So… is the Beretta M9 still the Worst?

[rockquarry]

The question of chrome lined versus unlined barrels and the effects on accuracy comes up from time to time. I have yet to see full scientific comparison of two rifles or pistols where the lining as the only difference.

I have also read that chrome lined ARs are not as accurate as those with plain barrels. Then again if you want an accurate SKS, you buy a Chinese one which does have a chrome lining. I've never seen the Yugo SKS (plain barrel) praised for its accuracy, so there are a lot more factors at play than just the presence or absence of chrome.

LV Steve, that's probably a good summation. I would suspect the US military has done some testing along these lines but I don't have enough interest in the matter to pursue it.

I had a couple of SKSs with chrome lined bores years ago; they were actually more accurate with cast bullets than jacketed, but after working with both rifles extensively, I decided I could do much better than an SKS. Sort of like living on bread and water when you don't have to. While I learned from the experience, I sold both guns and miss neither.

 

[biku324]

My Browning High Power in 40 has 'beef' to accommodate the bigger cartridge, including an extra locking lug.

 

[Trooper224]

The real differences are probably slight at best. "Experts" claim accuracy with non-chrome-lined barrels is better in ARs. Whether there is truth in that statement is unknown to me.

As a old competitor I can confirm that. You won't see any of the top shooters using chrome lined barrels. The difference, however, is slight. But, you're talking about a game where slight differences make a difference between first and tenth place.

In terms of practical, man killing accuracy, that difference doesn't outweigh the benefits in durability that chrome lining provides.

 

[budhall]

Well, the question raises question(s) of it own. This first being the "worst" of what?? i.e. compared to what?? So many answers here seem to compare it to the M1911 & M1811a1; though are they concerned with caliber, capacity, size, functioning, or what??
I spent 17years in the military using and training troops on the 1911a1. Then my final 3years we had the M9. Qualifying score improved with the M9 over the 1911. Commands stopped their ridiculous policy of carrying an empty chamber when the M9 arrived. As a collateral, quality and function of accessories(holsters, belts, mag pouches, etc.) improved. On the plus side, the M9 is ambidextrous, mag capacity is significantly improved, and speed of presentation is improved(that empty chamber policy BS again) over the 1911. While the GI FMJ Ball ammo isn't the question, the M9 does have a knack of reliably feeding just about every ammo it's fed. The 1911 did show more failure to feed properly and failure to eject completely, than the M9s record of virtually no failures. One negative of the M9 is the grip size; it's too @#$&! fat for some hands(both some men and women's hands). I'm 6' 2", 200+ lbs. and even I can't get a proper one handed grip and still reach the trigger correctly when the hamner isn't cocked. It's interesting to note here that across the industry there's a big trend towards thinning out the grips on most all full size pistols.
As for civilian agency consideration....if the M9/92FS meets their needs and the like it, then so be it. The grip is fairly large. The function is a traditional DA/SA, and most agencies are going with the striker fired systems; but with system is fine if you train to it.
As for "the worst" question; I don't think there is a such thing. Even those pistols we(whoever "we" are) think are junk; they all have a niche in the market. It may not be our niche, but it's still there.

 

[Riposte1]

The question of chrome lined versus unlined barrels and the effects on accuracy comes up from time to time. I have yet to see full scientific comparison of two rifles or pistols where the lining as the only difference.

I have also read that chrome lined ARs are not as accurate as those with plain barrels. Then again if you want an accurate SKS, you buy a Chinese one which does have a chrome lining. I've never seen the Yugo SKS (plain barrel) praised for its accuracy, so there are a lot more factors at play than just the presence or absence of chrome.

I have yet to see one either but I have quite a few chrome lined barrel, including four M14s we got of the DRMO list for the Sheriff's Office - I zeroed them all with iron sights and they shot fine - though that is hardly a sceintific test.

I have bought a lot of GI replacment barrels at gun shows which were chrome lined - they need to be modified in the feedway but they shoot great. I also have more than one chrome lined AR.

I also have an oddball S&W 1955 target that is black chrome on the outside and the barrel is chrome lined (as are the hammer and trigger but I smoothed the face of the trigger and narrowed it) - this is a group at 25 yards - a 260 gr. Lee cast bullet at 1100 fps. The chrome doesn't seem to hurt it.



Chrome lining may not be the "bee's knees" but I figure it doesn't hurt me

Riposte

 

[Dialogike]

I bought a 92F back in the late 1980's. It shot beautifully, buttery smooth action, very accurate. I just never could master the long D/A 1st shot then short S/A follow up when practicing double taps

I have fixed mine with a Wilson Combat short-reach trigger and smaller grips, so it handles great

 

[65-2x2]

One of these days the military will discover the CZ, and all the arguments will end.

I own and shoot several 1911s, a Beretta 92, a Sig 320 and a couple of the CZ 75 series. I like them all. While I still carry a LW Colt Defender in .45 ACP, if I had to carry an exposed sidearm in the line of duty, it would be the CZ. Of course I am one of those dottering old fools that doesn't believe that any ground shaking improvements in handguns have been made since 1935. I also believe that there are dozens of reliable handguns that are capable of any serious work and that there are probably scores of them that are capable of shooting better than I do.

 

[Sal1950]

The Sig P320 etal should have had a blade safety (like a Glock) AND a manual safety lever. To have a pre-cocked action like the P320 invites unexpected discharges.

To me a pre-cocked striker is scary and wrong, minimally they need a manual safety and maybe a 1911 style grip safety.
The P320 has documented lethal accidental discharges that need to be permanently solved, I just wouldn't carry one. I did carry a 1911 cocked and locked in Nam and never thought twice about it.

 

[ISCS Yoda]

Not a lot of hatred for the M9 in these parts......not at all............even Italian surplus is well liked!

 

[CALREB]

When we started issuing 92s I had a bit of a time switching from a revolver. The first press was fine it was the others I couldn't get used to. Had to commit to get a job a the academy , as that was the issue gun. In a month or so had got used to it and really liked it as a combat weapon. I was one of 3 assigned to check the sights on recruit guns before they were issued. So somewhere between 80-100 guns shot every month at 25 yards. I was really surprised how well the guns shot. Most between 2-3 inches for a 6 short group and every so often one was 1-1 1/2 ". One day at an instructor training day we took to shooting a steel silhouette at about 160 yards. It actually was pretty easy.

Yes, there was a few issues with barrel blocks and a couple things (that have been fixed now) but as a whole we saw fewer Berettas in the armory than any other semi auto. I really grew to like the pistol and have 5-6 of them. I don't carry one as an EDC as it's a pretty big pistol. But I always felt pretty good driving through LA to get home every night with one on.

 

[RebCop]

Having carried a Sig 226 in 9mm and then 220 in .45 for the majority of my LE career I absolutely feel the Sig was a vastly superior pistol to the Beretta. The M9 always had the ergonomics of a brick- they won the contract based upon price and political considerations.

It shoots softer than the Sig's because of the lower bore axis. It is also very reliable and that helped the selection.

 

[Rimfire Fanatic]

I have Beretta's, a 92 FS and an M9A3. I have an Sig P320 Compact and 3 1911's (A Colt Custom Shop, and A Kimber Eclipse Pro and LW 1911 5 inch).

If I had to pick one platform for 9mm, It would be The Beretta 92. I have Sigs and Glocks in 9MM as well, But the Beretta is my favorite. I shoot best with it, out of the 9MM's that I have.

The 1911's that I have are what I would pick if I could only have one platform, and I will always take a 45 1911 over any other caliber. Also, if it was the only Platform in 45 that I could have, that would be fine. I have had HK's, and Glocks in 45 ACP, and they never even came close to my 1911's. The Sig P220 was close, but still no cigar.

 

[fkienast]

I can't remember much about the M-9 pistols in the USMC.
The safety was different.
It was so accurate compared to our old 1911's.
It held a lot of bullets. For Desert Storm, I had 3 magazines and I was issued 9, that's right, NINE BULLETS, my share of the ammo we received.
Turned in 9 rounds at the end.

 

[Airdale26]

I never had a desire to own one.

Firearms are like cars or trucks Each has features and each individual has likes and dislikes. Not every likes the 1911 frames due to size, weight, mag capacity, hammer fired or just because it is old technology. Full size frames ( duty pistols) are not for everyone. Where smaller different calibers and increase in mag capacity are factors for others.

When student come to class one of the first questions I ask is what is their intent in the use. This sets the stage for them to think. Many already have made the decision, some regret their decision and we find those in local Gun Shops and gun shows being sold.

 

[Tabby Lynn]

Guess I'll be in the minority and talk against the M9. My was issued one about a week before deployment to Desert Storm. We had one range trip before deployment to test our new sidearms. I found the firearm "ass heavy" and slower on follow up shots over the 1911. Accuracy…similar to a shotgun using buckshot. I'll admit that my previous experience was primarily with 1911 firearms. Realizing the Army wasn't providing the volume of shooting I believed necessary for a combat soldier, I engaged in IPSC/USPSA handgun competitions. I can honestly say in all the years I competed, I did not see a M9/92 at any matches. I eventually saw Glocks in the later years, but no Berettas. You will not find an M9/92 on my arsenal, not willing to give up space for my 1911s.

Well I guess I will join you in the mostly unspoken minority. I think that there are more of us that learned that the M-9 or the Beretta 92 were essentially pieces of junk and I am glad I retired from the Army before I had to carry one. In 2023 I decided that I wanted to shoot the match at the CMP Pistol School out at Camp Perry with the intention of possibly picking up some Leg points during the pistol match. In order to practice ahead of time I bought a new Beretta 92FS, which almost immediately identified itself as a very expensive boat anchor. The weight did not bother me but the double action left a lot to be desired, as did the slide and barrel. Looking at the slide and barrel there was daylight showing almost all the way between the slide and barrel. At 50 feet it was impossible to keep 10 shots on a standard NRA B2 target much less anywhere near the center. I sent the pistol back to Beretta noting the accuracy problem. They replaced both the slide and barrel under warranty but when I got the pistol back there was still daylight showing between the slide and barrel. The accuracy was improved, at least when bench resting the pistol the rounds would stay scattered within the scoring rings with a few even making it to the 10 ring.

At Camp Perry I was hoping that the Army issue M-9 that we had to shoot would be an improvement over my Beretta 92, instead it was similar to the original 92 before sending it back to Beretta. Visible light all around the slide/barrel and about the same accuracy. So much for the hope for some leg points.

I since have bought a Sig Sauer M-17, which I found to be a very good, as well as accurate pistol. Easy to keep all the rounds in the 10 ring bench resting and within the scoring black shooting offhand. I even carried the M-17 when on duty as an armed security guard and never had any issues with the Level 2 Blackhawk holster I used. Now I find that the M-17 is supposedly dangerous and discharges on it's own. I have tried to induce a un-commanded discharge to no avail, even using the demonstrated methods that have shown up on You Tube that all had the person demonstrating pulling the trigger, at least partway back to cause the discharge. Couldn't get that to cause mine to fire either.

The 1911 can be chambered in what is called the 38 super, which from what I understand is somewhat similar in performance to the 45 ACP. Why doesn't somebody take the 357 magnum cartridge, turn it into a rimless design, and modify the 1911 to accept what I would call the 357 Super. Put it in a stacked magazine. It would be a 1911 design shooting a 357 magnum cartridge that would outperform any current semi auto cartridge out there today. This is including the current 10 mm pistols. I guess it sadly makes way too much sense for any of the gun manufacturer's to try to accomplish, or the military to put it into specifications for a new handgun.

 

[SGT ROCK 11B]

My Police Department was issuing Beretta 92FS so I got one. I think it was an excellent pistol. Of course it really depends on the Instructor.

 

[rockquarry]

Well I guess I will join you in the mostly unspoken minority. I think that there are more of us that learned that the M-9 or the Beretta 92 were essentially pieces of junk and I am glad I retired from the Army before I had to carry one. In 2023 I decided that I wanted to shoot the match at the CMP Pistol School out at Camp Perry with the intention of possibly picking up some Leg points during the pistol match. In order to practice ahead of time I bought a new Beretta 92FS, which almost immediately identified itself as a very expensive boat anchor. The weight did not bother me but the double action left a lot to be desired, as did the slide and barrel. Looking at the slide and barrel there was daylight showing almost all the way between the slide and barrel. At 50 feet it was impossible to keep 10 shots on a standard NRA B2 target much less anywhere near the center. I sent the pistol back to Beretta noting the accuracy problem. They replaced both the slide and barrel under warranty but when I got the pistol back there was still daylight showing between the slide and barrel. The accuracy was improved, at least when bench resting the pistol the rounds would stay scattered within the scoring rings with a few even making it to the 10 ring.

At Camp Perry I was hoping that the Army issue M-9 that we had to shoot would be an improvement over my Beretta 92, instead it was similar to the original 92 before sending it back to Beretta. Visible light all around the slide/barrel and about the same accuracy. So much for the hope for some leg points.

I since have bought a Sig Sauer M-17, which I found to be a very good, as well as accurate pistol. Easy to keep all the rounds in the 10 ring bench resting and within the scoring black shooting offhand. I even carried the M-17 when on duty as an armed security guard and never had any issues with the Level 2 Blackhawk holster I used. Now I find that the M-17 is supposedly dangerous and discharges on it's own. I have tried to induce a un-commanded discharge to no avail, even using the demonstrated methods that have shown up on You Tube that all had the person demonstrating pulling the trigger, at least partway back to cause the discharge. Couldn't get that to cause mine to fire either.

The 1911 can be chambered in what is called the 38 super, which from what I understand is somewhat similar in performance to the 45 ACP. Why doesn't somebody take the 357 magnum cartridge, turn it into a rimless design, and modify the 1911 to accept what I would call the 357 Super. Put it in a stacked magazine. It would be a 1911 design shooting a 357 magnum cartridge that would outperform any current semi auto cartridge out there today. This is including the current 10 mm pistols. I guess it sadly makes way too much sense for any of the gun manufacturer's to try to accomplish, or the military to put it into specifications for a new handgun.

Not that much difference between the .38 Super and 9mm and both use the same bullets. The .357 Sig has already been created. It's pretty much turned out to be an unpopular cartridge with good ballistics.

 

[USN-RET]

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?

View attachment 781825

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

I'm a big fan of the M9 and have a 92FS in my range rotation along with a number of 1911s including my Series70 Colt purchased in 1974. I'm a big fan of the steel framed firearms but have a number of the polymer types including three M&Ps in 9mm & 45ACP.

 

[65-2x2]

Beretta's biggest problem is a lack of experience; they are too new to gun making...

I do like 'em a little:

 

[crasig]

Had to add that MY Favored 9mm combat hand guns are one of my DA/SA CZ -75 clones: Sar 2000, & Jericho + laser.
Also, my classic Hi-Power Clones: Stainless Tisas, & Mauser marketed SA-80 by FEG.
Even my compact 9mm TOKAREV = Zastava M88A.
All have performed perfectly for me. Love them all.