting, but I wouldnt want to lug it around all day, or even part of the day.

You can't beat Glock simplicity. In two seconds you have the gun in 4 parts. No little doodads to loose in the carpet.

If you said which is better, I would have to say neither. Its like rock paper bayonet. For what you get with a Glock though, Beretta is overpriced IMHO.

March 24, 2003, 01:45 PM
Glocks fit my hands much better than Beretta's.Never thought I'd see or hear anybody say that. :D

March 25, 2003, 06:37 AM
The Glock has much more muzzle flip but I seemed to shoot it better than the 92. The Beretta's safety caused me some problems and I had a couple of rounds fail to extract from the range gun I rented (it was dirty as heck). Everyone had me talked into "buying the fantastic plastic" until I picked up a CZ and bought that instead of either one. Go figure...

In terms of quality, the Beretta is a better firearm, the Glock despite it's rep looks cheap to me. Ergonomics are better on the Beretta, it's better looking, cheaper hi caps, frame is way heavy for the round it fires but recoil is kept to a minimum. I think new shooters fare better with Glocks overall but I really prefer a SA/DA trigger choice. I'm not sure the "decock to lock" set up of the Beretta is my cup of tea but at least they offer several models with and without this option and Glock doesn't.

Both are great firearms and it tears me up to choose one over the other but I have to give the nod to the Beretta over the G17.


March 25, 2003, 09:47 AM
Though I own one of each and have owned one more of each, I have much more experience shooting the Beretta platform and that is what I'm more comfortable shooting.

I just bought a Kahr P9 Covert and if for whatever reason it doesn't work out for me, the next carry gun I try will be a Glock 36.

March 25, 2003, 11:06 AM
well, I'm going to disagree on this one :scrutiny:

I own a Glock 17 3rd gen, and since I live in Belgium, hi-caps are the only mags I can buy for my G17.

I also own a Beretta 92FS replica, same size, same trigger, same weight, ... the only difference is that it can only shoot blanks.

here's what I came up with (Glock 17 vs Beretta 92FS):

- 2 more rounds capacity.
- longer sight radius in a smaller gun (!).
- the glock can take more beatings than a beretta. they once threw a glock and a beretta out the window of the 10th store of a building, and guess what? the glock was unharmed, but the beretta was broken.
- altough the beretta is utterly reliable, the glock is even a tad more reliable (I talk about the 9mm's here, not the .40's), and you will need to replace springs and stuff on a beretta after 30 000 rounds. the glock can take well over 100 000 rounds.
- simplier mechanism and fewer parts.
- glocks are waaaaay cheaper.
- glocks weigh waaaaay less (about 70 % of a beretta).
- mags are cheaper
- Glocks shoot faster (for follow-up shots, you only need 1/8" triger movement)
- ...

as you can see, the G17 is a far more superiour pistol than the Beretta 92FS, altough this last one isn't too bad at all. it just had the bad luck that it competed with the G17 :evil:

March 25, 2003, 11:45 AM
now of course you're comparing a real G17 to a blank-firing replica of a beretta 92. hardly apples and apples.
im not disagreeing with your assessment/conclusion, just the methodology you used in getting there.

March 25, 2003, 12:10 PM
I'll vote for the Glock. Its lighter yet more durable, its slimmer and simple to operate. Though the trigger spring are said to break, its a rare occurence and I believe the gun is still firable even if it does happen. The beretta on the other hand is known to have a locking block failure that renders the gun totally inoperable when it happens. For reliability, durability and ruggedness, I'll take the Glock!

March 25, 2003, 04:29 PM
I once dropped a Glock barrel first onto pavement (missed my CC holster! :eek: ) didnt even scratch it, just offset the rear sight, which 5 seconds with a brass mallet fixed.

March 25, 2003, 04:30 PM
I got to go with the Beretta.

I really like the grip angle of the Glock, the way it way it points and the lighter weight. I don't like the square grip, trigger, or the cheesy feel of the thing.

The Beretta may be the smoothest pistol I have ever shot. Every moving part feels like oiled glass, it is a joy just to pick up and work the parts. The trigger is nice on mine but I have heard some people complain about theirs.

I think the Berettas and the SIGs are the class of the service pistol world. Glocks, Rugers, S&Ws, CZs and H&Ks are good guns but if you want more than just a reliable and accurate gun, go with a Beretta or a SIG, they give you something a little extra in addition to unquestioned reliability and accuracy.

If you enjoyed reading about "Beretta vs Glock." here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!