To make things more confusing, the 92FS didn't always have the tapered dust cover. For many years, they had a straight dust cover just like the M9 in the photo. So, if it's a recently made 92FS, you can tell it apart from an M9 just by looking at the dust cover. If it's an older 92, you'd have to pick it up and check out the sights to tell it apart from an M9.
When it comes down to it, it's all about personal preferences. I prefer 3-dot sights like the 92FS sights. But to be honest, I just wanted a classic Italian Beretta 92FS, for the heck of it. I looked around for a while until I found an Italian made 92FS, when there were plenty of US made 92s and M9s. Surprisingly, the Italian gun at this particular shop was the same price as all the other US made guns. I swept it up, NIB, everything included, for $499.
Some hate the 92/M9. It has received a lot of unfair bad press over the years for a few reasons, all of them to do with the military. Although it won the military pistol trials back in the 80's, (along with a Sig Sauer) it had initial problems that were quickly fixed. From Wikipedia:
"Prior to its widespread adoption by the U.S. military, questions were raised in a General Accounting Office report after an incident where a slide failure on a Beretta 92SB caused injuries to Naval Special Warfare personnel[3] and more failures were later observed in additional testing. These failures included both military and civilian Beretta models with very high round counts and after investigation they were deemed the result of ammunition supplied by the U.S. Army which exceeded the recommended pressures specified by NATO and by Beretta, but nonetheless provoked a modification in the M9 design to prevent slide failure from causing injuries."
More recently, the reliability of M9s in Iraq has been questioned, but it turns out it's due to low-quality magazines contracted by the government. Again, from Wikipedia:
"The U.S. military has been criticized for not purchasing magazines from Beretta. In 2006, the military awarded a contract to Airtronic USA due to the previous manufacturer, Check-Mate Industries, charging too much per magazine[4], though Check-Mate magazines are still sometimes issued. Check-Mate magazines have been shown to have severe problems with reliability. Prior to Check-Mate magazines being purchased, the military purchased magazines from Mec-Gar. Because Mec-Gar magazines had the least problems, some troops issued the M9 buy their own Mec-Gar magazines."
And finally, the 3rd complaint seems to come from soldiers disappointed in the capabilities of the 9mm NATO round itself, nothing to do with the actual Beretta firearm. But all these issues have, unfairly in my opinion, given the M9 a somewhat bad reputation in some circles.
I have nothing but great things to say about the 92/M9 and if you like the way it feels in your hand, buy it. It will never let you down.
