M9: Commercial vs Military?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sadly, I agree with several of the posters on this, that the 92 series is going away sometime in the not-so-distant future. I love the hammer-fired metal framed pistols, but the demand will wane and they won't remain economically feasible, except possibly as limited runs. Sure, it's basically a $600 gun, but I suspect the profit margin is way slimmer on that then on the $500 polymer guns.

Like it has been mentioned, the 1911 is not a valid comparison. Especially in the US, "everybody" wants a 1911, they continue to be the default steel gun being marketed. In the several large LGSs I have walked through (that are not big-box chains like Cabela's etc), there are lots of display counters. There are more new 1911's on display, than the entire rest of the new/used stock. This is a Beretta thread... Beretta is perhaps the only big maker I know of that doesn't have a 1911 available. And I hate to say it, but... give it time, I think they eventually make the move, too.

Sig has a zillion metal options, but they're now moving the 320. Sig reminds me of S&W, which once had so many 3rd gen variants that there's literally a decoder to help figure out what is what. ALL gone, now. Only remaining semi's- M&P, SD(Sigma), and 1911. And a new, niche 22.

CZ has a bunch of 75 variants, but they too have begun the polymer striker series.

The problem is simple, and frankly, unavoidable. There are lots of used guns around, and in guns such as the metal frames, these are great bargains. I have a Beretta 92FS, CZ 75, and Sig P226, all from the early 90s. They still run great, and if I want to replace springs (and barrel lug on the Beretta), they are now mechanically as nice as the new ones. Perhaps they get beat up... metal guns can get refinished with more options than polymer guns can. Once that is done, I then have a gun cosmetically as nice, or nicer, than the new ones. And while my pistols are testament to the continued popularity of the models, they don't make the manufacturer any money.

The Hi Power fell into this trap. They are nice pistols, that a relatively limited group of consumers like. But there are a ton of used options out there for much, much less, and 2 significant sub-groups of buyers are more inclined to get a used pistol: the person who wants just one "as example" will be happy with one for half the price and a little history; and the guys who like to upgrade guns just need a platform to begin with- why spend a lot more on something you will be swapping parts out of?
 
Guys I couldn't find an M9A1, which is what I wanted over the M9 since I wanted a rail for home defense. So I got a 92A1:


Guys I can't begin to tell you how much of a peach this pistol is!! It is an Italian made gun and craftsmanship is high. It has night sights on it and I plan to add a G series decocker, D spring, and 18 round Mec Gar mags and a Streamlight TLR-1 HL, all on order to make a home defense and range pistol. Very excited. The front night sight was dead though out of the box, probably was cracked and leaked out. Going to call Beretta USA and they should be able to fix it.

Can't wait to get this project done. Been wanting a dedicated HD full size 9mm for a while. This one is a peach!!
 
I'm honestly surprised that no one has mentioned the new Beretta M9A3! This thing is bad-ass from the factory - all metal construction (including the trigger), tritium sights, threaded factory barrel! I bought one last November and absolutely love it! This was the model that Beretta tried to sell the the USG for the new replacement pistol, but lost the contract.
 
I'm honestly surprised that no one has mentioned the new Beretta M9A3! .
Post #15
I've also seen comments on various forums the M9A3 model ( http://www.beretta.com/en-us/m9a3/ ) is backordered around 20,000 units. Some of the backlog for both guns is no doubt due to Beretta's move from Maryland to Tennessee, which stopped/slowed production, but these are popular guns, and they should be popular for some time.
At post #29, the OP bought a 92A1.
 
The Beretta 30 round mags work great in my 92. They'd be a cheap addition to really increase your capacity. They're nicely made.
 
Interesting that the supposedly "good to go" polymer parts are replaced by metal on the upgraded Langdon edition M9.

I wonder why that is? An expert gunfighter should already know that polymer is the way of the future and should demand MORE plastic on his guns.
 
Once upon a time, I went to the gunstore to buy an M9 because I liked the non-radiused backstrap and the straight dustcover. I ended up walking out with a 92FS...because I realized the subtle radius on the backstrap made a much better grip for me, and because I realized I liked the subtle slant of the dustcover - and I never looked back.

Moral of the story: check them out and see what makes a difference in your hands...
 
This is an old thread, but FWIW, there are a few more subtle differences in the civilian and commercial versions of these pistols. If there were an exploded version of the 92FS to compare side by side with the one linked to the M9, that may show a few of them, and they would definitely have different part numbers. The obvious differences are serial number, warning labels, sights, finish and grip screws, but there are subtle other ones in parts throughout the pistol. Unless you have had a chance to compare them disassembled, side by side, you would likely never notice.

I am guessing this will also hold true for the new Sig pistols, especially given their inordinate use of MIM parts nowadays. The military may specify certain critical areas be strengthened or have regular civilian parts substituted for more robust parts. Given what I've heard about Sig the past ten years, this would not surprise me at all. In the opinion of many, Sig has really gone downhill, especially their rifles, ever since that guy from Kimber took over.
 
One thing to remember is that the Taurus 92/99 is not a Beretta clone - it is a Beretta, made on Beretta machinery in a Beretta factory bought by the factory managers when Beretta was considering closing it down, and just re-named Taurus as part of the deal. If you prefer the Beretta, that's great, but don't look down on the "Tauri" - quality is the same.
 
One thing to remember is that the Taurus 92/99 is not a Beretta clone - it is a Beretta, made on Beretta machinery in a Beretta factory bought by the factory managers when Beretta was considering closing it down, and just re-named Taurus as part of the deal. If you prefer the Beretta, that's great, but don't look down on the "Tauri" - quality is the same.
However, the Taurus and the Government Beretta M9 are still using the first generation locking block, the biggest weakness of the design. All the other Beretta's are on at least the third generation locking block. The newer blocks are better/more durable.
 
lysanderxiii said:
Yeah, the last major military contract for the HP was in the sixties or seventies and they are still in production after 35 or 40 years*..
..
FN discontinued all new production of Hi-(or High) Power guns last year. They had been in production, with slow upgrades and model changes, since 1935. Unlike the 1911, clone versions were never real competition for the original manufacturer versions. The FN High Power/Browning Hi-Power had been on a long slow decline for a number of years.

That decline, I suspect, was because the BHP was a single-action weapon primarily designed as a service pistol, and the military and LEO agencies (here in the U.S. at least) have generally never been big fans of single-action weapons . FN built a .40 version for a while, but it was never as popular as the 9mm version.

There have been a lot of surplus BHPs floating around, including clones (like the earliest FEG models and the Israeli Kareen),. There are also near- or actual clones, like the Charles Daly (built using imported parts made by FEG, and assembled in the US to sport the "made in U.S.A." badge. Arcus (Bulgaria) makes a version that is basically a BHP, but one that looks a bit different. Close copies are now being made by Tisas, a Turkish gun maker, is making copies/versions of the Hi-Power -- but reviews have been mixed.
 
I have a different opinion. Now that the new polymer hotness will be replacing the M9 in the military, I think a lot of people will continue to be interested in the M9 for nostalgic reasons. I hated the M9 when I was active duty but now that I’m out and I have an excellent civilian 92FS it’s changed my mind about the Beretta and I now realize the military ones are just worn the hell out and junky as a result. Anyways how many young vets like myself bought a Beretta for familiarity? A lot I’m sure. And how many Berettas are serving around the world in other countries or agencies? I think the 92/M9 series is here to stay for a long time.
 
One thing to remember is that the Taurus 92/99 is not a Beretta clone - it is a Beretta, made on Beretta machinery in a Beretta factory bought by the factory managers when Beretta was considering closing it down, and just re-named Taurus as part of the deal. If you prefer the Beretta, that's great, but don't look down on the "Tauri" - quality is the same.
Over time, the PT92 and M92 have evolved along diverging paths as both companies sought to cut costs and win new contracts, with Taurus using castings and MIM and Beretta going the polymer-over-spring steel route. As these changes are implemented, dimensions change.

There is very little parts interchangeability between current editions of either gun. Even the magazines are no longer compatible.

As far as overall quality being the same......dude, have you owned or held both in your hand simultaneously? I don't think you would make that assertion. The Taurus is an OK gun made on old tooling in a 3rd world country, but it is NOT a Beretta.
 
Last edited:
As far as overall quality being the same......dude, have you owned or held both in your hand simultaneously? I don't think you would make that assertion. The Taurus is an OK gun made on old tooling in a 3rd world country, but it is NOT a Beretta.
I own both a Taurus rail-less dealer special and a 92A1. The Taurus' action is smoother, its balance better, and subtle differences in the PT92 grip profile compared to the A1 make it a better fit for my hand.

ps.That said, the brushed finish of an Inox 92FS looks classier than the polished frame on my stainless Taurus.
 
Last edited:
... the PT92 grip profile compared to the A1 make it a better fit for my hand.
I own neither, but have handled both the Taurus and all the various incantations of the Beretta, and I prefer the Beretta.

My analogy for the comparison would be the Taurus is kind of like a Gen 3 Glock while the Beretta is more like the Gen 4 version. They are close, but Beretta seems to have put a little more effort into rounding corners and making the gun more hand friendly. The Taurus feels crude in comparison - just the grip I'm commenting on - not the trigger or the cycling of the action (which also may favor the Beretta, but I haven't got that far on the Taurus for an accurate comparison).
 
You got a good one then, the last few PT92s I groped at the gunshow were pretty dreadful as far as fit, finish, and "smoothness." It's hard to imagine a smoother action than either of my M92s.....

I've had a few very nice Taurii over the years, including a .357 Titanium, M85, 441 .44spl, and the CT9 carbine- but have never been impressed by the PT92.

Glad you like yours, though.
 
You got a good one then
More by luck than judgement after reading reviews but it's possible, maybe, that it being NOS (New old stock) helped.

ps. If I was being picky, I could pick on the gritty decocker but it's no worse than what's on my CZ75 SP-01T
 
Last edited:
As far as overall quality being the same......dude, have you owned or held both in your hand simultaneously? I don't think you would make that assertion. The Taurus is an OK gun made on old tooling in a 3rd world country, but it is NOT a Beretta.

I own both. The PT99 was made in the early 80's, probably around the time it went from Beretta to Taurus, the Beretta in the mid-90's. Both are solid guns, well made, and substantial. I even sent the PT-99 back to Taurus for an action job either in the late 80's or late 90's, whenever they were advertising it for around $50. You obviously don't care for the Taurus, which is fine, but I assert only that I consider the quality basically equal. I suspect they have kept their tooling up to date, just as Beretta does, and if you consider Brazil a third world country, your standards are exceedingly high. Spend a couple weeks in Rio and Brasilia and you might change your opinion. I daresay if you judged the U.S. on San Francisco, you might think we were heading in that general direction - a serious shame, too. But - to each his own, and to all a good night!
Cheers!
 
Thanks but I'd rather not buy a Taurus. I understand their 92 clones are good to go, but I want the Beretta, and am just wondering how the commercial M9 is different over the military M9.

Yeah, wouldn't buy a Taurus 92 with YOUR money.

My experience with the 92FS, and 92A1 is the plastic is pretty sturdy. Had mine for years,
and haven't replaced a "cheap" component yet.
 
I own both. The PT99 was made in the early 80's, probably around the time it went from Beretta to Taurus, the Beretta in the mid-90's. Both are solid guns, well made, and substantial. I even sent the PT-99 back to Taurus for an action job either in the late 80's or late 90's, whenever they were advertising it for around $50. You obviously don't care for the Taurus, which is fine, but I assert only that I consider the quality basically equal. I suspect they have kept their tooling up to date, just as Beretta does, and if you consider Brazil a third world country, your standards are exceedingly high. Spend a couple weeks in Rio and Brasilia and you might change your opinion. I daresay if you judged the U.S. on San Francisco, you might think we were heading in that general direction - a serious shame, too. But - to each his own, and to all a good night!
Cheers!
I will gladly admit that there was a "golden age" for Taurus (and Rossi) that stretched ran from the early '80s to about '95. During this time, their quality rivalled S&W and Beretta- I owned several nice examples from that era. But since the rise of Braztech, the quality of both brands has fallen dramatically. Stock breakages on the Circuit Judge, poor wood fit, canted sights, jamming on the lever guns, internal parts breakages........

The CT30 carbines made for the Policia Civil were so bad, the government tried to return them all to Taurus.

None of this applies directly to the 99, of course, but comparing new production to the older ones, the rough cast and MIM bits may be updates, but certainly weren't intended to make the gun anything other than cheaper to produce. Doesn't mean it's any less reliable or durable, but it wasn't a Beretta then and it surely isn't a Beretta now.

As far as San Fran being a faleva, well the shoe might not fit yet but some day soon.....

No haterade, though, to any and all who love Brazil and it's guns. More power to ya!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top