anonimoose
New member
Shooters,
I don't conceal carry much*, but when I do, I choose my Beretta 92FS**. Sure, it's noticeably heavier than my Walther P22, but it's manageable. With the Crossbreed Supertuck, or even with a simple Uncle Mike's IWB, I sometimes forget that it's there.
What I don't understand is why many cite the weight of the Beretta ("It's a boat anchor!") as inappropriate for concealed carry...but then rave about, let's say, the Sig 229 as an excellent concealed carry choice. Huh? The Beretta 92FS weighs 34oz, the Sig 229 weighs 32oz.
I'd understand if people hated on the Beretta's barrel/slide length ("When I tried IWB, it kept digging into my butt!") but the beef seems to be with the weight, not the length. And yet weight doesn't seem to be an issue with Sigs for most people -- even the interminable "Glock vs. Sig debate for CCW" debates focus more on ergos, trigger reset, striker vs. hammer, etc -- rarely on weight.
Maybe it's just group-think/"conventional wisdom"? Or maybe humping a pack all those months just made me immune to weight/tolerant of discomfort!
very respectfully,
Moose
*active duty military, so I don't conceal carry at work and "socialize" (and carry) mostly on the weekends
**KISS: I lost my firearms virginity to the Beretta 92FS, so to speak, and it's basically the only pistol I've consistently carried, thus the level of familiarity/muscle-memory remains the same whether in Afghanistan or Arizona
I don't conceal carry much*, but when I do, I choose my Beretta 92FS**. Sure, it's noticeably heavier than my Walther P22, but it's manageable. With the Crossbreed Supertuck, or even with a simple Uncle Mike's IWB, I sometimes forget that it's there.
What I don't understand is why many cite the weight of the Beretta ("It's a boat anchor!") as inappropriate for concealed carry...but then rave about, let's say, the Sig 229 as an excellent concealed carry choice. Huh? The Beretta 92FS weighs 34oz, the Sig 229 weighs 32oz.
I'd understand if people hated on the Beretta's barrel/slide length ("When I tried IWB, it kept digging into my butt!") but the beef seems to be with the weight, not the length. And yet weight doesn't seem to be an issue with Sigs for most people -- even the interminable "Glock vs. Sig debate for CCW" debates focus more on ergos, trigger reset, striker vs. hammer, etc -- rarely on weight.
Maybe it's just group-think/"conventional wisdom"? Or maybe humping a pack all those months just made me immune to weight/tolerant of discomfort!
very respectfully,
Moose
*active duty military, so I don't conceal carry at work and "socialize" (and carry) mostly on the weekends
**KISS: I lost my firearms virginity to the Beretta 92FS, so to speak, and it's basically the only pistol I've consistently carried, thus the level of familiarity/muscle-memory remains the same whether in Afghanistan or Arizona