Discussion in 'Handguns: Autoloaders' started by Blue Brick, Sep 3, 2018.
I am looking at buying new, but are the older ones better?
The new ones are just fine if the plastic and plastic coated parts don't bug you.
New production M9/92 use a polymer trigger, mainspring plug, LH safety lever, magazine release, and guide rod. The trigger has a steel core inside.
From time to time, Beretta has offered a steel retrofit kit to replace these. It used to run $110, but I'm not sure if they currently offer it.
I had to search high and low to find all the bits in SS for my 92FS, and together they ran me 'bout $150. Replacement is very easy, takes about 45 minutes if you're careful with common hand tools.
IMO, the steel parts are worth it. Both the trigger action and accuracy have improved.
Very early M92s used an aluminum guide rod, known for breaking, and the locking shelves can wear out after many thousands of rounds, but otherwise these are all great pistols.
Other than the guide rod, I'm pretty sure all are polymer coated steel, just like the trigger. However, if you've just got to have them, the "steel parts kit" is about $75.
While Beretta makes all of them, a couple of other sources are models from...
Wilson Combat https://shopwilsoncombat.com/Non-1911/products/649/
Langdon Tactical https://www.langdontactical.com/guns-gunsmithing/guns/
Was the commercial M9 model even produced before Beretta began using the polymer-coated steel parts?
CDNN also stocks some steel Beretta parts.
Note that the commercial M9 (not the 92FS) differs from the bona fide military M9. I don't know that military M9's were ever released to the civilian world.
Well I wanted to back to DA/SA. I was looking at new....but maybe I might just have to look at the used options. Thx.
The Taurus is pretty much the same pistol, but with a better safety (bring out the torches and pitchforks).
My FiL was tinkering with his Beretta 92 this weekend. He had me bring my Taurus PT99, and he brought his Beretta with two barrels. After a bunch of swapping and shooting, he figured out which of his two barrels he shot the best. We both shot the Taurus slightly better than the Beretta. It might be because the grips are a tiny bit thicker and we both have XL hands, or maybe it was the larger sights. They are cheap used and have a lifetime warranty. Taurus bought the Beretta factory in Brazil and some point back in the 1980's.
Mine is from 1990, IIRC.
TaurusPT99 by Tallball posted Sep 4, 2018 at 5:23 AM
I bought one of the inexpensive Beretta 92S imports from Buds about a year or two ago. It was $300 at the time. Mine showed up in a used but good condition and the barrel was in great shape. That pistol shoots better than any of my other 9mms (Sig P229, Hi-Power, M&P Shield, PT-111). My only complaint is the small sights, which was specific to the 92S model. I've shot other 92s with better sights. The 92S was made between 1978-1982 for the Italian police, IIR. The main differences between the 92S and the 92FS are the safety + decocker and mag release. The 92S safety + decocker is not ambidextrous and exists only on the left-side of the slide for right handed shooters. The mag release on the 92S is on the bottom rear of the grip on the left side and takes a little getting used to.
I've seen them since for as little as $240 and thought seriously about buying another one just because they're that good.
I've never touched a US military version of this handgun but I can honestly say mine is a pure joy to shoot and is damn accurate.
The M1911 is the gold standard, ergonomically, for those of us with smallish hands. The M9, because of the double-stack magazine, has a grip that is just too thick. That problem is compounded by the double-action trigger, that requires a long reach. (Ergonomically, it's much easier firing it single action.) If it wasn't for the fact that the M9 was adopted as the army standard, and that I'm a completist collector, I would never have bothered with the Beretta. For a 9 mm, I prefer the single-stack German P38/P1. It just fits my hand better than the clunky Beretta.
Could be wrong, but IIRC, the PT and M92 mags don't interchange. Also, some later production runs of the Taurus use cast/MIM internals which may or may not matter to some folks.
Can't say I'm a fan of the PT with the surplus Italian Police Berettas floating about so cheaply at the moment.
As far as the ergonomics of the M92, ehhhhh, I find the standard grip frame just right for me, certainly slimmer than the classic P226. Friends I loan it to at the range sometimes comment on its bulk at first, but always hand it back with a smile on their faces.
The other current Beretta advantage is they are on at least revision 3 of the locking block. New Beretta's have them while the Taurus and the Government M9 (even current production, though the M9A1 the USMC buys may have the new block, I don't know) use the original design.
I bought used PD trade in 92FS off gunbroker just to familiarize myself with the gun. At the time I was contracting in Iraq and figured it would be a good one to learn. Overly heavy for what it is but surprisingly accurate guns.
I've since traded it off for something else.
The Beretta 92 does have a chunky grip and the trigger reach to the double action trigger is problematical for those with smaller hands requiring the adoption of a sub-optimal grip. The M9 is a bit worse in this regard because the 92 FS has a small relief cut out at the top end of the back strap that the M9 lacks.
There are also slimmer than stock grips to be had
Langdon Tactical VZ grips https://www.langdontactical.com/vz-g10-ltt-grips/
Update. After looking at all the options new and used....I think I might settle for a Security 9 (S9).
Of all the beretta 92 variants, I have to say that I agree with Tallball on the PT92 series. The frame mounted safety just makes more sense and is easier to use.
Of the beretta models, yes the older models seem to be better built. I have owned a few and honestly I never bothered to take them apart to see what the differences were. It’s very likely that the older guns I had simply had more wear which made for a smoother trigger and smoother feeling action. The last “new” 92 I had i hosed down with contact cleaner to dry it up and remove oil. I then ran it dry and ran it hard for about 50 mags before I cleaned it and lubed it back up. At that point it felt much more smooth and much more like the older guns. This was an “as new” used gun made around 2012. I finally gave up on true berettas because of my preference for the Taurus safety/decocker system.
Buy a gun without a rail unless you have a very specific purpose for the rail. That rail makes it tougher to find good holsters, not to mention added weight and sharp edges that like to snag things.
The 92FS and all its variants seem to be chugging along despite being replaced by the military. While the polymer striker fired guns now dominate, the Beretta has historical credibility and a cool factor that will be appealing for a long time.
I regret selling my 92FS. I know some don't like their thicker grip, but it felt just right in my hands. It was also very accurate and easy to disassemble and maintain.
Separate names with a comma.