So... forgive me but what was the point of the 92A1, and what differences does it have compared to the M9A1? Why did they put a new buffer system in only the 92A1? Thanks for the info.The 92A1 is somewhat of an oddity in the Beretta 92 line-up. It has a recoil buffer and the slide cannot be put on any of the other guns in the 92 series. When you look at the guns in the 92 series, note the take down button on the 92A1. It is round, while all the other models have an oval button (not counting the 96A1, if it is still available).
http://www.beretta.com/en-us/beretta-92-series/
When it first came out, the 92A1 was the only non-Brigadier that gave you the dovetailed sight (and rail, but who really cares about a rail). Since then Beretta has introduced other non-Brigadier offerings with the dovetailed front sight, but are compatible with other guns. I expect the 92A1's remaining life span to be relatively short.
M9A1 - Railed frame with a 92FS slide (3 dot sights). The front of the frame (where the rail is at) looks like the Vertec model. But it has the standard 92FS grip. The magwell also has a slight bevel, and the rear and front backstraps have a light checkering on them. Available in 9mm only, and this gun is only made in the USA.
This gun comes with two specially PVD coated 15 round magazines (which are expensive when bought separately).
I think the M9A1 is the coolest LOOKING railed model. But, the checkering is not deep on the frame, like it is on a 1911. I personally prefer the regular serrations, as I find that they give a better grip purchase.
90-Two - Commonly known as the "90-Dash-Two" or "The Dash." This is a redesigned version of the 92FS that came out in 2006. The slide and frame were redesigned. The guiderod is captured, and there is a recoil buffer built into the frame. It also has a front, dovetailed sight. Several of the small parts are totally different from the standard 92 design (hammer, mag release, trigger bar, slide safety switches).
The biggest difference is the grip. While the gun is not polymer, it does come with a polymer, slip on grip. This gun will be in limited production for 2011 (so get one now if you want one). There is hardly any aftermarket support, and the lack of aftermarket grips is really hurting sales. These are ONLY made in Italy. Available in 9mm and 40 cal. The gun comes with factory 17 round mags (in 9mm)
(I personally do not like the polymer grip - too slippery. I tried several solutions to this issue, but found none worthwhile)
92A1 - Newest release of the 92 - Released in the summer of 2010. This design takes some of the best aspects of the 90-Two... The rail, internal recoil buffer and dovetailed front sight (all great changes), and puts it into a more "normal" 92 frame. The 92A1 (and 96A1) will use standard Beretta 92 grips. The trigger guard is curved; however, like that of the 90-Two. The guiderod is also captured (which is a pro or con, depending on who you ask).
In addition - the slide is a little bit beefier than a standard 92 slide.
The gun is available in 9mm and 40 cal (the 96A1), and the 9mm version comes with THREE 17 round factory mags (the same mags that come with the 90-Two). These guns are only made in Italy.
This is a such better choice to the 90-TWO, IMHO. Also, the 92A1 balances the best in a 1 handed grip out of any of the railed models. I also personally find the 92A1 is my second fav Beretta 92 variant - right behind the standard 92FS (which balances the best 1 handed, IMHO).
There is also finally aftermarket night sights for the 92A1 from Trijicon now. And, while others may disagree - I personally like the regular front and rear strap serrations over the checkering on the M9A1. The checkering is rather shallow - so its not nearly as grippy as checkering on a 1911. I think the standard serrations on the front and back strap give a better grip.
I think for full disclosure you should admit you're a total Beretta slut, just saying
I told them I have owned 29 Beretta 92 variants over the past 20+ years now. And, I shot my M9A3 at the same time as the 92A1 - I KNOW it's not me. It was the sights
No one can tell me it's my fault on that - as I know how to shoot a Beretta
Thanks. So the M9A1 is pretty close to the A3 but DOESN'T have dovetailed front sights?
Not necessarily. Beretta has stopped sending 92 Compact Carrys to Wilson. Wilson complained they had 500 back orders, and Beretta told them to cancel those.Yes, that is true. But that was a Wilson decision to continue - not Beretta's.
Beretta is being paid to make the gun, so they will continue as long as Wilson pays them, presumably
Not necessarily. Beretta has stopped sending 92 Compact Carrys to Wilson. Wilson complained they had 500 back orders, and Beretta told them to cancel those.
For those of you who noted that any of the Beretta's shot low for you (or high, or any other handgun for that matter), I have one questions; Did you shoot only a single bullet weight through it?
I shot the brig again and it definitely hits about 3-4 inches low at 18 yards. To the point that it is basically unusable for me. Hopefully it's just this particular example.
I'm also using the aforementioned Wilson rear sight, which I just don't like so that needs to change. Or I need to practice more.
I've found that my 92 really prefers 124 gr ammo, and that it helps raise the POI to where I want it. I got really frustrated when I first shot my 92 because I was hitting low. The heavier ammo helped. So if you haven't tried it yet, give some 124 gr ammo a try.
For those of you who noted that any of the Beretta's shot low for you (or high, or any other handgun for that matter), I have one questions; Did you shoot only a single bullet weight through it?
Typically the answer is yes, and typically its light. Every gun has a preference for a certain bullet weight that it tends to shoot better than others. Not that you can't get it to shoot, properly, what ever you want. However, bullet weight really has an impact on this and should be tested thoroughly before you generalize how a gun functions based on one example.
I don't know if Shipwreck answer your question in his post, and I'm only speculating, but I think the 92A1 just a tagged along to the 96A1 as Beretta wanted to get a .40 S&W gun, that wouldn't quickly self destruct, back into the market. The gun is better set up for .40 S&W, and at the time it gave Beretta a railed gun with dovetailed sights, so you might as well chamber it in 9mm too. Now that Beretta has those bases covered with other models, I think the 92A1 will go away soon. Just my speculation.1KPerDay wrote,
So... forgive me but what was the point of the 92A1, and what differences does it have compared to the M9A1? Why did they put a new buffer system in only the 92A1? Thanks for the info.
Ah, I see. Sounds like it got it's fair shake then. Too bad.I was shooting full power plated 124s and WWB 147 JHPs.
.