To take it apart is very similar to the 92FS.

The gun must be in the de-cock position or it won't dissemble. Simply push down on that little lock button and swing the little lever forward. The key is NOT required to take the gun apart. I put the key in the pictures to show how you can lock it a few pics below*.





Once the slide is off, simply remove the spring and barrel. Done.



To put it back together, just put the slide back together, put the slide on the handle and pull it back. It will automatically re-lock the slide similar to a Glok.

*To completely lock the system, use the key to push in the button and turn it 90 deg CCW. Once locked, the slide will not move and the trigger cannot be pulled. Simply reverse the process to unlock it.



You mentioned the 92FS. Here is a side by side comparison of the two. Steyr is definitely smaller. It's got about a 4" barrel.



I handled a couple at shows, but bought it online witout having a chance to fire one.

Hope this helps.

Originally Posted by Spartan

To take it apart is very similar to the 92FS.

Hope this helps.

Oh my side! LOL

You sir rock! Thank you for going to all that effort for me, and I think you have sold me pending getting my hands on one.

The 92 I held recently had grips more along the lines of this
http://www.self-defender.net/weapons/beretta92.gif

That just looks perfect to me, no sharp or pointy edges too like the 92 has a few of, wearing my wifes p345 in its holster is a bit uncomfortable due to its size too.


Thank you so much!

Sure, no problem. The link you posted didn't work, but I am thinking you're referring to the Vertec edition of the 92/ 96 which is definitely more 'edgy' than the regular 92, and meant to resemble a 1911 grip style... aaaaaaaaaaaaaand I just so happen to have one lying around :



Kind of blurry, but the battery died after this shot so it's all I have for right now...



Glad to help. This is the type of stuff I wish was easier to come by when I am looking at buying something that's not readily available at a local store.

But, don't take my word for it, handle one and try to shoot one to make sure for yourself.

Originally Posted by Spartan

Sure, no problem. The link you posted didn't work, but I am thinking you're referring to the Vertec edition of the 92/ 96 which is definitely more 'edgy' than the regular 92, and meant to resemble a 1911 grip style... aaaaaaaaaaaaaand I just so happen to have one lying around :

Glad to help. This is the type of stuff I wish was easier to come by when I am looking at buying something that's not readily available at a local store.

But, don't take my word for it, handle one and try to shoot one to make sure for yourself.

Definitely going to try to get my hands on one unfortunately looks like most of the local dealers listed on the Steyr website are not where I'd prefer to shop but I did find one near my work I have been meaning to visit http://www.advout.com so now may be the time.

Thanks againQ

I had a Taurus Mil-Pro PT-140. It was a great CCW. Mine shot very good. Understand that I'm not the best shot in the world, but I could do 2 1/2 to 3 in 10 rd groups at 30ft on a good day 5 to 6 on a bad one. I loved the gun but I sold it to buy a rifle. I regret selling it too! It was easy to conceal and easy to shoot. That Taurus was a well made gun!

All this talk about the Steyr makes me want to go shooting with it. It's now next on the list.

Originally Posted by rahlquist

So youre saying if a person wants more stopping power than a 9mm then a .45acp is the next logical choice and ignore the .40S&W in your opinion?

That's how I feel yes, but to state something on record I feel the 9mm with a quality JHP loading is fine. I'd put my life on my 9mm with Gold Dots or Federal HSTs.

Originally Posted by TOF

In my opinion the .40 is the best of the three.

You can use 1200 fps 155 grain rounds or 200 grain 950 fps rounds.

The .40 produces more energy than either 9MM or .45

You have to use +P+ 9 or 45 to come close.

The .40 is a modern round designed based on modern powders and bullets.

9MM and .45 are both 100 year old designs.

If you want .45 or 9MM performance just load .40 to a wimp or double wimp level.

Bring on the torches.

DoubleTap loads a 230gr .45 to do 1010fps. Federal HST .45 JHP expands to 1" in tests. So it's really not a contest IMO. Not to mention all the kabooms from .40 and it's something I don't like.

Originally Posted by Dredd

.40SW recoil is too much for a round that isn't a true .45

Not only that, but you're fixing a problem that doesn't exist. You have 9mm which travels at upwards of 1200fps. Then you have .45 which is around 850fps. The .40 sits between this but doesn't have the size of the .45 or the velocity of the 9mm. So it's IMO a waste.

Also, you have a number of reported kabooms with .40 chambered pistols. The round is packed hot so that there is a chance for it to blow up in the chamber. Also, the .40 was evolved from the 10mm which is a very high powered round. The 10mm was too much to handle so the .40 was basically a slimed down version of it that can fit into a gun that is the same size of a 9mm. The 10mm required a larger firearm.

This is almost completely untrue.

The .40 recoil IS harsh, but there are worse calibers. I'm not sure where you came up with the information that the velocity was lower than a 9mm. I have a magazine in my gun right now that clocks in at 1325fps. 135gr. CorBon. Besides, it's performance is between a 9mm and a .45, how is that a bad thing?

While the .40 IS a very high pressure round, the KB's you mentioned tend to happen due to the casing not being fully supported at the base, it's not due solely to the pressure generated. If the case is fully supported, the chance of a KB is no worse than any other round. You can find pressures just as high with almost every caliber, just look on the box. It will say +P+.

Originally Posted by Patient_Zero

This is almost completely untrue.

The .40 recoil IS harsh, but there are worse calibers. I'm not sure where you came up with the information that the velocity was lower than a 9mm. I have a magazine in my gun right now that clocks in at 1325fps. 135gr. CorBon. Besides, it's performance is between a 9mm and a .45, how is that a bad thing?

While the .40 IS a very high pressure round, the KB's you mentioned tend to happen due to the casing not being fully supported at the base, it's not due solely to the pressure generated. If the case is fully supported, the chance of a KB is no worse than any other round. You can find pressures just as high with almost every caliber, just look on the box. It will say +P+.

125fps from a 135gr bullet is not special to me. It's almost down to 9mm weights at that point.

I have a few 40's and I like them a lot. Recoil is not bad and with a good hollow point you have a darn good carry round. I've had the SW40VE and still have a Para P16, Browning Pro 40, and just got a Taurus PT140 Pro. I've used the Smith as a carry pistol and now use the Para as CCW pistol. The PT140 is smaller then all of them and was bought for a summer CCW pistol.

I don't see any problem with a 40 recoil but I'm used to 45ACP o the 40 is a good bit less. In my Para the recoil to me is not much different than a 9mm. The Browning is a little more but I chalk that up to the lighter frame.

I tell people often that want to move to a bigger load than a 9mm to try a 40 before running out and getting a 45 ACP. Don't get me wrong, a 45 1911 is still my drug of choice. I'm just saying that the 40 round has it's place. I've had several people that have shot one of my 40's like it better than a 45 when it come to making the move from a 9mm to a bigger load. They will like the lighter recoil over a 45 and after all it's what individual shooter is most comfortable with that makes for what's best. If someone isn't totally comfy with their pistol then that can lead to a dangerous situation for them.

The .40 is a proven round and is used widely in law enforcement. The fact the some of the .45 worshippers resent it would not daunt me in the least.

I think placement and the ability to use the weapon effectively are the overriding factors. Those three calibers, 9mm, .40, and .45 are all going to do just about the same thing if you can shoot them accurately. So go with what you like and feel good with. I would feel comfortable with any of them.

Originally Posted by Teuthis

The .40 is a proven round and is used widely in law enforcement. The fact the some of the .45 worshippers resent it would not daunt me in the least.

I think placement and the ability to use the weapon effectively are the overriding factors. Those three calibers, 9mm, .40, and .45 are all going to do just about the same thing if you can shoot them accurately. So go with what you like and feel good with. I would feel comfortable with any of them.

That's 100% true. Shot placement is key. I'm a fan of .45 though and always will be. I wouldn't feel outguned if I had a 9mm though. I just don't like .40 because 9mm works fine, and if I need more I'll go right to .45. It's just my choice.

didn't mean to sound hateful towards anyone who likes the .40 It's just IMO, a caliber that attempts to put a band aid on a spot that doesn't need it.

Not only that, but you're fixing a problem that doesn't exist. You have 9mm which travels at upwards of 1200fps. Then you have .45 which is around 850fps. The .40 sits between this but doesn't have the size of the .45 or the velocity of the 9mm. So it's IMO a waste.




Remember if penetration is a desired trait, .40 is far superior (at least in my experience) than the .45, while also carring more knockdown energy than the 9mm...I can fire my p226 .40 faster and more accurate than I can a 1911 in .45, and feel much more confident with the stopping power of the .40 then I do with a 9mm...Granted I am fairly new to shooting handguns and have a lot to learn, anyone want to set me straight, please feel free.

Originally Posted by Dredd

.40SW recoil is too much for a round that isn't a true .45

Not only that, but you're fixing a problem that doesn't exist. You have 9mm which travels at upwards of 1200fps. Then you have .45 which is around 850fps. The .40 sits between this but doesn't have the size of the .45 or the velocity of the 9mm. So it's IMO a waste.

Also, you have a number of reported kabooms with .40 chambered pistols. The round is packed hot so that there is a chance for it to blow up in the chamber. Also, the .40 was evolved from the 10mm which is a very high powered round. The 10mm was too much to handle so the .40 was basically a slimed down version of it that can fit into a gun that is the same size of a 9mm. The 10mm required a larger firearm.

Remember if penetration is a desired trait, .40 is far superior (at least in my experience) than the .45, while also carring more knockdown energy than the 9mm...I can fire my p226 .40 faster and more accurate than I can a 1911 in .45, and feel much more confident with the stopping power of the .40 then I do with a 9mm...Granted I am fairly new to shooting handguns and have a lot to learn, anyone want to set me straight, please feel free.

Originally Posted by SigShooter127

Remember if penetration is a desired trait, .40 is far superior (at least in my experience) than the .45, while also carring more knockdown energy than the 9mm...I can fire my p226 .40 faster and more accurate than I can a 1911 in .45, and feel much more confident with the stopping power of the .40 then I do with a 9mm...Granted I am fairly new to shooting handguns and have a lot to learn, anyone want to set me straight, please feel free.

Confidence is a key factor to be sure. I'd wager your Sig is marginally more comfortable for you to shoot than a 1911 which is why the preference.

Originally Posted by themayer78

I like that the 9mm is cheaper to shoot and a little easier to conceal, and I like the idea of defending my home with .45acp. The 45 is a blast at the range too but so expensive.

Well, 9mm's getting expensive too. I do most of my plinking with a .22 Buckmark, and only run about 50-65 rounds through my 9mm pistol per range trip (50 FMJ into a B-27 or something similar, 15 of my Hydra-Shoks into a standard target to rotate stock and prove they still work, and any other shooting I do is .22). If I had a .45 I'd probably treat it similarly to my 9mm with JHPs; one, maybe two clips to maintain proficiency, and that's it.

Originally Posted by Liko81

Well, 9mm's getting expensive too. I do most of my plinking with a .22 Buckmark, and only run about 50-65 rounds through my 9mm pistol per range trip (50 FMJ into a B-27 or something similar, 15 of my Hydra-Shoks into a standard target to rotate stock and prove they still work, and any other shooting I do is .22). If I had a .45 I'd probably treat it similarly to my 9mm with JHPs; one, maybe two clips to maintain proficiency, and that's it.

I shoot 100 rounds of FMJ in my .45 and 9mm each trip. I usually shoot slow, deliberate, aimed, ad controlled shots. I try to keep trigger control in mind and point of aim/sight picture control all the time. Then I load up 1 mag of my carry/defense ammo in each of my guns and practice with it to be sure they function properly etc. I would normally practice double taps for the first few rounds, then controlled and aimed shots afterwards.