Beretta USA Presents Next Generation Handgun to the Department of Defense

Status
Not open for further replies.
Very shrewd of Beretta to introduce this upgraded M9 in this manner. It would give them a big leg up on their competition. On the other hand I don't think this firearm compares to other offerings if the US Military is really willing to look for the best weapon.
 
I like the improvements they made, and I think it's a better gun for it, but at the end of the day it's still a beretta 92, and I'm just not a huge fan.
 
I thought I read where the Army was looking to get away from the exposed barrel to help prevent sand contamination.

A more sand-resistant magazine would be nice, though.

Still larger and heavier than really needed, though, compared to the pending competition. This was their chance to field an improved PX4 to better compete with the other major makers looking to provide a significant upgrade based upon a plastic frame.

If the military doesn't opt to remain with the Beretta 92 variant, they're really going to have to work to revive interest in the big metal 9mm and depend upon the commercial sales to private buyers.
 
I see it as gimmicky. The changes are so subtle that they will likely not be noticed other than being tan vs black. The tritium is nice too, but that's not a big deal since every weapon turned in for testing should have that feature or be thrown out on merit. I do like it better than the m9, but the changes are too few and too little to make anybody ooh and aah...but the price point might.
 
It looks like they've addressed many of the things I disliked the most about the M9. I'll be interested in handling one when available. Looks to be a significant improvement over what the troops have now and I would guess it would be far easier and quicker to get this rolled out than to go through a whole new selection process. Maybe not the penultimate choice, it's established a good track record in it's lesser iterations, in the improved versions it should be very acceptable.
 
The M9 does the job just fine. Hopefully this will be enough to prevent an idiotic expenditure on something so inconsequential in comparison to other underfunded military needs.
 
The M9 does the job just fine. Hopefully this will be enough to prevent an idiotic expenditure on something so inconsequential in comparison to other underfunded military needs.
This.
I'm not a M9 fan, but it does work. A handgun is of little consequence in the big picture of the US Military.
 
I like the improvements, especially in terms of the shape of the grip frame and the thinner grips. I see where this is being done as an Engineering Change Proposal under the terms of the current M9 contract. Whether or not this will be enough to secure a new contract (when or if it becomes reality), remains to be seen.
 
I'm a Beretta fan, so I like the look. If the Brass picks it up or not, I'm getting one:D
 
My mind boggles at the hatred for this gun (M9 in general). My M9 is one of my most accurate, shootable guns I own. I'm not a fan of the safety, but I can just decock and flip the safety off to make it as ready as any of my Sigs. Concealable, it is not nor meant to be.
 
After 12,000 rounds through my personal 92FS, and nine years of pistol qual with the Army/Air Guard (at least four different M9s), I experienced two malfunctions, both FTE with Blazer Aluminum-cased ammo. I don't have a problem with the design, all other limitations notwithstanding.

However, I'm also scratching my head as to why they didn't offer some variant of the PX4. Also, I predict a lot of "Hey Sergeant, I lost my thread protector" from Private Snuffy.
 
Wow. In other words, it is an M9 with a rail, and a few other cosmetic changes. Contrary to what many may think, a rail on an M9 doesn't necessarily provide added value for those of us in the military.

That rail just increases the tendency for the weapon to catch on the holster or any other rigging on my kit. I'd prefer a standard 1911 or Sig 220 without any of the tactical "accoutrements". We aren't getting fancy weapon lights issued for our sidearms, so the rail is useless anyways.
 
Last edited:
Personally, I don't like rails. I have only two guns with them, and only one has a small light hanging from it in my nightstand vault. But I can see the military wanting some versatility with it.
 
If I recall correctly, it is physically impossible to make the breech face large enough for .45 ACP without redesigning the entire slide.
 
The M9A3 features a thin grip with a removable, modular wrap-around grip, MIL-STD-1913 accessory rail, removable front and rear tritium sights, extended and threaded barrel for suppressor use, 17-round sand resistant magazine, and numerous improved small components to increase durability and ergonomics, all in an earth tone finish.

In other words, it's the same old, same old, with a few dubious minor changes. I don't think that's what the military is looking for in a new pistol.

On the other hand, this is a brilliant marketing move by Beretta, because they will sell more to civilians.

I have an M9, and, having average-to-small hands, I find it much more awkward and difficult to use than an M1911A1. In this design, the ergonomics have taken a back seat to the magazine capacity (double-stack magazine, meaning a fatter grip) and the long double-action trigger. There's nothing that can be done to remedy these things within this same basic design.
 
In other words, it's the same old, same old, with a few dubious minor changes. I don't think that's what the military is looking for in a new pistol.

The modular wrap around grip is a major design change and does answer the military desire for a smaller grip for ease of use by shooters with smaller hands.

I have never had any use for the rail on any handgun but hanging things off of all small arms has become a common trend and a big market.

On the other hand, this is a brilliant marketing move by Beretta, because they will sell more to civilians.

It has worked well with the 1911A1, M-14 and M-16.

In this design, the ergonomics have taken a back seat to the magazine capacity (double-stack magazine, meaning a fatter grip) and the long double-action trigger.

Do you have any experience with the SRT on SIGS?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top