So… is the Beretta M9 still the Worst?

Glenn R. McMannly

Glenn R. McMannly

Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2023
Messages
521
Reaction score
1,527
Location
Missouri
With all the hubbub and friendly banter about the teething issues with the SIG-Sauer M17/P320, one has to wonder if the much-hated M9 is really that bad?

Hey, at least the unintended kill count of the antiquated M9 is still 0. With that said, we all know the broken slide issues of the early M9s that maimed SEALs.

So which would you rather have? A half-baked plastic ticking time bomb, or an overweight Italian boat anchor with a lousy trigger and breakage issues?

Or, how about this?

IMG_2496.jpeg

Sorry, but the M1911A1 is the finest fighting handgun EVER MADE.

If I were serving, I’d take one from mothballs and carry it with pride. The M9 is was a mistake. But the M17 is a disaster.

Glenn
 
Register to hide this ad
Based on a sample of only one, my Beretta 92F, purchased new in 1988 has been fired a great deal with factory loads and my own cast bullet handloads. Never a problem, it doesn't jam , and it's accurate. All 9mm pistols are heavy if you must load them to full capacity, but the weight makes them easier for the user to shoot well. I could find a much better boat anchor than any pistol. The safety as well as the single-action/ double-action design makes it among the very best. The only drawback I can see with the Beretta is shared by many other pistols: the cartridge for which it is chambered.
 
I quite like hefty pistols, they are easier to shoot in any caliber. Calling the Beretta 92 a boat anchor is a bit rich given the weight of a full-size 1911.

I have had range time with the 92 just once. Between the overly huge, square-edged grips and the DA trigger reach being in another zip code (despite my long fingers), I was less than impressed. It did damp recoil well, but no better than other pistols I have tried/purchased since.
 
LVSteve said:
I quite like hefty pistols, they are easier to shoot in any caliber. Calling the Beretta 92 a boat anchor is a bit rich given the weight of a full-size 1911.

I have had range time with the 92 just once. Between the overly huge, square-edged grips and the DA trigger reach being in another zip code (despite my long fingers), I was less than impressed. It did damp recoil well, but no better than other pistols I have tried/purchased since.
Click to expand...
Not nearly enough experience to make a fair judgement.
 
I was fortunate, I carried both 1911A1's and the M9. Both were good pistols. that said, time moved on for the 1911. I never liked the slide mounted safety/decocker on the M9. When doing a tap rack bang or slingshotting the slide on a speed reload, it was too easy to engage it.

The M9 is bulky and I was never a fan of the double action/Single action trigger.
The Military wanted a more modular handgun so different units had different options, smaller grips, ability to mount Red dots and lights, suppressors. Smaller model to concealed carry. neither the 1911 or Beretta could do that.

They both had there time. like many weapons. I sold my Model 92FS after I retired to buy something else. I purchased a Gen 3 G17 as I wanted to see what all the hype was. I own several G19's now and EDC them for the last 15 years.

It's small, light, super reliable, lots of holsters available, low cost magazines that are super reliable. I tend not to get hung up on a certain pistol. For me the Glock is what a pistol should be. I don't carry for looks, nostalgia, or cool points. It's a tool I'm using to win a fight I hope I never have to be in. I think a good shooter should be able to pick up any handgun and shoot it well. I shoot Glocks very well. In the end its the nut behind the trigger, not the gun.
 
Several years ago I weighed both my Ithaca 1943 1911A1 and Beretta 92f with full magazines. Both are fine pistols with tried and true designs. Wouldn’t call the Beretta a “boat anchor”. No offense-just saying.

1911a1 weighs 2lbs,13 1/4 oz
Beretta 92f weighs 2lbs 8 5/8 oz

Curious how those would compare to the new Sig Sauer Military pistol.IMG_0089.jpeg
 
I love both the 1911 (which I carried in the Marines) and 92F (which I carried on duty), and own versions of both. But let's face it, the 1911 is a jam-o-matic. I personally don't believe in striker fired guns for carry, so to me the 92F and FS which are super accurate and reliable and were and are ideal carry guns.
 
Last edited:
Notwithstanding those slide defects on the early batches of Berettas, nostalgia for the M1911A1 explained much of the alleged 'hate' for the M9 back in the late 1980s.

I loved the 1911A1, and still do. And like just about everyone else back then, I complained mightily about the new sidearm, and for all the reasons cited above. But the M9 was capable of far better accuracy than those old .45 autos, which had suffered decades of abuse by soldiers, mother nature, and the odd shade-tree armorer. And when I was issued a Sig 226 in later years, I found I actually shot much better with the Beretta.

I currently own several 1911 Colts, and will eventually add an M9 Beretta to the collection. It was a very reliable firearm and earned a reputation as a highly effective service sidearm, like it or not.

Incidentally, I have heard some current soldiers waxing nostalgically about their M9 Berettas, much as my generation did about our 1911A1s. On balance, though, I think their complaints are far better grounded than ours were way back then.
 
I taught the use of the M9 (and the M4) to military for well over a decade - I never did think much of the M9 - for one thing I never met a unit armorer who could detail strip one and get it back together!

That said, if you kept them lubed the usually worked until the broke - we broke quite a few, but usually it was a simple job to fix them if you knew about guns.

Still, I have been a 1911 guy since I was 15 years old and will likely remain one - though I do own a lot of different handguns and have killed half the deer and all the wild boar i've shot with a handgun.

I have never owned a 320, and don't know the workings of them. I guess I have to accept that there is something to this rash of "uncommanded" firings. At the same time, I am aware of 6 of a well known maker's striker fired guns, which are supposed to be perfect, going off in the holster without a hand on them - one of those was fatal (I have seen alleged photographic evidence for all of them) - and besides that our Agency experienced two Kabooms with the same brand (but that was caused by ammo - duty ammo).

Also of the above 6 accidental discharges - the holters used were questionable and likely the cause of the incident.

Riposte
 
I was issued the M15 (S&W), M1911A1 (a USAF match pistol. Mine was a Remington and older than I was at the time), M9 (Beretta), and M11 (SIG). They all worked fine. I preferred the M11 of that bunch. I prefer my S&W and Canik to all of them and the current M17/18. The Canik is the choice of the Turkish National Police and Air Force as well as 50 other countries.
m9_umh.jpg
usaf_m15_holster.jpg

usaf_m1911a1_nm.jpgSIG-Sauer-M18.jpgelite_sf_safe_taf.jpgcombo_M&P.jpg
 
Last edited:
SrA Andy Brown did fine with his Beretta M9. Stopped a nut with an SKS who was shooting up the base hospital. Four shots at 70 yards across the parking lot. Two hits, head and shoulder. Not bad for a bicycle cop.m9_andy_brown_fairchild_94.jpg
 
Last edited:
The govt paid about $180 for the M9 in 1985. They paid about $200 for the M17/18 in 2017. Not bad considering inflation since then (would be about $400 now). The holsters for the M17/18 cost more now than then though. The Bianchi UMH was about $100 MSRP, the Safariland rig is over $450. meet-us-armys-new-pistols-m17-m18-modular-handgun-system.webp
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top