In this episode of Critical Mas, Massad Ayoob talks about how the 9mm Beretta 92-series became so prevalently used worldwide for military, law enforcement, and civilian applications, and its continued popularity. Ammunition compatibility with European militaries, firepower and capacity compared to other sidearms of the time, and the enhanced safety of a heavy double-action first pull made a lot of headway in replacing the 1911 and other pistols in professional and civilian self-defense applications.
VIDEO HERE (15:36 minutes)
*****
I've never fired a Beretta 92 before. I picked one up once and it felt like I was handling a brick. I put it back down and moved on. If I had to carry something something that big and bulky, I'd want it to shoot a big and bulky round.
Never cottoned to the 92. I prefer the BHP.
ReplyDeleteA few years back a Turkish company was making an unlicensed smaller copy of the 92, some of which were imported to the US before Beretta stopped it. I have one and it is pretty handy compared to the full size one.
ReplyDeleteIf it's a Stoger, it's a Beretta. They are owned by Beretta and imported a lot of stuff from Turkey before the inport ban.
Delete"I've never fired a Beretta 92 before. I picked one up once and it felt like I was handling a brick. I put it back down and moved on. If I had to carry something something that big and bulky, I'd want it to shoot a big and bulky round."
ReplyDeleteThank you sir, I see my services are not required.
When I was with the Border Patrol we transitioned to the Beretta M96 in .40 S&W.
ReplyDeleteHunk of junk. The only good thing was the night sights.
Never did unnerstan how the military went to the burrito.
women in service....couldnt shoot the 1911 45.
DeleteSon used it in the Army a few times while deployed. Said that even taking into consideration that theirs were generally badly worn, he hated them.
ReplyDeleteI've handled them a few times, I'm like you: BIG grip, not comfortable.
The U.S. military adopted the Beretta so the Euros would buy our hardware also. Tit for tat. Same as we buy the crappy Airbus so the Euro weenies will buy Boeings. It's all just a great big NATO frat feast don't you know. Gotta keep those checks coming.
ReplyDeleteThere was (and still is) no reason to replace the 1911.
I respectfully disagree. The 1911A1 needs to be replaced with an A2 version that incorporates a rail and ambi safety. There are a few other minor things that could use modernization. My Springfield has serrations on the front of the slide which I like for example.
DeleteMy thinking is the rail is a must for when doing room sweeps or tunnel clearing.
I became a reserve deputy of the Los Angeles Sheriffs Department about the time they were transitioning to the M92 POS... This was after I'd been exposed to them in the Air Guard. Not at all impressed: D/SA is a stupid answer to a question nobody has ever asked.
ReplyDeleteOf course, the M92 was selected by the Army after a typical procurement goat-rope: One of the requirements that were required in the new selection was a grip that was easier for smaller (female) troops to hold, smaller than the 1911. So they picked a brick that was larger, of course.. Heavier, too.
I managed to shoot sufficiently well with the M92 to qualify for $100 extra a quarter in pay (on top of my $1/year less taxes and union dues) I got as a reserve deputy... But I got rid of my 92FS when I left the department, and stick to Glocks and 1911s now.
sorry but you folks missed out. yes, its heavy but its a great tool. simple and well made and reliable. a good shooter.
ReplyDeleteI carried one for almost 20 years. A fine sidearm that never gave a moment's complaint. I put many, many thousands of rounds through it and other than a spring kit every couple thousand rounds it never needed a thing. a misfeed or malfunction was exceptionally rare. the only noticeable wear is a groove from my duty holster rubbing.
I have heard the rumor that while the NATO countries wanted the U.S. to have the 9mm as their standard round, we wanted a base in Italy, ergo the Beretta.
ReplyDeleteFor myself, the only reason that I got rid of my own M1911 was that the one I had I could not reach the mag release very easily. I even added an extension button, to no avail. Now, I only have 9mm ammo, so I would have to either stock some .45 ACP again, or pick up a 9mm M1911, while not bad in and of itself, kind of a waste IMHO. The M1911 was made for the .45 ACP, and it is the gun that I fire the most accurately.
All the features and feel of an M1911 with the dimensions reduced to that which is proportional to a 9mm cartridge. Spendy but good guns are generally not the cheapest ones.
Deletehttps://www.springfield-armory.com/1911-series-handguns/1911-emp-handguns/1911-emp-champion-concealed-carry-contour-9mm-handgun-stainless/
Had one for a time. Good accuracy, handled well ( I do not have especially large hands, shoe size is larger than usual LOL ) and felt recoil was softer than same rounds through a SIG p320 or Glock 17. Would definitely trust one for defense.
ReplyDeleteI wanted to like the Beretta but never shot one well. I could shoot great with any Sig, CZ or Glock which I've had since '86, but not the Beretta.
ReplyDeleteNot a fan of the DA/SA switchover after the first shot. I want either an SA or a DA. The few times I have carried my Beretta Tomcat (a tiny version of a 92 in .32 Auto) I carry it in SA with one in the pipe, hammer back, and safety on.
ReplyDeletewhen I was new to handguns, about 25 years ago, my first was a S&W 686 but my second was a Taurus 92, a knock off of the beretta. I never liked that gun, the grip felt too big and I just never bonded with it. Years later I gave it to one of my kids, who immediately traded it in on a springfield XDM, his hands are the same as mine and it wasnt a good fit.
ReplyDeleteI don't know much about it except that there are signs with a silhouette of them with a big red crossed through circle at some stores around here that everyone calls "No Beretta" signs.
ReplyDeleteThe models with the VTech grip frame are not as big ang blocky as the original. The Turks are currently importing a clone with a slightly smaller grip that is a dream to shoot. It is called the Regard, shares m92 magazines, and will run you $400 +/-.
ReplyDeleteUntil the mid '80s for a Naval Aviator the standard was a S&W .38 special. Hated that pistol, would take me 50 rounds before I could qualify for expert. First time with the M9, fired for expert after one mag. Bought a 92S and have no complaints. Not a great concealed carry, but it goes wherever I go and seldom out of reach. My concealed carry is a Springfield EMP chambered in 9MM. 1911 is a masterpiece, hence the EMP.
ReplyDeleteLarge piece but quite accurate…..military workhorse
ReplyDeleteDay to day I carry the Smith and Wesson shield….more appropriate for nine mil
Spongey trigger, Shitty feel, Small hands can't grip it, prefer 1911 (and even women can shoot it accurately)
ReplyDeleteAh yeah, mas buffoon, the gun fight guru who has never been in a gun fight.
ReplyDeleteI had a choice between transitioning to a 92F or keeping a S&W 4" 66-2. Needless to say..
ReplyDeleteIf you like the basic layout of the Beretta 92/M9 but want something slimmer and more-ergonomic, consider getting a CZ 75B instead. Its operating system and layout is quite similar to the Beretta, but sleeker, slimmer and easier both to run and to carry. Superb quality, accurate and great factory trigger and sights.
ReplyDeleteBeretta is not a bad gun, but it doesn;t fit my hand comfortably. A Hi-Power or CZ-75 for me fits a lot better.
ReplyDeleteI have a Taurus 92FS and a Springfield 1911 in 45ACP. I have small hands to go along with my small stature. Never had any trouble with the Taurus and it is very accurate. Springfield not so much. Comparing the Taurus to Glock, the triggers are worlds apart. Taurus very smooth. Glock triggers are shit IMHO.
ReplyDeleteNemo
Every springfield I owned, I sold. They are VERY HARSH shooters. some are accurate, some where not. I went to SIG & COLT and never looked back. Expensive, BUT I do trust them w/my life....IMO
DeleteI don't play games with my handguns. They're all either Colts, Smith & Wessons or Rugers.
DeleteI have both the CZ 75B and the Beretta 92. I wouldn't say the CZ is slimmer or more ergonomic. They feel about the same.
ReplyDeleteThe one advantage of the Beretta over the CZ or 1911 is ease of take down. Other than that it is a matter of personal taste.
The US adopted the 9 mm Luger in order to get better ammo interchangeability, just as we did with the 7.61 NATO and the 5.56 NATO. Our howitzers fire the common 155 mm round, too. This is a big deal to the logistics guys.
A question for the group. As I mentioned above, I found the Taurus 92 an unlikable gun 20+ years ago, I currently have a Beretta px4 storm that fits my hand well. Does any one know if the grips are very different, or just my experience level?
ReplyDeleteNever liked them and would have preferred carrying a M11 over the M9. They shot well enough once you got used to the crappy trigger.
ReplyDeleteI went to the NRA show in Nashville and handled a Wilson Combat version of the 92.
It was an expensive pistol with a crappy trigger.
Your mileage may vary.
If Bill Wilson can't put a decent trigger in a gun, it can't be done.
DeleteI loved the M9 and found myself to be dead on accurate with it. Not the best for various reasons but by far not the worst and sample size of one but I rather enjoy shooting it.
ReplyDelete