Eating some crow. (Beretta 92)

[FrankenMauser]

Well...

I've long been an opponent of the M9 for the military.
I've never been a fan of the Beretta 92.
And I've been fairly outspoken about my opinions on those subjects.

A while back, I realized that most of my experience with the Beretta 92 was in regard to the poorly-maintained and universally worn-out M9s I had to use in the military, or 92s that had been ridden hard, put away wet, and beaten to death by their owners.

So, I decided to give the 92 another shot when Bud's offered the 92S Italian Police 'trade-ins' at $299.


Crow has been served.
I still hate the safety, and I have to omit the heel magazine release of the 92S when judging the 92 in general. It works, but I'm not a fan; and it adds complications with sourcing magazines.
And it's bigger than everything else, in nearly every way.

But this 92S shoots great, has not bobbled at all, and fits my hand better than even my all-time favorite 9mm, the Hi-Power.

A few weeks back, I shot my Ruger P95DC, the Browning Hi-Power, and the Beretta 92S back-to-back with the same loads. (Along with a borrowed Glock and a CZ75B.)
The one I kept coming back to was the 92S.

It just felt better.

 

[tallball]

They are good pistols. You paid a small amount of money for a great handgun that will last for many decades. Welcome to the Dark Side. A Model 96 may be in your future.

 

[polaris joe]

I used to be a fan of the 92. I have owned maybe 3 over the years. Nothing wrong with them but I have found guns I like much better. My favorite one was the 92 compact. I seldom see them anywhere today

 

[kraigwy]

I too had to eat crow regarding the Beretta 92 (only mine was the FS).

I was in the National Guard when the Army adopted the Beretta and was a huge fan of the M1911a1.

I happened to be in a position where the pistol was my duty weapon. I ran the AK NG Marksmanship Unit in charge of training and marksmanship for the state.

The powers to be yielded to me on small arms matters so I continued to carry my personal 1911a1. Those that knew the difference weren't in a position to question me, those that had the power didn't know the difference.

Fast forward several years, I had long since retired. I was offered a position training Afghan Police in Police Bomb Disposal. I would have to carry and qualify with the Beretta. I've never fired one. My wife, who had carried one as a duty pistol had. She told me I should get one and shoot it a bit.

I refused saying I would qualify if I had to, but would try to find an alternative.

So she bought me one. I started shooting it and was quite impressed. It does fit my hand well, I have no problem shooting it accurately and most of all, found it to be exceptionally reliable.

I shoot exclusively cast bullets. It was the only 9mm I had that wasn't picky on the cast bullets or how they were loaded.

I flunk the physical because of my hearing for the above job but kept the 92FS using it in USPSA and 3 gun matches because of its reliability, and being old and slow, I was faster with its 18 round mags compared to my Colts 7 rounds. Over the last 10 years or so, I 've fired thousands of rounds through it. The only hiccup was a couple time someone forgot to put primers in the cases when reloading, Cant blame the gun on that one.

I also don't like the safety, so I just don't use it. I just learned use a bit more concentration on the first, double action shot. That was a hang up on my part when I first started shooting the gun, now its second nature.

I'm not one who believes a gun needs to be squeaky clean to work, in fact I'm right down neglectful on the practice. But the Beretta, like my 1911s, don't seem to care. They function.

Its not a CC gun, but then neither are my Colts, that's why they made J-frame Smiths. But time is then name of the game in USPSA and similar sports, malfunctions cost time, I don't have those with the Beretta 92fs.

 

[g.willikers]

Enjoy yours.
When our military switched from the 1911 to the Beretta, I figured to at least give it a try.
Sorry, but I wouldn't trade a good 1911 for a carton of them.
Big and clunky and less powerful, to boot.
Not for me.
But use yours in good health.

 

[pete2]

I have a 92FS and I shoot it well, it never malfunctions, sent it to Wilson to convert it to decocker only. I found that it was easy to engage the safety by accident. BUT, it just ain't as much fun as a 1911 or a S&W revolver.

 

[Model12Win]

I got one of the S models coming from SOG.

 

[Nick_C_S]

I bought a 92fs back in '93 when my beloved Ca legislature was moving forward on a mag capacity restriction to 10 rounds (it passed, of course). At that time, I decided to get a high-capacity semi-auto; but which one? I figured if it's good enough for the U.S. armed services, it'll be good enough for me. So I got a 92fs in stainless.

I consider it the red-headed-step-child of my collection. It's always been a safe queen, basically. I have maybe 2k rounds through it. About the only time I shoot it is for 9mm ammo load work ups. I consider the 5" barrel a "baseline" length, so I use it for that purpose - like I did just yesterday, coincidentally.

But I digress . . .

Every time I pull my 92fs out of the safe, I admire its wonderful fit and finish. It's truly a well crafted gun. Shoots absolutely fantastic; reliable, etc. I'm very pleased with it. It does shoot about 1" left at 10 yards; so someday, I'll get a smith to drift the rear blade for me. It's only a safe queen because 9mm is just not my thing. I don't shoot 9 recreationally. I have a compact for carry; and I stay in practice with it. But that's really all. I'm a revolver and 1911 (45 ACP) guy.

So yeah. My 92fs is a sweet gun. Love it.

 

[sigxder]

92 is a good gun. Except under the conditions you mention. It's big is the major complaint. But everyone I've had was crazy accurate and always shoot. Have one worked on by Ernest Langdon a few years back. A 96 Elite I will never sell.

 

[TailGator]

I have a 92 FS that I really like. I'm not fond of the safety location, mostly because I like to work the slide overhand. But the big beast is so smooth, reliable, nicely crafted, and easy to shoot well that it makes me forget about the safety. If you consider quality relative to price, it is IMO really one of the better values in current production, and picking up those earlier models on the cheap is a great deal on a classic pistol. (Actually, I picked up a 84F that way a few months ago for the same reason.)

Congrats, OP. Watch for locking block cracks in those older models, and otherwise shoot and enjoy.

 

[Brownstone322]

For me (I was never in the military), it's always been ironic that so many have encountered M9s that are "poorly-maintained and universally worn-out." While I don't doubt that's true, I have a brand-new M9, and -- as someone mentioned above -- the fit and finish are sublime. I like to just pull it out and work the action and dry-fire it for a while, just to experience how it operates. It's absolutely liquid compared to my 1911s. And I have small-ish hands, but the M9 just "feels right" to me. I'd never carry an M9 around, but for the range I think the M9 is a Cadillac.

By the way, I've never understood how so many people seem to engage the safety when they rack the 92's slide. I actually use the safety levers as gripping points (much like the "ears" on a VP9), and with the way I grip the levers, my thumb is under the right safety and my forefinger curls under the left safety -- there's no way in hell I'd press the safety levers down. I'm not sure what other people are doing; maybe they overhand it, but I don't, because the open slide would bite my hand eventually.

Wonderful range gun and home-defense gun. Love it, love it, love it.

 

[pblanc]

The Beretta 92FS has a reputation for being one of the most ammunition-tolerant 9mm pistols ever, partly due to its non-tilt barrel design and straight-line feed path. The most common malfunction seems to be locking block failure. Since Beretta locking block kits cost only $35 and include a recoil spring, it makes sense to keep one on hand if you shoot a 92/M9.

The 92 is very pleasant to shoot if your hands are big enough to accommodate the grip. Trigger pull weight in double action is very easy to reduce with a quick and cheap mainspring swap. The DA/SA trigger is quite good, although I prefer that of DA/SA P-series SIGs.

I never had any issues with accidentally putting the pistol on-safe while cycling the slide, but some have. If you don't want or use the safety and have this issue, consider getting the Wilson-Combat low profile lever. This does away with the safety lever on the right side all together, and reduces the left-sided lever to the point it is virtually impossible to accidentally move the lever to safe. The lever is still there to function as a decocker.

One of my biggest gripes with the 92 series is the non-changeable front sight and the inability to cut a dovetail for a front sight.

 

[FrankenMauser]

Thanks for the tips, guys.

And, just for those that haven't encountered one:

The 92S has no safety lever on the right side, the front strap of the grip is straight (no swell), and the magazine release is at the heel of the grip. (Left side. - Not shown.)

Crappy photo:

Hmmm. The P95 actually looks blued there. In natural light, it has gone decidedly plum.
(I don't mind the Ruger 'plum' that comes with age.)

 

[mk70ss]

92F and then a 96 were my issued duty guns at my PD. They served me well and I missed both when we went the S&W MP.

 

[pgdion]

Cool I bought a 92Fs years ago. And it is still by far and without question .... my best shooter and my favorite pistol. And that says alot considering its competition.

 

[pblanc]

Thanks for the tips, guys.

And, just for those that haven't encountered one:

The 92S has no safety lever on the right side, the front strap of the grip is straight (no swell), and the magazine release is at the heel of the grip. (Left side. - Not shown.)

Crappy photo:

Hmmm. The P95 actually looks blued there. In natural light, it has gone decidedly plum.
(I don't mind the Ruger 'plum' that comes with age.)

The 92S also has the rounded front to the trigger guard, unlike the squared off front of the 92FS/M9 trigger guard.

 

[Mike38]

Welcome to the club. I sure do enjoy my 92FS. I gave Glock an honest try. Owned both a 17 and a 19. Sold them both for a loss to buy the 92FS. Glad I did.

 

[Mastrogiacomo]

I have seven....

Vertec 92FS
Stainless 92FS
Black (also Italian) 92FS
Nickle 85 Cheetah
Black 84 Cheetah
Inox 92A1 compact
Black 92FS compact

Love them all...

Laura

 

[dgludwig]

By the way, I've never understood how so many people seem to engage the safety when they rack the 92's slide. I actually use the safety levers as gripping points (much like the "ears" on a VP9), and with the way I grip the levers, my thumb is under the right safety and my forefinger curls under the left safety -- there's no way in hell I'd press the safety levers down. I'm not sure what other people are doing; maybe they overhand it, but I don't, because the open slide would bite my hand eventually.

One way the safety can be inadvertently moved with the Beretta (and other pistols that have slide-mounted safeties-like Third Generation Smiths, for example) is when you are attempting to clear a "stove-pipe" malfunction by sweeping your support hand across the top of the pistol to dislodge the case. I've had it happen more than once during clearance drills but just knowing it can happen and training for such an eventuality will make the "problem" a moot one.

 

[JoeSixpack]

Glad you was able to get some trigger time on a not beat to hell 92.
I find them exceedingly reliable and nice shooting guns which is why I like them not to mention they're easy on the eye's.

Aesthetics don't win fights but It doesn't hurt.

My only complaints about the gun is the long DA trigger, I mean it's really longer then it should be imo.. and the slide safety.

The original model had a frame safety, I understand why they moved it to the slide but they should have kept a variant with the frame safety imo.
All the other models with a frame safety are special editions long out of production.