Beretta M9 Video Review

I know a lot of former military personnel shoot the M9.  What are your thoughts on it.  Check out the review above.

Half of us hate it, half of us love it and the other half are undecided.

Military people may not be the most informed, since many are fresh out of high school. I'm not military so take this as just one man's opinion.

The Beretta 92FS/M9 is a fine gun, but no longer stands out. In fact, I believe that any design with a hammer is practically an antique. For this reason, I don't think it matters how well people like them. The hammer was a carry-over from the revolver days, and it no longer makes sense to me. A striker fired pistol is a minimist design, which means less moving parts, lower cost, less that can go wrong, easier to repair, smaller size, and lighter weight. Every one of those benefits are critical to military applications.

Having a hammer on a double action automatic means a second chance at ignition.

Darrin Wilson was glad he had that ability on his SiG when "unarmed teenage angel" Big Mike Brown was trying to wrestle away Officer Wilson's gun.

Striker is one and done, hammer means a second pull and a second chance.

Regarding the M-9 / Beretta 92.  It is Service Pistol sized, so it doesn't exactly disappear unless you have some major baggy clothes for concealment.

Great gun, dependable, accurate and accessories are all over the place.  Bill Wilson of Wilson Combat has taken to making his high quality services & accessories for the Beretta these days!

BIGGER_HAMMER

^^ This. I bought one for my GF as a bedside gun, since she's extremely comfortable with it from carrying it for years.

I love my M92's.
I will not use a striker fired pistol to defend my life unless its DA/SA (with a decocker).
If it doesn't make sense to build that than I will stick with my Beretta's and other DA/SA pistols. That Glock 21 I'm looking at wil be a range novelty along with the KRISS Vector that it shares mags with.
I want that long first pull to be sure that I want to shoot and follow ups if I get a bad strike.

Love mine .Accurate and reliable . Don't give a damn about conceal ability . I love full size hand guns .

It's like any other GI piece of equipment.  

There's better out there.  There's worse out there.  It does what it does well enough. Just like the boots, vehicels, etc that the Army buys.  

The reality is most GI's with sidearms aren't steely-eyed ninja killers.  They're pilots, clerks, staff pukes, etc. that will shoot 50 rounds out of the pistol twice a year after listening to a 15 minute class sitting in the bleachers at the range.  That's pretty much the extent of pistolcraft for most of the Army.  

We turned in our .38 revolvers for the M9.  It was the only time I was issued a NIB weapon in the Army.  They shot quite well new.  I thought it was a step up from the 4" wheel gun. Most people shot them better than the revolvers.  

I liked it well enough.  I currently own a M9, along with the other two sidearms I was issued, a M1911A1 and a 4" S&W Model 10 RB.

My 92fs is my go to pistol.  I carried an M9 in the Marine Corps Reserve, no issues ever other than magazine related.  Purchase with confidence.

+1.

But, have been in units that shoot it once a week.

A man wiser then me put it like this-

"It might not be the greatest pistol, but I use it at work. Any range time at work, translates into home. Any range time at home translates into work. I get free magazines, and all the kit that I buy for work, works at home"

I like the M9. Everything in the shooting world has a cost / benefit. Until there are some resounding handgun improvements I see no reason to change from the platform.

The Marines (at least in my experience) shoot very hot rounds which can't help the service life or new shooter perception of the pistol.

The value of proficiency with the pistol cannot be understated. The only reason I carry something else is because the M9 is big.

Love the M9, it is my go to service pistol. I shoot it better than Glock/Sig/HK etc. Just works for me personally.