Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Is there a reason not to buy a Beretta

Discussion in 'Handguns: Autoloaders' started by welshrabbit, Jul 10, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. welshrabbit

    welshrabbit Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2008
    Messages:
    36
    Hello,
    I have heard many people complain about the M9 or the Berettas in general, but has anyone got any specific reasons, other than personal taste not to buy a Beretta 92 series? Furthermore is there any difference between the M9 and a 92FS? I ask because on the Beretta website they list them as two seperate guns, and the M9 commands a higher price.
     
  2. IdahoLT1

    IdahoLT1 Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2008
    Messages:
    825
    Location:
    Boise, Idaho
    The main complaints about the Beretta 92/M9 is that its only a 9mm for its size. But with its size and weight, it has less recoil than other 9mm's, IMO. The only reason i can think of not to buy one would be if it didnt fit your hands. They are very accurate, extremely reliable, a good bargain and will last quite a while. Beretta USA is alo fairly easy to work with.

    As far as the difference between the 92FS and M9, it just depends. They are basically the same thing, with the exception of some very minor parts. Depending on the model, one might have an accessory rail and the other might not.
     
  3. ashtxsniper

    ashtxsniper Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Messages:
    393
    Location:
    Illegalville Texas
    Yeah the only thing that should keep you from buying a Beretta is well nothing. The 92 is an awesome handgun.
     
  4. M203Sniper

    M203Sniper member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2008
    Messages:
    465
    Location:
    I live in Arizona
    I had an M9 in the Marines & I carry a Beretta 92f everyday, 8 hours a day at work.
    [​IMG]

    The qualification course for my job is like this;

    12 rounds from 2 magazines of 6 each in 15 seconds from 3 yards.
    12 rounds from 2 magazines of 6 each in 15 seconds from 7 yards.
    12 rounds from low ready - double taps using 2 magazines of 6 each in 90 seconds from 10 yards.
    18 rounds from behind a barricade - kneeling position. 12 strong hand 6 weak. No time limit from 15 yards.
    6 rounds standing from behind a barricade at 20 yards, standing position.


    I shot a 273 out of 300 last go round, my best score is a 297.

    I would not buy a Beretta.

    The gun is too big,
    It is not any more accurate than another 9mm at the same price point nor is it any more reliable then another firearm.
    I dislike the DA/SA pull especially for the first DA shot.
    The external "de-cocker" is not a safety device.
    It has been around for 20+ years and just recently came out with a railed model.
    YMMV

    research here

    beretta model 92/96 fan sites :

    http://www.beretta-e.org/index.php?title=92/96

    http://www.berettacollection.com/9mm/92.htm


    http://www.berettaweb.com/armi/92%20only%2092.htm
     
  5. Thernlund

    Thernlund Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    Messages:
    2,347
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    I can't think of a single reason. It not fitting your hand is only an excuse to not carry it.

    :D


    -T.
     
  6. Joshua M. Smith

    Joshua M. Smith Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2004
    Messages:
    1,044
    Location:
    Wabash IN
    I prefer the Taurus PT92. IMNSHO, it's a better pistol. I CCWed one for 10 years or so until I decided to build a 1911.

    The PT92 I have I outfitted with a target guide rod with integral frame buffer and a Beretta locking block (the old style Beretta and current Taurus, last I checked, break every 5000 rounds or so). I also did some smoothing and ended up with a pistol that would shoot five shots under 2" at 25yds, with three of those being under an inch.

    I can't prove it, but I believe that the straight rearward motion of the barrel improves accuracy.

    I prefer Hogue grip panels. Tacky, very good grip, and thinner than stock.

    I'd recommend the Taurus over the Beretta, but both are good guns.

    Josh <><
     
  7. bensdad

    bensdad Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,281
    Location:
    Minnesota
    The safety is backwards. Up should be safe. down should be fire.

    I read a post here on THR from someone wiser than myself, that it's a good idea to have all your sidearms function the same way. I think he refered to it as having the same "manual of arms." I never realized how true this is until I took my wife's Bersa to the range along with MY guns. I shouldn't have to "think" about what I'm doing when I draw a gun.

    That's the ONLY reason I would not get a 92.

    Oh, one more reason. The Stoeger Cougar.
     
  8. CSG

    CSG Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2006
    Messages:
    140
    Location:
    Out West
    My 9mm Brig has been great and I love the thing. The stock grips are just right for my hand size but whether or not you should buy one depends on your use. There are a few pistols I might buy first for a duty weapon (larger caliber) and a few more for a concealed weapon (smaller size) but for day to day reliability and getting the job done, the 92 series has been pretty good. I suspect most of our armed service people would still like a 1911 though.
     
  9. wristtwister

    wristtwister Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2008
    Messages:
    419
    I've got a 92FS and find it a very entertaining gun. Like everything else, it's has it's quirks, and I had to figure out what to do with it to correct those, but it's accurate, and for the most part, very easy to work with.

    Cleaning and teardown is a snap, and it reassembles very quickly, so unless you have a problem handling the gun, it's a buy. As for the technology being around 20 years, that's not necessarily a bad thing. It provides a lot of spare parts, and a lot of information about loads, things you can change out without screwing up the works, etc., so it's "time tested", and you should be able to custom the gun to fit your particular style of shooting.

    It's a high capacity weapon, so it's good for home defense or carry, and provides a lot of firepower. It carries Beretta's name, and I've had little or no trouble with their products.

    WT
     
  10. Onmilo

    Onmilo Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2004
    Messages:
    9,773
    Location:
    Illinois`
    Yes there is.
    People on the internet will tell you Beretta pistols are pieces of junk that blow up and injure uncounted numbers of US SEAL operators.
    You cannot count yourself a real man unless you buy an XD,CZ,17-19-34-21SF-20, Browning High Power, or 1911 Colt.

    [​IMG]

    The only thing I would like to see done with the M9/92FS is adding a light rail and replaceable, dovetailed, tritium sights with the front on a strengthened slide ring.
    They got it half right with the M9A1 with its light rail.

    I have a genuine contract overrun M9 that was released by Beretta for civilian sale.
    It has all metal parts except for the guide rod which was plastic.
    The word I got was this contract run was rejected by some branch of the military because of the plastic guide rods.
    I can believe that because the M9 pistols I worked with in service all had metal guide rods

    Of the new versions, the only real difference I can see between the current 92FS and the current M9 offering are the markings, both have plastic parts in all the right places and they hurt the guns not one bit unless you are a purist.
     
  11. buzz_knox

    buzz_knox Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    4,849
    Go to m4carbine.net and run a search on the M9. Look for the comments by ToddG (who used to be a LE/military marketing director for Beretta and one of their team shooters). Also, I can provide a copy of an article Larry Vickers did on the M9.

    You'll get a good overview of the pros and cons of the Beretta, things to look for, and remedies for some of the cons.
     
  12. RevolvingCylinder

    RevolvingCylinder Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    782
    Or the latest more cheaply manufactured Beretta M9s break parts more frequently(I can only speak on behalf of new Army Berettas). They aren't just plastic parts breaking either. Brand new pistols breaking more frequently than the "old beaters". The commercial versions may be a different story altogether. That I don't know. But the fact of the matter is Beretta is saving money by taking some shortcuts. The plastic parts work but it could indicate that Beretta has also taken shortcuts elsewhere.

    Berettas are good, reliable pistols. If you like the feel of them I don't see why you wouldn't buy one. People talk about locking block failures on them like it's a regular occurring problem but I have yet to see one. I have seen plenty of other parts break on them though. If I had any use for anything chambered in 9mm Parabellum I would probably own one.
     
  13. MaterDei

    MaterDei Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,517
    Location:
    Houston
    You're the only person making these claims that I've noticed. :scrutiny:
     
  14. SureThing

    SureThing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2004
    Messages:
    545
  15. Onmilo

    Onmilo Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2004
    Messages:
    9,773
    Location:
    Illinois`
    Keep searching MaterDei, the posts are out there and they aren't mine.

    I have owned three Beretta 9mm pistols and one .40 cal M96 over the course of the last twenty five years, every one has performed admirably with no broken parts or major malfunctions.

    When I was checking out the .40 S&W cartridge, I deliberately chose the Model 96 because I thought it was the best pistol for the task,( I didn't have access to an H&K USP at that time).
    The pistol worked well, the cartridge left me less impressed.
     
  16. Blue Brick

    Blue Brick Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,452
    Location:
    Pinal County, Arizona
    You’re not SEAL until you’ve tasted Italian steel.:)
     
  17. burningsquirrels

    burningsquirrels Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    1,562
    Location:
    Georgia
    well, the army used the beretta... they didn't pick it because it was pretty or anything, but because it worked and passed their testing...

    perhaps a reason not to pick a beretta is because there are so many choices out there - BUT you must pick what works BEST FOR YOU in a high capacity 9mm. there's the sig p226, cz-75, if you're into steel guns. in plastic, of course there are the glocks, XDs, m&p, etc.
     
  18. worker

    worker Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2006
    Messages:
    83
    Yes, there are several reasons

    a) you plan to use it for concealed carry and
    you live in a climate/env that does not encourage
    long coats/etc

    b) you do not like 9mm and prefer 10mm (as an example)

    c) you want easily available aftermarket .22 LR kit for under
    $250 for the same gun

    d) you cannot consistently get a natural point of aim with it
    (that aquire target without using sights)

    e) you want to carry it cocked and locked and cannot
    imagine how you would use the safety on the frame
    that goes in to the oposite direction...


    in otherwords the only reasons not to purchase it are
    very subjective to your own specific needs

    there are really no 'objective' reasons why not to buy it
    as compared it any other current offerring in the same price
    range.
     
  19. Doogy

    Doogy Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2008
    Messages:
    98
    The "plastic" parts that some speak of, are only polymer coated metal, not plastic. Yes, the guide rod is plastic in some models, but is easily swapped out for metal if you like (although i've yet to read of a plastic guide rod breaking).
     
  20. jackdanson

    jackdanson Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2008
    Messages:
    859
    I've got a px4 and like it. Never had any reliability problems, easy shooting, 20 rounds, more accurate than I am, etc., etc.
     
  21. mljdeckard

    mljdeckard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    12,705
    Location:
    In a part of Utah that resembles Tattooine.
    I'll tell you my experience with them.

    In the summer of 1992, my arms room in Germany switched out 87 WWII era 1911s for new-in-cosmoline M-9s. I was the assistant armorer and I volunteered to do the bulk of the work to clean them up for issue. Furthermore, being in the position where I would have to sleep with my weapon in the field, and being able to pick pretty much whichever weapon I wanted, I took the pistol.

    They feel great and shoot great. Probably not the best for people with small hands though. Particularly, the single action is very easy, and using military issue ammo, when it shoots, it pops right back down on target every time naturally. (I never tried any variety of other loads in one.)The controls are very natural and ergonomic.

    However, as stated above, the frame is unforgiveably large for only being a 9mm/.40. Much bulkier than a 1911 in .45. The army should include night sights, but they don't generally. We started having problems with soldiers tampering with them, taking off the grip panels, removing the springs and putting them in backwards, dinging up the exposed mechanics, etc. These were NOT particularly accurate. (Although at least as accurate as the old 1911s with old bushings and barrels they replaced, and within the old and very low accuracy army standards for a sidearm.) Where any problem that I ever had with a 1911 could be fixed with a detail strip and parts replacement, every time something went wrong with an M9, I had to send it to support-level maintenence.

    I also had a Taurus T-92, and while I liked the safety better, I had a lot of problems with it. Light firing pin strikes, the double-action was slipping for no explicable reason, I got rid of it.

    It's not that the Beretta design is bad, it's mostly that there are so many other designs that are so much better. I don't think anyone can honestly say it is tougher than a Glock, A USP, or an XD. I THINK, that U.S. troops should carry the simplest, most idiot-proof, and cost-effective sidearm available. (Glock.) As for me, I tried a dozen other pistols for carry before I decided that real men carry 1911s. (Sarcasm intended, put your flame-throwers away.) It just feels better, shoots better, and carries better. (For me, anyway. I can tinker with it without destroying it. I WISH the army would let me take it to war, but I know it won't happen.
     
  22. gtmerkley

    gtmerkley member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    299
    Location:
    Southern Hoosier state away from South Bend
    non I can think of off hand
     
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2008
  23. HaveBlue83

    HaveBlue83 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    Messages:
    29
    I personally HATE THEM. the trigger pull is very long in DA (to me), the finish wears off too easily (under holstered conditions and combat), the aluminum frame can be damaged too easily, and the locking block seems to like to blow one of its tabs off from time to time....

    this is from combat experience and from fixing them under harsh conditions. +1 on *** plastic parts. The new parts I get for the guide rod are plastic and the safety levers are that polymar coated stuff....yuck.

    I also HATE how many parts are in the system....that slide has WAAY to many for the average user to go doing a full clean on it from time to time.

    females shoot good with them and they are accurate. First pistol I ever fired was a 96 .40cal and I shot great with it.

    I just don't like them....but then again I am a 1911 man :)
     
  24. SureThing

    SureThing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2004
    Messages:
    545
    The only reason not to get one is the CZ 75.

    I have owned a 92, Taurus92, and CZ.

    The CZ I still have.
     
  25. krs

    krs Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    2,588
    Location:
    Tall Trees
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page