I'm looking into getting into IPSA shooting and have narrowed my choices to the Beretta 96 or Glock 22. These are really the only ones in my price range. I'm leaning toward the beretta, but the durability and reliability of the glock is appealing. What do ya'll think?

So you have narrowed it down to two .40's built on 9mm frames, one of which has a nasty tendency to KB with non-factory ammo.

I own a 92fs, and I love my beretta, and would not trade it for anything other 9mm on the market today.  But if I were you, I'd look at HK or Sig for a .40.  My information about the beretta 96 MAY be incorrect, but I have heard they can be problematic.  I own a USP .40 and love it.  Dead nuts accurate, though it does have a high bore axis, and doesnt exactly have a competition trigger...then again neither does glock.  But I believe it is one of the ONLY handguns that is offered in both 9mm and .40 that was designed as a .40, and scaled DOWN to 9mm.  Not the other way around.

If I am wrong, please correct me.  If I had to pick from the two, having shot the Glock 22 quite a bit (my dad owns one), I'd say go for the beretta, if you must stick with one of the two.

Ditto on the H&K. Ditto on the Beretta in 9mm.

I would LOVE to own a USP but unfortunately it and the SIG are way out of my price range. i'd like to own a .40 instead of a 9mm (i know many argue against that, but that's just what i want). I'm not worried about KBing, because i don't reload and i plan on using factory ammo anyway. My biggest concern about the beretta is reliability, while my biggest concern about the glock is accuracy.

The Beretta 9x series is one of the most reliable handguns in the world. I'd rent both and se which shoot best for you.
The weight of the 96 may be helpful for matches.
-Steve

I wanna be different - howabout the XD40?

Quoted: My biggest concern about the beretta is reliability, while my biggest concern about the glock is accuracy.

Never seen Glocks have a problem with accuracy.

A very well informed source tells me the most durable .40S&Ws out there are the S&W 4006 and the FN Browning Hi-Power.

The Smith has a very fast and short trigger reset.  The Hi-Power has the advantage of a single action trigger.  Both are all steel and will have relatively mild recoil.  You should be able to find a police trade in 4006 fairly cheap.

Just some other options.

If you are looking at doing competition shooting, the Glock is the way to go. Look at the G35 if  you must have a .40 but the XD is getting a good rep as well. The better way to go is with the 9mm if possible, since it is both cheaper to shoot and has less recoil. In USPSA Production, everyone shoots Minor with 10rd. mags anyway.

Lumpy...no offense, but I have a huge problem believing your source about the S&W and FN/Browning. I have  seen 35-40 S&W 5906's used at an Academy that could not come close to the durability or reliability of the Beretta's or Sigs, and seriously doubt that the 4006 has miraculously resolved these issues. The Browning is not a whole lot better with higher pressure 9mm's such as NATO stuff. The Brits have long known that the FN won't hold up to thousands of the "9ZED" rounds, the HRT guys had some issues with this as well, and...once again...I doubt the .40 is a lot better so far as longivity is concerned. I DO like the feel of the FN/Browning, though.

I like .40's also.  And, you actually might be able to afford a Sig.  I have a Beretta 96 Vertec and a SigPro 2340.  The price in my area is $588 for the Beretta and $499 for the SigPro.

Both guns are very reliable and accurate!  The SigPro is slightly more accurate and somewhat lighter.  I like the longer site radius of the Beretta, tho.  It is much easier to take down in the field, too.

Anyway, the SigPro is another option and worth some of your time to check it out given your desire for a .40 cal.