Handgun Forum banner
21 - 40 of 57 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,216 Posts
The open slide feature allows more dirt to get in and I find the pistol to be cumbersome with the slide mounted safety (a safety really isn't necessary anyway), its a very large pistol, significantly larger than the 17, and constantly breaks down from most I've talked to and read. I think it speaks volumes that the Navy SEALs opted to go with the P226 rather than the M9. The P226 is a large service weapon, but it just feels and handles better than the M9 for me. I know it has a loyal following, but if someone were to give me one I'd trade it for something else. That said, I do know from experience the weapon is accurate in the hands of a trained shooter. I've read that the dod is looking to replace it again, and I think they desperately need to. Along with replacing the 5.56 with am7.62.
Length G-17 8.03 inches
Length M9 8.5 inches
Width G-17 1.18 inches
Width M9 1.5 inches
Height G-17 5.43 inches
Height M9 5.4 inches

As you can see the size difference is de minimis and not "significantly" larger than the G-17. Secondly, the open slide design is beneficial in preventing stove pipes and clearing malfunctions if they were to happen. Likewise, as opposed to your view regarding allowing more dirt to get in, the design would likewise allow more dirt to get out. The M9 has passed those type tests with flying colors I might add. If it hadn't it would not have been chosen as the US military's official sidearm which has seen and continues to see service for the last 26 years or so. Coupled with the fact the US military in recent history actually uses their weapons much more so than any standing military on earth. As far as the pistol "constantly" breaking down, the only place I could imagine you've run across that information is from a Glock website or from "ole" 1911 affectionados still bitter over the 1911's replacement.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,434 Posts
Length G-17 8.03 inches
Length M9 8.5 inches
Width G-17 1.18 inches
Width M9 1.5 inches
Height G-17 5.43 inches
Height M9 5.4 inches

As you can see the size difference is de minimis and not "significantly" larger than the G-17. Secondly, the open slide design is beneficial in preventing stove pipes and clearing malfunctions if they were to happen. Likewise, as opposed to your view regarding allowing more dirt to get in, the design would likewise allow more dirt to get out. The M9 has passed those type tests with flying colors I might add. If it hadn't it would not have been chosen as the US military's official sidearm which has seen and continues to see service for the last 26 years or so. Coupled with the fact the US military in recent history actually uses their weapons much more so than any standing military on earth. As far as the pistol "constantly" breaking down, the only place I could imagine you've run across that information is from a Glock website or from "ole" 1911 affectionados still bitter over the 1911's replacement.
There is a huge difference btwn 1.18" verses 1.5" width. And like I said, the pistol has its loyal following. The lion's share of people I have talked to about the pistol, who have to use it, hate it. A few service ppl like it ok, but even fewer "love" it. I've never seen bad mouthing on a Glock website. You like the pistol. I'm ok with that! But if someone were to give me one I would sell it or trade it for a better pistol. The SEALs and British SAS went with the P226 for a reason. I'll side with their choice. The 1911 is making its way back into military service. I know the US Army bought a new round of M9s but that isn't proof they will not replace it. I suspect that within ten years the M9 will be replaced by a .45 of some design. Now wrt why the M9 was chosen, it was bc Beretta undercut Sig on the overall package deal, but the P226 out performed the Beretta, which is ultimately why the Navy SEALs chose it over the Beretta.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,434 Posts
I don't know about the one you owned but I find them very far from finiky. I went over 15 years w/o a stoppage shooting anything and everything I fed it and changing nothing but the recoil spring on intervals. I believe when it did stop on one round(was the last round in the magazine) it was a worn mag spring or possibly a worn extractor? I remember it quite well as things like that just don't happen that often, like a shock to me. Perhaps one of the most reliable and tested pistols on the planet with an average reliability of 17,500 rounds without a stoppage, I wouldn't call that finiky. About the size of a G-17 and lighter than a P226. Conversely, the 92FS consistently bests the US military requirement of a 10-shot group of 3" or less at 50 meters (just short of 55 yards) and has done so since about 1986.
If you're going to quote me, then quote me accurately. I said I don't like them, but that doesn't mean anything. My comments reflect my experience with the M9, and those with whom I discussed it. I find them to be too cumbersome and finicky, but I also acknowledged the pistol has its following. I really don't care how great you think they are. I'm not going to agree with you, but that's fine. I carry the G19 Gen4 bc it is the best conceal carry pistol for me. It so happens that it is one of, if not the most popular conceal carry pistol available; however, it isn't everyone's favorite choice. I'm ok with that. I don't feel the incessant need to defend the pistol. It works for me and that's all that matters to me. If I had a choice and could carry anything other than the M9 as a service pistol I would go with the P226. Why? I have experience with them. It fits me better than the M9, and it is a better pistol by most's assessment. Some folks swear by HK, but not me. I also find them to be big and cumbersome on the whole, so I don't like them either. That's fine! I don't have to. I love the 1911 and the BHP, but if it were up to me I would not press either into military service. While they are great pistols with vastly proven track records, they just aren't very practical today in my opinion. I don't think the US military will ever select a striker fired pistol as the British Army has, but there are plenty of great hammer fired choices, one of which is the FNP 45. I wouldn't hesitate to pick the Glock 21 or 41 Gen4 or the S&W M&P 45, but I don't think the conventional wisdom of the US military would agree with me. But back to the original premise, I do not like the M9. Most I've talked to don't either, but that's ok. It doesn't mean you can't!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
12,434 Posts
There is a huge difference btwn 1.18" verses 1.5" width. .
Pretty much the extra width is from the safety levers - not necessarily the rest of the gun per se. If you lay the Beretta down magwell to magwell with many guns - it's not any wider. I've compared it to a 1911 - with the standard size grips on a 1911, putting the two magwells together yields about the same width.

I no longer have a Glock, and have no plans to buy one again. So, I don't have one to compare. The grip on the Glock is lighly not quite as wide, but it's not off by those #'s listed above, I would bet. I think that # likely comes from the slide safety. On an IWB holster - that's not an issue.... It's usually the width of the grip that's the issue when concealing a gun.

There is a huge difference btwn 1.18" verses 1.5" width. And like I said, the pistol has its loyal following. The lion's share of people I have talked to about the pistol, who have to use it, hate it. A few service ppl like it ok, but even fewer "love" it. I've never seen bad mouthing on a Glock website. You like the pistol. I'm ok with that! But if someone were to give me one I would sell it or trade it for a better pistol. The SEALs and British SAS went with the P226 for a reason. I'll side with their choice. The 1911 is making its way back into military service. I know the US Army bought a new round of M9s but that isn't proof they will not replace it. I suspect that within ten years the M9 will be replaced by a .45 of some design. Now wrt why the M9 was chosen, it was bc Beretta undercut Sig on the overall package deal, but the P226 out performed the Beretta, which is ultimately why the Navy SEALs chose it over the Beretta.
That is not true about Sig. I am on an iPad now, so I will dig up the link later. But read the GOA investigative report about the matter. You will find out that the Sig did not out perform the Beretta. In fact, the sig 226 failed on one of the tests, but the pentagon did not want to have only one choice, so they gave the Sig a pass to keep it in the running... I will find the link later...
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
12,434 Posts
Read the GOA report at that link below... Do not forget too, that in the 80s when these things went on, Sig had some issues back then too... In the 80s, I happen to remember a lot of people with broken Sig frames. Does that make all Sigs suck? No. And, that was also a long time ago.

Here is the direct link to that report if anyone is interested: http://archive.gao.gov/d4t4/130439.pdf

It really doesn't matter to me if someone hates the Beretta 92. I don't care about that. However, when people use factual errors as the basis on why they think that, that is when I try to point things out as being wrong.

There are plenty of guns I do not like that others do. No buggy" and, I can share my personal opinions as to why that is true. But, I don't claim my opinions are fact as a blanket statement...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,216 Posts
You will find out that the Sig did not out perform the Beretta. In fact, the sig 226 failed on one of the tests, but the pentagon did not want to have only one choice, so they gave the Sig a pass to keep it in the running....
Interesting, I've just read the same "facts" from the GOA report. Those seals may wish to reconsider?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,434 Posts
Read the GOA report at that link below... Do not forget too, that in the 80s when these things went on, Sig had some issues back then too... In the 80s, I happen to remember a lot of people with broken Sig frames. Does that make all Sigs suck? No. And, that was also a long time ago.

Here is the direct link to that report if anyone is interested: http://archive.gao.gov/d4t4/130439.pdf

It really doesn't matter to me if someone hates the Beretta 92. I don't care about that. However, when people use factual errors as the basis on why they think that, that is when I try to point things out as being wrong.

There are plenty of guns I do not like that others do. No buggy" and, I can share my personal opinions as to why that is true. But, I don't claim my opinions are fact as a blanket statement...
I have said why I don't like the M9. I've seen the reports you've listed, and I'm really not interested in this fruitless debate. There is a reason the SEALs chose the P226. I've talked to some who actually used the weapons, and it isn't all in official reports. Seriously, if you guys actually believe everything written in official findings you're pretty gullible. I've written enough of them to know what is fact and what is what they want you to know as fact. Either way, I really don't care. Like I said, enjoy your 92fs.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
12,434 Posts
Your entire argument is based on "the SEALS." You have it in every one of your posts.

I've shown you an actual report with DETAILs. Details that you cannot argue against with facts - other than "the SEALS."

Say what you want about it - but people "misremember" things and make it into fact all day long. I can't tell you how many people "knows someone who was hit in the face with one of these Beretta slides." Despite the fact that the # of affected guns that had these issues were very, very small. Everyone "has a friend" who was there when it happened.

Anyway, the report is actual FACT. It's official, and it is from the time period where this occurred. It gets into SPECIFICS of the test itself - it talks about the stages of the test, and what guns flunked out. It explains that the Sig did NOT pass a test, but was given a pass to continue anyway - so they would have more than 1 gun to choose from at the end of the test. Apparently the brass didn't want to not have a choice and be stuck with just 1 specimen at the very end.

Also, back in the 80s, at the time these tests were done, many people were having problems with their frames of the aluminum framed Sigs breaking. That's a non issue now, but it wasn't back then.

Despite all that - the Sig may be the best to you. And, there is nothing wrong with that... But, I do take exception to denigrating the Beretta on misplaced facts.

Anyway - no one is saying you can't like the Sig better. However, you keep essentially stating that the Sig itself is better, and that the 92 is inferior and flawed, and that the Sig beat the Beretta in the military trials. You stated that the "Sig outperformed the Beretta" in the military trials. Then, when I post the actual facts of how what weapon was chosen, you ignore the entire report...

I am not claiming that the Sig 226 isn't better in your eyes. But better is a matter of opinion here. We all have our own personal likes and dislikes. That is why there are so many different makes and models of guns on the market. But, I just see the wrong info pop up on forums all the time about the Beretta 92. And, when I see it, I try to point things out that are not always true.

I've shown that your facts are not true, but you won't let it go.

Enjoy the Sig 226 - it is a good gun. But, please don't start making up facts about the Beretta 92.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,434 Posts
Your entire argument is based on "the SEALS." You have it in every one of your posts.

I've shown you an actual report with DETAILs. Details that you cannot argue against with facts - other than "the SEALS."

Say what you want about it - but people "misremember" things and make it into fact all day long. I can't tell you how many people "knows someone who was hit in the face with one of these Beretta slides." Despite the fact that the # of affected guns that had these issues were very, very small. Everyone "has a friend" who was there when it happened.

Anyway, the report is actual FACT. It's official, and it is from the time period where this occurred. It gets into SPECIFICS of the test itself - it talks about the stages of the test, and what guns flunked out. It explains that the Sig did NOT pass a test, but was given a pass to continue anyway - so they would have more than 1 gun to choose from at the end of the test. Apparently the brass didn't want to not have a choice and be stuck with just 1 specimen at the very end.

Also, back in the 80s, at the time these tests were done, many people were having problems with their frames of the aluminum framed Sigs breaking. That's a non issue now, but it wasn't back then.

Despite all that - the Sig may be the best to you. And, there is nothing wrong with that... But, I do take exception to denigrating the Beretta on misplaced facts.

Anyway - no one is saying you can't like the Sig better. However, you keep essentially stating that the Sig itself is better, and that the 92 is inferior and flawed, and that the Sig beat the Beretta in the military trials. You stated that the "Sig outperformed the Beretta" in the military trials. Then, when I post the actual facts of how what weapon was chosen, you ignore the entire report...

I am not claiming that the Sig 226 isn't better in your eyes. But better is a matter of opinion here. We all have our own personal likes and dislikes. That is why there are so many different makes and models of guns on the market. But, I just see the wrong info pop up on forums all the time about the Beretta 92. And, when I see it, I try to point things out that are not always true.

I've shown that your facts are not true, but you won't let it go.

Enjoy the Sig 226 - it is a good gun. But, please don't start making up facts about the Beretta 92.
Dude, your opinions are no more valid than mine, I don't care how right you think you are. Your right to your opinion does not make your opinion right, got it?

Now, I stated in my initial response I don't like the weapon but that it is accurate. My opinion of the weapon is based primarily on MY EXPERIENCE with it. That was not good enough as you and y'boy denner felt the need to prove my opinion of the pistol wrong. Well you can't!!!!! My opinion is what it is. It is based on what I think of the actual weapon after using it.

The other opinions about the open slide allowing dirt to get in are based on my experience, reviews I've read, people I've talked to, etc. Once dirt gets in it gets in the oil and can cause the gun to get gummy and jam. And it has!!! The open slide does not allow dirt to get out as there is no dirt in it after it has been cleaned. That's pure poppycock devised by someone who just wants to be right. Nevertheless, I could not care less.

I've read the reports where the Sig failed a test. I've also read reports that prove an elephant can hang by its tail by a dandelion over the side of a cliff. Dude, reports are not always accurate. Some intentionally mislead to justify the actions people take, but you go ahead and stick with the 92fs. I DO NOT CARE!!! It isn't just my opinion the P226 is a better service pistol. But again, I don't care. I just answered they original posters question with the truth. Past that you and y'boy denner turned this into a national defense of the Beretta bc you didn't like my opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,059 Posts
I've read the reports where the Sig failed a test. I've also read reports that prove an elephant can hang by its tail by a dandelion over the side of a cliff. Dude, reports are not always accurate. Some intentionally mislead to justify the actions people take, but you go ahead and stick with the 92fs. I DO NOT CARE!!! It isn't just my opinion the P226 is a better service pistol. But again, I don't care. I just answered they original posters question with the truth. Past that you and y'boy denner turned this into a national defense of the Beretta bc you didn't like my opinion.[/QUOTE]

Unless they are reports on "BALISTICS"? Just can't shoot from the hip.

To the original poster I would say it is not the gun it is the way your shooting it. I have found grip and trigger pull are everything.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,434 Posts
I've read the reports where the Sig failed a test. I've also read reports that prove an elephant can hang by its tail by a dandelion over the side of a cliff. Dude, reports are not always accurate. Some intentionally mislead to justify the actions people take, but you go ahead and stick with the 92fs. I DO NOT CARE!!! It isn't just my opinion the P226 is a better service pistol. But again, I don't care. I just answered they original posters question with the truth. Past that you and y'boy denner turned this into a national defense of the Beretta bc you didn't like my opinion.
Unless they are reports on "BALISTICS"? Just can't shoot from the hip.

To the original poster I would say it is not the gun it is the way your shooting it. I have found grip and trigger pull are everything.[/QUOTE]

Not sure what ballistic reports have to do with why someone likes or dislikes a particular pistol, but I do agree the problem is not the gun. The 92fs is an extremely accurate pistol. I would also argue that grip and trigger pull is critical for all pistols, although some aren't as sensitive as others. Glocks are notorious for jamming if it is "limp-wristed". I've found the 92fs is a fairly user friendly pistol wrt shooting it. I just don't like it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
I had a hard time shooting accurately with my 92 so I bench tested it. I shot 5 rounds each at 15' 25, 30 and 50 feet. The gun knocked out the X at 15 and 30 feet and fell off to a 4 inch group with a couple of bulls at 50 feet. I then shot 15 rounds, no bench, at 25 feet with my usual poor results. So, the problem is me, not the gun. I could say the PF is a "bad" gun and it is..but just for me. It may be the perfect gun for someone else. Some positives are; the pistol never fails with any type or brand of ammo and I keep it ready for home protection due to the 15 round capacity. I do carry it in the car as well. My overall opinion is this big honker is just hard to shoot for some people.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,216 Posts
Dude, your opinions are no more valid than mine, I don't care how right you think you are. Your right to your opinion does not make your opinion right, got it?
With all due respect, I believe you need to decipher between reliable information/fact and personal opinions. If I or anyone else would have a choice between your personal observations and/or your second hand information to form an opinion, as opposed to myself owning two 92's(1993 & 1997) and one 96FS(1998). Shipwreck, who owns or has owned more 92's than anyone I know of and is very well respected, an experienced trainer and LEO in TapNRack; Beretta's and the U.S. military's' data and testing and a GOA report to boot? Unfortunately, you've chosen a pistol in which there is a long, long, line of reliable information to dwell upon.

Likewise, the GOA report in which you believe is not reliable, or inaccurate because it does not conform to your own false information? In my mind it clearly shows you are spouting false information which would unfortunately persuade those who are naïve or just new. Just who would you believe and/or take credence in their opinions? 1. You stated Sig outperformed Beretta in the military trials and faced with the GOA report(if you read it) is just misleading. 2. You say Beretta's 92's are finicky, or at least the one you owned, if in fact you have ever owned one. 3. You state that Beretta 92's break all the time. As a whole, I don't care if you care, but I care if everything you've stated is false and/or misleading even though in your mind you hold it as true.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,216 Posts
I had a hard time shooting accurately with my 92 so I bench tested it. I shot 5 rounds each at 15' 25, 30 and 50 feet. The gun knocked out the X at 15 and 30 feet and fell off to a 4 inch group with a couple of bulls at 50 feet. I then shot 15 rounds, no bench, at 25 feet with my usual poor results. So, the problem is me, not the gun. I could say the PF is a "bad" gun and it is..but just for me. It may be the perfect gun for someone else. Some positives are; the pistol never fails with any type or brand of ammo and I keep it ready for home protection due to the 15 round capacity. I do carry it in the car as well. My overall opinion is this big honker is just hard to shoot for some people.
Come on Lonestar, you can master it. Keep the sights on target and squeeze the trigger straight back to the rear and start at close range until you master the trigger and then and only then move out to further distances. You'll get it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,059 Posts
Come on Lonestar, you can master it. Keep the sights on target and squeeze the trigger straight back to the rear and start at close range until you master the trigger and then and only then move out to further distances. You'll get it.
Yes yes +1 , You can learn to shoot anything , put in the time , put in the rounds.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,434 Posts
Come on Lonestar, you can master it. Keep the sights on target and squeeze the trigger straight back to the rear and start at close range until you master the trigger and then and only then move out to further distances. You'll get it.
On this I have to agree!
 
21 - 40 of 57 Posts
Top