thoughts on Beretta M9/92fs?

[GarandFan]

I seem to have been bitten by a bug, and the symptom is the desire to get a Beretta M9 type pistol. Part of me just wants to be familiar with the platform in current military use. Another part of me thinks that because I've loaded up a few thousand rounds of 9mm ... that I need another pistol in that caliber. I already have a Glock 19, a SIG P229, and a CZ75 ... but you know how that goes. ;-)

 

Anyone have experience with these, or general thoughts about the pistols? What's the double-action trigger pull like? Long and heavy I'd imagine? What kind of magazines are preferred ... factory Beretta? Mec-gar? Also, what kind of $$ am I looking at ballpark, for NIB ones or gently used ones?

 

I know I know ... I should just get one and get the experience first-hand. But strangely enough I've never even fired one of these things ... and I've found a lot of knowledge here and a willingness for folks to share.

 

Thanks in advance to anyone willing to share thoughts/experience on M9 pistols.

[Vaden]

Personally, I absolutely love them. I bought an ex safe queen this year and put about 200 rounds of NATO spec Winchester down the tube. The only reason I am selling mine is to fund my ridiculous 1911 habit. I will definitely own one again but its not practical for me right now as that trigger is not something I would want to learn for action pistol shooting. I would put my life in its hands as readily as I would any Glock though, and the unique aesthetics really draw me back to it time and again. It just begs to be held.

 

In summary, great range/home defense gun, you will not regret it. Add to the fact that you can get a .40 cal 96fs top end and magazine and have a dual caliber gun that switches out in about 3 seconds and you've got a gun that belongs in every enthusiasts safe.

[rott]

I just looked up prices and the M9 appears out of stock right now. If the prices remain the same though, you should be looking at about $570ish plus tax for a new M9.

 

Sorry I have no experience at all with them. I have a 92FS on my list to some day get....

[Vaden]

$400ish for a well used specimen up through $500 for minty clean models to $3800+ for a rare billenium.

[Bud]

personally, I absolutely hate them. Carried one professionally from 1987 -1999.

 

Big, clunky, heavy, old technology, small magazine capacity, and impossible to conceal.

 

A slide mounted safety-decocker? really?

 

How old school is that?

 

Even the Marine Spec Ops units have rverted to the 1911 and the the Military Coips of all the services are now carrying M11s (Sig 228)

 

The 9mms you already have are all vastly superior to the 92FS or variations.

[3ddiver]

I used to shoot one in USPSA. It shot really nice but I switched from it because of the heavy DA pull and the manual safety. The biggest reason I went away from it was the safety because of the extra time it took to flip it off. I still enjoy shooting it when I take it to the range though. It is a very accurate gun but like Bud said it is heavy compared to what you can get now. I use it in my NRA classes because it is esy for the students to take apart also.

[GarandFan]

Thanks for the thoughts (yours too, Bud). I like honest, personal perspectives. I hear you on the big, clunky, heavy, etc., but don't understand the "small mag capacity." At 15 rounds standard, and excellent 18 and 20 round Mec-gar mags all over the place ... their round capacity is comparable to typical, "modern" 9mm pistols.

[Patriots & Tyrants]

You sound like me minus the glock, Beretta 92 is going to be my next gun. Mecgar makes 17 round mags putting it on par with any other semi auto and changinh a couple springs can get you a sigish trigger all for about 400 less than a sig.

[Howard Roark]

I am following... I like all steel handguns, and I like our traditions of military guns in the hands of the people. That's just me. Maybe a m9 is not good for carry, but I still want one. My family members who also served would probably like the M9. Maybe not the perfect 9, but it probably depends on the use case.

[xmikex]

Honestly, I'd only own one for weapons familiarity. If you are in the .mil, you should own one as it's the handgun you're most likely to be using when deployed.

 

Overall though they suck. LOL

 

I'd use the M9 money to take a professional handgun training class - but I'm more of a "guns are tools" kinda' guy - don't have the budget to be a collector).

[TyGuy]

I just got a 92FS Inox made in Italy. If you don't care about it being blue or stainless then go for a blued one made in Italy. Made in Itsly costs more, BUT if you don't have a Beretta made in Italy you are missing out. Beretta is the world's oldest arms manufacturer still in business.

[TyGuy]

I think the 92 F/S is one of the most beautiful handguns in the world, and John MacClame used one in Die Hard!

[AFigmentOfYourImagination]

I think the 92 F/S is one of the most beautiful handguns in the world, and John MacClame used one in Die Hard!

 

Dude, he would have been bad @$$ even with a Taurus 22/25 series.

[abolt243]

heck Garand!! Just buy it!! You know you want to!!

 

What's another 9mm or so around the house??

 

Tim

[I Hate Gunlaws]

I carried an M9 for nearly 5 years. Big and clunky, but easy to shoot, and my issue M9 never failed to go bang, even in desert environments after plenty of dust exposure. The D/A trigger pull is long and heavy, but the single action was nice and crisp... at least on the pistol I had. Personally, I wouldn't mind having one, but I keep finding other pistols to buy. Also, never jump out of a plane with one in a right drop holster, then pull a slip and finally perform a PLF on that same right side. You'll wind up with a bruise that hurts like heck, and is nearly the same shape as the pistol...lol.

 

Regardless, some people love them, some people hate them. I liked mine.

[spec4]

I've had my FS92 for years. Don't shoot it a lot, but it has never failed to operate the way it should. They seem to be priced around $500. Also, the takedown and cleaning IMO is easier than a 1911.

[Lou]

heck Garand!! Just buy it!! You know you want to!!

 

What's another 9mm or so around the house??

 

Tim

 

GF, do you really need a reason to buy one other than you can?

[blueliner]

I carried a 1911 for my active duty time in the Army (84-88) and an M9 for my reserve time including my call up to active duty for 4 months in Desert Shield/Storm (88-92). I would take the M9 to battle everyday of the week and twice on Sunday! I currently have both a GI1911 and an Beretta M9 in my gun safe, but I prefer my M9. I love shooting my M9 over everything else, it is the most relaible handgun and smoothest to shoot and handle of any hand gun I have ever found. Personally, I like the decocker/safety on the slide. I never drank the "koolaide" of the Glock phenom, I like a gun that has a hammer I can see, a safety I can work and takes some intelligence to use.

 

My current M9 I bought used for $400. I replaced all the springs and got a nice trigger job done which makes the DA pull much nicer. I shoot my M9 4 or 5 times a month in IDPA competition. I do catch flack from some people (usually the Glock shooters) about my big. ancient Beretta, but I get the last laugh when the scores come out!

[GarandFan]

Abolt and Lou ... you guys really hit the nail on the head!

 

Yes, I am just trying to get some opinions. That said, I seem to have a lead on an excellent condition used "commercial" M9, that I might be able to get for ca. $300-350.

 

Looks just like this:

 

http://picturearchive.gunauction.com/7142151309/8721355/b97c7b74f893f3f8d26865e6e0bf9941.jpg

[blueliner]

Abolt and Lou ... you guys really hit the nail on the head!

 

Yes, I am just trying to get some opinions. That said, I seem to have a lead on an excellent condition used "commercial" M9, that I might be able to get for ca. $300-350.

 

Looks just like this:

 

http://picturearchive.gunauction.com/7142151309/8721355/b97c7b74f893f3f8d26865e6e0bf9941.jpg

 

Best looking handgun ever IMHO!

[Kaeghl]

Getting in late on this, the only thing I might add is the obvious grip size. I don't have hands, I have paws. EIther paw wraps around the grip nicely, so I do feel that I have slightly better control of the 92 size gun. Smaller grips feel like they're lost and drifting around in my fist. You have slightly larger than the 'the norm' hand size, you'll like it.

 

jmho

[8x57]

I've only had the Taurus versions, so I'll give you my experiences with them. First I had an all black 92AFS without the rail. Now I have the model 917 which is the same gun except with a 4" barrel and a rail. Both seem about as heavy as a steel 1911 and considerably wider. I think my 7.5" barrel .44 magnum Redhawk would probably conceal easier. They go bang very reliably, except I've been able to trip up the cycling when shooting off a rest. They have decent combat accuracy, not as good as a 1911 for me, but enough to hit an 8" steel plate out to 25 yards consistently. I think accuracy would be better if they used some sort of barrel bushing. All the models I've seen (Taurus and Berreta) had quite a bit of slop where the front of the barrel goes through the frame. The 18 round flush fit Mec-Gar magazines are some of the nicest I've ever used in any handgun. Taurus put the decocker in a much better location than Beretta's original design and it works great. They are significantly easier to field strip than a 1911, but I think they're worse than a 1911 for complete disassembly due to having a bunch of parts staked in place. My overall opinion is that they are good reliable combat guns but are quite heavy and bulky while only being 9mm. They have their place as a combat, plinking, or home defense gun. There are far better options for carry and target work. I keep my current 4" model with a light mounted on it and 3 magazines full of +P hollowpoints for a home defense gun.

[cherryriver]

I'll answer from another perspective, a civilian instructor.

I start out by saying: any gun that runs is a good gun. Period.

Then: the cardboard and the timer don't lie. So:

Since our main product is women's intro and follow-on classes, there's a side answer as to how well the 92 does with women, especially relatively new shooters, and we find it does cross the gender line to a large degree. The short answer is: poorly.

First, in terms of hits on target, the 92 is the 9mm we show them in our classes that consistently produces the worst results on paper. That goes double if the sequence is started from the carry condition. We apply that condition to students contemplating using the gun for either competition or carry. The holes aren't in the good places, and they don't get there quickly.

Like any instructor, I'm used to seeing blank faces not getting it. But nothing compares to trying to explain the manual of arms for the 92 pattern to new or newer handgunners. There are folks who think I'm pretty good at explaining mechanical stuff, but the 92 might exceed my capabilities. What Bud said...

The handle size and shape are not favorable for quite a few people of both genders. The reach to the trigger is unacceptable for a significant proportion of the population. While not fatal, these elements are a concern for many.

We've literally had newer shooters come to our classes with 92s, bought, I suspect, because of the US military's usage, and who, despite our best efforts, have taken up other guns available in the class and gone away trading in their 92s. Never seen that with any other gun in our experience (with the notable exception of more-mature women who've purchased .357 revolvers... another story).

That leads to another way to describe the situation: one of the specialties of the house with us is "TD's gun buffet" in our secondary class. We lay out something north of a dozen 9mm rental handguns from GAT's capacious showcase and let them fondle them dry, them shoot them live later. 92s get set aside early in the range session pretty frequently, and those who stay with them for more than a couple of magazines simply never fire them from the carry condition.

Finally, we do know some things from running hundreds of newbies through these 101 and 102 classes: the best centerfire hits are almost invariably with the 1911, but, due to the thumb safety and single-action trigger, the Glock 34 and XDm virtually always win out when it comes to efficiency combined with good hits.

There's still more we learn from our competition and holster classes, too, but it's pretty similar. Tough to deploy quickly with acceptable accuracy, and lots of fumble time at both ends of the timer.

All that said, the 92s we've been exposed to have been good, reliable runners during their time with us. That counts more than anything for sport or personal protection. So, if you like it, stay with it, get good with it, and get the hits, it's a good gun.

[Xwing]

It's a gun on my "must buy" list

[cherryriver]

Another point worth making about the 92, especially as applies to women: It's probably the easiest slide to rack for people with weaker hands. Maybe only a 9mm 1911 would come close. This is a huge benefit that experienced handgun shooters easily overlook.

The rest of the controls, excepting the safety, are similarly user-friendly.

The Taurus clone cited above gets around the safety with an easier-to-comprehend operation. We have one in our stock just to teach the DA/SA trigger system.

We feel the Glock 34 gets a decent third place for slide-rack-ease. That leads to the success we've had with it, especially the Gen4.

The whole slide-rack thing throws a big kink into gun selection for older and less-strong shooters, doubly so for new ones. The 92 could be an answer for someone just for its ease of racking.

And that may matter in a household where it is shared by persons of varying abilities.

What made me think of this is all those S&W 686s and Ruger 100s and little five-shooters that arrive in our classes... and the more mature ladies who were sold them can't operate the DA trigger with only their trigger finger.

[jackinelgin]

I've owned a 92 at one time. Also Glock,XD and a M&P. Just got this. If you like heavier 9mm's with a decocker,try a CZ. This is a SP-01 Tactical.Only had her out once but shot the best I have yet with an autoloader.

http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e260/jackinil/DSC00155.jpg

[Stavros31]

I have a Beretta 96a1, it always ends up in my range bag. It is a must have in any collection.

[Gunslinger]

I carried one daily in Afghanistan. Never used it except for shooting te giant rats that plagued our outpost. As far as then and shooting it at different ranges I never had an issue. I like the ambi safety and the 15 rd mag is nice.

[RandyP]

Simplest answer is to rent one and shoot up a couple boxes of ammo and then decide. Even if you have to drive a bit to a range with one in their rental fleet it is still less $$$ and grief than buying a pistol you then fund out you dislike.

[stm]

I like the 92F quite a bit. I used to own one, but I currently don't have one in my collection. This and a previous thread about the Beretta 92 renewed my interest in them. Yesterday, I wandered in to a local shop that had a new one in the display case. Upon picking it up in my hand, I had a rush of memories. I forgot how bulky it felt in the hand. The DA trigger was long and stiff, a bit of a reach for my stubby fingers. The slide mounted safety / decocker felt awkward at first, but my thumb soon remembered how to quickly manipulate it. The sights were decent, but I remembered how difficult it was to have night sights installed due to the integral front sight. The slide was easy to manipulate, and the exposed hammer was a familiar sight.

 

In my experience, the Beretta 92 is extremely reliable, more than accurate enough for self defense, and a sharp looking pistol. I prefer only OEM magazines for my pistols for reliability reasons. I've had bad experiences with aftermarket magazines in the past. Like most any pistol, given enough training and trigger time, most anyone can master it. But not many people are dedicated enough to master it. I've seen a USPSA Grand Master shoot a Beretta 92 in a match. I was very impressed.

 

But there are easier guns to shoot. Guns that require less time to master, and cost less. As others have mentioned, it may not be the best gun for a beginner to learn with, but the Army has been successfully doing that for 26 years or so.

 

I handed the 92 back to the clerk, and decided there are other pistols I would like to add to my collection first.