Opinion of the U.S. M9 Beretta Pistol
- Thread starter x westie
- Start date
I would disagree, in my opinion hanguns have never been more durable than the current breed of service guns. Better matterials play a large part in this.
With the exception of the 1911 and BHP guns, I have yet to see an older designed service pistol come close to the durability of the Glock, SIG, and even Beretta.
So about that M9 thing...
I read an article recently about the M9 and how the US military contract they landed stipulated that they had to manufacture them in the US. Before the new plant was opened a number of slides were imported and those were the ones prone to breakage. There were some horror stories about maimed faces but in truth some minor injuries occured. Since the slides were made in the States there have been no issues outside of the norm for any firearm.
Mike
Found the article-hope it's ok to leave link:
http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/history/true_story_m9.htm
Last edited:
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
No problemo! I personally prefer the 92FS over the M9. Actually, everyone does.
Thats why you never see 92FS on the EE, yet see a million M9's. And they all have the same shoddy sales job.
US ARMY ISSUED!
Come again???
You prefer it and everyone does? You've owned both an M9 and a 92? I prefer the M9, because it's only the markings on the slide that change, and I prefer the M9 markings.I see the rare M9 (one was mine, and it's the one that's on the forum as we speak), and a bunch of 92's. The M9's you see on the EE aren't issued either, they are civilian M9 production runs done specially by Beretta. There were only a couple thousand new production civilian M9's made by Beretta on the last run I do believe.
Based on the magazines that I have read with third party feedback from actual guys using these things, they 'feel' that there isn't enough power to stop the enemy with it.
Whether this is actually true or not, I don't know because the articles were very vague and seemed subjective without any specific examples.
Whether this is actually true or not, I don't know because the articles were very vague and seemed subjective without any specific examples.
- Location
- Calgary, Alberta
IIRC, the milspec for the Beretta was 3,000 without major parts failure or something silly like that.
I never have and never will understand why people bother comparing things by "what the military uses". Who cares? Do you think they're any smarter than we are?
The one thing that sticks with me from my military experience was just how utterly #### all my issued kit was, and how I had to go to the surplus store to replace it all with better stuff!
If I were sent to Iraq, my first concern wouldn't be whether my issued Beretta passed some test 24 years ago with flying colours, it would be whether it had been well-maintained and actually went "bang" when I pulled the trigger.
Frankly I suspect I would take my own Beretta if at all possible!
I never have and never will understand why people bother comparing things by "what the military uses". Who cares? Do you think they're any smarter than we are?
The one thing that sticks with me from my military experience was just how utterly #### all my issued kit was, and how I had to go to the surplus store to replace it all with better stuff!
If I were sent to Iraq, my first concern wouldn't be whether my issued Beretta passed some test 24 years ago with flying colours, it would be whether it had been well-maintained and actually went "bang" when I pulled the trigger.
Frankly I suspect I would take my own Beretta if at all possible!
On youtube there is a video of a Glock test. The guy drops the Glock in a puddle moves it around a bit to get some mud in it and then brings it up a shoots off the clip without a problem.
The next video is the Beretta. Same test except the Berreta jams and has to be manually cycled to fire.
I would be wary of a Beretta as my sidearm.
The next video is the Beretta. Same test except the Berreta jams and has to be manually cycled to fire.
I would be wary of a Beretta as my sidearm.
I've always found the Beretta to be very reliable {I've seen more service size Glocks and SIG jam than 92s} as long as its kept clean and generally well maintained, the problem seems to be that they don't seem to take grit or wear very well. As you said i'd rather have some other design at with me if my life depended on it.
I saw it on youtube, so it must be reality....
They are both great guns with proven REAL WORLD track records. I'd suggest you spend a little less time on youtube and a little more time at the range....
A little bit of mud and the Beretta wont fire??? I suggest you pull your head out of your a$$. The Glock has a passed many harsher tests than that. And Im not just talking about youtube.
Thanks for coming out though
the ultimate test was done with a uzi years ago- it was used as a promo for the carbine/smg where not only was it dropped in the mud( i'm talking MUD here, not just a PUDDLE) and runb over a couple of times by trucks- just hosed off drained , and prrft- that's the sound as the mag empties on f/aA little bit of mud and the Beretta wont fire??? I suggest you pull your head out of your a$$. The Glock has a passed many harsher tests than that. And Im not just talking about youtube.
Thanks for coming out though
