ARCHIVED
 wtwining
Member
Team Member
Joined: Mar 2006  OH, USA
 Posts: 1746 Feedback: 100% (7) Link To This Post |
Posted: 5/3/2012 7:24:02 PM
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Originally Posted By wtwining:
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Originally Posted By wtwining:
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
The Beretta is reliable but not durable. Trigger return springs cannot be expected to last more than 2500 rounds and locking blocks fail under high round counts as well. Add in the ergonomic and size issues and there's not much to make someone choose a Beretta over a newer design. Thank you! now we all know why you dislike the Beretta, now could it be possible you can offer any links (evidence) to your claim or do you expect us to research every accusation you might make? Nope. What I learned about the Beretta wasn't learned on the Internet. lol..okay then, you probably have pics or something to back this info up right? Call Corey Trapp at the Gunsite Gunsmithy. Will do, thanks! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/3/2012 7:49:03 PM
Out of curiosity, Combat_Jack, which handgun(s) do you prefer? Are you a Sig guy, Glock, HK by chance? Have you owned a 92FS for any lengthy period of time? Just wondering what personal experience you have with the pistol.
|
|
|
|
scotchymcdrinkerbean
Alcohol is my anti-drug
Team Member
Joined: Oct 2003 LA, USA
Posts: 12619 Feedback: 100% (3) Link To This Post |
Posted: 5/3/2012 10:48:44 PM
Just to add my $.02:
I've carried a Beretta 96 Centurion and a 92FS as duty weapons, and carried them both concealed as off duty weapons as well, and shot the snot out of both of them, and never had a problem of any kind with either.* The only issue, if you can call it that, is that you do have to keep them lubed, while you can pretty much ignore a Glock (my weapon of choice these days is a G19.) *As I type this I realize that that was a lie––when I first bought the 96 Centurion it was shaving bits of jacket off every round it chamber when firing, but Beretta fixed it free of charge, and even sent me a check to cover my shipping costs to them. (This was back in '96 or so, and I seem to remember them not even having a warranty at the time.) No other issues since then. |
|
|
Combat_Jack
Green Suited Salaryman
Team Member
Joined: Dec 2001 USA
 
Posts: 64091 Feedback: 100% (13) Link To This Post |
Posted: 5/3/2012 11:51:32 PM
Originally Posted By rparrish:
Out of curiosity, Combat_Jack, which handgun(s) do you prefer? Are you a Sig guy, Glock, HK by chance? Have you owned a 92FS for any lengthy period of time? Just wondering what personal experience you have with the pistol. I think I've owned pretty much one of everything but right now its pared back to Glock, Smith and Kahr. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2012 12:15:31 PM
[Last Edit: 5/4/2012 12:16:03 PM by rparrish]
So you have owned a 92FS? Did yours break or fail to function correctly? Not trying to come across as a jerk, just curious if your dislike for the pistol is based on personal experience or word of mouth from other people.
|
|
|
|
AssaultRifler
Get off my lawn
Team Member
Joined: Sep 2004 USA
Posts: 31131 Feedback: 100% (103) Link To This Post |
Posted: 5/5/2012 3:03:16 PM
got back from fun show just over an hour ago. Neighbor bought a 92A1. His first handgun so I got to show him how to field strip it, clean it, load the mag, use the decocker, etc. In other words I got to finger f*ck a NIB A1
 Very nice gun, I only have a 92F and some 92FS, don't have an A1 yet. Now it's on my list or maybe the M9A1 |
|
|
gogetumnow
Member
Team Member
Joined: Nov 2001 UT, USA
Posts: 97 Feedback: 100% (4) Link To This Post |
Posted: 5/5/2012 3:50:03 PM
Man I'd love to get an A1 to go along with my later model 92FS.
The Taurus was my first intro to this style of gun. Had a PT92 stainless I got used. It was a sweet looking gun, although it had a nagging extraction problem every so often. After replacing the extractor and the spring and it still having problems and not wanting to deal with Taurus customer-no-service (been there done that) I spun it off. I immediately went and bought a NIB Police 92FS and have loved it ever since. The overall quality is much better on the Beretta. You can see and it feel it as soon as you pick it up. With the long sight radius I can be quite accurate with this gun. I'd love to get an A1, mount a light and use it as my bedside gun. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/6/2012 1:34:44 AM
I have to agree to a degree with Jack.
The 92 is deficient in it's design. The locking block is an issue, and even though it's been improved (multiple times) they do still fail. Same with slides. That's why there is the stickied thread at the top of this forum for people to learn how to inspect for those specific issues.
Beyond that, the trigger reset is poor in comparison to other pistols, the DA/SA trigger is less than ideal (although that's more personal preference) and it has a fairly large grip size. Works ok for me, but it's not great. I personally hate the safety position. Not only is it not ergonomic, it also gets in the way.
As for those saying that Stoeger has put 100k rounds through his, so they must be awesome, they aren't exactly right on point. First, he isn't using stock 92FS models. Second, he has said that Beretta doesn't currently make a pistol he would want to buy. And he has photos on his website showing the frame damage that his pistols have sustained.
Now, before I am crucified, I am a 92FS owner. I own one because that is the type of pistol that my company intends to issue to me, so I figure I should have my own, so I can learn the platform. I am spending my time finding the issues so I can learn the work around and become more than just proficient with it. It's got plenty of positives, but it's nowhere near perfect.
I also see failing in other pistol platforms. In fact, I don't think anyone currently makes a perfect pistol. Every company has some failings. It's better to find those issues and learn how to deal with them than to stick our heads in the sand and pretend that it's a perfect pistol. |
|
|
|
556A2
Tier 1 Geek
Team Member
Joined: Sep 2003 NC, USA
Posts: 9844 Feedback: 100% (29) Link To This Post |
Posted: 5/6/2012 2:57:27 PM
Originally Posted By itgoesboom:
As for those saying that Stoeger has put 100k rounds through his, so they must be awesome, they aren't exactly right on point. First, he isn't using stock 92FS models. Second, he has said that Beretta doesn't currently make a pistol he would want to buy. And he has photos on his website showing the frame damage that his pistols have sustained. In fairness, the Elite series still use stock frames which aren't different than a 92 frame asides from the checkering. All the other upgrades do not affect the durability/reliability of the platform. Plus any high round AL frame is eventually going to get frame damage. Its not something that is limited to Berettas. I do agree with him that Beretta is lacking in making different variants. I would love to see G configurations again. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/6/2012 3:27:46 PM
I had a 92FS for about 4 years. I loved the gun. Quality was superb. Never had any type of problem. It would shoot anything I fed it. I sold it to finish an AR project I was working on. Big mistake. I miss the gun every day. Had I not just bought an XDm9, I would be buying the 92A1.
Putting money away for the purchase. And never selling another gun again. Just have to buy a bigger safe. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/6/2012 8:24:10 PM
There are so many different opinions on this subject. I have certain preferences for handguns, but I am not even going there. The bottom line is that if you spend at least $500 on a new handgun lots of good run of the mill weapons are out there. Glock , Beretta, Sig, ect... have all at some time or another had some kind of issue. Some manufacturers have corrected their problems while others haven't. If you look hard enough someone always disagrees and complains.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/6/2012 9:33:09 PM
[Last Edit: 5/6/2012 9:34:56 PM by 88_Sahara]
I love my Italian 92FS. Accurate, reliable, and feels great in my hands.
|
|
|
|
wtwining
Member
Team Member
Joined: Mar 2006 OH, USA
Posts: 1800 Feedback: 100% (7) Link To This Post |
Posted: 6/14/2012 6:44:31 PM
well I received a email from Mr. Trapp from gunsite:
Mr. Trapp, Hello, my name is Warren Twining, I was instructed to contact you in regards to the durability of the M9/92FS Beretta pistol. I don't want to bug you with a lot of goofy questions or anything, but a gentlemen brings to our attention that M9 in not a durable pistol. If you have the time, I am hoping to get your opinion on the matter of the Beretta M9/92FS as a durable pistol. I have included a link to the forum of the discussion that has lead me to you: http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_5_15/124460_.html&page=3&sr=0 Thanks for your time Warren He's response: Our experience here with the M9/Beretta 92–– series has been fairly poor. I don’t personally consider it to be a duty quality pistol, lacking both reliability/durability. Our military classes normally bring 1 extra pistol for every 3-4 people, so as to replace broken ones during the week of training. Trigger return springs, trigger bar springs, slide stop springs, right side safety and locking blocks are frequently broken. Any debris in the trigger well area will stop the gun from firing. It’s much too large in the butt, the triggers are poor and the ergonomics are terrible. In short, the only reason to use one is because you have no other choice, it’s issued to you. Certainly it will have its defenders, I’m not one of them. I’ve seen, shot and worked on hundreds, not just one or two. I have no reason to recommend it to anyone. CT It would appear that there experience with Beretta are the G.I. issued ones from the arms room, so it would be interesting to see how a new out of the box Beretta would run, however, It makes me wonder how the Beretta was able to compete with the Sig in the Army trials. |
|
|
|
Combat_Jack
Green Suited Salaryman
Team Member
Joined: Dec 2001 USA
Posts: 64567 Feedback: 100% (13) Link To This Post |
Posted: 6/14/2012 6:53:20 PM
That is about as damning as it can get.
|
|
|
556A2
Tier 1 Geek
Team Member
Joined: Sep 2003 NC, USA
Posts: 9916 Feedback: 100% (29) Link To This Post |
Posted: 6/14/2012 11:51:23 PM
Originally Posted By wtwining:
It would appear that there experience with Beretta are the G.I. issued ones from the arms room, so it would be interesting to see how a new out of the box Beretta would run, however, It makes me wonder how the Beretta was able to compete with the Sig in the Army trials. Beretta was able to compete with the P226 since the 92Fs were NIB as were the P226s. The simple fact is the Beretta 92 is a quality pistol that can hold its own against pistols from the same vintage. If it was so shitty, it would not have won the trials twice. The problems that plague the M9 would plague the P226 if it was adopted over the Beretta. Then people would be arguing that we should have adopted the Beretta 92F instead of that shitty Sig P226 once they got high round counts along with poor maintenance & aftermarket magazines. |
|
|
scotchymcdrinkerbean
Alcohol is my anti-drug
Team Member
Joined: Oct 2003 LA, USA
Posts: 12994 Feedback: 100% (3) Link To This Post |
Posted: 6/14/2012 11:58:09 PM
Originally Posted By 556A2:
Originally Posted By wtwining:
It would appear that there experience with Beretta are the G.I. issued ones from the arms room, so it would be interesting to see how a new out of the box Beretta would run, however, It makes me wonder how the Beretta was able to compete with the Sig in the Army trials. Beretta was able to compete with the P226 since the 92Fs were NIB as were the P226s. The simple fact is the Beretta 92 is a quality pistol that can hold its own against pistols from the same vintage. If it was so shitty, it would not have won the trials twice. The problems that plague the M9 would plague the P226 if it was adopted over the Beretta. Then people would be arguing that we should have adopted the Beretta 92F instead of that shitty Sig P226 once they got high round counts along with poor maintenance & aftermarket magazines. Probably, but in all fairness, didn't Beretta come in with a cheaper bid than Sig as well? |
|
|
556A2
Tier 1 Geek
Team Member
Joined: Sep 2003 NC, USA
Posts: 9917 Feedback: 100% (29) Link To This Post |
Posted: 6/15/2012 12:34:09 AM
Originally Posted By scotchymcdrinkerbean:
Originally Posted By 556A2:
Originally Posted By wtwining:
It would appear that there experience with Beretta are the G.I. issued ones from the arms room, so it would be interesting to see how a new out of the box Beretta would run, however, It makes me wonder how the Beretta was able to compete with the Sig in the Army trials. Beretta was able to compete with the P226 since the 92Fs were NIB as were the P226s. The simple fact is the Beretta 92 is a quality pistol that can hold its own against pistols from the same vintage. If it was so shitty, it would not have won the trials twice. The problems that plague the M9 would plague the P226 if it was adopted over the Beretta. Then people would be arguing that we should have adopted the Beretta 92F instead of that shitty Sig P226 once they got high round counts along with poor maintenance & aftermarket magazines. Probably, but in all fairness, didn't Beretta come in with a cheaper bid than Sig as well? Sig was cheaper per pistol, but Beretta was cheaper with the support package (mags & spare parts). All you ever need to know about the XM9 Trials |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/15/2012 3:13:32 PM
Here is an interesting link… There are so many rumors and innuendo… Interesting to see the actual government report that was done to investigate any unfairness against the other companies vying for a chance to supply the military pistol.
http://archive.gao.gov/d4t4/130439.pdf Of course, I've posted this before... Follow up posts to such a thread usually result in people who don't read the pdf, and then keep posting "their version" of what the official story was...
Also,,, One of the main issues people always jump to is how they always see problems with the Beretta M9 in the military. Now, I am not the first to point this out - but military armorers typically DO NOT do preventive maintenance. They don't change the recoil spring every 3-5k. They don't change the trigger return spring every 5k. They do not change the locking block every 15-20k. The gun just keeps going until something breaks. Then, it’s called “a piece of crap” Numerous military guys have jumped in on past threads on this very topic. They state that there is no procedure for tracking fired rounds through M9s. So – if ya don't change the recoil spring at all... EVER... You probably WILL crack a locking block way before the 20k round lifetime. Changing the recoil spring to prevent that is a must. The gun is MADE to have the recoil spring and trigger return spring changed with regularity. I see it claimed all the time by military personnel (on gun forums) that while the military M9s sometimes suck, the 92FS’s in private hands generally do well. Well, this is probably why…. I have nine Beretta 92s (some are different variants), and will probably buy more.... I just sold a $3k 1911 and a $2.5k 1911 a few months ago. I shot them less and less after I caught the Beretta 92 bug again about 3 years ago. I have full faith in the platform. The gun also fits my hand in a 1 handed grip perfectly. I’ve owned a lot of different handguns over the years. This is my favorite platform for a variety of reasons. I’ll admit that makes me a bit biased in favor of Beretta. But, the anti Beretta crowd quite often does not know what they are talking about, and are often just repeating something that another person told them… Finally - I've also seen some military guys on a forum tell the story of seeing soldiers use their M9 as a hammer, and then just put it back on the shelf with the other M9s. Do that a few times - What do you think is gonna happen to the next guy who is issued that gun? If the Sig 226 had been chosen instead of the M9 - You'd see just as many complaints about that gun having been chosen, over all the years (people tend to forget all the cracked frames Sig had in the 1980s but remember a handful of cracked Beretta slides that happened 25 years ago)... Some people are never happy... |
|
|
|
Boom_Stick
I produce freedom in mass quantities
Team Member
Joined: Nov 2000 WA, USA
Posts: 10825 Feedback: 100% (10) Link To This Post |
Posted: 6/20/2012 2:58:35 AM
[Last Edit: 6/20/2012 3:20:13 AM by Boom_Stick]
I bought a police special 10 years ago, came in the blue carboard box with trijicon night sights and three mags. Its been a very reliable pistol, accurate and I'd trust my life with it. I like the egronomics and the slide mounted controls aren't an issue for me. I've shot the hell out of it, dropped it in the lake, presented it from the holster and dry fired a billion times and it keeps coming back for more.
I'll probably never sell this beretta it's a keeper, but that being said I'll never buy another Beretta 92. |
|
|
Infallible
Stranger in a strange land
Team Member
Joined: Apr 2004 USA
Posts: 12578 Feedback: 0% (0) Link To This Post |
Posted: 7/13/2012 10:57:51 PM
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Military service has no bearing on my qualifications to speak to the advantages or failings of different models of handguns. no but it has everything to do on your character make up by showing up in the Beretta forums just to shit in the thread without any significant contribution to say otherwise. In otherwords, your over inflated opinion of self worth isn't appreciated here. |
|
|
SchlaffTablett
"Senior Pistola"
Team Member
Joined: Oct 2001 PA, USA
Posts: 1769 Feedback: 100% (61) Link To This Post |
Posted: 7/14/2012 12:02:48 AM
[Last Edit: 7/14/2012 12:05:37 AM by SchlaffTablett]
I'm a gunsmith and was a DoD 3rd shop and DoS armorer and have or have had government and factory armorer certs from most major manufacturers. I have seen MANY completely fucked up M9's come through the armory and with very very rare exception it was due to negligence and ineptitude of both the user and unit level armorers.
GI's are historically hard on gear but have traditionally been at least instructed on proper care, use and maintenance of weapon systems. In today's military however, I have seen this attitude gradually eroding in favor of the "use it up and throw it away, uncle will buy me a new one" attitude. The young GI's abuse the gear and the leadership doesn't reprimand them for it because its either too time consuming or they themselves don't know any better and the guns condition reflects it. This is compounded by a total lack of round tracking and preventive maintenance. The majority of M9's I've seen still have gen 1 locking blocks, weak recoil springs, and (because every GI now feels they have to have CTC grips) damaged or missing trigger bar springs. Hell I've seen soldiers use a bent paperclip to try to take the place of one before. As far as armorers, many units don't actually have one at least not an 45B. The trend recently has been to pipeline supply guys through a week long condensed armorer course and drop them into the platoon or even company level Bravo billets. They can then limit the number of forward support personnel and get an extra grunt on the ground. This, in effect, is leaving a guy who really isn't combat arms trained and not functioning in his primary MOS to maintain a units weapons and doing so very often with limited parts, tools, and equipment. These two factors alone conspire heavily toward poorly performing weapons especially those that, quite frankly, are carried lots and shot little. The bottom line is the weapon itself is just fine when properly cared for and maintained but the military just doesn't do that and so, inevitably operation is effected. Then there are all of the "if only I could get a 1911" guys.... |
|
|
Combat_Jack
Green Suited Salaryman
Team Member
Joined: Dec 2001 USA
Posts: 64876 Feedback: 100% (13) Link To This Post |
Posted: 7/14/2012 1:50:39 AM
Originally Posted By Infallible:
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Military service has no bearing on my qualifications to speak to the advantages or failings of different models of handguns. no but it has everything to do on your character make up by showing up in the Beretta forums just to shit in the thread without any significant contribution to say otherwise. In otherwords, your over inflated opinion of self worth isn't appreciated here. The truth is the truth, either here or in any other forum. |
|
|
M3A1
The face of GD
Team Member
Joined: May 2006 IA, USA
Posts: 2277 Feedback: 0% (0) Link To This Post |
Posted: 7/15/2012 4:24:08 AM
Originally Posted By 556A2:
Originally Posted By wtwining:
It would appear that there experience with Beretta are the G.I. issued ones from the arms room, so it would be interesting to see how a new out of the box Beretta would run, however, It makes me wonder how the Beretta was able to compete with the Sig in the Army trials. Beretta was able to compete with the P226 since the 92Fs were NIB as were the P226s. The simple fact is the Beretta 92 is a quality pistol that can hold its own against pistols from the same vintage. If it was so shitty, it would not have won the trials twice. The problems that plague the M9 would plague the P226 if it was adopted over the Beretta. Then people would be arguing that we should have adopted the Beretta 92F instead of that shitty Sig P226 once they got high round counts along with poor maintenance & aftermarket magazines. Spot on. Sigs from the 80s were using stamped slides and roll pins, in hindsight we now know those were not the most durable design. If the 226 had been adopted we would be hearing the "My cousin knows a guy..." stories about how awful the Sigs are, all GIs hate them etc... I find it curious that CJ needs to shit on Berettas but considers Kahrs to be among the best 
You don't like Berettas, we get it. Why are you still here? |
|
|
|
Combat_Jack
Green Suited Salaryman
Team Member
Joined: Dec 2001 USA
Posts: 64887 Feedback: 100% (13) Link To This Post |
Posted: 7/15/2012 11:29:43 AM
I don't consider Kahrs among the best but I find them useful. The four I've owned have worked well.
|
|
|
M3A1
The face of GD
Team Member
Joined: May 2006 IA, USA
Posts: 2278 Feedback: 0% (0) Link To This Post |
Posted: 7/15/2012 3:54:52 PM
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Beretta paid Ernest Langdon to shoot a 92 but I can't think of any others. I've handled a 96 that had a dead return spring. I wasn't shooting it when it went dead at least. I value guns by the binary system. They're either the best or they're shit. I guess I'm borderline like that. Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Originally Posted By rparrish:
Out of curiosity, Combat_Jack, which handgun(s) do you prefer? Are you a Sig guy, Glock, HK by chance? Have you owned a 92FS for any lengthy period of time? Just wondering what personal experience you have with the pistol. I think I've owned pretty much one of everything but right now its pared back to Glock, Smith and Kahr. So if Kahrs aren't among the best, why do you own them? Is it because you like the design, or enjoy shooting it, or some other personal reason? Perhaps there are people who feel the same way about Berettas? You done? |
|
|
ARCHIVED
