Twenty years ago the Beretta 92F was the gun to have, it was popular in movies and books and other than a few slide breakage issues in the U.S military afaik they have been good pistols. I've had my old Italian-made 92F since '97 and it was used then and I've had many pistols before and since(Glock, Sig, CZ, Walther, HK, etc) and the Beretta is the only one I still hang onto. Why is it now such a sport to hate on the poor girl? Despite the issues in the states with the slides it has performed well with the main-line troops since the mid-80's. has anyone heard any horror stories of troops being killed in combat for the sole reason that their Beretta failed them? Now it seems if your pistol isn't half tactical tupperware it's not worthy of being carried on your hip. I would take my 92F over anything out there, be nice if it was shinier but beggars can't be choosers.
Why is Beretta so bad?
- Thread starter RCPerkins
- Start date
handofzeus
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Trout Creekish Ontario.
I've been trying to talk a buddy's ex-father-in-law out of his 92f for the last year. The thing is almost mint and he wants to sell it BUT...he always tells me 'I paid $1000 for it ya know'. With new blued 92Fs going for as low as $700 at times I have to get him to come down to earth. That Beretta is the only large frame auto that fits my hand well. They may be dated, but they're still one of the most attractive and recognizable designs around.
I like Berettas.
say what you will about EYTALIANS
but they sure know style. I love how Berettas look and feel. (though, i find CZ and 1911 to be more comfortable in my hands).
maybe they are just out of fashion now, possibly due to 9mm caliber it ..mainly comes in?
say what you will about EYTALIANS
but they sure know style. I love how Berettas look and feel. (though, i find CZ and 1911 to be more comfortable in my hands).maybe they are just out of fashion now, possibly due to 9mm caliber it ..mainly comes in?
- Location
- Gangcouver, BC
Excellent pistol. The only reason I sold mine is cause it was difficult to shoot, I have small hands, guess thats why I don't own a DE.
NorthCoastBigBore
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Northwest BC (Rural) 103-I-##
Also had mine since the mid-late '90s and it is my only centerfire auto, more interested in revolvers and antiques than I am semis so the Beretta is all I need or want. Been using it for IDPA and everything else, club IPSC style matches, steel shoots, you name it. Now I'm never winning the dang matches mind you but for me it works just fine (I do get a lot of good natured fun poked at it. "Riggs" is a common nickname but I love the Lethal Weapon series anyway). Recently replaced the recoil spring over some stove pipes but that turned out to be an ammo issue (changed recipes) and I stuffed the old spring back in (well over 10K on it but frankly I think it likes that softer spring).
Happy shootin', with whatever you got
Happy shootin', with whatever you got
I think it's a handsome pistol, I grew up watching Hong Kong action flicks where the 92 series were prominent, I can't knock it for its style. However, the way my shooting tastes have developed have led me to dislike the actual use and operation of the firearm. I personally think it's too big and bulky for what it is (despite being a huge fan of Ruger Mark II and III pistols [/hypocrisy]) but I have a particular disdain for DA/SA triggers and slide mounted safeties, but that's just me. At the end of the day, let's just:
- Location
- Hudson Quebec Canada
One of the better pistols that I have ever had. I bought one 3years back only for my brother to grab it from me. Very nice looking and very good finish.
This^ big time! I even put hogue grips on my 92A1 and with small hands I can get grip it no problem. Love that pistol.
JDForBrkFst
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Roughly North Central AB
I suspect many may be on the same boat as I am. When newer shooters ask me what i think of it, I tell them it's a good pistol, nothing wrong with it. I just don't like it. Maybe the way it looks, maybe it's the association with Mel Gibson performing the worst shooting flinch i've ever seen in a movie, or ever for that matter (at the range in Lethal Weapon). I don't know for sure, there's just something about it...
there's 3 things wrong with the 92, and have been since the 51 brigadier- the LOCKING piece( the wedge beneath the barrel), the trigger return spring, and the mainsprng- for some reason BERETTA lists these as "consumable parts" and they need to be replaced every so often( and yes , i have one- a 92s) but you can't say it's finicky about ammo- it's just that there are maybe better designs out there - ask the rental range officers/owners what pistols perform best for them and you won't find it's beretta- it's a sig or something- and look at what these pisols are doing-anybody and everybody handles and fires them, - crap ammo, and cleaned and parts replaced if and when they fail
I have one and I like it but to be honest the design is now dated. I enjoy the large grip and think it feels great in my hand. However the pistol is very large compared to current designs and I really hate the slide mounted safety. There is nothing wrong with the pistol and it shoots and functions as designed, I just think that there are lots of more ergonomicaly designed pistols availiable that work better for most people.
I think its more people hate on double actions in general. Single actions will always have the "best" trigger pulls. Striker fire pistols have the same trigger pull from first to last shot and with no external safety are ALWAYS ready with a round chambered. Striker fired guns are the safest and fastest with a round chambered. There is nothing wrong with Beretta's, they are a fine gun. I think in most people's eye's Polymer Striker fired guns are the best tool for the job. They are not nice to look at and not nice to shoot, but always work and have advantages stated above. A pistol connoisseur should own multiple guns in multiple calibres of multiple actions anyways. An Italian made Beretta 92FS is on my must have list.
That sums it up for me.
Too big for what it is
Not a fan of the trigger
Safety position sucks
They're okay guns, just been surpassed by other designs.
As somebody who owns two Glocks and have witnessed the M&P, XD[M], PPQ, whatever come into popularity off the Glock's success (not saying Glock was the first polymer gun, but it was the first to get such recognition) I have heard people complain that metal frame DA/SA guns are becoming obsolete.
I don't think that polymer guns are a "fad", I think they are here to stay. But I also don't think DA/SA guns, or guns with external safeties, are going anywhere.
Any time a "new and improved" gun comes out, people flock to it, gawk over it, say it's the best, and then excitement tapers off.
Look at the 1911, every time a new type of gun came out people must have been drooling over the higher magazine capacity, light weight, design, etc. but still after 100 years people, myself included, can't help but buy an all-steel, single-action, manual safety gun that requires hand fitting.
So what's this got to do with the 92FS? People complain about it and want the latest and greatest. But the 92SFS hasn't gone anywhere. It's still heavy, it's still DA/SA, it still lacks a super duper rail (unless you get a 92A1 or M9A1) and yet it's still churning along. And it may outlast the production of some polymer guns.
Sometimes you just don't mess with success.
I can also take the P226 as an example. Again it's big, it's heavy and people don't want to drop a thousand bucks on it. You could get a super-duper great new polymer gun for so much cheaper that seems so much more advanced, right? I thought so too but every time I read up on a gun I thought was the future, it still had little issues that weren't apparent on the tried and true design. I can't really quantify it but you have to fire and handle and own one to understand. But you may have a different opinion.
I hear people complain about DA/SA. In Canada, unless you compete, this is a moot point. When are you ever decocking the thing at the range? But the Beretta allows you to use the safety as a decocker and also as a safety, so you can keep it OFF safe and it's still safe.
There are some alternative models I wish that the 92FS would come in. I wish it came in the exact same configuration with a steel frame for high volume shooting.
I don't think that polymer guns are a "fad", I think they are here to stay. But I also don't think DA/SA guns, or guns with external safeties, are going anywhere.
Any time a "new and improved" gun comes out, people flock to it, gawk over it, say it's the best, and then excitement tapers off.
Look at the 1911, every time a new type of gun came out people must have been drooling over the higher magazine capacity, light weight, design, etc. but still after 100 years people, myself included, can't help but buy an all-steel, single-action, manual safety gun that requires hand fitting.
So what's this got to do with the 92FS? People complain about it and want the latest and greatest. But the 92SFS hasn't gone anywhere. It's still heavy, it's still DA/SA, it still lacks a super duper rail (unless you get a 92A1 or M9A1) and yet it's still churning along. And it may outlast the production of some polymer guns.
Sometimes you just don't mess with success.
I can also take the P226 as an example. Again it's big, it's heavy and people don't want to drop a thousand bucks on it. You could get a super-duper great new polymer gun for so much cheaper that seems so much more advanced, right? I thought so too but every time I read up on a gun I thought was the future, it still had little issues that weren't apparent on the tried and true design. I can't really quantify it but you have to fire and handle and own one to understand. But you may have a different opinion.
I hear people complain about DA/SA. In Canada, unless you compete, this is a moot point. When are you ever decocking the thing at the range? But the Beretta allows you to use the safety as a decocker and also as a safety, so you can keep it OFF safe and it's still safe.
There are some alternative models I wish that the 92FS would come in. I wish it came in the exact same configuration with a steel frame for high volume shooting.
Brutus
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Shot the original Beretta M9 in the mid-eighties after the US Army adopted them. Us Canadian soldiers were having a grand time shooting it until thier senior armorer noticed we were using 9mm NATO spec ammunition in it, that was put out for the Uzis. Apparently they had M9 specific ammunition for it at the time, (not informed) but us easy going Canucks thought all 9x19mm was interchangeable using our BHPs and SMGs as an example. We apologized profusely while he threw a snitty-fit (maybe one of them should have been more careful maybe?) and these were set aside for slide inspection. IIRC, this fairly common problem was since addressed by the Italian manufacturer and beefed up slides (steel insert?) was the eventual result.
Nothing wrong with a decent 9mm Beretta once you get past the very first horridly heavy DA/SA pull IMO.
Nothing wrong with a decent 9mm Beretta once you get past the very first horridly heavy DA/SA pull IMO.
1riot1ranger
CGN Regular
- Location
- Calgary, AB
This.
I've got an Elite II and it's a great gun, but not superior to my Shadow or GP6.
I will add, however, I think the Elite II is more accurate than my other DA/SA 9mm pistols. At 50m the Beretta outshoots the others and its trigger isn't superior to the CZ or GP6.
