Beretta 92 FS, Any reason not to buy ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I am seriously starting to look for a surplus 92D slide to put on my 92FS frame. No safety at all. That would mean I'd have to carefully lower the hammer to the DA position, but that is something people who shoot revolvers have had to do for more than century, should they find it cocked, but change their mind about shooting it. This would be a slicked down 92, and very attractive in my eyes.
 
leadcounsel said:
Don't you find it odd that Italy and the USA and NO other nation uses the Beretta 92 as the sidearm of choice.
Click to expand...

Have all the opinions you like, but make sure the facts you state aren't wrong before you say them with such authority. Off the top of my head without even researching, Frances uses the 92 under the name PAMAS, Brazil uses the Taurus variant 92, and Wiki lists many more countries. Didn't you bother reading the 92 Wiki article when you read the CZ-75 Wiki article and Glock Wiki article? Since it's the pistol you're attacking?

Also, if the 92's safety location and grip size is a fair target of criticism for those with small hands, as a guy with large hands, personally I can never rely on the CZ-75 as a combat pistol. That tiny slide is hard me to grab in a hurry.

My larger hands probably do result in some pro-92 bias for me. Rarely have I felt such natural control and comfort it a pistol.
 
Last edited:
Quote:
Speaking of slides, yes, they do still crack and break. It's referred to as a "slide separation failure" and yes, I've seen it happen before on several occasions.

There were 14 documented cases out of a batch of 3 million pistols of the slide separating.
Click to expand...

Here's our procedures for replacing any part, and slides (cracked, broken or otherwise) also falls into this same process:

1. Replace part.
2. List part by description, NSN, quantity, etc. on the parts inventory list as to what weapon this part was being used on.
3. Annotate the parts replacement on the weapon's 105 that will also be entered into SFMIS for an electronic copy of the 105 as needed.
4. Put crap part into DRMO box for processing at a further date where it is sent away as scrap.

Do we run to Beretta or depot making up a report of the why's and how's of how what part broke and all the particulars? Oh yeah, I love to make more work for myself and the guys in my shop doing this sort of thing rather than cutting them loose so they can get back to their families after duty hours.:rolleyes: We just make the trains run and the pistols go bang. I'm not going to waste my time or my troops time telling Beretta all about a problem that is already known to exist with this design.
 
I'm not going to waste my time or my troops time telling Beretta all about a problem that is already known to exist with this design.
Click to expand...

Those numbers were from NSIAD GAO reports, not anything from Beretta.
 
Side by side, the 92fs just cannot compete in most categories with other pistols..
odd... Wonder how it managed to win national events at Camp Perry, IDPA, IPSC, USPSA?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I don't have a dog in this fight. I've had several Beretta 92s, a Vertec and a 96. They're nice guns. I just happen to like others, better.

That said, I would note that the guns used at Camp Perry (and probably at some of the other competitions cited) were built by the US ARMY Marksmanship Training Unit's gunsmiths, and they are finely-tuned custom guns, comparable to some of the best available from big-name gunsmiths. Some of those guns are not representative of the basic Beretta used by the military.
 
leadcounsel said:
The role of a sidearm is NOT exactly the same as the role it would play for a civilian range toy or self/home defense or carry piece.

Don't just rely on me.... U.S. Special Operations have a choice in sidearms, and they notably pick Glock, Sig Sauer, and HK... that should tell you something.

Don't you find it odd that Italy and the USA and NO other nation uses the Beretta 92 as the sidearm of choice. And police departments have abandoned it in favor of Glock, XD, and Smith and Wesson...

So, either the rest of the world is wrong, or the rest of the world is right and the 92/M9 is not really that good of a value pistol compared to the other dozen outstanding choices.
Click to expand...

You are correct...the role of a sidearm in the military is NOT the same as the role of a handgun for civilian use, in general.

However, be careful about using the Special Forces as any kind of justification for or against any particular sidearm. I served aboard a SpecOps submarine for a number of years, deploying SEALS on various missions. SEALS, like any other SpecOps organization, have a great number of resources available to them with respect to firearms; what they may or may not carry varies not only on mission parameters, but personal experience and opinions as well. And they will carry a Beretta, Colt, and other firearms not mentioned above as well. There is no exclusivisity (is that a word?) with respect to this.

And the military isn't like smaller police organizations, either. They don't budget to replace firearms nearly as frequently, especially is what they have is entirely servicable, has plenty of logistics support, and there is contract support for the maintenance and upkeep of the systems. Unless there is a pressing need to replace a sidearm, it isn't done. Otherwise there would be a continuing cycle of bimply buying the "latest and greatest" every few years when the next new and improved firearm comes out. And the various police agencies in this country aren't necessarily an "issue only" force...many allow for variances in sidearms, whether issued, personally owned, or particular types/brands. The military does not operate that way.

Do I find it odd that only two countries use this firearm? Nope. Not at all. In fact, you can make similar statements about a variety of other firearms which are "only used by (X number) of countries", either by police or military organizations. This doesn't mean, by itself, that any particular firearm is (or is not) any good. Just using that logic, the Sig SP2022 must not be a "good firearm" because of it's limited use in military organizations around the world.

There is as much to be said about economics, politics, and personal choice in the selection of any given firearm. And yes, even the "latest fad" aspect.


BOTTOM LINE:

As with any pistol: Is it reliable? It is accurate? Does it have a good service life? Does it fit your hand?

If the answer to these questions is "yes", then it really boils down to personal particulars in the choice.

:)
 
jhb said:
the only reason I haven't bought the beretta yet, is I think its just plain ugly.
Click to expand...

Heh! EXACTLY the same reason I won't buy a Glock...they're awesome pistols in reliability, accuracy, concealed carry, and so much more. But to me they're uglier than sin and I won't buy one because of that!

I can still appreciate Glock performance and reputation, however.


One of the very reasons I bought my 92SF in the first place is because I think it's a thing of beauty, along with it's performance and reputation.

;)
 
I like 92F's because of Die Hard, the way it looks, and the way it feels in my hand.

I don't like them because the DA is not that great and I think that a safety on a DA/SA is silly.
I do like Sig 226's for the same size, style (Hammer fired, DA/SA), and purpose (Full size large capacity 9mm).

I think i might own one in future for a range toy.
If you dig it and have the moneys, go for it!

You might want to compare a 226 and 92F at the range and see which you like better though.
 
For the record, I don't HATE the 92FS. I just believe, from extensive civilian and military experience owning the weapon, carrying the weapon in combat, and shooting the weapon extensively (to include expert qualification repeatedly) that there are better guns, especially for the money.

To clarify, I have large hands and can palm a basketball... I do actually like the ergos of the grip. I give credit where it is due. The gun isn't sinful, and actually the reason I purchased one, as I said, is due to the very attractive lines and designs, and Hollywood definately helped to sell this pistol.

But, my analysis is that, in summary, the bulk, girth, weight, and operation of the pistol is simply outmatched by more modern designs that do the same job, better. Assuming for the sake of argument that the 92 and it's competition have a failure rate of exactly the same, then why wouldn't you pick a lighter, stronger design gun with better safety mechanims and designs, even at the same pricepoint?

Comparing it to the competition the competition just flat out wins:
Trigger - not counting specially 'tuned' triggers, Beretta's trigger is nothing special. Among Stock triggers and reset, I believe the competition like Glock or CZ wins. Many people like XD but it's squishy. MP are good triggers too.
Safeties - With grip safeties, loaded chamber indicators, trigger safeties... Beretta is below it's competition. If it's loaded and cocked and dropped... who knows.
Grip - personal preference, but modern guns are adjustable
Decocker - Sig or CZ win. The Beretta decocker is in a bad place and operates counter-intuitive and is easy to accidently decock when operating the slide.
External safety - 1911 style like CZ. Beretta is counter intuitive.
Accuracy - tie
Sights - competition
Frame material/weight - polymer/competition
Ruggedness - most combat guns pass incredible standards so this is a tie
Price - seems Beretta is typically more expensive than Glock/XD/CZ/MP, and equal to Sig and less than HK, most of the competition wins.

Can't find the article now, but I read an article a few years ago that said that Glock and CZ were the MOST popular competition handguns. That may have changed and opened up to newer guns, but unlikely would open up to an older design like the 92. There MUST be a reason people gravitate to guns that AREN'T the 92... So this isn't just MY bias here...

Here's some evidence I found on the web in a quick search.
http://idpashooting.wordpress.com/2009/02/21/top-10-most-popular-idpa-guns/
Under 5% of IDPA shooting was done with a Beretta 92 in this 2008 compilation, and it barely edged out Caspian and Rock River!

http://www.idpa.com/blog/post/2012/04/20/Glock-and-SW-Make-Up-67-of-IDPA-World-Shoot-Guns.aspx

In the Tactical Journal (Vol. 15, Issue 4) you'll find on pages 26-33 the equipment survey results from the 2011 IDPA World Shoot. Looking at the brands of handguns used by competitors one fact stands out above all else, two manufacturers, Glock and Smith & Wesson, dominate the list.
Click to expand...
Beretta barely make the list here and has 1/2 the representation as Caracal or Predator Tactical!!!!! !!!!???? Beretta comes in at .03% representation, behind Tangfolio with 3-4 times the representation! Tangfolio!!!! Does Caracal, Predator Tactical, or Tangfolio even have any serious military or police contracts in the world?!?! Beretta lost out to Caspian!!! And tied with Chiapatta!!!!! Good lord. Not a good showing for the 92, and that says something in a competition. CZ has tripple the representation and so does Sig.

Despite its decades of service in the US military and police and the world, the 92 FAILS to even make it into the American Rifleman's Top Ten list. 1911 is there at #1, Glock is there at #3, the Browning HP is there, but the Beretta was beaten by the Broomhandle Mauser...
http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/top-10-handguns-2/

The web is filled with evidence that the 92 just isn't the gun that people wish it was. I'm sorry, but it's the truth. Heck, Taurus "improved" it by putting the correct safety on it.

I give the 92 it's credit. It's a veteran of decades of service and heck a better designed product than I will ever make. It is just not the king of handguns anymore and should be retired... It's a mediocre or good gun, just not an overly impressive gun in my mind. Many better guns available.

In summary: It's more expensive than the real competition, has unpopular design features, and is not used by most of the world military and police or competition shooters... so it's not just me. It was my first gun and I have since owned a couple, and may one day own another... but it will never be my intended go to gun nor would I ever pay anything other than a rock bottom price for one...
 
Last edited:
leadcounsel said:
Decocker - Sig or CZ win. The Beretta decocker is in a bad place and operates counter-intuitive and is easy to accidently decock when operating the slide.
External safety - 1911 style like CZ. Beretta is counter intuitive.
Click to expand...

I hear what you are saying about the issues with the 92FS, and most of them are related to the location of the safety and its operation (Walther style) which is backwards to most. I have learned just to not use the safety, or use it just as a decocker, so most of the downside of this pistol, if not all of the downside is mitigated. Remember, this is a service pistol, designed for external holster carry.

In my area Italian made Beretta 92FS's are $550, new in box at dealers. This is well below many of its competitors in its class except for CZ which I have several. New 75B's are $500 locally. Comparing the 92FS next to my CZ-75B, it is a hard choice as to which to pick up. My solution? Both always come to the range with me, and I shoot both about equally well.
 
I give the 92 it's credit. It's a veteran of decades of service and heck a better designed product than I will ever make. It is just not the king of handguns anymore and should be retired... It's a mediocre or good gun, just not an overly impressive gun in my mind. Many better guns available.
Click to expand...

okay your opinion which gun is the "King"?

I dont consider it the king of handguns much less in 9mm. That honor in 9mm goes to one that is 78yrs old IMO. I guess that should have been retired too?
 
leadcounsel wrote,
It's more expensive than the real competition,
Click to expand...
I would say Beretta's real competition is other duty sized metal framed 9MM pistols.

In my neck of the woods the CZ75 and 92FS sell for the same price.

The SIG P226 is a couple of hundred dollars more than either of those two.

The Browning Hi-Power is another hundred or so above the SIG.

Admittedly, the Taurus version of the 92 is a hundred or so less than the Beretta.

I can't think of too many other full size metal framed 9MM's. You really can't cost compare metal framed guns to polymer pistols, because there is such a difference in material and manufacturing costs between the two.
 
leadcounsel said:
For the record, I don't HATE the 92FS. I just believe, from extensive civilian and military experience owning the weapon, carrying the weapon in combat, and shooting the weapon extensively (to include expert qualification repeatedly) that there are better guns, especially for the money.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.

However, the remainder of what you've posted must be taken into context with the OP's opening statement back in Post #1:

Exerpted:

Beretta 92 FS, Any reason not to buy? I have wanted a full size 9m and looked at the 92FS, I liked it. The gripe was fine and really liked the site radius much more then my compact. I wear trifocals and the radius seems to make a big difference, at least that is why I shoot my 1911 and Blackhawk so much better I think At 625.00 +tax any good reason not to buy. Thanks for any input, I have a hard time spending my money. This will be a range gun only.


While I both respect and honor your opinions as to what is and is not a "better gun", none of these things are really germaine to the OP's topic, the pertinant items of which I've put in bold.

He likes the gun, including the grips. The site radius of the 92FS works well with his eyewear, which is very important to him. It's going to be a range gun only and it's selling for $625. With these qualifications, is there any reason he should NOT buy this pistol, as he values the investment of his money very highly?

So, is there anything mechanically wrong with the pistol which would make it a bad investment? And is there anything about the price which would likewise be a problem?

Don't mistake me here...I think giving your opinion on what would be a better gun is important AFTER you've first addressed his concerns.


I love talking guns. But for any given gun, you or I could go on about how this or that is better and easily get side tracked from the initial concern. Ever go to a dealership to look at a new car? Tell the salesman what you want and after giving you a cursory pointing in the general direction of the vehicles you're looking for, he'll immediately start in on all kinds of other stuff you never asked about and really wouldn't care about if the vehicle didn't meet your basic requirements you came to check up on.

:)
 
I've owned probably almost everything at one time or another... Over the years...

Beretta 92s are currently my favorite... I've also owned many of the 92 variants - recently sold them off and am only getting the basic, no railed model now. Balances the best, IMHO.

All have D springs in them... Triggers are very nice because of that (no very heavy DA 1st shot). I love the platform... Even more than 1911s, if you can believe that.

I even sold off an Ed Brown and a 9mm Springfield Custom Shop 1911.

The back and forth over the platform can go on all day. Some guys like to give me grief about the 92s. I don't really care. I have a smile on my face every time I hit the range - and I am reminded each and every range trip why I love the gun so much.

No gun is perfect for everyone - my favorite may not be your fav. Nothing wrong with that...

But, in order to keep with the theme of this thread, I guess I'll say that Berettas suck so much, I just had to get 6, with one more to come (so, I can have my "Beretta Wheel" again :) :) )

6Berettas-text_zpsa1d376ca.gif
 
Last edited:
Beretta 92 FS, Any reason not to buy? I have wanted a full size 9m and looked at the 92FS, I liked it. The gripe was fine and really liked the site radius much more then my compact. I wear trifocals and the radius seems to make a big difference, at least that is why I shoot my 1911 and Blackhawk so much better I think At 625.00 +tax any good reason not to buy. Thanks for any input, I have a hard time spending my money. This will be a range gun only.

While I both respect and honor your opinions as to what is and is not a "better gun", none of these things are really germaine to the OP's topic, the pertinant items of which I've put in bold.
Click to expand...

@RetiredUSNavyChief - ALL of my points go directly to the OPs question.

1. He has poor vision. The Beretta sites are TINY. Other guns have much better sights with the same site radius, about 5". Competition wins.
2. Cost and investment. $625 is far too much for a 92FS. He'd immediately lose from an investment standpoint. You can get these for under $500 online - $470 plus shipping here: http://www.jgsales.com/beretta-92fs...ood-to-very-good-condition,-used.-p-6973.html
3. Cost of other guns. Yesterday I saw a CDNN ad for $500 Sig Sauer 226 and $400 Smith and Wesson M&Ps in near new condition. I can't shout it loud enough. Other guns are similarly priced or cheaper AND better from an objective standpoint, according to THE WORLD of gun shooters, not just me. Just look at the stats of numbers of serious users, from nations to law enforcement to competitors.
4. Comfortable grips are a consideration, but not the entire analysis. A person can learn to adjust to standard grips. I find that Glock grips are average, but the guns are among the best overall.

At the end of the day, it's his money, and it's just a range toy. I have a lot of range toys that are not guns would not be 'go to' guns but would serve in an emergency if nothing else was available, and that is where I would personally place the 92FS.

We're all on the same team here, we all love guns and love talking guns. My advice is NOT meant to offend, but just to share my opinion and experience and help steer a guy in the right direction.
 
Last edited:
Thanks to every one who has posted, really did not mean to cause a debate, but it has been helpful. I think I will go up towards Seattle in the morning ( man I hate that drive ) to a larger store and take a look at the beretta, sig 226, maybe a Glock 17 or what they have. It will be busy as the Ruger Rep is going to be there with free range time and ammo to try out there guns.
I just finished loading 45ACP and switching over to 9m, would sure be nice to have the new gun and make sure my OAL will work on a new gun before loading 6 or 8 hundred.
For now, time to open a beer and start the BBQ while the sun is out and not raining.
Thanks again.
 
The bad thing about those DA/SA pistols is that they suck. It's pretty funny. Just go squirrel hunting with someone with a Browning Hi-Power and you'll throw it in the creek.
 
Long trigger pull

I have a 92fs that I enjoy shooting. The only problem, and I don't know if this really qualifies as a problem, is that it has a much longer trigger pull than any of my other guns. Yesterday I was shooting a variety of guns (glock, ruger, CZ, and Smith) and the only trigger that really threw me off was the Beretta. It isn't bad, it is just very different. If that is something that might bother you, you might consider it.
 
I have owned 3 Beretta 92's and one Taurus 92. Out of the four total guns I only had problems with one. The third Beretta(fixed sights) I bought shot low and left 7"+ at 15 yards. It was sent back to Beretta and a month and a half later I got it back. It shot fine then. The barrel was replaced and unsure what other work was done. The only flaw I had was I owned the pistol less than two weeks and was either going to have to pay shipping g back to them of drive 35miles to the gun store I bought it t and have the, return it. I opted for the latter as I needed the owner to shoot it to talk to the beretta rep. Beretta for almost a week did not want to admit that there could be a problem with the pistol. They kept using "shooters error". I included a note with the gun. I did get an appology note when it was returned. They are great pistols.either you like them or you don't. I have no problem with them ,but have moved on to Hk's and Sig's. They are very reliable, and tough as nails.
 
I think if a manufacturer ever pushed a "shooter error" excuse on me, after I had wrung out a pistol and found it defective, I would have cussed them out on the phone, and said either check the gun out or shut the **** up. For a maker to assume they didn't error, and infer that the CUSTOMER was wrong, is totally out of line UNTIL they check it out. I like my Beretta, but customer service and PROFESSIONALISM is another matter. Beretta, are you reading this?
 
That was the only reason I switched to Sig... I won't bad mouth the 92 at all. Even the one that I bought that had issues, every manufacturer makes mistakes. I just swore off the company after my bad experience. They make fine weapons. What really irked me was the Beretta rep I had spoken with (I think his name was Mike, bear with me it has been almost 10 years) still didn't want to do a return on it until the owner of the gun store (licensed Beretta dealer) called and told them about his experience shooting the pistol. That was why I brought it back to him, he shot 4-5 different types of ammo and all performed equally horrible. After that Beretta had no issues doing a return and repair on the pistol. When I received it back, I sold it and the other one I had and never looked back.

But please know it might just have been that CS guy. I still swear they make great firearms. I just will not do business with them anymore.
 
Well I bought the Beretta 539.00+ tax, I shall see if it was a mistake. Did not like the Glock 17 at all, the grip was just off for me and really, not a nice looking pistol (sorry Glock fans, we all see things differently ) The CZ 75 B was ok, I like CZ's, but just didn't feel right. The only model Sig 226 they had was more expensive then the standard and I really don't need a threaded barrel, just was not worth 300.00 more for a range gun for me.
The place was packed with the Ruger demo going on today. I got there 10 minutes before opening and a line was 30 deep. This place is the most stocked and lowest prices in the area, Lots of AR's with M&Ps starting at 699.00.
God, I wish I was rich or didn't care about my savings but being retired I never know when I might need it, Plus, would like to leave my daughter something other then a house.
Thanks again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

O
  • Locked
My first Beretta 92...
2
Replies
25
Views
3K
benderx4
B
W
  • Locked
Is there a reason not to buy a Beretta
2 3
Replies
56
Views
3K
Scratchshooter40
S
T
  • Locked
Beretta 92 upgrades
Replies
24
Views
6K
peashooter
P
G
  • Locked
Beretta 92/96 conversion
Replies
5
Views
2K
rklessdriver
R
J
  • Locked
ati beretta 92 clone
Replies
0
Views
558
jeepguy
J
Back
Top