Beretta 92FS or Remington 1911

[boostedxt]

I was given a beretta 92fs as trade for some products the individual couldnt pay for. Its brand new and never been fired. I have always loved the 1911, who hasnt? I am thinking of selling the 92fs and picking up a remington 1911 in its place.

Which in your opinion is a better gun? I know the history of both, but I have never fired the 1911, and I have heard mixed things about the new remmy.

Thoughts? I am 100% happy just keeping the 92fs, but I figure I could use this time to get the 1911.

joe

 

[wow6599]

A 92 for a Remington 1911? Keep the Beretta.

 

[oneinthechamber]

Beretta... no doubt. I might trade it in for a Colt or Kimber, but not Remington.

 

[speaksoftly]

I'd take a 92 over a 1911 any day of the week. I'd take a Beretta 96 or 90-Two over either of those also.

 

[boostedxt]

thats the way I was leaning given the 92's history and such.

thank you!
Joe

 

[Shipwreck]

Hell, I have a semi custom and a custom 1911, I still love my Beretta 92, and it is my concealed carry gun. Keep the Beretta.

 

[dsk]

The Remingtons impress may of us die-hard 1911 lovers as being a bit on the cheap side. They seem to be working okay, but they're made using a cast slide and frame, and the small parts are likely all either cast or MIM as well. They're probably not a bad pistol for somebody on a budget, but if you're serious about durability and reliability you'd be advised to get a Springfield GI or Mil-Spec instead, which has a forged frame and slide, and a much longer reputation for quality. I'd say keep the Beretta and save up for a decent brand of 1911 with a good track record.

 

[stchman]

I never even knew Remington made pistols. I know they make shotguns and rifles.

According to the Bud's Gun Shop a Remington 1911 new is $578 shipped to an FFL.

A Beretta 92FS is $568 shipped to an FFL at Bud's as well.

I have seen Cabela's sell the 92FS for $525 on sale in the past.

It appears that the Remington 1911 is a more expensive pistol. It all depends on what you want.

 

[boostedxt]

how do you conceal it shipwreck? I can hide my cz and my xd but I have hard time hiding this gun....

joe

 

[Shipwreck]

how do you conceal it shipwreck? I can hide my cz and my xd but I have hard time hiding this gun....

joe

I use a comptac Pro Undercover IWB holster - at 3 o'clock.

I carried a Glock 26 and a Walther P99 over the years - but I never really practiced with my carry gun. I don't care to shoot at the range with small guns that much. I then moved up to a HK USPc 9mm, and then a USPc 45.

1 day, I compared the USPc45 and the Beretta 92 - the grip is ALMOST the same length... The grip is usually the issue when it comes to concealing - not the barrel length. I picked up a holster for my 92FS just for the heck of it. I've been carrying it for a year now.

Rusting of the grip screws was the only issue (the frame is aluminum, and the holster has a sweat shield for the slide) - I bought an HK P2000 for summer carry. But now that I found Beretta grip screws covered in NP3 (hence, rust proof), I carry the 92 all year long.

I tend to wear mock turtlenecks and cargo pants - but even with t-shirts, it conceals fine as long as I carry it at 3 o'clock IWB.

I even have a railed Beretta - the M9A1. I got a pro undercover holster for that, and I trade off between either gun.

 

[rygould]

+1 DSK. I would keep the 92.

 

[jonboynumba1]

well I don't know a thing about these new Remington 1911's so I'd have to go with the 92...as I've owned one and it shot very well....big for EDC but who am I to judge...I sometimes carry a G21SF!!-LOL

 

[Jackal1]

Yes Remington made 1911's back during WWII. They haven't made them since then, and the ones they make now are generally considered sub-par quality.

I'd keep the Beretta 92 as it is a great QUALITY gun.

 

[boostedxt]

i am keeping the 92fs. i have shot it a few times and am really accurate with it and it has quickly become one of my favorite guns to shoot.

joe

 

[Skylerbone]

Got an up-close look at the new R-1 at Scheels this past weekend. Initial impression: how did Remington stoop so low in reissuing such a revered platform? The asking price was $699 for this stamped, poorly finished (rough bluing, not park) pistol.

Perhaps Remington should have held out another year and introduced a forged, no MIM parts, 70 Series style, nicely blued 1911 with a cleaner slide (we HATE billboard advertisements, internal safeties that do nothing, cast anything-excepting Ruger, lousy bluing...are you listening Remington?)

If it were forged in the U.S. and had the finish of my 1100 or 700 I'd buy 4 in a heartbeat. Given the reputation of Colt and S&W 1911s and their attention to what matters, the Remington can stay put in the dealer's showcase.

As for the Beretta, it's a proven winner and will serve you well. Getting $400 trade in on an unfired one won't leave you with a 1911 you can be proud to own. The 92 is a pistol anyone should be proud to have in their collection.

Best of luck, don't give up on the 1911 purchase and be safe.

PS I know it's not stamped but it may as well have been.

 

[wunderkind]

Beretta 92:
-Cheap to feed (relative to .40's and .45's)
-As close to nil recoil as a centerfire service weapon can get
-Cool factor
-that super-smooth cycling of the action

You'll miss it if you get rid of it.