I have fired a decent variety of pistols, but I don't currently own my own pistol. I am not yet 21 (only a couple months to go) and thus I don't own my own pistol, my Dad currently owns a Springfield Arms Ultra-Compact 1911 .45ACP, Smith & Wesson .357 Magnum revolver, and a Glock 17. My best friend owned a 357 SIG P226, and a .38 Special Colt revolver (I think he said it was a "trooper"). I've fired all the pistols listed a bit, I think I've put about 1,000 rounds through the revolver, and probbably 200 for all the others.
Lately, I'm beginning to dispise the revolver- it's haveing serious issuses with ammo not going off when I try to fire double action, but thats another issue to settle elesewhere. Last time I took it out and fired 30 rounds, not a single round fired double action- they all fired single action, the time before that, I fired every round double action and only 1 failed to go off (which was better than what it had been doing. . .)
I've been researching balistics a bit, and I believe I like the .40 S&W the best.
I think I'll start by listing what I dislike about the guns I have (while, I've already done that for the revolver. . .). I don't believe these are necessairly bad guns, I believe their are good things about them, but in describing my preferences I will list what I dislike.
I dislike the 1911 because it is very difficult to dis-assemble for cleaning, especially in comparison to the Glock. Another thing I dislike about the 1911 is the contols seem un-necessairly difficult to operate, the hammer has an amazingly heavy pull- I like being able to fire single action for a light trigger pull and thus more accuracy (at least, that has proven true on the revolver) but the contorls on the 1911 just seem overly difficult to use. I cant think of any other pistol I've fondeled with such stiff controls. I'm also not very happy with the 6 round magazines that the ultra-compact uses (I think the standard 1911's have either 6 or 8 round magazines?).
I don't like the Glock 'cause the rounds are two little and the pistol is too light, overall it feels like a toy. I'm also not a fan of the lack of external safety features on the glock. I dislike the lack of weight that the Glock has, and I'm not very fond of polymer frames. I don't think polymer frames are a bad thing, but as long as I can get a metal I want it. :)
The only complaint I have for the SIG P226 I've handeled is the de-cocking lever. It's a slight bit difficult to reach, and it has an very long travel.
After handeling some Beretta 92/96s, I believe I want one. :) I like the metal frame, and I like the controls. I'm not sure wether I want a FS or G model, but that cen be decided later. Does this seem like a good or bad decision? I think the SIG is a nice pistol too, and a biased source of mine has been attempting to convince me that the SIGs are more reliable. I haven't had a chance to fondel very man USPs (I think I've seen one so far), but I'm not a big fan of the polymer frame. I've been lead to believe that Walther and Smith & Wesson auto-pistols are not quite as reliable as the other brands? I haven't looked at many other Springfield Armory pistols, mainly 'cause they just seem to be even more rare than the H&Ks.
So I think it's down to Beretta 96 vs SIG P226. . .