Posted: 7/10/2025 3:34:33 PM EDT
Do you favor the SIG P226 over the Beretta 92, and Luger over the 1911? 
|
| That gun isn't being fired, or held in any way, and I can still see the muzzle flip. |
|
Quoted: That gun isn't being fired, or held in any way, and I can still see the Quoted: That gun isn't being fired, or held in any way, and I can still see the FIFY.
|
|
Quoted: 92's are the best looking handguns imo. Attached File Attached File |
|
So close yet so far away.  
|
|
Quoted: So close yet so far away. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/77421/IMG_1958-3584055.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/77421/IMG_1960-3584056.jpg Royals are nice. |
|
The only thing wrong with the current 92/M9-based guns is they need a slide redesign for lower optics mounts. Everything else is great, and all of the early issues with the slide and locking block have been fixed. You have slide and frame mounted safety options, though the G style decocker-only is probably the best. The original 92F became the FS when they added the bigger hammer pin to prevent the slide coming off the rear in the event of a break. The Brigadier slide corrected the weak point (that is only weak for +P+ ammo anyway). And the radiused corners on the locking block eliminated the stress risers and dramatically extended the locking block service life. You know the gun is good when the only remaining failures are due to recoil springs not being replaced. If you're wearing out recoil springs before anything else breaks, you're shooting a shitload of ammo with no failures. I don't like the 320 because of all the holster pops. But before that, I didnt like it because it was just another soulless polymer framed striker gun. I was considering a Flux Raider because the chassis is awesome, but the gun that goes in it is a piece of shit, so hard pass. |
P226 is ubiquitous in just about every movie where a handgun is involved.  ETA: Holy CARP thats a ton of cameos for the P series.  https://www.imfdb.org/wiki/SIG-Sauer_P220_pistol_series#SIG-Sauer_P226 |
|
I can't explain it, but I hated the M9 while in the military, but love my 92X. Maybe it's the vertical grip. Attached File |
|
Quoted: I can't explain it, but I hated the M9 while in the military, but love my 92X. Maybe it's the vertical grip. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/64869/20250503_185454_jpg-3584228.JPG Those 92X models are a nice combination of features, but the rounded trigger guard means holsters made for 92FS and M9 variants won't fit as good. And holster selection is already sparse. |
|
The Luger is an ergonomic nightmare, and is in no way better than the 1911, which is plainly obvious when you see that the 1911 and its derivatives are incredibly prolific today while the Luger was an evolutionary dead end. Being more expensive doesn't make it better. The 92 and P22X (scalloped rail guns aside) are both excellent designs, as is the CZ-75. The P320 is a cheap piece of shit that is not the equal of the Glock, Beretta, P22X series SIGs, CZ-75, nor even the 114 year old 1911. If it were it would make sense to go with the less expensive weapon. It does not make sense to go with a less expensive weapon that is also substantially shittier than what it replaced. This is a troll thread. The P320 is to service handguns what UCP is to camouflage utility uniforms. |
|
Quoted: The Luger is an ergonomic nightmare, and is in no way better than the 1911, which is plainly obvious when you see that the 1911 and its derivatives are incredibly prolific today while the Luger was an evolutionary dead end. Being more expensive doesn't make it better. ... The 1911's ergonomics were designed to mimic those of the Luger. |
|
Quoted: Beretta got the contract in exchange for Italy agreeing to another nato base in Italy Beretta got the contract because they made a better gun for less money. Every Sig in the XM9 trials suffered a cracked frame in less than 7000 rounds, and they bid more than Beretta. |
|
Quoted: I can't explain it, but I hated the M9 while in the military, but love my 92X. Maybe it's the vertical grip. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/64869/20250503_185454_jpg-3584228.JPG |
|
The low bid thing didn't bother me at all, it just doesn't make sense to me, who is totally not involved in procurement, why they would pick anything over other very well established platforms available at the time. And now here we are with 320s going off in holsters when torqued. |
|
Quoted: Those 92X models are a nice combination of features, but the rounded trigger guard means holsters made for 92FS and M9 variants won't fit as good. And holster selection is already sparse. Truth! Beretta doesn't think about these things. I bought a brigadier elite G model when they were released and while an excellent pistol I sold it because there were no holsters for it. |
|
Coworker came into a Red 9 recently. We fired it one weekend. I thought I wanted one badly before firing it. I want one even worse now. |
|
Quoted: It is a good thing they don't. Quoted: Quoted: The 1911's ergonomics were designed to mimic those of the Luger. It is a good thing they don't. Yeah, except that they do. The 1911's ancestors looked like this:  After field trials against the Luger, Colt changed the ergonomics by moving the mag release (so it was more like the Luger's), making it lock open on an empty mag (like the Luger), adding a grip safety (like the Luger's), adding a thumb safety (like the Luger's), and making the grip angle steeper (so it was more like the Luger). The final 1911 is heavily derivative of the Luger. |
|
Quoted: Yeah, except that they do. The 1911's ancestors looked like this: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2a/Pistol_US_Colt_M1900_%2810193185426%29_%28cropped%29.jpg After field trials against the Luger, Colt changed the ergonomics by moving the mag release (so it was more like the Luger's), making it lock open on an empty mag (like the Luger), adding a grip safety (like the Luger's), adding a thumb safety (like the Luger's), and making the grip angle steeper (so it was more like the Luger). The final 1911 is heavily derivative of the Luger. I'm aware of what the 1911 evolved from, but it's quite a stretch to say that any of what you listed to be "more like" means the 1911 mimics Luger ergos |
|
Quoted: I'm aware of what the 1911 evolved from, but it's quite a stretch to say that any of what you listed to be "more like" means the 1911 mimics Luger ergos Quoted: Quoted: Yeah, except that they do. The 1911's ancestors looked like this: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2a/Pistol_US_Colt_M1900_%2810193185426%29_%28cropped%29.jpg After field trials against the Luger, Colt changed the ergonomics by moving the mag release (so it was more like the Luger's), making it lock open on an empty mag (like the Luger), adding a grip safety (like the Luger's), adding a thumb safety (like the Luger's), and making the grip angle steeper (so it was more like the Luger). The final 1911 is heavily derivative of the Luger. I'm aware of what the 1911 evolved from, but it's quite a stretch to say that any of what you listed to be "more like" means the 1911 mimics Luger ergos Slide release, magazine release, thumb safety on the 1911 aren't Luger ergonomics? Pics of heel release 1911? |