school me on the beretta 92

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have the Beretta 92, SIG P228, 226 and a H&K too. The action of the Beretta is smoother and more accurate for me then the SIG or H&K USP. Raw recruits 18 years old can learn to shoot the Beretta much sooner than the older 1911 according to the Army. It is a big gun for the caliber but the long sight radius and heft make it easy to shoot well. It is a my favorite when shooting here at my farm range out to 40 yards. That said, the grip can be a problem for some people with small hands
 
Bullet Bob said:
Love my Beretta 92, but if you don't have the energy to search and learn about things on your own (i.e., Beretta forum, google search, etc.) so you'll have at least enough information to know what you want to ask, I recommend a Hi-Point for you.
Click to expand...
Yeah, do your due diligence and ask around on some forums... just not THIS forum. Right?

:rolleyes:
 
rskent wrote,
I think it's a great 9mm service pistol. If you can reach the trigger it would be a very good choice.
Unfortunately My fingers are nowhere near long enough. You know what they say “tiny fingers big ….”.
Click to expand...
I hear that a lot, but while the grip does feel chunky, I find the trigger reach, at least in double action, to be easier for me with the Beretta 92FS than other duty size double column 9MM's such as the SIG P226 (standard grips, not E2), and the CZ75B. Some current models come with a modified backstrap that reduces the trigger reach a little. It's not much, but it is noticeable.
 
I think the 92 is a classic. If you have large enough hands it feels great and shoots great. My P226 is more accurate but the 92FS is no slouch. Very very smooth. With the D hammer spring the DA pull is lightened up nicely and SA pull improved also. Highly recommended.

I don't like the location and operation of the decocker/safety, and have inadvertently swiped it down/on during reloads during matches. But that can be trained around.

Gratuitous pic

0a677153.jpg
 
Post #15....

Post 15 is flawed for several reasons.
SECDEF Robert Gates cut the new XM9 pistol trials several years ago due to budget/$$$ issues. The armed forces signed new contracts with Beretta USA to take delivery of 1000s of new M9 9mmNATO pistols. The US Marine Corps chose to get the newer M9A1 pistol. It has a 1913 rail & a few minor upgrades.
The USMC also selected the Colt M45 1911a1 service pistol for spec ops & selected units.
The DoD & DARPA do not spend $$$ on unfunded projects or weapon systems like "new sidearms".
The M9 Berettas will be around for a long time.
The M16 & M4 rifles aren't going to change anytime soon either.
After the long run of OIF(Iraq) & OEF(SW Asia), the armed forces are going to draw down. That means no new super guns or planes or tanks or bazookas. :rolleyes:

Also, before you huff & puff, the "tier one" units like DevGru, ForceRecon, ACE, ISA(Task Force Orange), AWG, Rangers, etc get budgets & funding from a different source.
They are not in the contracts & procurement systems of the regular military.
 
I also agree that post #15 is flawed. The U.S. armed forces is not going to get a new pistol any time soon and are quite happy with the performance of the Beretta 92. It is an easy pistol to learn to shoot well. It went through rigorous testing years ago and met all the performance standards they were looking for. It is true that special forces units have a wide array of guns to pick from, but that has been the case for many decades; and, that in itself is not because of any flaws in the Beretta 92 as a service pistol.
 
Great guns. However, for me they are freakishly big. I sold mine for a much more practicaly sized pistol. But again, they are really good guns and if you are LE or open carry all the time they would probably just right for you.
 
I used to own the Beretta 92F, mine was made in Italy.

Build quality was very good and the pistol was reliable. I don't own it anymore and here is why...

1. It is too large for everyday comfortable carry when compared to other, equivalent for the role, options

2. The safety on the F model is mounted on the slide and is UP for Fire. This requires a specific manual of arms, whether or not you use the safety. You must be in the habit of pushing up on the safety when you draw the pistol to ensure the safety is in the ON/FIRE position. To do otherwise, is to risk drawing your pistol to fire and inadvertently having the pistol on safe when you need it most.

3. There are much better options when it comes to size, weight, and firepower available now that are easier to carry.

Given these issues, I don't think you will go wrong buying one if you are willing to deal with what I mentioned above. It will be a well built reliable pistol.
 
The safety on the F model is mounted on the slide and is UP for Fire. This requires a specific manual of arms, whether or not you use the safety. You must be in the habit of pushing up on the safety when you draw the pistol to ensure the safety is in the ON/FIRE position. To do otherwise, is to risk drawing your pistol to fire and inadvertently having the pistol on safe when you need it most.
Click to expand...
I'm primarily a 1911 shooter, and have been since the late 1980's, but I'm always fascinated that you can't get through a Beretta 92 thread without the above statement. However, there are multiple entire threads about S&W metal framed autos (what I shot before the 1911), and Ruger P-Series guns that operate the same way as the Beretta 92 Series, and nobody will comment on the operation of the slide mounted safety.

S&W 5906 thread http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=664005&highlight=5906

Ruger P-Series http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=718881&highlight=ruger+p90+accuracy
 
To JTQ... that surprises me as well. The design of the safety is sound, but in all the pistols you mentioned, the manual of arms is the same... and the Operator should take this into consideration, especially, when comparing a pistol with this feature against competing models without it.

So, this is not a judgement call, but an awareness issue...

I'm surprised it's not mentioned more often... I guess everyone knows...
 
I'm convinced the reason you don't see it mentioned in threads about the S&W Traditional Double Action (TDA) autos and Ruger P-Series is because…

1. They are no longer in production.
2. Most of those threads are populated predominately by lovers of the S&W TDA's and Ruger P-Series rather than the Beretta threads that seem to draw as many haters as lovers.
3. The S&W TDA's and P-Series really aren't competitive anymore with the other guns that people who make those comments prefer, such as SIG's, CZ's, and Glock's (and other striker fired guns).

The Beretta 92/96 Series (and the Beretta PX4 family) are still competitive in the market place with SIG's, CZ's, and Glock's, so to point out the superiority of their chosen pistol, the Beretta must be shown to have a fault. That fault is typically identified as the safety/decocker of the FS models.

Sure, I'd prefer a G model Beretta (decocker) over the FS model (safety/decocker), but the safety/decocker is really not much of an issue. Most will only use it as a decocker anyway, and will never have an issue with it, just like all those many people that have successfully used S&W TDA's since the 1950's, and all those who have successfully used the Ruger P-Series guns since the 1980's, and even the Walther P38 since before WW II.
 
Beretta safety controls; ambi safety.....

The 92FS/M9 ambi safety design is another reason why I wasn't a huge fan.
The D(DA only) model was great but as noted, the 92/96 series is a pain to lug around after 12/16 hours. :(
I recall a uniformed PA state trooper who was in agreement with that. We were talking about the 96D .40S&W which the sworn personnel used for several years before going with Glocks. The PA state troopers now use Glock 21 .45acp sidearms.
To my limited knowledge, the LAPD first ordered police officers to keep the 92F safety off but then let the sworn officers & detectives decide what format(safety on or off) they wanted to carry. The union had a say in that SOP change. ;)
I prefer frame mounted types like the well engineered M&P pistols or the USPs.

Rusty
 
I just can't resist a Beretta thread. Full disclosure - the Beretta 92FS is my favorite firearm of all time, so I am very biased. But I also have more time handling Beretta 90-series handguns than any other firearm (with the possible exception of a Remington 870 shotgun), so I've had plenty of time to dissect and analyze it's pros and cons.

There seem to be some universal complaints about it:

• It's big and heavy for a 9mm
• Its safety/decocker is in a bad spot
• It has a long and very heavy DA trigger pull
• It doesn't fit small hands or short fingers

There also seem to be some universal praises:

• With quality magazines, it is boringly reliable with every variety of ammo
• It has very little felt recoil or muzzle flip because of its size and weight
• It is very accurate out of the box, if the shooter does their part
• It is a tight-fitting, quality firearm with a very smooth action

Now, of course there will be people who disagree with 1 or all of the above, but these seem to be the most common complaints and praises. Here is my take on the complaints:

• It's big and heavy for a 9mm - I agree, but that is part of what makes it comfortable to shoot. It's not an ideal CCW, but that was never its intended purpose. It was designed as a duty and combat sidearm.
• Its safety/decocker is in a bad spot - Yeah, sort of. I can certainly reach it comfortably with my thumb while maintaining a shooting grip. I will admit that it is a liability when conducting reloads with the "power stroke" method. But it can be trained around. Also, G models and G conversions offered by companies like Wilson Combat utilize a decocker only, so even if the hammer gets inadvertently decocked during stress, you'll never have a dead trigger when you were expecting a bang.
• It has a long and very heavy DA trigger pull - This is so easy to fix, it's stupid: Buy a "D" hammer spring from any number of sources for about $5. Remove grips. Push lanyard loop/mainspring cap down on a hard surface to relieve pressure, and push out the roll pin. Let the mainspring cap fall out along with the stock spring. Replace with the D spring and put everything back together. Voila! You just took your DA pull from about 1,000 lbs. to around 8.5 lbs. Dry firing will continue to improve it even more.
• It doesn't fit small hands or short fingers - I more or less agree, but I wear a medium size glove and have no problems whatsoever. Improvements can be made, too. There are short reach triggers available, as well as thinner grip panels. If you are used to 1911s or Glocks, then yes, the trigger reach will seem far. But if you have a lot of experience with DA revolvers, DA/SA Sigs, HKs, etc., then it's not really a problem.

One other random note - It's the only semi-automatic pistol I've ever handled that can be field stripped and reassembled with 1 hand. I timed myself one night, and after about 20 attempts, I could field strip my 92FS into it's 5 main pieces (barrel and lug, frame, slide, recoil spring, guide rod) and put it back together with 1 hand behind my back in 30 seconds flat.

It's also a good looking gun, if aesthetics are important to you.
 
We'll done OJ.

I guess my biggest personal complaint is it (the 9mm) won't always knock the steel plates over.
 
I am good friends with a guy who did 3 tours with it in the Army recently, and he hates it with a passion. He says that the guys he was stationed with would have contest to see how quickly one could pull the slide off the gun. He said that one guy could get it off instantly in any position. He also stated that most of the people there didn't like the gun either.

Bottom line, I don't ever plan on buying one, I think it's ugly, don't like the safety, and don't like the way the barrel is exposed. Will it work? Sure. Not my first choice by a long way though.
 
Post 15 is flawed for several reasons.
Click to expand...

I also agree that post #15 is flawed. The U.S. armed forces is not going to get a new pistol any time soon and are quite happy with the performance of the Beretta 92.
Click to expand...

Hey Post 15 is mine. Are you fellas sure you completely read my comments?

The fact that the military is looking for a replacement of the Beretta 92/M9 is totally meaningless. The military has been looking for replacements of the M-16 for decades along with just about all of it's weapons.
Click to expand...

Just a few links about replacing the M-9;

August, 2005;

http://olive-drab.com/od_other_firearms_pistol_m9.php

August, 2011;

http://www.armytimes.com/article/20110828/NEWS/108280315/Pistols-shot-replacing-M9

July, 2013

http://www.airforcetimes.com/articl...270003/Testing-M9-replacement-start-next-year


The Military Industrial Complex is a grossly bloated organization whose leaders want to spend billions of dollars on new toys while retiring battle tested weapons such as the A-10 Warthog. ( can anyone in Washington, D.C. say Russian Tank Buster).
Click to expand...

Air Force;

How about the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter? It’s only $163 billion over budget, seven years behind schedule, and will cost taxpayers about twice as much as sending a man to the moon.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/02/f-35-fighter-plane-costs-103579.html

The Navy;

The Navy is sending one of it’s Littoral Combat Ships overseas, even though the Pentagon knows the ship's guns don’t properly function and is unsure whether the ship can even survive combat. The USS Freedom cost the US government $670.4 million and one hit and it is sunk.

http://rt.com/usa/combat-ship-navy-freedom-163/

Oh the A-10 Warthog is designed for close ground support and is especially capable for taking out Russian Armor today, Wait Barry says his buddy Vladimir isn’t going to invade the rest of Ukraine and the Baltic Nations along it’s border.


The Beretta has earned it's racing stripes through several decades of hard use.
Click to expand...

After 29 years of hard use I think the Beretta 92/M9 has proven itself to be a durable, reliable handgun and fail to see the need for more, expensive testing programs of other handguns when the gun is always going to be limited to 9mm ball ammunition. For general use in the Military I don't see any reason to adopt a different handgun. The Military already has adopted smaller 9mm handguns (SIG I think) for non-uniformed personnel (investigators) for concealed carry.
 
And another so. My son has done two tours overseas and likes the Beretta M-9. Last time he was home on leave we went to the range where he enjoyed shooting a big round hole in the head of the target. He said he was pretending it was a terrorist!

(p.s. He loves my tuned 92. I going to have to buy another so I will still have one to shoot).
 
BERETTA 92 is a good gun

HORSEMAN,

I have several BERETTA 92 and 96 pistols. The BERETTA 96 was my agency's issue pistol when we switched from the .357 magnum to the .40 S&W round.
We spent a lot of effort on testing the gun and the ammo. We were the agency that pushed the development of the 155 grain jhp for duty ammo.
In testing pistols for issue, ALL FAILED, EVERY ONE OF THEM.
The companies went back to the drawing board and SIG offered the 229 and BERETTA the 96 Brigadier ( a 96 with a re enforced slide).
This time, the BERETTA and SIG were the only ones to pass the testing. BERETTA then won based on total contract cost.

This is the same reason BERETTA beat the SIG 226 in the U.S. military testing. BOTH PASSED THE TESTING and BERETTA submitted the lower bid when it included the total cost including magazines. The SIG lost out over the cost of their magazines. My source for the opinion on the U.S. military was one of the officers involved in the actual testing. It came down to money.

On the BERETTA 92, the strong points are that recoil is moderate, the trigger is very good, on my D models, the trigger is great, comparable to a tuned revolver and accuracy is excellent for a production pistol. I have used it on the range out to 100 yards and I am an average shot. Reliability is equal to the GLOCK, H&K, SIG, SPRINGFIELD ARMORY XD line or WALTHER P-99 in my experience with all of these guns.
My agency used the 96D models down on the southwest border where a lot of guns can be put out of action by the dust and mud. They worked fine for us.
The takedown is also very easy.
ONLY USE BERETTA or MECGAR MAGAZINES! The cheap knock offs may work and are ok for the range, but only the above should be used for personal defense.

Weak points are the size, it is a big gun, as large as a 1911, but thicker. I really prefer the size of the 92 Compact model for my own use with the 9m.m. rounds, but stick with the full size for the .40 S&W.
The weight and size were probably the most often heard complaints with the BERETTA as I remember.
I still keep a BERETTA 96D as my house gun with a 92D as an alternative.

just my experience with this pistol

Jim
 
BSA1, they were talking about replacing the M16 platform since the 1960s, when I was in the Army, and they had trouble with them due to the Powder and not cleaning them. The fact remains that platform has been in continuous use longer than any other rifle in U.S. history. I suppose we will hear the same thing about the Beretta M9 for 45 years too. Heck , my uncle complained about the M1 rife that jammed on him and others during combat in France during WW2.
 
I suppose we will hear the same thing about the Beretta M9 for 45 years too. Heck , my uncle complained about the M1 rife that jammed on him and others during combat in France during WW2.
Click to expand...

And my dad complains about 1911s being inaccurate rattle traps from his experience being issued one in Vietnam. They were recycled from WWII at least.

This is probably one of the most common complaints I always read on gun forums from current soldiers about the Beretta M9. Some of these guns have been recycled since the mid 80's, with hundreds of thousands of rounds through them. Sure, any gun with this much use is going to start rattling and losing accuracy.

Just like the 1911 has continued to gain popularity 30 years after it ceased it's US military service (and 100 years after it was designed), perhaps the Beretta 90-series guns will only see a true spike in popularity and acceptance 30 years after it is retired from military service, if that ever happens.

The companies went back to the drawing board and SIG offered the 229 and BERETTA the 96 Brigadier ( a 96 with a re enforced slide).
This time, the BERETTA and SIG were the only ones to pass the testing. BERETTA then won based on total contract cost.
Click to expand...

Yes, the Brigadier slide is highly sought-after nowadays, especially in .40 S&W chambering. Beretta no longer makes it, but has replaced it with an internal buffer system in the 96A1 (and 92A1, but that's probably overkill for 9mm). Same with the G and D configurations - no longer available. I will always lust after a 92G-SD, as I see that as the ultimate pinnacle of the Beretta 90-series design (Brigadier slide, G decocker-only, picatinny rail, dovetailed sights, front and back checkering, beveled mag well). I may just have to assemble something similar, then send it to Wilson Combat for some customizing.
 
Just like the 1911 has continued to gain popularity 30 years after it ceased it's US military service (and 100 years after it was designed), perhaps the Beretta 90-series guns will only see a true spike in popularity and acceptance 30 years after it is retired from military service, if that ever happens.
Click to expand...

Won't happen with the Beretta, and here's why the 1911 is different.

From the early 1900s when JMB developed the 1911, until basically the 1980s +/- a decade, there was never a truly competitive .45 caliber pistol. And those that were competitive were thicker and DA/SA. With the AWB of 1994, people flocked to the bigger caliber handguns with under 10 round mags. And people flocked to the 1911 due to the light crisp trigger. The 1911 had a real and artificial niche created, and people have clung to that. It's thin, powerful, and does what really no other pistol does - king of the thin, powerful, SA pistols. When it was designed it was worlds better than it's competition, and few platforms caught up to it for many decades. The 1911 always makes the list of top 10 most influential and best handgun designs by contemporary gun writers, and often makes #1. I have rarely seen the Beretta 92 series in the top 10 or even top 20 lists. Glock and Sig are often in the top 10 or top 20 lists.

IMO, the Beretta does NOTHING better than at least 1/2 dozen platforms, and IMO it performs/design is as good or worse or even far worse than 1/2 dozen platforms - reliability, accuracy, cost, safety design, weight, size, durability, capacity... I see no area that it is BETTER than any other 9mm gun, and plenty of areas it is worse. And look at all of the professionals that CHOOSE NOT TO use the platform. Shooting competitors, law enforcement, etc.

I've owned several, and have been around the platform, highly experienced with hit, shot expert in the military with it, and carried it on several deployments to Iraq. That's where my experience level is with the 92 series.

I believe that politics aside and cost of switching aside, the M9 would have never been adopted and it would have long been dropped. If it wasn't for the politics of the day, the M9 would have never been adopted by the US Military. And had that happened, the 92 series would never have gained as much popularity as it has today. And IN SPITE OF this fact, that millions of Servicemembers have used the M9, it STILL isn't as popular or as good as Sigs, Glocks, and the like... which didn't have that artificial boost...

If it was so good, why is it not used by competitors and why has it been dumped by nearly every Law Enforcement agency in favor of other platforms?

When the M9 is ultimately dropped, and someday it will be, it'll drift into it's rightful position, about 10-20 handguns down on the list of best handguns for home defense, and nowhere in the top 50 of best carry handguns.

The 92 series is an above average pistol, with a decent track record, in an era of phenomenal pistol designs. Take away the artificial military boost and market, and it can't compete...
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

W
  • Locked
  • Poll
I bought a Beretta 92 because:
2 3 4 5
Replies
101
Views
7K
NC-Mike
N
J
  • Locked
beretta 96 to 92 conversion
Replies
4
Views
633
Thrash1982
T
O
  • Locked
Brazilian Beretta 92
Replies
5
Views
2K
GRIZ22
G
T
  • Locked
  • Poll
Beretta 92/96 as CCW?
Replies
6
Views
1K
CDH
C
A
  • Locked
Night Sights for Beretta 92
Replies
4
Views
1K
Texas Colt
T
Back
Top