Just a quick Beretta Nano price tipoff/question

[LockedBreech]

So, as a big Beretta guy, my general thoughts on the Nano have been moderate/underwhelmed. It's a well-built, reliable (now) gun but the feature set can be said to lack compared to the other options on the market. For the $400-ish it goes for it's not quite worth it.

Well, I was just messing around using the Bud's "Make Offer" tool, and I put in a lowball starter of $340, and it accepted it. I was really surprised. In the past I've been able to shave off maybe $20-30 with that which makes me think they might be overstocked. With 6-month layaway. That's bargain-basement price for a Beretta. That puts it about $15 cheaper than the Ruger LC9S without all the safety gunk I don't like. It might not be perfect, but it's not junk. I'm seriously conflicted now.

Any reports from recent purchasers on quality/reliability/accuracy? On a 6-month layaway that's less per paycheck than I spend on coffee.

Edit: Spelling/formatting

Edit 2: I would prefer this thread not serve as a forum for debating the merit of layaway plans. I'm young and have no family, so for me they're an easy way to get new guns without really feeling the lost money. I understand that many people use them irresponsibly but we can discuss that elsewhere. I mostly just want to know if current-production Nanos are running smooth.

 

[AustinTX]

That's a hell of a deal, in my opinion. I've had some time with the Nano (one was a rental), and I think it's a really well-made gun. I actually think it's right there with the Walther PPS in build quality, and better than any of the rest of the ultra-slim nines in that regard, but the ergos don't work as well for my big hands as the PPS's (or the Shield's), and I much prefer the PPS's trigger to the Nano's longer and heavier pull. I can shoot the Nano very accurately, but not as easily/quickly as I can shoot the PPS accurately. But you already know I prefer the PPS, of course, so there's no need to further belabor the reasons why.

My understanding -- and I could be wrong, because I'd generally been away from the forums for ~2.5 years and tending to other hobbies, etc. until a couple of months ago -- was that reliability issues always had to do with the weaker 115-gr. FMJ range ammo. While that's a legitimate gripe, I've never heard of the Nano having any issues at all with the usual SD rounds. I don't see complaints about reliability with the FMJ range ammo anymore, either, so maybe Beretta tweaked the RSA a bit -- I don't really know.

Anyway, it's a very well-made gun, and that's a tremendous price for the quality you're getting. If the gun is a good personal fit, I'd definitely go for it. Hell, I'm almost tempted at that price, and I have no need for it.

 

[Schnitzjr]

For that price, I think many other single stack choices are better.
The Nano has the worst trigger of the bunch, lowest capacity and a weird grip (most call this "high bore axis but IMO the grip is too damned short).
Mine prefers 124g loads over 115g.
It's a difficult gun to shoot accurately but it is capable of being very accurate once you master the trigger pull, unlike most other single stacks that are awesome shooters right out of the box.
The Nano does have a couple positive features. The sights come off with an Allen wrench and mine has absolutely no wear. I have multiple thousands of rounds through mine and I could tell you it has a hundred and you would believe me. It's quite stout.
For my money, I would buy a Shield..