I bought mine back in the late 80s (before the military accepted it) due to a gun magazine article. The testers crammed every type of ammo into it they could find and the gun just ate the ammo, even when it had been bent because someone didn't feed it correctly into a machine gun. In short, it ate anything that could be stuffed into the magazine. It had no eject port for cases to hang on and no ramp that the cartridge had to travel up on. In short, it was more reliable than any 1911 could hope to be.
But that was then.
Since that time ultrareliable autos have pretty much been perfected. Yes, you can still jam a Glock by limp wristing it, but I ultimately settled on the very nice S&W 659. Not only was it reliable, it had a stainless steel frame, stainless steel slide and stainless steel pretty much everything else.
I also lamented the fact that Beretta has never stood behind their products. For the longest time, they denied there was a problem with their military pistols, even as slides were popping off the frames; then they denied there was anything wrong with their Tomcats at a time when both cops and civilians were betting their lives on them. Even now Tomcats can crack their frames any time, rendering the guns inoperable. Beretta now admits there's a problem, but they can't fix the problem and can only offer Tomcat owners discounts on a replacement (non-Tomcat).
I still have a few Beretta pistols, but I sold my 92s long ago. I might pick up one in the future if I get a good price, or trade, for it. I also still consider it to be one of the finest 9mm pistols ever made, and I'd take one ANY DAY over a Glock.
.