M9: Commercial vs Military?

I would get Taurus 92 with rail. It is more advanced design with frame-mounted safety. You can even get lovely one in nickel finish & gold plated controls. A well proven warrior of South-American slums.

paulsj said:

I would get Taurus 92 with rail. It is more advanced design with frame-mounted safety. You can even get lovely one in nickel finish & gold plated controls. A well proven warrior of South-American slums.

Click to expand...

No snark intended Paul, but the PT92 is actually based on the oldest Beretta 92 specs as made on Italian machinery for the Brazilian government starting in '74. Berettas have been available in nickel, stainless, and gold accented finishes at various times in their long production run. The M9, both commercial and military, use a plastic coating called Bruniton.
Nothing against the Taurus, it is a good gun.

As far as I know, the only differences between civilian 92FS and military M9 are the coatings and markings. My advice is to look for whatever you can get cheaper. If you can find a M9 marked Beretta for less than one marked 92FS, go for it. There really isn't that big a difference between the two to warrant a seller up marking the M9 and calling it "military grade" or something like that.

I don't know the difference between the military M9 and the commercial M9, but there are differences between the commercial versions of the 92FS, the M9, and the M9A1.

92FS http://www.beretta.com/en-us/92-fs/

M9 http://www.beretta.com/en-us/m9/

M9A1 http://www.beretta.com/en-us/m9a1/

I prefer the pre-2002 92FS guns lurking in the used counter. They will have the proper metal parts instead of plastic. The only difference will be markings and the civilian three-dot vs military snowman sights.

Just to clarify, there are three versions of the same gun -- the commercial 92FS, the "commercial" M9, and the military-issue M9. The difference is in the markings. The 92FS has 3-dot sights while the M9 has just one dot on the rear sight. My 92FS has slotted grip screws while my M9 has Allen-head grip screws. Otherwise they are the same. The so-called "plastic" parts are really plastic-clad parts, and aren't an issue.

As a general comment, the Beretta is not one of my favorite guns. The ergonomics of the M1911 are better, especially for someone with smallish hands. And I hate the double-action trigger pull.

I have had a couple of Taurus M92's. Nice guns and relaible IMHO.

Get them side by side and rack the slide on the Taurus then the Beretta. The Beretta is like melted butter the Taurus is not.

I vote Beretta

AlexanderA said:

Just to clarify, there are three versions of the same gun -- the commercial 92FS, the "commercial" M9, and the military-issue M9. The difference is in the markings. The 92FS has 3-dot sights while the M9 has just one dot on the rear sight. My 92FS has slotted grip screws while my M9 has Allen-head grip screws. Otherwise they are the same. The so-called "plastic" parts are really plastic-clad parts, and aren't an issue.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the comments on the plastic coated parts, I was going to include that in my post.

In my previous post, I was also going to comment on the sights, but when I grabbed the links above, I noticed the commercial M9 and the M9A1 both currently show 3-dot sights. I think they used to have the post/dot sights (at least the commercial M9 like the military M9), but unless it is an error on Beretta's web site (certainly possible) they are now showing 3 dot sights on all the commercial 92FS/M9 guns.

JTQ said:

I noticed the commercial M9 and the M9A1 both currently show 3-dot sights. I think they used to have the post/dot sights (at least the commercial M9 like the military M9), but unless it is an error on Beretta's web site (certainly possible) they are now showing 3 dot sights on all the commercial 92FS/M9 guns.

Click to expand...

IMO, the 3-dot sights are better. Looking closely at my 92FS and M9, the rear sights on both are actually the same, with 3 dimples that can be filled by paint. The 92FS has the side dimples filled with white paint, while the M9 has the center dimple filled with paint. It seems that the owner could change the painted dots at will.

I have the Beretta 92FS and love it. A lot of folks don't like the grip claiming it's too big, but it fits me perfectly. Recoil is very light, and it has shot accurately and reliably pretty much any ammo I fed it. It's also very easy to disassemble, maintain and modify. There are also lots of holster and grip options for it - not as much as is available for Glocks, but still fairly decent.

No matter the version, the 92 is a classic- but if you want a NEW one do it soon! Now that Beretta has lost the Army contract, civi-sales will not be enough for them to justify continued production. Just look at what has happened to the High Power......
I give the 92 series two more years, tops.

NIGHTLORD40K said:

No matter the version, the 92 is a classic- but if you want a NEW one do it soon! Now that Beretta has lost the Army contract, civi-sales will not be enough for them to justify continued production. Just look at what has happened to the High Power......
I give the 92 series two more years, tops.

Click to expand...

Two more years? Not likely. The M9/92 will be around for most of the rest of our lifetimes, at least.

Note the Wilson Combat foray into the Beretta 92. See they are out of stock. Beretta can't keep up with production to fulfill demand.

http://shopwilsoncombat.com/Beretta...gadier-Tactical-9mm/productinfo/BER-92BRIG-9/

I've also seen comments on various forums the M9A3 model ( http://www.beretta.com/en-us/m9a3/ ) is backordered around 20,000 units. Some of the backlog for both guns is no doubt due to Beretta's move from Maryland to Tennessee, which stopped/slowed production, but these are popular guns, and they should be popular for some time.

Beretta has also introduced a universal G-conversion lever, that will allow you to turn your decocker/safety version into a decocker only gun without the help of a gunsmith. http://www.berettausa.com/en-us/beretta-g-lever-kit/

JTQ said:

Two more years? Not likely. The M9/92 will be around for most of the rest of our lifetimes, at least.

Note the Wilson Combat foray into the Beretta 92. See they are out of stock. Beretta can't keep up with production to fulfill demand.

http://shopwilsoncombat.com/Beretta-_-Wilson-Combat-92G-Brigadier-Tactical-9mm/productinfo/BER-92BRIG-9/

I've also seen comments on various forums the M9A3 model ( http://www.beretta.com/en-us/m9a3/ ) is backordered around 20,000 units. Some of the backlog for both guns is no doubt due to Beretta's move from Maryland to Tennessee, which stopped/slowed production, but these are popular guns, and they should be popular for some time.

Beretta has also introduced a universal G-conversion lever, that will allow you to turn your decocker/safety version into a decocker only gun without the help of a gunsmith. http://www.berettausa.com/en-us/beretta-g-lever-kit/

Click to expand...

I hope you're right J! Perhaps being one of the last non- poly guns will allow it enough of a niche market to survive. We shall see.

NIGHTLORD40K said:

No matter the version, the 92 is a classic- but if you want a NEW one do it soon! Now that Beretta has lost the Army contract, civi-sales will not be enough for them to justify continued production. Just look at what has happened to the High Power......
I give the 92 series two more years, tops.

Click to expand...

Yeah, the last major military contract for the HP was in the sixties or seventies and they are still in production after 35 or 40 years*....

The last time the US Army bought M1911 was 1945, and exactly when did they stop product on them?

___________
Although likely to be dropped in 2018 or 2019.

the m45 was contracted by the marine corps like in 2012 so the 1911 still has a place in the military to this day. Other "people" use them as they please in specific units. Over all as far as business goes, colt has had their nails dug into military contracts for a very long time with no real end in sight. They aren't doing that great as a business however, perhaps military contracts are keeping them afloat.
Beretta lost their contract, so im sure it will have some effect on them financially, however unlike colt, I think Beretta has had a fair amount of commercial products that have came out over the last five years so im sure they will be ok.
I'm not a fan of their products for the most part, the nano and the storm are alright i guess. I'd be interested in trying out the apx, but if you have glocks you might as well stick with what you know as the design seems...very similar.
the m9 and all its variants are whatever. if you broke enough of them, you'd be over them too. dont know how you break them? me either...but the barrel lug has cracked on me more than twice.

M45 is no longer being used, or authorized for use, by Marine Raiders (formerly MARSOC). They've been replaced by the Glock 19.

they're still in the armory. PMO's SRT still has them, at least SRT on where I'm at does. They are still used on the MEU's for those that rate. That includes the ricky recons. Wanna ask me how I know...
and yes im well aware of the switch to the g19

Here's another option, the Langdon M9

http://www.beretta.com/en-us/langdon-m9/

lysanderxiii said:

Yeah, the last major military contract for the HP was in the sixties or seventies and they are still in production after 35 or 40 years*....

The last time the US Army bought M1911 was 1945, and exactly when did they stop product on them?

___________
Although likely to be dropped in 2018 or 2019.

Click to expand...

......and for much of that 40 years, all-metal pistols were the only game in town. MIM, polymer, and investment castings are all market/price drivers which will spell the doom of the M92 (and HAVE killed off the HiPower) in effect, Army procurement and refurb contracts have been subsidizing the civilian models. Its a death spiral- raise $, lose sales volume, raise $, and on and on.
The 1911 is an anomaly because it is in a market unto itself. Every manufacturer's 1911 only has to compete against OTHER 1911's- nobody cross shops a 1911 versus an M&P......
Look, I love the M92. I hope l'm wrong- but there's no way Beretta will be able to sell a handful of $1000 M92s every year to justify keeping the line open. Savage 99, Smith and Wesson 3rd gen, Winchester 95, Winchester 12.........Colt Python: all were fine weapons, loved by many- but untenable to make and sell to today's market.
Hey, if nothing else, you can tell your wife: "But honey, I HAVE to buy a new Beretta because this guy on THR says they gonna quit making them!"

NIGHTLORD40K said:

Look, I love the M92. I hope l'm wrong- but there's no way Beretta will be able to sell a handful of $1000 M92s every year to justify keeping the line open. Savage 99, Smith and Wesson 3rd gen, Winchester 95, Winchester 12.........Colt Python: all were fine weapons, loved by many- but untenable to make and sell to today's market.

Click to expand...

You may be right, the Beretta 92/M9 may quickly go away. However, for clarity, while they do have some "high end" versions, the Beretta 92FS/M9 is a $600ish pistol. It has some value to those comparing it to a $500ish polymer gun, as it gets you a hammer and metal frame for just another $100, and it is less expensive by at least $200 vs the P22X series guns from SIG.

Regarding the loss of those other guns you listed, they were all fine guns, but there were other options available when those guns went away. When the Savage 99 went away, there were still lever actions available. The S&W TDA metal frame autos left, but there were still the SIG and Beretta.

If you're looking for a metal framed, hammer fired, DA/SA pistol, for whatever reason (SIG P320 failed drop test, M&P 9 poor accuracy, Glock ejection problems, XD no parts available, etc.), there really aren't a whole lot of options. It may be niche group, but the DA/SA metal framed niche is still probably a pretty big niche. It's certainly not as big as the polymer striker fired "niche", but there are significantly fewer players for Beretta to compete with in the metal framed DA/SA market.

NIGHTLORD40K said:

No matter the version, the 92 is a classic- but if you want a NEW one do it soon! Now that Beretta has lost the Army contract, civi-sales will not be enough for them to justify continued production. Just look at what has happened to the High Power......
I give the 92 series two more years, tops.

Click to expand...

The life of the 92 and M9 will largely be determined by how fast Sig can pump out the M17 and M18. There are some members of the 101st who are already getting them. When Beretta got the contract in 1985, it wasn't service wide adopted until 1990 based on some sources. I am sure there are still some 1911s in dark corners of unit armories that come out during large, sweeping inventories. I don't believe Beretta will keep the production line open for very long on civilian sales alone. Certainly not as long as 1911s enjoy in the civilian market.

They can realize greater profits by selling half plastic guns.