I'm asking this question in the biased Beretta forum, I'm well aware...

I am looking for a 9mm hi-cap to serve in an apocalyptic role- hi cap mags, etc

Beretta M9/92fs or a s&w M7p?

Feel both, see which you like better, and get both anyway

Edit: don't be afraid to take a look at different beretta versions for different features you might like/want. Take a look at wilson combat's beretta

Sweet Jumpin' Jehosephat! That is awesome!

how much are you wanting to spend? Thats about $1500 in that picture

Beretta is sexy and smooth, however it is heavier and has a DA/SA trigger. I also have an M&P 9 which I upgraded with APEX trigger kit and night sights. I do love the consistent trigger pull on the M&P and the lighter weight for all day carry. I would feel comfortable carrying either one of course. If you want something that has a bit of style, then Beretta all the way, love them. If you just want a modern duty gun, then M&P for sure. To me the all metal guns with hammers are all being replaced by the plastic striker fired guns. Which makes sense, they are lighter weight and easier to use. Really they all shoot the same bullets at the end of the day. So it all depends on what you prefer.

There is a reason the military had never and will never use a striker fired gun

1903 Springfield calling...

Beretta DA triggers suck.  Beretta 92 mags are widespread.

If things wet totally to the pooper,

Finding 5.56 ammo along with M-16 / M-4 Mags
&
Beretta 92mags with 9mm ammo would be the two things I've feel most sure will be around if the time ever does come that there are guns left laying around....

I'll take the 5" M&P pro with APEX please

My vote goes for the 92fs or an M9 version all day long and twice on Tuesday.  I have an M&P .45 which is an outstanding pistol and I like it for EDC.  I also have a 92fs which is outstanding as well and in my opinion built like a combat pistol should be, a tank.  If the zombie apocalypse comes, I will have my Beretta 92fs by my side .  It all boils down to what you like and prefer.

...is the reason that the striker-fired market didn't exist in 1985? lol

I like the M&P better all the way around- fully ambi, comes with rail, 17 vs 15 standard capacity...  That said, I've seen some Berettas with like 5x the recommended number of rounds, still working like a champ.

I like Berettas. They just run and run, and mine has eaten ammo without issue that made Glocks and Ruger SR-series guns choke (underloaded reloads).





My current one:











Less than $800 total in that gun (ignoring the Surefire) including swapped springs, drilled tritiums, Elite II hammer, and Wilson trigger.





They are also very easy to work on, which is nice if you want a survival-type gun. Parts are fairly inexpensive and last a long time. A complete extra barrel assembly with chrome-lined barrel and locking block is under $125 from Beretta's website iirc.



ETA: Mags are also slightly cheaper for the Beretta. $25 for the M&P and $20 for the Beretta, both for factory 17-rounder magazines. The Beretta also has the excellent Mac-gar mags in 18-round flush ($24) and 20-round slightly extended ($29) flavors. For the especially adventitious, there is also the 30-round extended factory magazine for $37.

You have good taste

I own and like both.  Figure out which one fits your hand the best and go.  Can't go wrong with either.

Hmmm, tough choice. I think I would (and have) go with the Beretta.

It's a tough choice because both pistols are so very different and good quality. I love my 92fs and it will be the last pistol,if it came down to it, that I would sell, not that I have many. I had a M&P and it is a fine weapon and will serve you just as long, but there is just something sexy about the 92 series.

I know have an M&P Pro CORE and a Beretta M9A1.  I must say that even though I haven't shot the Beretta, it is already becoming  dead even.  Dry fire drills are making me love it.  If it's as accurate and I suspect it will be MORE accurate, or at leas if I shoot better with it, it will be my favorite of the two.

The real question to me, would be is it better than my CZ.  I'm not confident it will shoot better than my CZ.

Of the two listed, the 92FS for the following reasons.

1) Accuracy. The 92FS will be much more accurate when both are in bone stock condition.

2) Metal frame. No flexing while under recoil, polymer frames flex.

3) Changeable grip panels. Rubber, wood, composite. The 92Fs accepts them all.

4) Low cost of mags.

There's more, but those should be enough, IMO.  

FIFY

chose what you feel more comfortable shooting. thats all that matters. if you like shooting it more, you will carry it more.

I own more than one M&P and I know number 1 is at least debatable.  Number 2, I don't know.  Number 3 is simply true.  And number 4 is also true.  How your opinion discredits facts is beyond me...

Otherwise I agree with the bulk of your statement, though "all that matters" isn't always true, and can be very subjective.

I can pop clays sitting on a dirt berm from 50 yards with my original 92FS. Yards, not feet. The M&P I had couldn't do that, so I sold it off.




Some people are simply full of "themselves"...............    

I've shot both.
My preference is the the M&P.
I thought it was great, in fact, and that really surprised me.
The Berettas trigger pull was just awefull.
I couldn't say whats more durable or reliable.

1 is a matter of opinion, or that someone can just shoot better with that gun then they can with others.

2 has no bearing on the matter plastic frames will flex but its just part of having a polymer frame, has no bearing on accuracy or recoil so therefore hes just putting it in there for his own personal opinion once again.

3. once again it about personal preference, wood, metal rubber, just because it changes grip panels does not all of the sudden make it perfection. it is still personal preference.

4. i have bought all my used mags for $15 a piece which is what i see the beretta mags go for, unless i am mistaken, but if i am then i retract my statement, but the basis of my response was that his 4 reasons were just his own justifying to himself why the beretta is better, were all personal preference for him.

im not saying it is or it isnt better, just that his reasons were bullshit, and that OP need to shoot both and decide for himself.

Than you haven't been following M&P's for more than a year or two.  How about S&W changing the barrel twist rate recently or having to fix lock up issues?  How often do you see people needing Lone Wolf or KKM barrels for their Berettas?  The M&P is INHERENTLY more inaccurate than some pistols.  I'm not saying it's a poor pistol.  What IS a matter of opinion is someone not shooting well with the M&P because they don't like the trigger.  Inherent accuracy isn't up for debate, but knock yourself out.

2, I don't care because I don't know and I'm not going to pretend to.  

3 is obvious as far as preference goes.  What he was stating is that you have the OPTION OF THOSE TYPES OF GRIPS.  Go make a wood grip for the M&P.  Let me know how that goes.

4 really gives away where the smell of bullshit is coming from.  Go to the M&P thread and let everyone know you've gotten all of your used mags for 15 bucks.  In fact, buy em all up and sell them for 20.  They'll be gone in a day and you'll be so rich you can pay people to put on nose plugs when they read your posts.  Even if you found some super nice guy (sucker) to sell you 5 or more M&P mags for 15 bucks, it's nowhere near as often as getting bags full of Beretta mags for 10-12 a piece.  

Now, as hard as you're arguing FOR opinions here, even if his were simply opinions, you still call his opinions bullshit?  You see the logical fallacy in that, or do you need for me to send you a link to a Dianne Feinstein video...

I honestly don't know which one is better either.  I only know two things;  I love both of my M&P's and my Beretta, AND 2 of the few things that are not subjective are covered in this little discussion of ours.  Or I'm an idiot, and I'm ok with both options.

In Arfcom fashion the only answer is both.

Even with the apex trigger/dcaek, I am still more accurate with my M9. Could be because I have a couple thousand more rounds with it since its my duty gun...
The M&P is no slouch, and is more fun to shoot, and closer in I'm faster with it. Though it could be the extra weight of the surefire and that I've drilled to shoot it more dynamically (transitions/etc) and most of the time I shoot my duty gun (and until recently my personal clone) is for more static qualifying stuff.

Both have plenty of mag options and aftermarket support, only reason I haven't got an A1 is because all of my holsters would be incompatible, but its in the long term to compete with replacing the 9FS for carry.

Except for the da/sa I could go either way.

I own multiple examples of each, but just have never grown to love that da first shot.


Other than that, it is a toss up for me.

My m&p has had the same barrel for it since I got it, and it has the old style barrel, and I have never had an issue with locking up or accuracy, never have I looked into a kkm or third party barrel unless it was for the threaded options

If you can't shoot worth a shit with it, it's you not the gun.

I have bought my mags for $15

Here's a link, they don't have the used 9mm in stock but it's the same when they do, just buy them before they sell out, if you can't find cheap mags it's because your not looking, not because they don't exist!

Never had I had an issue with my M&P so once again his whole statement and yours is bullshit, just personal preference. Get over yourself.

Whichever OP likes shooting more he will shoot more, all the things you stated that make the trying to say the beretta is better because you can put wood grips on it, and the m&p only has the standard, yeah well the m&p is lighter as well, and still has no issue with recoil and doesn't have a pesky safety to worry about (unless you choose one with a safety), that doesn't make it better, it just makes it different, so whatever OPI likes to shoot more is better. Plastics, metal, wood, jello grips won't change that.

I just ditched my M&P 9mm for a 92G Centurion. I will agree that my 2014 modle M&P was acurate and reliable. I prefer a DA/SA trigger and I like the style of the older DA/SA guns. I have an old school 1994 USP 9mm that I shoot beter than any Sig, Beretta or striker fired wondergun. Your choice of pistol is about as personal as your choice of underwear. The M&P is a fantastic pistol with a few better fetures than the Beretta, but if you want a DA/SA gun you would be hard pressed to find one better than the 92 for the money. If weight is a concern check out the FNX line. If your OK with heavy look at the Lionheart as another option. I'm in love with the double action plus trigger.

On paper the Beretta has never been a great pistol. I never really cared for them until I shot an M9, now they are my favorite pistol.

Shoot one for yourself and see how you like it. In my experience, they are great for both beginners and experienced shooters and easy to be accurate with.

I have an Italian made 92a1. It was my first pistol. I read all the things people hate about them before I bought it and bought it anyway because I like the way it shot. I had fired a ton of guns before I bought it including the M&P and its arch competitor the Sig P226.

Truth being there are very few bad 9mm pistols today. Its just a question of what do you like.

Is the 92 bigger than the M&P? Yep. But its only slightly bigger than a P226. I know a lot of people don't like the meaty grip but I love it. Gives you something to wrap your hand around. This is a very well made and solid gun. It will fire anything, its not a fussy shooter and it shoots soft because of all that metal.

You can get mags in all kinds of crazy sizes. You can get 10, 15, 17, 20 and 30 round magazines.

If you like it, than do it. There aren't to many all metal guns around anymore.

I have owned a 92fs for 17 years, and I just purchased an M&P 9mm for my wife. Which one is better? Which one feels better in your hand and which do you shoot better with. I love my Beretta. It was my first pistol. The grip is wide for people with smaller hands, but you can change to Aluma-grips and thin it alittle. The m&P just fits. With a different backstrap it will fit better. Go to a shop that rents guns and shoot all guns you're looking at. That will tell you which is better for you. I would also suggest you look at the Beretta Vertec. It's got a 1911 style grip and points just right. The new 92A3 also has same grip frame. Check out also the Beretta/Stoeger Cougar. Smaller profile grip that fits the hand better, and the locking mechanism for the barrel makes it very accurate out of the box. Whatever you chose make sure it's right for you. Don't just pick based on capacity and popularity. No gun even if it costs $1000 and has 20 round standard mags, will shoot worth a damn if it doesn't fit you right.

Get both.

The current striker fired pistols have wonderful weight savings on them if you have to pack them around all day.  They are a bit nicer to carry IMO.

BUT, the Beretta 92 is awesome.  A lot of people like to run them down and I was hesitant to get one.  I picked up a used Taurus 92 a few years back and despite all its typical Taurus problems, I really liked it. I later sold it off and ponied up for a Beretta 92FS and fell in love. The QC and overall attention to detail was much higher on the Beretta.  When I shot it I found the accuracy to be stunning. It felt like I had laser accuracy in my hands.  That long sight radius and thin profiled top allowed an awesome sight picture.

Like other have said, it will handle mild to wild loads with aplomb. The reliability on my 92 has been phenomenal.

I can shoot berettas very fast while keeping good groups. The RSOs at the range started busting my chops when I pulled out my new/used beretta a couple weeks ago. All the standard comments we've heard. I hadnt shot a beretta in 10years. I started with slow fire to get a feel for it. After a few mags working my way back to 25 yards I started to speed things up.

2 rounds, 5 rounds, 3 rounds, etc. Reload and repeat. I was on a roll. The RSOs shut up after 3 mags. Even my reloads were faster.

Im still a little more accurate with my g19 shooting slow but my beretta wins the speed+accuracy no contest.

I don't mean to be rude. but that's total BS.  I'm not a Glock advocate but plenty of military guys have carried a Glock.  Just not general issue.  More like the guys that see a lot more trigger time........  If that tells you anything.

As far as which to choose, that's a tough one.  I'm sort of waffling at present myself.  The M&P is lighter (I have a .45) and you can feel it when carrying.  It is also thinner and you can feel that too.  But then the grip is like a hair bit longer (on the .45) than in the M9 and the beavertail and rear of the slide kind of stick up further than the M9.   So.....  it's kind of a toss up.  They both are good guns though.  I have way more rounds through my M9 and like it a lot.  I think it be a good SHTF gun.  But every gun has it's upside and downsides.  DA/SA doesn't really bother me and I actually kind of like the long heavy pull on a carry gun.  I mostly carry a snubby revolver, so......  

Like others said.  Get both and tell us which one you like better OP.  

I will be honest, my Beretta 92FS was the first pistol I purchased, and I still have it after 17 years. Love the gun, but I don't shoot nearly as well with it as I do with my 1911. More practice time and better trigger control and I am sure I would. The grip is wide, but Aluma Grips help with that somewhat. Now with my wifes newly acquired M&P, its a whole other story. The replaceable back straps make the grip user customizable. It just fits with the right back strap. Ive never been a fan of Glocks, just not my thing. But with the striker fired M&P,  I'm a big fan. Shoots great, comfortable recoil, and just fun to shoot. Considering getting another 9 for myself or maybe even a .45.

Bottom line, as I said in a prior post. Go to a range that rents guns, and try out a few different pistols. Last thing you want is to buy blind and absolutely hate it when you shoot it.

If the GOAL is "apocalyptic defense and survival", then Beretta 92 100% without question. Mags and spare parts are stocked by not only the US military but a handfull of others, and it's very popular amongst recreational shooters and will be easy to come across. If you're planning for Fallout happening, what you want is the gun you can repair and keep running. When the chips are down, no amount of "cool" on the gun in your backpack that broke a week ago will compare to one in your hand that works when you need it. Don't buy the gun that "wont" break because "IT'S JUST SO COOL AND RELIABLE", buy the gun that you can repair when it DOES break, because guns are just machines and every machine that has ever been designed, built, or used by a human has worn out in time. Better to be able to handle shit when it happens, than to plan for "shit won't happen".

FWIW, I own several guns, only ONE of which is Beretta (and it's a Px4, not the 92 I'm recommending here) and I hope I'm not lumped into the "disregard his opinion because he's a fanboy" camp.

PX4 is a great gun. I prefer it over the 92. Had one in .40, but decided to consolidate to 9mm and .45. Also have the Beretta Cougar in 9mm. Fits the hand very well. Again, I still say shoot them all and see what fits you best.

Could not agree more. Tacticool won't serve if  the gun won't run, or you cant shoot it well.