Beretta M-92: Your Opinion?

[Texas Star]

The M-9 and its commercial versions have been controversial. We all know that the SEALS blew some up, with the slides flying off and hitting one man in the face. A slide block to avoid this was installed, and it was reportedly verified that the ammo they were using was not only fired FAR more often than most users would ever shoot a gun, it was loaded to PROOF pressures!

To put that in perspective, those guns were fired more times in a week than most shooters would fire one in several years! (Thousands of times.)

Now that new locking blocks have been developed and are standard in newer commercial guns, what do you think of the Beretta, in 9mm? Do you think it's underengineered to handle the pressure peaks in .40 S&W?

The guns with slanted dust covers were engineered to provide added strength in a critical area when chambered for the .40. So, they provide even more strength in a 9mm, although it seemingly wasn't needed in that caliber.

What about those of you in the military, or who are on police forces that issue the Beretta? How have the guns held up? Are they generally liked? Have there been any VERIFIED problems that aren't also shared by other autos?

BTW, I'm on the Beretta board under the same name. I just thought that I might get a wider response here, and perhaps a more objective view.

Thanks,

T-Star
P.S. Does anyone know if the military has bought the improved locking blocks?

 

[nawilson]

Sir, this is 100% my personal opinion, so please take it for what it is worth... which ain't much.

I don't like the M9. The tradional DA provides an inconsistent trigger pull. The sights are milled into the frame, so it shots where it shots. At least a dove tailed rear sight can be drifted. The grips are awfully big, and it is heavy. Constantly clearing it as you enter a FOB wears out the magazine spring to the point that it will not load a cartridge into the chamber. Last, but certainly not least, it is a 9mm.

All that said, it shoots ok for the Army qual course (which isn't really very challenging). In Iraq, I did pick an M9 over my good looks as a backup to my M4. Lol, good looks never seemed to help me much...

As an aside, it seems that most of the negligent discharges I heard about were with the M9. I don't think that is the weapon itself as much as the DA operating system. Soldiers would eject the chambered round and then drop the magazine... with the DA system, if the trigger is pulled it will go off. With a SA system, the pistol must be cocked, and a cocked pistol would cach the eye of any decent NCO.

 

[aterry33]

The M9 was bound to be disliked by many, as it replaced the M1911, which is probably "the" classic handgun of all time, except for maybe the S&W M&P.

Many of us believe that the gun it beat out in the Army trials, the SIG P226, was actually a better weapon.

It is not a bad weapon at all, but it is big and heavy for a 9MM, and IMHO, outdated when compared with more modern handguns.

I have not served in the military but from the folks I've talked to who have, the M9 gets generally lukewarm to unfavorable reviews.

 

[Texas Star]

Sir, this is 100% my personal opinion, so please take it for what it is worth... which ain't much.

I don't like the M9. The tradional DA provides an inconsistent trigger pull. The sights are milled into the frame, so it shots where it shots. At least a dove tailed rear sight can be drifted. The grips are awfully big, and it is heavy. Constantly clearing it as you enter a FOB wears out the magazine spring to the point that it will not load a cartridge into the chamber. Last, but certainly not least, it is a 9mm.

All that said, it shoots ok for the Army qual course (which isn't really very challenging). In Iraq, I did pick an M9 over my good looks as a backup to my M4. Lol, good looks never seemed to help me much...

As an aside, it seems that most of the negligent discharges I heard about were with the M9. I don't think that is the weapon itself as much as the DA operating system. Soldiers would eject the chambered round and then drop the magazine... with the DA system, if the trigger is pulled it will go off. With a SA system, the pistol must be cocked, and a cocked pistol would cach the eye of any decent NCO.

Thanks for the honest post. But what is an FOB area, and why would entering one wear out a magazine spring? I have heard that the aftermarket magazines are nowhere nearly as good as genuine Beretta and Meg-Gar ones.

My son did three tours in Iraq, one as a "contractor." He never saw a problem with magazines that were maintained well, IF they were by Beretta or Meg-Gar, which he insisted on using. And he never saw a problem with the M-9 that wasn't due to bad magazines.

The rest of your issue seems to be a training problem, due to many troops not being familiar with handguns. There is no magazine disconnect on the M-9 on purpose, to allow it to be fired if no magazine is available.

As for NCO's spotting a cocked gun, in a flap holster, that might be hard. The 1911 could be carried that way, although it was usually against orders.

 

[ColbyBruce]

I have owned one Beretta 92F and two 92FS, and have an Italian made stainless 92FS on lay-a-way. I will keep this one. I traded or sold the others due to the size and weight, but always missed them. Yes, they are large and heavy. But for me, they point and shoot well and I have a few smaller 9mm's to CC.

 

[Texas Star]

In fairness, the M-9 was never intended for CC. The SIG P-228 (M-11) was chosen for that, although I think it's a bit thick in the slide for it.

The M-9 is a bit large for a 9mm, though.

The SIG-P-226 did pass govt. trials, but was beaten by Beretta on a lower bid cost.What SIG fans forget is that they have had trigger spring issues, slides rusting, and slide rails that broke. The latter were beefed up, and stainless slides are now offered. I'd def. buy the stainless slide. I think the rusting slides were a result of SIG slides being stamped, and they didn't use enough chrome in the steel formula, as it would have made the slides too brittle to stamp instead of mill. But that's just my guess...Their stainless slides are milled, I gather.

T-Star

 

[Goldstar225]

I used them briefly during the latter part of my military career. IME they were accurate and reliable but didn't fit my hand at all. The overall size didn't concern me since they were meant to be a service weapon instead of being a CCW.

 

[sipowicz]

Just to clear a few things up.

The rear sight is driftable.

The Navy SEALs who blew them up were using NATO issue ammo. NOT proof loads.

They wear out around 20,000 +/- rds IMO. Rated for more, or less, depending on who you ask.

 

[REM 3200]

Thankfully I retired just before I would've had to start carrying the M-9. I carried a M-1911A1 for 26 years less the 6 months that I was on flying status where we carried a M-10 Smith.

 

[GyMac]

I thought it was a good military weapon, accurate and reliable, but big for its cartridge. It's not something I would have chosen, but it's okay.
When we first got the Beretta many of the younger Marines criticized it compared to our 1911A1's, even though they had never fired one.
The old .45's were worn and POI was nowhere near POA at 25 yards. Sights were small and sometimes fell off the gun. All those years of military abuse through constant cleaning had taken their toll. We needed something different and we got the Beretta.
Chris

 

[mesinge2]

I have an Italian made 92FS and IMHO it is harder to learn how to transition from the heavier DA first shot to the subsequent lighter SA shots on the Beretta than to just have the same trigger pull weight of a DAO or SAO weapon but it is by no means impossible to learn. It just requires more training to do properly. As for the manual safety, I personally ignore the safety and simply use it as a decocker. I decock the weapon and flip the safety off and carry like a DA revolver. Also, it is one of the most accurate pistols I have shot and because of its weight the recoil is very subdued. Finally, I has literally fired thousands of rounds though this pistol and I cannot remember a jam. This includes hollow points, truncated cone, lead reloads, and 127 grain +P+ loads.

Oh wait, I'm lying it jammed with the 9mm shotshells the one time I tried them. Hey, I was curious.

 

[Ron H.]

Sir, M9s had only reached the Fleet about six months before I got out, so I never heard of or saw breakage issues with them. They were too new, had too few rounds through them.

I did see, more than once, the trigger return spring pop out during cleaning. A Marine would be scrubbing the inside of the magazine well with his green tooth brush, and out would pop this thing that looked like a bent paperclip, and all of a sudden the trigger just dangled around loosely and wouldn't go forward any more. Our armorer accused a couple guys of unauthorized maintenance--until it happened to him.

As a whole, guys who were issued pistols were pleased with the M9 when it came out. It had better sights than our old, clapped-out 1911s and was also a little lighter and had less recoil. Probably most importantly, the M9s were new, tight guns. Our .45s were all WWII vintage and mostly worn-out rattletraps. Once we got the M9, pistol scores went up dramatically.

My own perceptions of the M9 are that it's absolutely enormous for a 9 mm, with too fat a grip and too long a DA trigger reach. I don't care for DA/SA triggers generally, and the M9's setup is bad even within the type--compare it to a Sig or S&W third-gen auto some time. The M9 is a good-looking beast, though.

Hope this helps, and Semper Fi.

Ron H.

 

[therevjay]

Don't have alot of experiance with them, they were coming in as I was going out. I have read that most of the militarys reliability problems with them were caused by poorly made magazines.

The only thing I can see to dislike is, like almost all Beretta handguns they seem awful big & heavy for the cal. that they are.

 

[LTC]

I have had a 92FS for about 2 years. It goes to the range with me each week. It has functioned well for me, it fits my hands well and it points well for me.

I have obtained a 96FS .40S&W top end for it and it also functions well with it installed.

I am no "gun hand" but I can do a reasonable job on bowling pins at 25 yards with it.

It is big and heavy and that suits me. I have had no mechanical problems with it and have probably shot 4000 rounds between 9mm and .40S&W through it.

LTC

 

[rags]

Don't have an M9. I do have Italian made 92FS with 800 rnds through it. No failures or jams. I ONLY use Beretta mags. The first DA pull took a few rounds to get used too. Soon I was double tapping like I do with other 9mm's I own.
Couldn't be happier with it. I didn't buy it for CCW and believe it's size for a 9mm is a non-issue for me. Feels good in my hands. Hasn't blowed up yet either!!

Love it! ...and it's little brother Cheetah too!

rags

 

[M14sRock]

Just to clear a few things up.

The rear sight is driftable.

The Navy SEALs who blew them up were using NATO issue ammo. NOT proof loads.

They wear out around 20,000 +/- rds IMO. Rated for more, or less, depending on who you ask.

This about sums it up.

The amount of rds fired in a given amount of time will affect the overall life span.

I know guys with over 35,000 rds through M9s over a period of years, and others who have shot them out of spec in less than 20,000rds, but those have been fired in relatively short spans of time (2+/- years). It is also critical to keep the recoil spring fresh, which most shooters do not do. The one that I saw shot out of spec in less than 20,000rds was only on the second spring. Not enough, by far.

There have been a small number of military units that have worn out brand new M9s in pre-deployment training at a well known shooting school in SoCal. They are shooting tens of thousands of rounds in a 6 week training cycle. But M9s are cheap, and were designed to be used til toast, then scrapped.

Keep the springs fresh. Avoid the older CMI "sand proof" mags. The current CMI, Beretta, & Mec-Gar mags will do just fine.

 

[sipowicz]

I'm shooting mine tomorrow when I run the range...wish me luck!

 

[rags]

I'm shooting mine tomorrow when I run the range...wish me luck!

Plus at least 3 layers of Kevlar...

rags

 

[Fishslayer]

Many of us believe that the gun it beat out in the Army trials, the SIG P226, was actually a better weapon.

When the M9 came out I liked it a lot. I actually prefer the DA/SA platform. It fit my hand like it was made for me, three dot sights. I had zero problem qualifying with it even though I had never seen a DA bottom feeder. The DA/SA transition doesn't seem to bother me. IMO it's a fine weapon.

Since I've fired a P226 tho I'd have to agree with aterry. Given a choice I would take the 226 hands down.

 

[ColbyBruce]

Here is my latest one, being stainless, it will be a keeper.