Questions Re Beretta 92FS INOX and M9A1

[12many]

I am going to get a Beretta 92FS Inox or M9A1 for my next purchase. I am trying to build up a bit of a collection with some different pistols to have and shoot. Variety keeps things interesting. All will be shot, not sold, and likely handed down as I get old. I have been doing lots research so am up to speed on most of the basics for the 92FS and M9 line, but I still have some questions though.

These are my questions. Thanks for any input on these.

1. Some of the Inox models have black 'parts' like trigger and saftey lever . . . and other are silvery stainless? I have read that some have more stainless parts than the non-inox models. Is this also true of the Inox models with black tiggers and saftey lever?

2. Is there a benefit to getting the Inox models other than the corrosion resistance? For example, is the stainless barrel more accurate? Are the stainless parts better?

3. With regard to the M9A1, I am aware that it has the following differences from the 92FS:

- Diff color/coating
- Flat front trigger guard
- accessory rail

Is there any reason I would want this model over the Inox? Any other benefits that I am missing? More accurate?

4. I also see that there is a 92FS version with a polished slide. It 'shore looks purdy', but don't know much about it. I assume it is just a polished Inox with wood grips for more $.



Thanks.

This is probaby one of the most confusing model lines to pick from due to all the variations. Not as many differences/options as the 1911 though. That took a long time to figure out.

 

[Fishman777]

Any reason you aren't considering the 90two???

The 90two is a more advanced design than both the 92fs and the M9A1.

The 90two's rail covers and name have really hurt this pistol, but I think it is the best gun in Beretta's current lineup. If I ever buy a Beretta it will be a 90two. The things that I really like about the 90two include the increased capacity, the interchangable grips, the decreased trigger reach, and the recoil buffer (helps with percieved recoil and decreases wear on the locking block). If you like the 92 series, you should really give this gun a chance.

Some people have stated that the 90two solves problems that don't exist. I disagree. These people aren't paying attention to the criticisms that frequently appear on gun forums. I constantly hear people whining about how the grip is too big, the trigger reach is too long, and how the locking block isn't as durable as it needs to be. Well for all of the Beretta critics, here is the solution.

 

[12many]

I will look into it. Thanks.


One of the reasons I liked the 92 or m9 was the historical background it has as having been the sidearm selected by the military. No big deal, just a bit of history. Both are more gun than I will even need or shoot through.

I did some research and it looks like the black parts are metal covered in polymer (plastic). I wonder if I can buy after market SS parts ??

 

[Old Dog]

OP asked:

1. Some of the Inox models have black 'parts' like trigger and saftey lever . . . and other are silvery stainless? I have read that some have more stainless parts than the non-inox models. Is this also true of the Inox models with black tiggers and saftey lever?

The newer production models with the "black parts" have plastic and plastic-coated parts (plastic guide rod, trigger, safety/decocker lever, slide stop, sights) and you can detect other differences as the recent versions have a slight upwards taper of the dust cover and a slightly radiused backstrap at the top of the grip.

Most Beretta aficianados prefer the old models with the classic lines and all steel (and aluminum/alloy) components. Many who buy the newer pistols swap out the plastic parts with steel (for example, you can order a nice stainless steel guide rod through Wolff's Gunsprings for about $29, which is where you'd start). A new trigger assembly is also a must.

2. Is there a benefit to getting the Inox models other than the corrosion resistance? For example, is the stainless barrel more accurate? Are the stainless parts better?

No to all. Except that the Inox 92FS is a very strikingly attractive pistol and some think it looks better than the black version.

3. With regard to the M9A1, I am aware that it has the following differences from the 92FS:
...

Is there any reason I would want this model over the Inox? [No, only if you desire the rail for mounting a light..] Any other benefits that I am missing? More accurate? [Maybe, maybe not.]

If I ever buy a Beretta it will be a 90two.

Well, take it for what it's worth, but from one who's actually carried a 92FS on duty for more than 15 years and has owned several, I think the older versions of the 92FS are entirely satisfactory. Not saying the 90-Two is a bad pistol, but the older Berettas with all metal parts are terrific pistols, great shooters, reliable and usually quite accurate.

Not sure why anyone would need any type of recoil-buffer in a 9mm; even, as postulated, to save wear on the locking blocks, realize that this part is a relatively cheap and easily replaced part that takes many thousands of rounds before it's at risk of breaking.

My advice for one's first Beretta would be to pick up a lightly used older model (available quite inexpensively almost anywhere).

 

[Fishman777]

I don't mean to sound like I don't like the 92fs...

The 92fs is one of my favorite pistol designs. I actually prefer the 92 series pistols to any other pistol designs. They fit me very well and I shoot them very well. While I haven't owned either pistol, I have shot both the 92fs and the 90two on several occasions. I personally like the 90two better for the reasons that I stated before. I just think that it is more ergonmic than the 92fs, but that is not to say that the 92fs is a bad pistol.

I started shooting with revolvers and I haven't been able to kick the habit. When I eventually add an autoloader to the collection, it will either be a 90two or some sort of polymer gun.

 

[The Ruckus]

Call me crazy, but I would not buy used that has 2-3k rounds through it for steel parts. The plastic parts are extremely easy to replace and very cheap to do so. I myself have an '07 production Beretta 92FS and love the gun. I notice no difference with the steel or plastic guide rods, it's a 9mm after all.

PS-Another small difference with the M9A1 counter-part is it comes with sand resistant magazines (seriously doubt you need that)

 

[Miked7762]

A few other small differences between the M9A1 and the FS:

Checkering on the front and rear straps
Larger bevel at the magazine well
Available with 2 dot or 3 dot sights

The rear sight is actually indented for both configurations but only one style is painted.

The only all plastic parts on the newer pistols are the grips and the guide rod. Everything else is either powder coated or plastic over a metal skeleton. I personally like the newer parts due to the corrosion resistance, especially the trigger and trigger bar.

 

[12many]

Thanks everyone. I ended up ordering a 92 Inox.

It was a bit of an impulse buy and perhaps I should have got the M9 instead. Given that it pretty much the same gun, in the end it will not matter. I am not sure why I got the Inox over the M9. Looks and the sights I guess. Since the 92 Inox was discontinued I thought I had to get one right now !!!.

If I get cash flush some day I can pick up the M9A1, but I doubt I would buy both. I will post some pictures when I get it, I am sure most of you have Never seen a 92 Inox before.

 

[Firepower!]

1. Yes
2. No
3. No
4. Yes

PS If you are building collection get INOX. I have had both, black and silver. Silver will be a better choice in collection. Black ones are more common.