Handgun Forum banner
21 - 26 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
I like the 92fs. There's a learning curve because of the eccentric safety/decocker that's awkward to use. I prefer no safety at all, and the long D/A trigger pull on the 92 acts as a safety. I find the gun more accurate than me. At 78 my eyesight isn't great and I have trouble hitting center mass at 90 feet without a sandbag. But 45 feet or under I'm dead on with this pistol. It is compact enough to carry but a little heavy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
319 Posts
Same here. And I like my 1911 also. A great design.
The first time that I fired a 1911 or a M92, I took to them like a duck to water. With the M92, I can hit a standing man at 100 yards. I have hit 1/2 man targets that far away, with a Beretta; and I wouldn’t have any trouble doing it with a M1911 .45 either.

I don’t know why I am able to do that, except that I do. It’s confidence in myself and the gun. Or something.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,199 Posts
Thread is really old, but I'll chime in. My 92FS is great, in all respects except one...ole girl is heavy and difficult to conceal, but doable. For me, the SA/DA lock work is a natural and easy to get used to, and that 4.9" barrel squeezes as much velocity out of that 9mm round as possible.

If I had to get into a gunfight, it is the handgun I would want with me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Shock buffs in a 92?

Any of you guys ever used shock buffs in a 92? Had any issues with steel on aluminum frame wear?
Shock buffs help but all aluminum frame pistols will show internal wear. I doubt it is an issue to worry about. By the time wear to the frame happens you will need a new barrel or thus a new gun. BTW: Betetta now has a new A4 out.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
 
21 - 26 of 26 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top