Which Beretta would you choose, and why?

If you like 40 and are set up for reloading then the 96. The 92 series is my favorite handgun and one I carry all the time. I have never fired the 96 as I do nothing with 40 Cal. But to each his own.

On another forum, one of the fella's asked how to improve the longevity of his Beretta 96. Several of the big Beretta experts (some former employees, and some Team Beretta shooters) responded (admittedly a little tongue in cheek) the way to extend the life of your Beretta 96 was to not shoot it. Most looked at the 96A1 buffer as a bandaid that only slightly helps a gun better suited to 9mm. Forum member 9mmepiphany has some extensive Beretta 96 experience, and if I recall correctly, had great success with it.

On the other hand, the Beretta PX4 should be able to handle the .40 S&W pretty well. I believe forum member Lonestar49 has had long term experience with a PX4 in .40S&W. You may want to PM him, or search for his posts.

Forgot to answer. Of those two I'd pick the 92FS.

Remember, Beretta is just finishing up their move from Maryland to Tennessee, and they are working on a universal decocker/safety lever that will be user configurable to change from a safety/decocker to decocker only. If you can be patient for a few more months, you may have more options within the Beretta 92/96 family.

It gets covered in pretty much any Beretta 92 series discussion, on just about any forum.

Here's one http://berettaforum.net/vb/showthread.php?t=126755

My other prediction... the M9A3 will become the default civilian Beretta as far as frame and slide go. You'll get a slide that has both front and rear sight dovetails and doesn't require a Brigadier slide. You also get a frame that is more small hand friendly, but the a grip option to give the traditional 92/M9 grip. Add in the user configurable FS or G model and you've addressed most of the complaints against the Beretta 92 series.

The A1 guns are somewhat of an oddity in the Beretta line-up. Look at the disassembly button on the right side of all the Beretta 92 guns. Note the A1 guns are the only ones with a round button. All the other's are oval.

http://www.beretta.com/en-us/beretta-92-series/

JTQ said:

My other prediction... the M9A3 will become the default civilian Beretta as far as frame and slide go. You'll get a slide that has both front and rear sight dovetails and doesn't require a Brigadier slide. You also get a frame that is more small hand friendly, but the a grip option to give the traditional 92/M9 grip. Add in the user configurable FS or G model and you've addressed most of the complaints against the Beretta 92 series.

The A1 guns are somewhat of an oddity in the Beretta line-up. Look at the disassembly button on the right side of all the Beretta 92 guns. Note the A1 guns are the only ones with a round button. All the other's are oval.

http://www.beretta.com/en-us/beretta-92-series/

Click to expand...

I find the standard grip to be perfect but I am me. Most firearms manufacturers do seek smaller grips so I agree with you. I own a WC 92 and it comes with the Brigadier slide. One problem with it is holster availability. While it isn't exactly hard to find a holster, you will have less options.

Easy choice. The 92FS, 92G or M-9.

9mm of course.

Lots of firepower with 15 - 20 round magazines.

Factory 9mm FMJ as cheap as .20 cents a round.

Easy and cheap to reload. Lots of new and used brass out there. I feed my guns mostly cast lead bullets.

Easier on the gun.

I prefer no rail.

I don't really care for .40, and I don't like rails.

But you aren't me. If you can reload for .40, then you can make loads that aren't going to beat up a 96 or 96A1.

As far as the 92A1 and 96A1 go, they are slight oddballs, but they are the most advanced version of the 92 series. The changes weren't a "bandaid", as the slide is heavier and the buffer does mitigate the kind of frame damage 96s were known for. And unlike many other 92/96 series pistols, they have replaceable front sights. The mags, barrels, locking blocks and major springs are all the same as the regular guns, so I really don't understand arguments about the A1 guns being too different or a "dead end". They will last longer than standard pistols and the kind of parts that do wear out are fully replaceable.

As far as the G conversion goes, the rumors are that the conversion is NOT going to be cheap. Possibly as expensive as the Wilson version. The 90Two/92A1/96A1 conversion is much cheaper.

RX-79G said:

The mags, barrels, locking blocks and major springs are all the same as the regular guns, so I really don't understand arguments about the A1 guns being too different or a "dead end". They will last longer than standard pistols and the kind of parts that do wear out are fully replaceable.

Click to expand...

For what it's worth...

Beretta 92/M9 recoil spring and guide rod http://www.berettausa.com/en-us/ber...od-and-stainless-steel-recoil-spring/eu00031/

It does not fit the 92A1, 96A1 and the 90-TWO.

Click to expand...

92A1/96A1 recoil spring and guide rod http://www.berettausa.com/en-us/92a1-metal-guide-rod-assy-92a1-90-two-recoil-spring-asse/c8c582/

Does not fit standard 92FS style pistols due to captive style assembly and rod design.

Click to expand...

I prefer the plain Jane 92FS in 9MM of course. I installed a D spring, Elite II hammer, and extended mag release, and I am happy.

I once had a beretta 92FS and boy was it a tack driver. I foolishly sold it to my cousin and have been trying to buy it back every since. I could easily go out and buy another, I just want that particular gun back for some odd reason lol. I've shot a buddy's stainless 96 and it was a good shooter and a good looking gun, but it just doesn't do it for me like that good ole 92 did. I've yet to shoot a gun more accurately on a consistent basis than that 92FS I had. I do however shoot my Cz 75B just as well. My vote goes for another 92. Maybe a 92FS centennial instead of the standard 92FS. The centennial actually has the safety where it should be in my opinion, good luck finding one though and if you do it surely will cost a pretty penny

JTQ said:

For what it's worth...

Beretta 92/M9 recoil spring and guide rod http://www.berettausa.com/en-us/ber...od-and-stainless-steel-recoil-spring/eu00031/

92A1/96A1 recoil spring and guide rod http://www.berettausa.com/en-us/92a1-metal-guide-rod-assy-92a1-90-two-recoil-spring-asse/c8c582/

Click to expand...

Some, if not all, 92FS guide rods will work in the 92A1. This Wilson one, for instance, works in both:

http://shopwilsoncombat.com/Wilson-...uted-Beretta-92_96-Full-Size/productinfo/670/

I prefer the 92fs also. I installed the Beretta lightweight hammer and the Wolff d-spring. I also installed the Wilson Shoc-Buff. This might help
the frame on the 96. Check these out.

http://www.brownells.com/handgun-pa...ffers/shok-buff-recoil-buffers-prod97371.aspx

Beretta 92G.
because decocker only.

I have always thought the 92FS or 92FS Inox were a classic design.
It's just one of those pistols I put off buying and still would love to have but it just gets bumped back in favor of something else.

I have one of each. They are both excellent pistols. IMHO it's win/win.

I love the reliability of my glock. I love the steadfast stoutness of a good steel .357. Pocket .380s inspire warm feelings when walking through bad places unexpectedly.

All of that is true, for me. However there is one gun that just fits me. The 92fs. Mine is stock with the typical stubborn long DA trigger, but I did add a nice stainless guide rod.

Her name is Rosa Belladonna, and she is a deadly mistress. A tack driver, a welcome hand-filling warm companion in the worst case scenario.

The 92fs, to me, is a classic military sidearm of worthy note. Yes, it is now "outdated". Yes, it dethroned the beloved 1911.

Still, it's a reliable, durable, and capable firearm.

Rosa, is the last gun I would ever part with.

Hello All, I'm new to the Forum .
I too have and cherish, the 92.
First auto pistol I've owned.

Between the two choices I would go with the Model 92FS. If I were looking for myself it would be between the M9A3 and the 92 Vertec Inox. The straight backstrap design fits my smaller hands better.

The 92FS (which I've got). I've got a few guns in both 9mm and .40S&W, and truthfully right now I shoot mostly .40 (mostly due to the way USPSA is scored), but between the two for value, versatility, recoil, etc, I still LIKE 9mm more even though I currently shoot it less.

That said - I generally don't like DA/SA's, preferring either striker fired or single action, so if I were in the market for a Beretta right now I'd personally be holding out for the APX .

deleted

I have an M9 which for all intents & purposes is a 92FS and love it. As for you comment on magazine, you can get magazines for the 92FS dirt cheap. I picked up several at a recent gun show for $8.00 a piece. They were military surplus, but haven't had a failure yet.

Happy shooting