Beretta 92S review

[Willie Sutton]

"Of all the other pistols you mentioned, none are currently produced"


Which is why they are all *appreciating as investments* due to fixed or reducing numbers of good ones available for trade. Better actual utility due to improvement does not make something more valuable in the big picture, if supplies of the "better" product are infinitely large. Within collectables of all sorts, the fine balance between rarity and desirability is what causes collectables to rise in value.

Example: The original 1911 Colt was improved in many ways to produce the 1911A1. The later pistols have features that make them *much* better for the user. Fact is, though, that the older 1911's are worth *three times* what a 1911A1 is worth. Why? Rarity balanced against desirability.

Example: Plastic crystal Rolex Sea Dweller watches are far inferior to the current production sapphire crystal versions. They sell for FIVE TIMES what a new one is worth at the store. Why? Relative rarity, and desirability due to Rolex being a collectable marque.

The list of similar examples is nearly infinite. From cars to airplanes to cameras, to <insert collectable category here>.


These pistols are out of production, and total numbers available are low. Berettas are a collectable marque, have their own fans, and that drives desirability. Future value will increase sharply once they are "no longer available at the store".



"Where is the value?"

The value is in the future rarity of a model that was never sold in numbers here in the USA, as well as the fact that there is an ever-expanding community of serious Beretta collectors who want to amass a collection of one of each of every model built. Let ten years pass and you'll see how it works: There is no limit to the number of future Beretta collectors that can be bred. There is an absolutely finite number of early-feature 92's available for collectors. There is *zero doubt* that values on these will rise once surplus stocks are no longer available. I'm not a Beretta collector, but I know a good deal when I see one. This is a good deal.


Willie

.

 

[Mike OTDP]

Agree 100%. $300 OTD for a low-time Beretta 92 is a steal.

THIS is how you invest in firearms. I bought my East German Makarov from a guy selling them from a crate. $179. I wish I'd bought the whole crate of them.

 

[W.E.G.]

wild cat mccane

I guess I am trying to be argumentative

I fail to see how this has sentimental value, collector value, or value.

It is only 200 dollars away from a new 92. It's used. The mag release is not favored by anyone. Heck, you can by a used 92 for nearly the same price.

Of all the other pistols you mentioned, none are currently produce.

Where is the value?

As others have noted, these guns may appreciate a bit.
For now, they ARE cheaper than a new one, and they have some historical panache.

Magazines are abundantly available, and happen to be compatible with the magazines that have been used for years by US military, understanding that you may need to "notch" some of the magazines that are cut only for the F and FS models. I'm pretty handy with a chainsaw file, and its even a neat "boondoggle" project for a young aspiring "gunsmith."

I'm not giving up any of my Glocks for these guns, but I will have some fun with them, and if you will allow me to say, they are AT LEAST as good an investment as putting the same amount of money in the bank.

Just have some fun with them for now I reckon.
If you got a real gem specimen, protect it for appreciation purposes.
I kind of like having some that are a bit banged-up already. I can let others use them and not worry about indifferent handling that some folks seem to demonstrate toward firearms.

Have some fun with it if you can afford it.

Otherwise, you only "need" just one good defensive handgun.
The 92S would NOT be my first choice for that.

 

[AustinTX]

Of all the other pistols you mentioned, none are currently produce.

Where is the value?

The 92S hasn't been produced in 32 years. The 92FS, 92A1, etc. are 92 variants, yes, but they're not the same model. That matters to a good number of people.

As others have noted, these guns may appreciate a bit.
For now, they ARE cheaper than a new one, and they have some historical panache.

They may have already appreciated a bit. A few people have flipped them on GB for $400-500.

Have some fun with it if you can afford it.

Otherwise, you only "need" just one good defensive handgun.
The 92S would NOT be my first choice for that.

Exactly. The vast majority of the guns in my collection were never intended for any sort of "practical" use (if by that we mean concealed carry, SD/HD and related training, and hunting). I bought them for some combination of appreciation of craftsmanship and history, aesthetic appeal, collectibility, oddity, pure range fun, and so forth. All of which are perfectly legitimate reasons to buy a particular firearm, even though another at a similar price might be much better suited to some "practical" application.

 

[wild cat mccane]

People selling them for 400 is not going to last when word is out that anyone can pick one up at 300. 400 is only from poor informed consumer.

It is not equivalent to the current 92. They don't have added safety features and don't benefit from a better anything due to the older technology.

Are you thinking these would go for 400? 500? when sold out? No way. At 500 you are a mere 100 from a stainless new 92.

I say these are a deal at 250. 350? No. Spend the extra and get new which is safer and has the better mag release.

 

[WVsig]

People selling them for 400 is not going to last when word is out that anyone can pick one up at 300. 400 is only from poor informed consumer.

It is not equivalent to the current 92. They don't have added safety features and don't benefit from a better anything due to the older technology.

Are you thinking these would go for 400? 500? when sold out? No way. At 500 you are a mere 100 from a stainless new 92.

I say these are a deal at 250. 350? No. Spend the extra and get new which is safer and has the better mag release.

Agree anyone buying one right now for $400 to $450 is ignorant of the current market for these guns but that does not mean they will not move into that price point once the this stock of imports are gone but it tells you a little bit about what the market will be once the initial imports are gone.

One could argue that today's 92FS is not the equivalent of the older 92s. I cannot remember the last time saw a blued 92FS NIB. Do the current 92FS come with a solid steel guide rod? Current 92FS have MIM parts right? Most of today 92FSs are made in the US not at the mother ship in Italy. What is the safeties and triggers on a new 92FS made out of?

In the end different strokes for different folks. I would never buy a Taurus even their 92 clone which IMHO is the best gun they make. I don't see a lot of value in them and they will certainly never appreciate in price, not that that is why I buy guns. If push came to shove I would feel fine having to defend myself with my 92s. Would it be my first choice probably not but I am lucky enough to be in a position of choices.

A lot of times what we buy does not come down to objectively what is better or what is best. Most of the time its what we like or other subjective criteria. I like blued guns. I prefer to avoid MIM. I don't mind plastic parts on poly guns but they cheapen metal guns IMHO. The mag release is not really an issue for a range gun and if one were to use it as a self defense weapon training is all that is required. Learning to run the gun you have is really not that hard.

This is not going to be a defensive weapon for me and I don't think this gun will be shot to the point where metallurgy or addition safety features of the 92FS will ever come into play. As a side note my particular gun has the larger hammer pin and the 92FS channel in the slide. So the slide will not come flying off if there is a locking block failure. LOL

I think these guns will move up in price. How high I do not know and personally do not really care. I did not buy 12 of them hoping to sell them later at a profit. I bought one that was verified to be LNIB if not NIB unfired for a reasonable price out the door. For my intended use I saved quiet a bit over a NIB US made 92FS.

Clearly you will not be buying one now and most likely will not be buying one in the future but you are not making a convincing argument against buying one now or that they will not go up in price later. There are numerous examples of guns of a particular vintage going up in price even though there are new "improved" models still being produced. Browning HI Powers come to mind. German Sigs of all kind also fit into that group. Again different strokes for different folks.

 

[AustinTX]

People selling them for 400 is not going to last when word is out that anyone can pick one up at 300. 400 is only from poor informed consumer.

Not really the point. These supplies are limited, and if a 92S in excellent condition can sell for $400-500 now -- ignorant consumer or not -- buying one is not going to be a long-term losing proposition for anyone from a value standpoint. The ignorance of the current buyer is irrelevant. Some time after these new supplies have dried up, much as has been the case with pistols others have cited, the going rate will resemble what these ignorant buyers are paying today. The buyer paying $280-350 for these will be able to sell his 92S for more than he paid for it.

It is not equivalent to the current 92. They don't have added safety features and don't benefit from a better anything due to the older technology.

All of which is known and none of which matters to people interested in buying a vintage 92 with a blued finish and polished frame -- something that hasn't been produced in more than three decades. You're operating from the mistaken assumption that most buyers of these are deciding between a 92S and new 92FS/92A1.

Are you thinking these would go for 400? 500? when sold out? No way. At 500 you are a mere 100 from a stainless new 92.

See above. Many of the people buying these now are not weighing the 92S against a new 92FS/92A1. The same will be the case for people looking to buy them in the future.

I say these are a deal at 250. 350? No. Spend the extra and get new which is safer and has the better mag release.

See above.

 

[Ibmikey]

I ordered one of the PSA offerings for a friend, receiving a new condition pistol with a used mag. Really, the pistol appears to be unfired showing no use inside or out. I am not a Beretta 92 fan but had trouble resisting the $289 price, when they dropped the price thirty bucks I ordered a second pistol knowing it will in no way compare with the first pristine model but I shoot my firearms and used (not abused) is ok. It can rest alongside my P1, p6, CZ82 and others mentioned in this post when not being shot.

 

[W.E.G.]

RANGE REPORT!!!

The weather here just keeps getting worse.

I wanted to go to my outdoor club (the one with the expensive membership fees), but shooting pistols oudoors in the rain and 34 degrees didn't sound like fun.

After some pondering, I remembered that I have a couple "free passes" for the indoor range, "Blue Ridge Arsenal," that they gave me when I bought one of those Smith and Wesson .22 LR AR-15 type rifles during the "lull" in gun-buying right before Obama got elected again.
So, I packed up my new 92S and "Old Faithful" Glock 22, and ran out there as soon as morning rush-hour traffic subsided.

I never liked shooting at Blue Ridge Arsenal because the ventilation was horrible, and parking was always a zoo.
It was still plenty-crowded when I got there today, but the shooting gods had to be smiling on me for some reason.
Only one parking space, and it was the one RIGHT BY THE FRONT DOOR. No worrying about parking over in the trucking depot lot and maybe getting towed.
No wait at the check-in, and no wait to get in the range.
When I entered the range (had not been in there in a few years) I realized they really have updated the place.
The air actually seemed breathable, and they even had new touch-screen-display target carrier panels.
I kind of miss the old toggle switches that looked like they came off a science-fair project from the 60's.
I guess I don't exude much electricity, as I had to touch the touch-screen buttons several times to get them to react.

I loaded up the Beretta, and first shot, the slide split in two, and fired back at me and hit me right between the eyes.
When I came-to, I realized that the locking block was shattered, and several of the springs were sticking out of the gun and looked all twisted.
The RSO, who was carrying a Smith and Wesson Heavy-Duty in a flap holster, heard me wailing, so he came over to see what was all the commotion.
Just then, he noticed that I had also had the "plastic" Glock pistol.
I think he made several disparaging remarks about my manhood, and my Un-American selection of firearms.
But I'm not for sure because I was distracted by him pouring the sand-bucket on my head and all over my gear.

No, really, the 92S functioned exactly like it was supposed to, and there were no incidents at all.
The RSO did watch me for a minute or so until he was satisfied that I was not going to go all Yosemite Sam in there.

If there was anything that seemed weird, it was that the commie-sourced "Silver Bear" steel-jacketed 9mm ammo actually made a sparks-shower as the bullets left the barrel.
I'd only ever shot that stuff out of Glocks before, and I'd never seen the sparks-shower before.
I reckon it was those steel bullet jackets running against the sharp rifling in the bore that made sparks like what you would see in the nighttime if a muffler was dragging on the road.
Kind of entertaining, but also kind of distracting.
At least the RSO didn't REALLY dump the sand bucket on me.

All firing today was done from 7 yards.

It took me a couple mags to "get used to" the gun.
Initially, I was not following-through on the shots, and I was pushing rounds low-left to a pretty embarrassing degree.
Once I got accustomed to the trigger, things started to settle down, and I was getting acceptable groups just a hair below my aiming point at 7 yards.
Pics of a number of the targets follow. You can see that my marksmanship (or lack thereof) was the primary issue today.
Even after I became accustomed to the Beretta trigger, I managed to still dramatically "throw" a few shots - especially some high ones and low ones.

A few observations about this gun that I'm sure are not unique to these recent imports.
Probably more relevant to the Beretta 92 series generally:

• In single-action, the trigger has a tremendous amount of travel.

• It stops pretty firmly when it reaches the sear-engagement part of the travel.

• The movement of the trigger would suit me a lot more if the sear engagement began sooner --- I mean a LOT sooner.

• The "posture" of my trigger finger when it reaches the sear-engagement point feels as though my finger has moved too far to the rear to maintain optimal control of the weapon during follow-through.

• More time on the trigger, and I'm sure I'd get used to it, and my follow-through (and therefore group-size) would improve.

• I'm not crazy about the curved face of the trigger either. I always prefer a flat-faced trigger.

• The curved trigger-face causes me to feel a bit unsure about the exact placement of my finger, and it focuses the sensation of the trigger to a very narrow area on my finger.

• This isn't helped by the fact that I've had some surgery on that finger-tip, which causes me to have inconsistent tactile sensation in the area where the doctor stuck his scalpel.

• Creep is minimal once the sear-engagement point is reached, but there definitely is a consistent, and discernible, creep.

• Overtravel feels minimal - which should come as no major surprise, since it feels like the trigger has already moved as far is it could possibly go before sear-engagement even begins.

Recoil... what recoil? This is a fairly heavy pistol shooting a relative lightweight caliber.
I took a break from the 92S to shoot some very blasty duty-ammo in the Fo-Tay Glock.
When I came back to the 92S, I literally flinched on the first shot because there was SO LITTLE recoil. It was as though the first shot was some sort of dud.

I'm really happy with this gun.
I'm still not going to change anything on it.
I used the original magazine a lot, and I loaded it to full capacity, and it worked flawlessly.
The two brand-new mags I got from Midway also worked perfectly too - although I wish they had the old-school steel floorplates instead of those "modern" plastic jobbies.

While y'all study these targets and laugh at my sorry marksmanship, I'll go stand over the laundry sink and run a brush through the bore real quick, and then spray the bejeezus out of the slide with Break-Free, and blow it off with compressed air.
That's my idea of "cleaning."
I might even put some newspaper in the sink to catch the solvent, since our local trash service uses residential trash in some sort of incinerator/steam-generator/electrical-generator arrangement.
Kind of like "recycling" --- or at least better than sending the solvent into the water treatment plant.


I ran these drills/tests:

• Slow-fire single-action

• Double-action (starting with hammer in down-position, gun raised from belly level and quickly fired at target without "dressing-up" the sights)

• Rapid fire (starting with hammer in down-position, gun raised from belly level and entire magazine quickly fired at target without "dressing-up" the sights)

Beretta 92S magazine appears in each pic for scale.

In case you are wondering what's up with the "ghosty" bullseye image on the targets, these targets were a gift from a friend, and the printed side has everything on it from a multi-colored bulseye, to a grid pattern, to the coordinates for targeting the international space station.... and of course, the name of his business.
I prefer a simpler target for these sorts of outings, so I figure what-the-heck, free targets, I'll just put an orange sticker on them and shoot only at that, or I'll just leave them blank for center-of-mass drills.
At least the "ghosty" image of the bullseye that shows-through gives you an idea of where the middle of the target was even when there is no bullseye or orange dot-sticker.

Ammo used today:


.
.
.

Single-action tests









.
.
.


Double-action tests






.
.
.

Rapid-fire tests

 

[AustinTX]

Great review, W.E.G. Hope you recover quickly from your concussion and other assorted injuries.

 

[Miked7762]

I loaded up the Beretta, and first shot, the slide split in two, and fired back at me and hit me right between the eyes.
When I came-to, I realized that the locking block was shattered, and several of the springs were sticking out of the gun and looked all twisted.

You forgot to mention that every other Beretta 92 on the range did the same thing like some kind of fission reaction. It's never just one that has a problem, it's at least every other one and every range trip has to include at least one cracked frame.

 

[LockedBreech]

Great write-up.

Thanks to a tip-off from a TFL poster who knows I'm a Beretta lover, I was able to get one of these that is literally new in box. Other than the electropenciling, it is a factory new pistol. Though not for long once my 1000 rounds of American Eagle get here.

My primary nightstand/car gun is a 2013 92FS. It's a very good gun. Comfortable, oozing fit and finish, and perfectly reliable so far. No gun comes close for me. I paid $535 for it. For $330 shipped, I got the NIB 92S and I am nearly as enthralled with it. For a Beretta guy, these really are a steal. I grabbed three new era-proper magazines with the flat steel baseplate from Apex and a third gen current-production locking block from Beretta.

It may not have the newest and coolest features, but it's a fundamentally sound design, beautifully blued and machined, and a great little piece of the lineage of the 92 design.

Also, I saw some people saying they'd rather have a Taurus 92, and just to playfully pour some fuel on the fire, I'd rather have a Beretta with actual rust on it.

But I'm a bit of a fanboy and I don't deny it - to each their own!

 

[Fiv3r]

Great writs up

Makes me want to take my 92 out to stretch her legs. Love these pistols.

 

[W.E.G.]

These guns will not lose value.
They are already a reputable gun, at a fair price.

They may appreciate in value - or not.

Who cares?

If you like the gun, and you can afford it, and you have fun with it, then sit back and enjoy it!

I like old cars - usually ones that are "nothing special" and that are pretty much a "money pit."
I like them because of the effect they have on me.
I'm well aware that there are people out there who think its pointless.
Remind me why I'm supposed to care what those people think?

Besides - guns are cheap - pretty much ALL of them.
Its your time, and the opportunity costs of playing with them that are expensive.
You never get that back.

If you enjoy "just working on them," then there's an immediate profit right there.

 

[W.E.G.]

So, who shot their "new" 92S this weekend?

Range reports?

 

[stchman]

Hopefully the gun is a shooter, it definitely looks like it was beat to hell and back.

 

[stchman]

As much as I loved the Berettas in my life, the Taurus P92 Stainless for $350 has suited me better.



It's gorgeous, plus it shoots well.

.

I would consider a Taurus PT92 like yours if they took Beretta mags.

 

[rklessdriver]

Nice Beretta.

I have seen them and think they are a good deal. I only wish PW Arms would have marked them on the bottom of the dust cover.
Will

 

[Dudedog]

I have a question though. In trying to get the mainspring out, I've removed the roll pin that holds the lanyard loop in place. I assumed that the lanyard loop would just come out at this point, but it didn't. Does the magazine release need to be removed to get the lanyard loop out, and if so, does anyone know how to do that

I have the same issue with a Taraus drove the pin out expected plug to come flying out, nope sitll in there. (no lanyard loop,, but a plug same spot, D spring works in the gun if I can get it in)
What's the trick to get it out?

I am happy with my Taraus PT99. Like the frame mounted safety/decocker.

I think that seems like a decent deal on the Beratta. Only one person can decide if a gun is really worth what you paid for it ... You.

 

[Confederate]

...understanding that you may need to "notch" some of the magazines that are cut only for the F and FS models.

And how does one do that?

I've got a couple of Italian 92 mags made for the old Italian model, with the notch at the bottom. I've considered drilling a large hole in these to see if it would latch there. Is there a better way? (I'd be using them in a Taurus PT92, that stainless one on the first page.)

On another matter, is it safe to shoot an old well shot gun from that era? Even though I've never heard of a slide separation on an Italian Beretta, I talked to the fellow who oversaw the pistol's testing for the Navy. He was angry over it and denied that they had used any substandard ammo. And he told me about the slide separations on the military model. Scared the hell out of me. He said he wouldn't shoot any of those guns after 5,000 rounds. He said they'd never had any failures before 5,000 rounds, but that after about 7,000, they checked the guns very carefully for hairline fractures or fatigue. They never saw any warning signs, he said. Someone would be shooting them and the slide would break free and hit the shooter in the face. Even though I think they had protection, some were badly injured. But worse, even if they healed okay, most could never shoot an automatic handgun without badly flinching. He said Beretta denied the problem for some time, but that the Navy never supported him in his findings. He was very bitter over it.

There's no doubt that it's no longer a problem. The fellow I talked to those many years ago favored switching to the Sig P-226, like the Seals did (they had enough clout that they could say to hell with it). I'm not a huge fan of the Sig and have the .45 auto model. Too boxy and the hammer drop bites my thumb...dumb luck. But I like the Berettas, especially the Italian ones.

I know that both Beretta and Taurus have taken steps to prevent slide separation sometimes in the 90s, but on older autos I think I'd be uncomfortable. Beretta later said it was a metallurgical problem of some type, like the tellurium content, but they built something into the frame itself to make everyone happy. For a modern gun, it still has the appeal it did when it first came out. Imagine, sixteen shots. In the early military tests, the Beretta had a failure rate of 1 in every 2,000 rounds. No other gun ever came close. The Smith & Wesson 459 had a failure rate of 1 in every 956 rounds, I believe. And the 659 is my hands down favorite 9mm.

ADDENDUM:

See:

• Tracking the M9 Slide Failures
  
• The True Story of the M9

.

 

[Confederate]

I would consider a Taurus PT92 like yours if they took Beretta mags.

They do.

Back in the 80s, I bought an Italian Beretta and loved it. Couldn't believe the high capacity and the looks. Then the government adopted it and the price shot up through the ceiling. So, after reading some reviews, I sold the Beretta and bought two Taurus PT-92s. They weren't as nicely finished, nor were they quite as accurate, but they shot just as reliably. And, like many South American pistols, they smelled funny. It was probably the oil.

After awhile, I sold them and bought a Smith 659. Then, fairly recently, I bought the stainless Taurus. Frankly, I had really fallen for the Beretta ceremonial pistol that was featured as the suicide pistol in the movie, A Few Good Men. But that's not available to civilians, and the cost would be prohibitive.

The stainless Taurus was featured in the first Wolverine movie and was used by the mutant who was good with guns. Unusually good. It also was featured in the series, The Dome, and used by the protagonist, Big Jim.

I also didn't care for the stainless Beretta's two-tone look.

All in all, the Taurus is now shooting probably as well as the Beretta. Both are great guns, though I wouldn't touch a Taurus revolver. Beretta was nuts to have sold its facilities to Taurus. It would have been better for them to have blown it up.

 

[Miked7762]

They do.

Not without modification, they don't. The Beretta magazine catch uses a machined rectangular protrusion. The Taurus uses the flat portion of a keyhole shaped piece, it is slightly more forward and much wider.

 

[W.E.G.]

Modified an M9 mag to work in the 92S



http://youtu.be/5GUSAR3GAUU

 

[Jaymo]

You're not a S.E.A.L 'till you've eaten Italian steel. .

I like the Beretta design, except for the slide safety. I can't work it as easily as S&W or Makarov slide safety, much less as easily as a 1911 style frame safety.

I don't recall ever seeing or hearing of this problem with a Taurus PT92/99.
I've owned a pair of sequentially serial numbered PT99s since 1997.
I've had no problems.

As far as collectible status of an early 92 goes, just look at first gen S&W autos. They're in demand and not cheap.

 

[W.E.G.]

Folks keep calling the lever on the slide a "safety."

Its not a safety.

Its a non-rebounding de-cocker.

You carry this gun with the red dot showing at all times.
This puts the hammer (for the first shot) in double-action mode.
The trigger pull for that first shot is every bit as heavy (in my opinion heavier) than any Smith & Wesson double-action revolver.
Is a Beretta carried in this manner any less-safe than if you were carrying any of the double-action revolvers made for the last 100 years?
Those revolvers didn't use a "safety."

If you want to carry it with the red-dot covered, you have disabled the functionality of the pistol.
There might be various "good reasons" for doing that in certain circumstances, but it should never be the standard manner of carry.

Is there even one documented instance of the slide on a 92S failing?

There were some US military-contract 92's which did have slide failure.
We know this.

I am aware that Beretta made some design changes in the slide after the failures of the US pistols. I don't think that should move us to conclude that the original design was inherently defective.

From wiki:

Prior to its widespread adoption by the U.S. military, questions were raised in a 1987 General Accounting Office report after an incident where a slide failure on a Beretta 92SB injured a Naval Special Warfare member, and two more failures were later observed in additional testing. These failures included both military and civilian Beretta models with very high round counts, and after investigation they were deemed the result of ammunition supplied by the U.S. Army which exceeded the recommended pressures specified by NATO but nonetheless provoked a modification in the M9 design to prevent slide failure from causing injuries to the user.