A few things to report here. We'll start with the 1911 VS Beretta. When I first fired my 10mm Beretta at the range, I ran in to a guy there who had 3 or 4 1911A1s out. I invited him to shoot my Beretta but he said he would never shoot a beretta, going in to details about how much he hates it for replacing the 1911. This seams to be a major cause of Beretta hatred among old school military fans, as if Beretta devised a sinister plot to infiltrate the military and force them to replace the 1911 with their gun. To our dear 1911 fans, if you have a problem with it, then take it up with the politicians and military personnel who made the decision. After all, Sig Sauer, Walther and even S&W threw a 9mm at the military. I don't see you complaining about them. The only difference between them and Beretta is that they lost in the trials. In that respect, I wonder what the reputation of the Sig P-226 or Walther P-88 would be like had they won the trial and been subjected to the long term and wide spread abuse that the Beretta constantly goes through which always brings out the worst in a gun. With the reputations these guns get, it would almost sound like it'd be in a manufacturers best interest to avoid getting a military contract.
Now for ammo. People are always complaining about the 9mm VS .45ACP for efficiency, apparently ignoring history. Here is a historical wake up call for you. In WW II, the US used the .45ACP in our sub guns and pistols. In the same war, Germany used the 9mm in their pistols and sub guns. Germany ended up with a considerably higher kill ratio against the US. Especially in the military, these cartridges have ups and downs to each other which probably do more to change when/how a gun fails to protect it's user rather then changing the odds. This is REALLY not an issue in the civilian wold since when JHPs are in the game, what the 9mm lacks in size and weight it makes up for in energy.
Now, myths tend to have reality in their roots even when the myth is total nonsense. The Beretta like any other gun is not without problems. As one of our users pointed out already, part of the problem is that the military lacks the provisions to customize a beretta like Civilians can. With decent action polishing, sights customizing, spring upgrades and the like, the Beretta can stand up to quite a bit of abuse without failure, though the standard (original) models were not meant to handle +P ammo for the duration that the Beretta is often subjected to, though it CAN handle +P ammo if moderately used.
Overall, I can't imagine any 1911A1 being as dependable as some of the tricked out Berettas I have seen. The sheer design of the gun seams to have some limitation in potential though I would love to be proven wrong. Not to say that the 1911A1 is not beyond reasonably reliable but to the extent of what I have seen, I have more faith in the basic design of the Beretta then that of the 1911A1. In action, this has been confirmed. In one occasion, on a cold and humid early spring morning, I watched a Beretta jam a few times from metal expansion in the design, and by noon the gun was as reliable as any other. That is the only time I have seen a cared for beretta jam. I have seen well kept 1911A1s jam many times for all kinds of reasons.
In any case, both are good guns and for the most part, they are face value guns. If you like the Beretta, then get one. It's a great gun and fixes for just about everything the military complains about are available, if at all necessary in the civilian world. The same is true of the 1911A1. Smaller capacity but bigger bullets. Both are modest in recoil and accuracy and as long as you are taking care of them, you shouldn't have to worry about them failing on you.
