I agree with JohnKsa's account of the selection process. While Beretta is not known for great customer service in the civilian realm, they went above and beyond for the XM9 trials.
In my own 9mm selection process, I owned many different brands...some classic, some not too well known. Even owned a West German SIG for a while.
At one point, I bought a 92FS, just to see if all the criticism I was reading was justified.
I found the Beretta to be an excellent pistol. Accurate, reliable, and it fit my hand well. The negative to me was the difficulty in tearing it down beyond a normal field strip. I was also disturbed by the well known tendency of the trigger return spring to break, and the possibility of locking block failure.
Eventually, I traded that 92FS straight across for a Glock 17. I was immediately impressed by the ease of completely tearing down the Glock. It can really only be compared to the 1911 in that regard.
The size and weight of the 17 are advantages to me...and I would think they would be to our service people who are carrying huge amounts of gear in rough terrain. The Glock finish and plastic frame are largely immune to wear, compared to the Bruniton finish of the Beretta.
I like the Glock trigger, and shoot it very well. I do as well at long range with the G17 as I did with the 92FS, and I like the consistent trigger pull of the Glock better than the DA/SA beretta.
The result of my personal 9mm trials? For decades, I preferred the Browning HiPower as my 9mm of choice...I owned several, and CCW'd them often. But, after shooting the Glock 17 for a while, and it's little sibling, the Glock 26, I recently sold my last HiPower. The Glock has completely eclipsed it as "best 9mm" for MY needs. YMMV, as they say, and that's fine by me.
The past is gone...the future may never happen.
Be Here Now.
Last edited by amd6547; November 25, 2012 at 09:54 AM.