This pops up all the time and it really isn't warranted. There are three plastic parts on newer production 92s: the guide rod and the two grip panels. The other parts in question are simply plastic coated or plastic filler over steel. Touch a magnet to them and you'll see.
Beretta 92 is it all that
- Thread starter f4t9r
- Start date
- Status
This pops up all the time and it really isn't warranted. There are three plastic parts on newer production 92s: the guide rod and the two grip panels. The other parts in question are simply plastic coated or plastic filler over steel. Touch a magnet to them and you'll see.
The Beretta 92/96 was my first encounter with a pistol that didn't feel great in my hand, but which shot great from the holster during qualification. I found the Beretta to have a smoothness of operation and recovery unmatched by any gun I've shot other than the H&K P9S. It's accuracy was outstanding, it has a huge ejection post, is easy to reload and has outstanding reliability.
My research has shown that the major complaint of military issued M9s can be traced to the issued (non-factory) magazines
My research has shown that the major complaint of military issued M9s can be traced to the issued (non-factory) magazines
bubbinator
Member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2008
- Messages
- 88
Bereta 92 is it all that
Not! My 20yr AF Leo background was with the M15 S&W 38 and as I retired they switched to the M92. New giuys were not confident. I tranisitioned to state LEO job, was issued a S&W M66 2.5". Not satisfied I got a Taurus PT92AF. It was nickle(Faux SS? not non-rusting), had adjustable sights and every qual I shot was 100%! Itfit most M92 holsters(Galco Miami rig had issues with the Taurus Ambi safety(BTW another +). Posting now-Some 9mm has returned to my CCW options-Browning HP, Kel-Tec 9mm with WW Ranger 127+P+. As a CCW platform- a 1911 5" is a lot better option-same size, wide frame options with tons of energy availavable over the 9mm frame.
Not! My 20yr AF Leo background was with the M15 S&W 38 and as I retired they switched to the M92. New giuys were not confident. I tranisitioned to state LEO job, was issued a S&W M66 2.5". Not satisfied I got a Taurus PT92AF. It was nickle(Faux SS? not non-rusting), had adjustable sights and every qual I shot was 100%! Itfit most M92 holsters(Galco Miami rig had issues with the Taurus Ambi safety(BTW another +). Posting now-Some 9mm has returned to my CCW options-Browning HP, Kel-Tec 9mm with WW Ranger 127+P+. As a CCW platform- a 1911 5" is a lot better option-same size, wide frame options with tons of energy availavable over the 9mm frame.
MachIVshooter
Member
The 92 is a superb handgun. Accurate, reliable, good looking. I love mine.
That said, the S&W 5906 is a superior firearm. Nice aesthetics, equally reliable and accurate, but more ergonomic and definitely stronger. If I had to choose between them, it would be a no-brainer. YMMV.
That said, the S&W 5906 is a superior firearm. Nice aesthetics, equally reliable and accurate, but more ergonomic and definitely stronger. If I had to choose between them, it would be a no-brainer. YMMV.
I love my 92FS - large but not real heavy, REALLY accurate, REALLY soft recoil, I have the Inox verison. Looks great. Was put through test by the Army once: 11 shooters firing the weapon - result: 168,000 shots with no stoppages of any kind. Test stopped at that point.
Met a Vietnam and Iraq combat veteran at the range. He claimed the military issue magazines were poor and caused misfeeds. He got Beretta to send him Beretta factory magazines and all was well with his military issue M92 after that.
He liked the Beretta so much he bought one when he came back, had it engraved with his name and other things, I got to handle it at the range.
For me, the gun is big for my short fingers. I never cared for 9mm, the adoption of that caliber was for standardization of ammunition with NATO, a political decision, and a poor decision.
He liked the Beretta so much he bought one when he came back, had it engraved with his name and other things, I got to handle it at the range.
For me, the gun is big for my short fingers. I never cared for 9mm, the adoption of that caliber was for standardization of ammunition with NATO, a political decision, and a poor decision.
Madcap_Magician
Member
The M9/92 is a fine pistol. The military has a certain disdain for it in large part due to our being forced to use it with hardball ammunition, which in 9mm is obviously a notoriously poor stopper. That's the arrow, not the bow.
I've never had a malfunction with one I've shot, and it was accurate, light-recoiling, and ergonomic.
I've never had a malfunction with one I've shot, and it was accurate, light-recoiling, and ergonomic.
mljdeckard
Member
It is a very bulky pistol, and its design is such that it can't be chambered in .45. A friend recently asked me about it, and he decided not to get it because he wanted a gun his wife could also use, and she has very small hands. It would be difficult for her to work the safety with her strong hand. It has a good single-action trigger, and it consistently drops back on target between shots.
I am a 1911 guy, and I didn't like my issued M-9, but as a civilian, you probably won't put yours through the abuse and neglect mine had seen.
I am a 1911 guy, and I didn't like my issued M-9, but as a civilian, you probably won't put yours through the abuse and neglect mine had seen.
I was in the 10th mountain in the late 80's.I heard very few complaints about the 92FS's.At the time i had little experience with shooting one until i bought a M9 recently;and i love it.It shoots better than my glock but about on par with my XD45.Is it heavy for a handgun?sure.Do i plan on taking in on a road march 30 miles out?NO.
It gets good reviews because its a good gun.I dont care if some grunt in the 101st airborne or a marine in the 1st battalion doesnt like.I like it because it works and looks good.There are tons of good handguns and im glad to have one of them.I rest my case.
It gets good reviews because its a good gun.I dont care if some grunt in the 101st airborne or a marine in the 1st battalion doesnt like.I like it because it works and looks good.There are tons of good handguns and im glad to have one of them.I rest my case.
I owned a 92f when it first came to the US. Mine was made in Italy and was a very well built and reliable firearm. Also, came with the synthetic and walnut grips. The Walnut grips were beautiful.
Here's what I didn't like about it...
Too damn big for a 9mm (or 40 for that matter) - so, concealed carry out of the question for me.
I had the F model and didn't like the non-intuitive (to me) external safety (up is fire).
If you are looking for a range toy that can double effectively for reliable home defense, I'd say get it.
If you are looking for a pistol that needs to be an all-rounder, then you would be better served with a Glock 19 or something similar.
Here's what I didn't like about it...
Too damn big for a 9mm (or 40 for that matter) - so, concealed carry out of the question for me.
I had the F model and didn't like the non-intuitive (to me) external safety (up is fire).
If you are looking for a range toy that can double effectively for reliable home defense, I'd say get it.
If you are looking for a pistol that needs to be an all-rounder, then you would be better served with a Glock 19 or something similar.
kmrcstintn
Member
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2006
- Messages
- 1,236
I have had a Beretta 92 or M9 commercial variant in my collection in one iteration or another for the last 7 or so years; it is my favorite 9mm semiautomatic handgun; on a sidebar...I am purchasing a KelTec Sub 2000 carbine in 9mm and I am getting the model that accepts Beretta 92 mags to mate with my current 92 in Inox finish
Nakanokalronin
Member
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2008
- Messages
- 354
My favorite handgun to shot and use for defense is the 1911. My second is the Beretta 92 series and although its a double stack 9mm with a DA/SA trigger, I've come to appreciate and shoot them just as well as my 1911s.
Instead of posting a bunch of Beretta pictures, I'll post a picture of my favorite.
Instead of posting a bunch of Beretta pictures, I'll post a picture of my favorite.
Confederate
Member
The Beretta 92 is a fabulous pistol and was the first ultra-reliable pistol to hit the market. Beretta engineers designed the gun so it wouldn't have an ejector port for the cases to catch on. The chambering also was designed so that the cartridge would load straight into the gun without a large ramp. And it's an easy gun to clear if per chance it did jam. In the first military trials it averaged one malfunction each 2,000 rounds, which is great.
Second place was the Smith & Wesson 459, which malfunctioned on an average of once every 952 rounds (still better than any out of the box Colt). Then the Sigs hit the market and that was that! Later, Glocks came along and then the polymer gun craze began.
I still love the Beretta, though I think the military models had problems with slide separation. I met the guy who was in charge of Navy/Marine acquisition at the Naval Sea Systems Command, where I worked several years. He was so angered at Beretta that he said the guns should come with tweezers and a first aid kit, so that when it failed, you could remove the parts that hit your face! He said the guns they tested could fail any time after 5,000 rounds. They examined the frames with high tech microscopes and he said it was impossible to predict which guns would fail. There were no hairline fractures that could give away the failures. Beretta finally fixed the problem and I haven't heard of any military or civilian failures.
My choice would be a Taurus 92 stainless. I got one in a trade and it's an astounding shooter. I even got a Beretta air pistol, which is fun.
My favorite 9mm is a S&W 659. It's heavy, but I love it. They couldn't build guns like that for under a grand nowadays. With the holster I have, I could carry the thing all day long.
I like showing friends my Taurus and my Beretta air pistol. This is the
only Taurus I'd recommend as I'm not a big fan of their revolvers. The
Taurus shown has a 20-round clip installed.
.
Second place was the Smith & Wesson 459, which malfunctioned on an average of once every 952 rounds (still better than any out of the box Colt). Then the Sigs hit the market and that was that! Later, Glocks came along and then the polymer gun craze began.
I still love the Beretta, though I think the military models had problems with slide separation. I met the guy who was in charge of Navy/Marine acquisition at the Naval Sea Systems Command, where I worked several years. He was so angered at Beretta that he said the guns should come with tweezers and a first aid kit, so that when it failed, you could remove the parts that hit your face! He said the guns they tested could fail any time after 5,000 rounds. They examined the frames with high tech microscopes and he said it was impossible to predict which guns would fail. There were no hairline fractures that could give away the failures. Beretta finally fixed the problem and I haven't heard of any military or civilian failures.
My choice would be a Taurus 92 stainless. I got one in a trade and it's an astounding shooter. I even got a Beretta air pistol, which is fun.
My favorite 9mm is a S&W 659. It's heavy, but I love it. They couldn't build guns like that for under a grand nowadays. With the holster I have, I could carry the thing all day long.
I like showing friends my Taurus and my Beretta air pistol. This is the
only Taurus I'd recommend as I'm not a big fan of their revolvers. The
Taurus shown has a 20-round clip installed.
.
It's amazing that one of the biggest flaws about the 92 - that gets repeated over and over again occurred like 25 years ago. Geeze...
All the sig fans seem to forget all the cracked frames that sig had an issue with for a little while in the eighties...
Does it matter NOW?
No, it doesn't.
All the sig fans seem to forget all the cracked frames that sig had an issue with for a little while in the eighties...
Does it matter NOW?
No, it doesn't.
Confederate
Member
Yes, but I said Beretta fixed the problem.
That said, the company's reaction to the problem was hardly stellar! When it's .32 Tomcat began having cracked frames, Beretta completely denied there was a problem. As far as I know, the Tomcat problem still hasn't been fixed. The company was trading INOX versions to people who had cracked frames the last I heard.
That said, the company's reaction to the problem was hardly stellar! When it's .32 Tomcat began having cracked frames, Beretta completely denied there was a problem. As far as I know, the Tomcat problem still hasn't been fixed. The company was trading INOX versions to people who had cracked frames the last I heard.
Wanderling
Member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2011
- Messages
- 923
My uneducated, inexperienced opinion based on putting about 100 rds of ammo through a friend's 92FS back in August:
+ It's a BEAUTIFUL gun. Beautiful. If it were a girl I'd propose on the spot
+ It's accurate* and doesn't have much felt recoil (*see below)
+ It seems to be put together very well, and cycles very smoothly.
- It's waaaay too heavy for being a 9mm.
- The grip was too wide for my hands. I have Glock 17 and the grip is not as comfortable as some other guns I held and shot, however it's not uncomfortable either, and I was able to shoot it accurately on day one. With 92fs, however, I was not as accurate and I seemed to "mind" the grip width all the time. My friend, who has huge hands, didn't have a problem with it though.
Honestly, my very subjective choice would be to go with one of the "plastic fantastic" 9mm guns, or for all steel go with CZ75B. A disclaimer - I salivated over its photos on the net but never actually shot one. However it's just as beautiful in my opinion, has a stellar reputation, more comfortable grip, and is cheaper too. An objective opinion - if you try the Beretta and like it, go for it.
+ It's a BEAUTIFUL gun. Beautiful. If it were a girl I'd propose on the spot
+ It's accurate* and doesn't have much felt recoil (*see below)
+ It seems to be put together very well, and cycles very smoothly.
- It's waaaay too heavy for being a 9mm.
- The grip was too wide for my hands. I have Glock 17 and the grip is not as comfortable as some other guns I held and shot, however it's not uncomfortable either, and I was able to shoot it accurately on day one. With 92fs, however, I was not as accurate and I seemed to "mind" the grip width all the time. My friend, who has huge hands, didn't have a problem with it though.
Honestly, my very subjective choice would be to go with one of the "plastic fantastic" 9mm guns, or for all steel go with CZ75B. A disclaimer - I salivated over its photos on the net but never actually shot one. However it's just as beautiful in my opinion, has a stellar reputation, more comfortable grip, and is cheaper too. An objective opinion - if you try the Beretta and like it, go for it.
If you don't have small girl hands then the grip is 2nd to none, put a $15 dollar houge wrap around grip on and u will be amazed. A 5" barrel is as good as factory gets with accuracy out of pistols.
as for the army guys who hate it most who say this are not officers and were never issued one. I've talked to several who trust their life to it. They bought these from Italy vs. boosting our own economy with a US gun maker. So yea nuff said.
I love people who argue accuracy, every gun has a Moa, that's how accurate it is, the rest is ur dumb azz screwing it up.
as for the army guys who hate it most who say this are not officers and were never issued one. I've talked to several who trust their life to it. They bought these from Italy vs. boosting our own economy with a US gun maker. So yea nuff said.
I love people who argue accuracy, every gun has a Moa, that's how accurate it is, the rest is ur dumb azz screwing it up.
Last edited:
Agreed, if u want an ugly plastic glock go for it. throw it In The mud, run it over... Who care who the hell is ever in that situation where ther pistol is that abused, most don't even have scratches
the beretta is one of the most accurate factory pistols ever made. It rivals 357 revolvers with 6" barrels at 50 yards. Do that with ur glock
the beretta is one of the most accurate factory pistols ever made. It rivals 357 revolvers with 6" barrels at 50 yards. Do that with ur glock
Don't get me wrong flocks are great guns, but beretta 92's are better. personally striker fire pistils are horrible for my accuracy it's like a improved double action. single action is the only way to go, the more lbs. ur trigger pull, the more your barrel gets pulled off target.
Have one and like it. Won't carry it as it is way too big for the caliber. Does shoot anything I put in the magazine (any 9 P that I load), even stuff my 39, Kahr, and Glock don't like (and there isn't much the Glock don't like.
If I'm carrying anything that big it will be my Kimber pro carry.
If I'm carrying anything that big it will be my Kimber pro carry.
Now a glock 17l with a nice long Barrel and a light trigger is ideal for me! And adjustable match grade sights are the only way to go, much more accurate, every one shoots diifferent, one guy will shoot high right, the other will shoot low left, so adjusting ur trigger is crucial, instead of holding off. FYI, I'd u are shooting Off, it is most likly your grip and your trigger pull pulling the gun off target? always pull the trigger straight back, pulling it back with ur finger slightly pulling towards u will usually cause u to go high right, and pulling left on the trigger usually goes low left. practice your trigger pull ALOT I. Dry fire, this will improve your accuracy hugely. watch the sights when your hammer releases, this is when most guns go off target, I. That super small amount of time your gun twitches with poor grip and trigger pull techniques. Follow these steps and u will I prove your groups at 25 yards.
Last edited:
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
Pray tell, then how do you get past that horrible, hard, gritty, long DA first shot?
And what competitions is the Beretta coming in second to the 1911?
A good 25 yard group is the size of a cantalope, roughly 5-9" in diameter. Not saying u can't do better, but most can't eVen do a basketball size group. now at 50 yards if you can shoot a basketball size group u are doing great. Off the bench my friend shoots is 92fs in cantalope size groups, which is excellent for a pistol, and rivals his 6" 357 revolver. Whe also shoot at 100 and 200 Yards, and beleive it or not whe only have to aim the beretta a couple feet high, and we can hit the 3' diameter gong, although he hit a gateraid bottle With his 357' he wasn't able to duplicate the shot, which proves it may have been luck
- Status