92fs sucks. just my thoughts.

[stevereno1]

The beretta 92 sucks for the following reasons. They are not rust-proof, and they have an exposed barrel that aloows debris into the action. I do know that they are very accurate, and cool looking, but can they perform like a glock, or sig, or h&k/? Not even close.

love, Steven

 

[arthurcw]

well...well... Glocks suck because they are not Sigs. Sigs suck cause they don't fit my hand. HK sucks because... No WAIT... I suck and they hate me!

NO WAIT!!!! ALL HANDGUNS SUCK!!!!

Love, Arthur.

 

[spyderdude]

No gun is rust proof, not even Glocks, just takes a bit longer for them to rust. Any gun can get debris in the action, and cause malfunctions. If you take care of your guns, they will take care of you.

 

[Old Dog]

Umm ... Steven, are you looking for debate? If so, I'm not really sure why you'd pick the Beretta to pick on ...

I live in Western Washington, never had a problem with rust on any of my three 92s. Nor while I carried one on duty in a marine environment, and certainly never had a problem with debris in the action while carrying one daily in the Middle-Eastern desert environment.

For a full-size service pistol in 9mm, the Beretta is about as good as they come. Mine have been more accurate than my Glocks were, and as reliable as my SIGs and H&K.

Not my first choice for a duty weapon, but I'd still prefer one to the USP that I have to carry now. Only issue I have with the 92 is the sights and the frame-mounted safety (which should be used only as a de-cocker).

Yeah, they are cool-lookin' though -- esp. in Inox.

 

[Autolycus]

Guess Steven did not read this thread.

It is nice that he has an open mind. I had a 92FS that I could not really get a good grip on it. Its not a bad gun and I enjoyed shooting it but it was not for me. I love the aesthetic appearance of the gun very much. I like the weight and the heft of the gun.

Either way I think this thread will be closed as I have reported it. Read the link I posted please.

 

[stevereno1]

yessir I am looking for a debate! I am tired of everyone giving the 92 the title of a "great gun" I am also not a fan of the ar platform and the small gas tube that works the action. Can we not arm our soldiers with a .45? why not a Glock 21 sf or a xd .45? can we not produce a rifle for our troops that operates on a piston action rather than a gas-operated jam-o-matic? Just cause a gun looks cool, doesn't mean it is a cool gun.

 

[Steve in PA]

So.......just how much handgun experience do you have?

Just what kind of "performance" are you looking for?

Every gun rusts.

I have a Beretta, along with Sig, S&W, Ruger, Walther, with several of each. I'll stack my 92FS against anything you want to throw at it.

 

[stevereno1]

I have not been inconsiderate, rude, or vulgar. Why report this thread? I guess the second ammendment is golden, but the first is ignored by some on this site.

 

[D-Man]

Parody poster? Troll?

 

[stevereno1]

I believe that a 92, dropped in the muck, will fail to feed almost every time. I also believe that the Glock, and h&k will fire upon every attempt. The glock and hk are better than a 92, and a even a sig is better.

 

[stevereno1]

glocks don't rust overnight. A 92 turns into a nice shade of orange.

 

[auschip]

I guess the second ammendment is golden, but the first is ignored by some on this site.

Well, as soon as the .gov steps in to shutdown this thread I think you will have a valid arguement there (just a quick hint, you might want to read the 1st again).

WRT your initial post, I happen to own both a 92F, an XD 45, and I did own a glock (the .40 not the .45 but still). The 92F performed admirably in everything I asked it to do, with no problems. Just how much experience do you have with any of these pistols, anyway?

 

[10-Ring]

I thought SIGs were the ones w/ rust issues...don't the 92fs' just blow up in your face when you shoot machine gun ammo through them? Man, I really gotta get my blanket statements down

 

[andrewshogun]

I've shot my fair share of guns, and the 92fs is surprisingly the most accurate pistol I've ever fired. Not necessarily my favorite, but it sure was accurate and very easy to shoot.

 

[Ninja42]

Do not feed the trolls. Let this thread fall to the bottom or be locked.

 

[stevereno1]

I owned a 92 that I loved. It just got that surface rust that I hate, and would fail to feed. I kept it clean, got "better mags" and it still sucked. I got a Glock 17 and it was a complete success.

no more need to question my experiance, or wharever. I stand alone, and have owned more guns than most have picked up at a gun show.

 

[Old Dog]

The great thing about the internet is that only MY opinion represents reality and truth.

Everyone else, no matter what their experience, is WRONG.

 

[41magsnub]

And? So? What? You singular experience does not make a gun "suck". It is too bad you had such a bad experience with it, but seriously now (and think before you answer), what are you trying to accomplish here Steven?

Is it to share your poor experience with the unwashed masses so they do not make the same mistake? Noble of you but your methodology could be a lot better. I think you are more looking for a confrontation which is not what this site is all about.

no more need to question my experiance, or wharever. I stand alone, and have owned more guns than most have picked up at a gun show.

Arrogance is unbecoming and detracts from your argument. If you have to resort to statements proclaiming how much experience you have you have already lost.

 

[stevereno1]

wow! I have been chastised, called a troll? and had my shooting experiance questioned here, and have yet to find a reason that the 92 is better than a glock.

note that i haven't gone whining to close the post 'cause you mean guys hurt my feelings either. whatever.

 

[auschip]

wow! I have been chastised, called a troll? and had my shooting experiance questioned here, and have yet to find a reason that the 92 is better than a glock.

note that i haven't gone whining to close the post 'cause you mean guys hurt my feelings either. whatever.

The ergonomics are better on the 92F, and the trigger is better. We questioned your experience, because you make blanket statements based on a user group of one, and subjective experience (incidentally, I did the same thing above - but I did it on purpose).

Hugs and kisses on all your pink parts.

 

[stevereno1]

what blanket statements? let your 92 get misty, and put in a gun case overnight. Try that with a Glock, and see the results.

 

[esq_stu]

I guess the second ammendment is golden, but the first is ignored by some on this site.

We all want to vent now and then.

What keeps this site worthwhile is civility. What keeps this site civil is rules about what is and is not appropriate.

I think this website can pretty much be considered private property. The first and second amendments pertain to what the government cannot do. The owner of private property has the right to decide who gets to say what (or carry a gun) on his property.

I appreciate that there are rules of civility here and that they are enforced. I thank the owners and moderators for that.

 

[stevereno1]

So, let me get this straight. I post a thread on how the 92fs sucks, and I am now uncivalized? I am a horrible troll? Wow! I am on the wrong site.

 

[Geronimo45]

They are not rust-proof,

There's stainless models, IIRC.

and they have an exposed barrel that aloows debris into the action

It also allows debris to be blown out of the action. Some designs are to keep the dirt from getting in, some want to keep it from staying inside.

 

[Lonestar49]

Hmmm, I guess the truth is..

Quote: *I believe that a 92, dropped in the muck, will fail to feed almost every time.

I also believe that the Glock, and h&k will fire upon every attempt. The glock and hk are better than a 92, and a even a sig is better.

*what blanket statements? let your 92 get misty, and put in a gun case overnight. Try that with a Glock, and see the results.
-----------
...

To begin with; *just how many times did you drop your 92 in the muck? Might that be the problem, along with the rust?

Me, and most everyone else would find dry shelter of some sort, and lovingly wipe up their weapon, as to be clean and dry before putting her in a closed, tight, non-aired, no air circulation environment for some 12hrs plus.. Or at least put the gun somewhere with air circulation, until better circumstances prevailed.. IMHO

But, from all that I know, and have read, that own 92's, not one has complained of rust, nor of mags that cause jamming, unless mag springs are old, or not clean. But, they must be doing something right, like preventive maintenance, along with round counts, as to replace old mag and recoil springs, because the issue of jamming, or rust has not come up, both from long time owners, and new owners.

If I read such a rust horror story, I would bring it up, as I call them the way I see them, even with my own guns, as I would not recommend a Sig P232 SL 380 to anyone, as I have had my issues with that gun, and they appear solved, but none the less, it was a long journey to get that gun constantly at 100%, but the scare still remains.

From where I stand, I would say you and your gun are a rare occurrence, as the rest fall under:

~ A thousand flies cannot be wrong ~ which can mean something is good, or something is bad, but they cannot be wrong..


Ls