Beretta 92

[RobertBrown]

Considering adding the 92fs Inox compact to my collection. It appears to have everything I want in a weapon of this class and it is easily serviced and upgrade-able. Only available in 9mm
Would appreciate your opinion on this weapon.
View attachment 476120

View attachment 476121

 

[brown40]

Maybe not the best 9mm platform, but a beauty, and hard to argue with how many contracts they've secured and rounds they've put through. If funds ever become plentiful enough here I have to toss the coin between the 92 and the CZ75... then the Hi Power is another proven piece... I really like the matte stainless, and the open slide is cool and functional. I have heard complaints about the exposed barrel being a dust trap, but I believe those were daily open carry.

 

[RoyJackson]

This gun has been around for a lot years!
I don't own one (Glock 17's and 19's are my choice)...fired a few 92's over the years. Nice gun, but a bit heavy.
When I wrote I'm a Glock guy, it's because they're functional and easy to maintain...they sure ain't pretty! And, as a carry gun, easily replaceable for not a lot of money.

That Beretta is a pretty gun, and 9mm ammo is a lot better than it was 20 years ago. Now all you need to do is determine if you really want it.

 

[MF283]

My brother has the Beretta & Taurus 92, i like the Taurus better. It just feels better in my hands & shoot's round per round with the Beretta & i seem to get tighter groups with it.

Ronnie

 

[TripleR]

I own Beretta 92 Elite, Sig 228/229 and Glock 19/23/27 and like Roy carry Glocks when carrying a semi-auto. I was required to carry Glocks only as does my son, so I got use to it and it's extremely reliable. However as to ergonomics, I prefer the 92 or Sig. The later Berettas are stronger than the originals, I had one, no problems, but some had concerns.

It's very easy to take down and clean and in my experience as dependable as any. If you are a reloader, the Sig and 92 stock barrels are easier on cases than Glocks, but if you don't, won't make any difference. You will find a variety of opinions, this is just one and I'm certainly no expert.

 

[blackdog2086]

Back when Beretta got the contract to supply the U.S. military and became the M9, it won primarily on cost which amounted to several dollars per weapon less than the Sig Sauer P226. That being said, even the military required to carry the M9 aren't crazy about it. Special Forces units that are allowed to carry non standard issue weapons either carry Sigs or custom 1911 pistols.

My jobs have required me to carry daily for the better part of my life starting with Smith and Wesson revolvers and evolving into modern double action semi autos. When the department I worked for transitioned to semi autos, I was one of a handful of testers who literally used and abused various weapons daily for months, shooting tens of thousands of rounds. Guns included Glocks, Smith and Wesson semi autos, Beretta, Sig and H&K. The only 2 weapons to survive our abuse and fire time after time without fail were the Sig (P226) and the Glock.

I personally don't care for the Glock just because it doesn't fit my hand well, but otherwise it is a great weapon. The department went with the Sigs, partly because of the fact that the Glock didn't have either a manual safety or a full double action pull required for the first shot, and was considered a safety risk by management types.

Much of your decision would have to depend on what your uses for it would be. Plinker, carry weapon, home defense? I've put a lot of rounds through Beretta 92's and enjoy it for target shooting and general plinking. As far as a weapon I'd stake my life on, I'd go with a Sig or Glock.

I know I didn't really answer your questions, but I thought I'd muddy the water a bit further.

 

[k0ua]

To further muddy the waters. While I have put a lot of rounds thru the 92F I never really like them very well, and have never owned one my self. Now they are reliable and durable, and many people love them, but like the above poster I prefer SIGs and Glocks, which I own both. One of the things that always bothered me about the 92 is the ease of which an opponent can disable your 92 in a fraction of a second by grasping the slide and manipulating the disassembly lever downward with his forefinger and pulling the slide assembly off of the frame. This maneuver, if done by a practiced individual can be done before you may realize what happened.

The answer to that of course is to never let an opponent get close enough to your firearm to do that maneuver. And the likelihood of that happening is very slim, but it has always stuck in my head.

Bottom line is buy whatever fits you and pleases you and you can hit well with. I just have never been a fan of the 92, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't.

 

[JRobyn]

I have one. My favorite handgun second to my Super Red Hawk. An absolutely beautiful piece of engineering to fondle and admire, not to mention that it is as solid and dependable as a rock. But lots more accurate. My wife's matching non-Inox was stolen and she opted to replace it with a CZ 75D Compact. I would be heartbroken if anything ever happened to my 92.

 

[C4Ranch]

I'm a fan. 92FS was my first handgun. And have grown to love the action and safety. The thing thst sold me from the beginning is the fact that the firing pin physically rotates 90 degrees making it impossible for the round in the chamber to fire. You can see it rotating as you flip the safety on which also safely decocks. Maybe not a big deal for some, but it is to me. I also carry a beretta storm subcompact. Same function and familiar safety location gives me confidence having bullet in chamber at all times and simple flip of the safety and double action will fire away.

 

[/pine]

You should read Lee Child's (character 'Jack Reacher') opinion of the 92fs...!!!
FWIW...many other prolific/popular writers that have black opp operatives in their story lines will describe why they prefer the 92fs over other options...but none better than Jack Reacher...