SwampWolf
Member
At least one thing the Beretta has over the Taurus equivalent is resale value. It will always fetch a higher return than the Taurus-and maybe for no good reason other than the "name". That's just how it is.
Beretta 92
- Thread starter KJS
- Start date
- Status
I have a taurus PT92AR and have put a few hundred rounds through a beretta as well. From the factory the berreta has a nicer feel, I replaced the plastic grips on my taurus with a set from hogue that were less than $15 IIRC, and its got the same great feel as a beretta now.
I also replaced the rear sight with an adjustable. It always shot low from the factory which was my only real complaint about the gun, and was easily fixed.
As for reliability, I've never had an issue with it. Probably approaching 3000 rounds through the gun, think I've replaced the recoil spring 2 times and that is the only work I've done. I should add that its not a carry gun, and I have several other choices for home defense so I don't religiously clean the thing. I recently used it when I took a CCW course and when we went out on the range, out of 12 of us, only 3 of us made it through 75 rounds without a malfunction. Me, and 2 guys shooting brand new Sigs. There were glock,ruger, keltec,colt and a few others all represented. I'm sure that alot was user error, but the fact remains that my taurus ran flawlessly. I had to laugh too because we stopped at 75 rounds of shooting because the instructor said "its getting late and these guns are getting really dirty, they're going to need cleaned or we will just have more problems". Like I said, my taurus isn't my go to gun and doesn't get cleaned religiously. I STARTED the course about 150 rounds past a cleaning and didn't have a bit of trouble.
I also replaced the rear sight with an adjustable. It always shot low from the factory which was my only real complaint about the gun, and was easily fixed.
As for reliability, I've never had an issue with it. Probably approaching 3000 rounds through the gun, think I've replaced the recoil spring 2 times and that is the only work I've done. I should add that its not a carry gun, and I have several other choices for home defense so I don't religiously clean the thing. I recently used it when I took a CCW course and when we went out on the range, out of 12 of us, only 3 of us made it through 75 rounds without a malfunction. Me, and 2 guys shooting brand new Sigs. There were glock,ruger, keltec,colt and a few others all represented. I'm sure that alot was user error, but the fact remains that my taurus ran flawlessly. I had to laugh too because we stopped at 75 rounds of shooting because the instructor said "its getting late and these guns are getting really dirty, they're going to need cleaned or we will just have more problems". Like I said, my taurus isn't my go to gun and doesn't get cleaned religiously. I STARTED the course about 150 rounds past a cleaning and didn't have a bit of trouble.
ohioshooter
Member
I have a 92fs and although it fits my hand perfectly and by far the best fitted gun I have I don't carry it. I switch between a Glock 19 and a Kimber Crimson Carry. The Kimber will probably become my full time carry gun if I get the Grand Raptor II soon.
benderx4
Member
Love my Berettas! One of the finest overall 9mms EVER made. Here's one of mine:
(Taurus isn't the only one with a frame mounted safety!)
(Taurus isn't the only one with a frame mounted safety!)
tnstr8shooter
Member
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2008
- Messages
- 4
The Beretta 92FS was my first handgun purchase many moons ago and I still have it. Short of utter destitution (is that a word?) I will never get rid of it.
I used it to qualify for my HCP and let one of the guys in the class use it. We both did great and he loved the gun too. My wife recently completed her HCP class using the same gun and also loaned it to another lady. My wife shot a perfect card; I don't know how the other lady did, but I do know she passed the class. Now the other lady has decided that the Beretta is the gun she wants to buy, despite the considerable size. The gun has been 100% reliable; I've never had a FTF, FTE, or any other problem, and I know I have limp-wristed it more than once.
I think the appeal to all of us has been that the gun is well balanced, has very little recoil, and looks great to boot. Also all of us have fairly large hands, so the size of the gun has never been a problem. I have recommended it as a first gun purchase several times, and I don't think you can go wrong making it your first semi purchase.
Let us know how your rental goes.
Darren
I used it to qualify for my HCP and let one of the guys in the class use it. We both did great and he loved the gun too. My wife recently completed her HCP class using the same gun and also loaned it to another lady. My wife shot a perfect card; I don't know how the other lady did, but I do know she passed the class. Now the other lady has decided that the Beretta is the gun she wants to buy, despite the considerable size. The gun has been 100% reliable; I've never had a FTF, FTE, or any other problem, and I know I have limp-wristed it more than once.
I think the appeal to all of us has been that the gun is well balanced, has very little recoil, and looks great to boot. Also all of us have fairly large hands, so the size of the gun has never been a problem. I have recommended it as a first gun purchase several times, and I don't think you can go wrong making it your first semi purchase.
Let us know how your rental goes.
Darren
Last edited:
DFW1911
Member
Mine have been outstanding, both in 9mm and .40 S&W. I wouldn't hesitate to buy another one.
My(2)Cents
Member
The 92 is a service pistol, its ment to take a beating and keep shooting. If you want a pistol that will be reliable then you got it. accurisy on the other hand is not the best but it'll do. The fact that the military uses it doesn't mean anything they only switched to it because it fires the nato round and they got the lowest bid. It also has a thick grip (that's what she said) so if you don't have big hands then I wouldn't recomend it.
A lot of people down the 92 but I say if it works in your hand and you can hit black down range with it then go for it.
A lot of people down the 92 but I say if it works in your hand and you can hit black down range with it then go for it.
My brother has a 92 he bought new over twenty years ago. He likes it a lot, never a problem with it. I've shot it a number of times, and while it may feel a tad large in my hands, it's very comfortable to shoot, and I group as small with it as anything I've shot. It's a time-tested classic, everyone should probably own one.
Les
Les
IdahoLT1
Member
benderx4, i envy you. Ive been looking for a Steel-I for quite some time. About the closest thing ive found is a stainles Vertec.
benderx4
Member
Thank you sir! Took me two years to find one, and when I did, it was totally by accident. And then wouldn't you know it, after finding the Steel I, I found a Billy less than a month later. Go figure.
Confederate
Member
The Beretta 92 was the first of the ultra-reliables to hit the market. It was quickly followed by the S&W 459/559/659 and Sig Saur 9mm and .45. Until these guns hit the market, the Browning High Standard was about the most reliable, but it wasn't an ultra-reliable.
In the early military trials, the S&W 9mms had a malfunction average of once every 952 rounds. That's great, but the Beretta had a malfuntion average of once every 2,000 rounds. No Colt 1911 without extensive work could even approach that. (I still see 1911s jamming on ranges and many of them are expensive--much more so than more moden designs.) Until the Beretta 92 hit the market, most police departments still used revolvers. It was only after the new designs hit the market that autos really stopped jamming enough to be totally dependable.
Berettas are now only one brand of many that work. Their magazines have horrible springs that lose thei spring easily, but the gun is still so dependable that it will always have a following. In combat, no one in their right mind would want a 1911 Colt over a Beretta, and it's not a caliber issue at all. (Even if I wanted a .45, it would be a Glock or something.)
The only thing I'm still not sure of with the Beretta is its longevity. Perhaps others can address that.
In the early military trials, the S&W 9mms had a malfunction average of once every 952 rounds. That's great, but the Beretta had a malfuntion average of once every 2,000 rounds. No Colt 1911 without extensive work could even approach that. (I still see 1911s jamming on ranges and many of them are expensive--much more so than more moden designs.) Until the Beretta 92 hit the market, most police departments still used revolvers. It was only after the new designs hit the market that autos really stopped jamming enough to be totally dependable.
Berettas are now only one brand of many that work. Their magazines have horrible springs that lose thei spring easily, but the gun is still so dependable that it will always have a following. In combat, no one in their right mind would want a 1911 Colt over a Beretta, and it's not a caliber issue at all. (Even if I wanted a .45, it would be a Glock or something.)
The only thing I'm still not sure of with the Beretta is its longevity. Perhaps others can address that.
Personally, I don't have any complaints against the Beretta 92FS/M9. I've heard it criticized for being over sized for a 9mm, and of course, lots of criticism of the 9mm round itself; but I've never heard anyone criticize it as unreliable. In fact, the only time I've heard it's reliability mentioned was in praise of the M9.
I've never had an M9 jam on me at a range, the only place I've fired one, thank God. I bought a 92FS because it was relatively cheap, 9mm is cheaper than practicing with my 1911, and I do like the pistol. It's not beautiful, but it's not Glock ugly either. I have no complaints with my 92FS either; about 1,200 rounds later, still no jams firing everything from Brown Bear to PMC (granted it's never fired more than 150 rounds or so between good cleanings).
The only real complaint I might have is with the mags, but it does depend on what company you buy them from [in terms of reliability]. I still don't understand why they're $30 a piece, when 20 round M14 mags are $30 or a little less and Sig 1911 mags can be had for $13 ...
I've never had an M9 jam on me at a range, the only place I've fired one, thank God. I bought a 92FS because it was relatively cheap, 9mm is cheaper than practicing with my 1911, and I do like the pistol. It's not beautiful, but it's not Glock ugly either. I have no complaints with my 92FS either; about 1,200 rounds later, still no jams firing everything from Brown Bear to PMC (granted it's never fired more than 150 rounds or so between good cleanings).
The only real complaint I might have is with the mags, but it does depend on what company you buy them from [in terms of reliability]. I still don't understand why they're $30 a piece, when 20 round M14 mags are $30 or a little less and Sig 1911 mags can be had for $13 ...
BERETTA fan
I personally like and carry the BERETTA 92 and 96. The 96D Brigadier was my agency issue gun for about 10 years. The only problem was the weight and we beat them to a pulp. We used the 155 gr. JHP ammo at 1200 fps. It never failed in the field and no one who has complained about the reliability or accuracy of the guns, only their size and weight.
Using the 155 grain load, it hit with the power we had been used too with the former .357 magnum 125 grain JHP load.
I still shoot the BERETTA for fun, use it for self defense in the house or when I am traveling.
If you go for a .40 S&W caliber, I highly recommend that you get a Brigadier model with the stonger slide (it has a built up area around the locking lug cuts). If not, stick with the milder 180 grain ammo.
I would pass on the 180 grain .40 S&W loads. They do not seem to do anything that the 9m.m. +p and +p+ load cannot do with a larger ammo capacity.
For a concealed gun, the 92/96 is a bit large, like a full size 1911. Even the compact 92 13 and 8 shot models are still fairly large. They are a bit lighter and I like to carry my 8 shot 92 CDM model when I go for a walk at night.
Right now, if you are willing to go with a double action only gun, you can get a really good price on a 92 or 96. I just bought a 96D Vertec model for $425.00 as it was double action only.
Along with the smaller grip, it adds a light rail which I wanted for a house gun.
The BERETTA has the best double action only trigger I have tried and sold me on the double action only trigger system. It is as smooth as a well tuned revolver trigger.
Jim
I personally like and carry the BERETTA 92 and 96. The 96D Brigadier was my agency issue gun for about 10 years. The only problem was the weight and we beat them to a pulp. We used the 155 gr. JHP ammo at 1200 fps. It never failed in the field and no one who has complained about the reliability or accuracy of the guns, only their size and weight.
Using the 155 grain load, it hit with the power we had been used too with the former .357 magnum 125 grain JHP load.
I still shoot the BERETTA for fun, use it for self defense in the house or when I am traveling.
If you go for a .40 S&W caliber, I highly recommend that you get a Brigadier model with the stonger slide (it has a built up area around the locking lug cuts). If not, stick with the milder 180 grain ammo.
I would pass on the 180 grain .40 S&W loads. They do not seem to do anything that the 9m.m. +p and +p+ load cannot do with a larger ammo capacity.
For a concealed gun, the 92/96 is a bit large, like a full size 1911. Even the compact 92 13 and 8 shot models are still fairly large. They are a bit lighter and I like to carry my 8 shot 92 CDM model when I go for a walk at night.
Right now, if you are willing to go with a double action only gun, you can get a really good price on a 92 or 96. I just bought a 96D Vertec model for $425.00 as it was double action only.
Along with the smaller grip, it adds a light rail which I wanted for a house gun.
The BERETTA has the best double action only trigger I have tried and sold me on the double action only trigger system. It is as smooth as a well tuned revolver trigger.
Jim
blue german
Member
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2009
- Messages
- 32
Avenger 29
Beretta did produce a 92 model with the frame-mounted safety (much like the 1911). I know, I own one. This is the ORIGINAL Beretta model 92. They seem to show uip from time to time,
even though they can be as much as 34 years old (mine is marked as having been proofed in 1989). There is even an updated 92 with the frame mounted safety (called 92 STOCK).
Take a search thru Gunbroker or some other site....or search Google. There are a number of these older Berettas up for sale now.
Beretta did produce a 92 model with the frame-mounted safety (much like the 1911). I know, I own one. This is the ORIGINAL Beretta model 92. They seem to show uip from time to time,
even though they can be as much as 34 years old (mine is marked as having been proofed in 1989). There is even an updated 92 with the frame mounted safety (called 92 STOCK).
Take a search thru Gunbroker or some other site....or search Google. There are a number of these older Berettas up for sale now.
sfc_mark
Member
They got the contract because the Army wanted to switch to 9mm and the Berettas went an average of 18,000 rounds between malfunctions. None of the others tested came close. When a pissed off New England Senator called foul on awarding the contract to a foreign company, they opened the trials again with a few more competitors...the Beretta still far outclassed all the competition.
When the Army tested the M9A1 for the Marines a couple of years ago (the Army does all small arms trials for DOD), they got an average of 20,000 rounds between malfunctions.
Taurus_9mm
Member
I really love my Taurus PT92 and have a few thousand rounds through it now. I would like to add a Beretta 92FS at some point as well though, and if it's an INOX, all the better. 
KJS
Member
Yeah, I see that grip size always comes up when this model is discussed. When I rented a Beretta 92 last fall the grip certainly was quite large compared to any other grip I had ever felt. A guy working at that gun shop showed me another Beretta model that he personally preferred due to it having a smaller grip size. I held up one of my XL paws and asked what he thought. He didn't think a big grip would be any problem for my big hands.
I too have found the "it's big & bulky" complaint to be another very common one. Certainly, if one was looking for a concealed weapon, this isn't the 9mm one would select unless they were in Alaska wearing a parka year round.
I would only expect to fire it at targets. There is always the very small chance that a bad guy could get shot if he decided to break in, but it would really be recreational with defense as only a secondary use.
After renting a Glock 22 earlier this month I discovered that lighter doesn't automatically equally better. I'm a novice shooter, but at last my targets don't look totally embarrassing with relatively heavy steel frame revolvers. That Glock chambered in .40 S&W even had a laser mounted on it and still my shots were terrible. I found that light guns really like to jump around a lot. That same day I rented an S&W 629 with 6.5" barrel. Despite the hard kick of a .44 Mag I was able to hit my target the same as I can with a .357 or .38.
That suggested to me that more more weight & size isn't always a bad thing. And, like one comment above, I too would say a Beretta 92 has more style than a Glock that, while very practical & reliable I'm sure, looks like a block of plastic totally lacking in style.
KJS
Member
Being a newbie, I'm forced to ask what INOX means?
Why would you add a Beretta 92FS if you already have the Taurus version of it that you really love? Can I assume you just love collecting guns? Reminds me of one pic I saw on this board where a guy displayed his entire collection of S&W revolvers on his dining room table. I didn't even try to count, but there were certainly more than 50 of them -- and who knows how many other revolvers he had by other makers and how many autoloaders & long guns he might have had. In S&W revolvers alone he had enough to shoot a different one each week, kind of like how women collect shoes.
the INOX is the stainless steel version.
I don't own a Beretta or Taurus 92, but I have shot the Taurus. First time shooting it, I made one ragged hole at 15 yards. The balance was excellent. While people complain about its weight, the weight makes it very easy to shoot accurately at a decent pace. The trigger was also very nice. Can't go wrong.
Choosing one over the other-I'd get the Beretta. No specific reason... Just because.
I don't own a Beretta or Taurus 92, but I have shot the Taurus. First time shooting it, I made one ragged hole at 15 yards. The balance was excellent. While people complain about its weight, the weight makes it very easy to shoot accurately at a decent pace. The trigger was also very nice. Can't go wrong.
Choosing one over the other-I'd get the Beretta. No specific reason... Just because.
KJS
Member
It's odd how many will complain about weight in a 9mm, yet I bet many of them have a .22 pistol with a bull barrel that weighs more than most 9mm guns.
Renting a Beretta 92 was the first, and thus far only, time I've fired 9mm. I was quite surprised by how much kick that little round has. I was clearly biased by those who criticize it for lack of stopping power. These would generally be the folks who think .45 ACP is the ultimate defensive handgun caliber and who often think 1911s were handed down by the god of guns to fire .45s.
(Renting a 1911 is on my to do list, since I surely must try this iconic gun that served the US military for 75 years and which American Rifleman put as #1 on their list of the top 10 handguns of all time. The president of Beretta wrote the NRA and asked why his M9/92FS wasn't in their top 10 after a quarter century of US military use, getting that gun a cover story the next month.)
Jenrick
Member
KJS, you'll probably find a .45 kick less then a lot of guns do in .40 S&W.
Back to Berettas, I picked up a 92FS to have to use when instructing DOD personnel on the range. I'd shot one a few times before this and found them to be good guns in general. The main things it has going for it over most other pistols:
Long sight radius is standard, sure a 5" 1911 or G24 have a longer sight radius, but compared to other service pistols it's got them beat.
Open top slide. It's next to impossible to get a stove pipe or FTE with them, and even if you do it's stupidly easy to clear.
Continual evolution. Not too many pistols are as well used/tested in training and in combat as the Beretta. The M9 has continued to evolve due to this usage.
It is a large gun and if you have short fingers the trigger reach can be long. I'm glad I picked one up, and it's certainly a fun gun to shoot. Far as relieability goes, I've got my G34 up to about 40K rounds malf freesince 2005, my USP .45 at about 8K malf free since 2009, and I'm starting to get some rounds through my 92FS. I expect it to shoot just as well as the other two.
-Jenrick
Back to Berettas, I picked up a 92FS to have to use when instructing DOD personnel on the range. I'd shot one a few times before this and found them to be good guns in general. The main things it has going for it over most other pistols:
Long sight radius is standard, sure a 5" 1911 or G24 have a longer sight radius, but compared to other service pistols it's got them beat.
Open top slide. It's next to impossible to get a stove pipe or FTE with them, and even if you do it's stupidly easy to clear.
Continual evolution. Not too many pistols are as well used/tested in training and in combat as the Beretta. The M9 has continued to evolve due to this usage.
It is a large gun and if you have short fingers the trigger reach can be long. I'm glad I picked one up, and it's certainly a fun gun to shoot. Far as relieability goes, I've got my G34 up to about 40K rounds malf freesince 2005, my USP .45 at about 8K malf free since 2009, and I'm starting to get some rounds through my 92FS. I expect it to shoot just as well as the other two.
-Jenrick
KJS
Member
Yeah, that was a major point made in American Rifleman. Beretta had to compete with all the other gun makers to win a military contract and it's been subjected to all sorts of heavy use and abuse in harsh environments and they still keep working.
The gun shop/range where I rented a Beretta 92 said it was their most rented gun, so it seems to appeal to enough people to get that kind of attention.
I also notice that Cabela's chronically has this model on sale -- it's on sale in their next flyer that I just looked at online. I gather it must be popular since it would seem pointless to stock & frequently advertise a gun few buy.
Taurus_9mm
Member
Greetings KJS,Being a newbie, I'm forced to ask what INOX means?
Why would you add a Beretta 92FS if you already have the Taurus version of it that you really love? Can I assume you just love collecting guns? Reminds me of one pic I saw on this board where a guy displayed his entire collection of S&W revolvers on his dining room table. I didn't even try to count, but there were certainly more than 50 of them -- and who knows how many other revolvers he had by other makers and how many autoloaders & long guns he might have had. In S&W revolvers alone he had enough to shoot a different one each week, kind of like how women collect shoes.
Personally speaking, I've desired one of the Beretta 92s on and off over the years, though I never have picked one up in all that time. Lately I've been thinking about them with greater frequency, as well as the more recent Beretta PX4 Storm series. I consider myself a shooter foremost but I suppose I do collect also to a degree; some of mine see much more time locked up than out on the range but I try to remedy that so none are neglected.
Have you considered purchasing a 92FS or did you go ahead and buy one?
www.taurusarmed.net www.gunnerforum.com
- Status
