Beretta 92 vs Glock 23

[drrpg01]

Any advantages/disadvantages to the two models compared to each other or just the 9mm vs 40 cal in general?

[Sixer]

For me the Glock 23 is easier to conceal but YMMV. I've shot both and own one... Glock 23 :)

[rjrivero]

I own both and shoot my Beretta more. It's gotta be one of the sexiest guns ever made.

http://www.revolverforums.com/forum/picture.php?albumid=31&pictureid=177

[Nowhere Man]

The Beretta 92 in 9mm has very mild recoil. The Glock 23 in .40 is quite snappy.

The 92 would not be my first choice for CCW. The 23 would be much easier.

Both guns are reliable and "battlefield" accurate.


Dave

[pogo2]

The Beretta 92 is a big gun - more suited to range or home defense than carry, in my opinion.

The Glock 23 is compact and light weight, but holds 13 + 1 rounds of .40, a caliber that is just as effective as .45 based on gel test data. It is one of the best CCW guns in the market. It does have a sharp recoil but you can get used to it.

So it depends on your application which you choose.

[greensteelforge]

Glocks are designed from the ground up with economics in mind. They are very reliable, and relatively accurate, but should not be overstated as being a superior weapon on any grounds. The Beretta is a well made, and proven weapon with far better control characteristics than the Glock. It is a bulkier gun than most 9mm's, but makes up for it with speed and consistancy. Beretta makes a .40 version of the 92, but I'm not sure if they offer it in DA/SA. I've had lots of experience shooting lots of pistols in lot's of matches (mostly combat simulation speed matches), and the Beretta 92 is still my favorite. Granted, most of my matches were military, and the Beretta was my only option. The only gun that was really even competitive with the Beretta was the Browning Hi-Power clones that some of the international teams shot, and a few Sig P226's that the Air Force brought. We always had a few law enforcement groups, and special ops teams with Glocks, but they just couldn't maintain very good accuracy at speed with the violent muzzle snap.

[Ozzieman]

Personally I think if you’re going to compare two guns from those two companies you should give the Beretta 90TWO type F or G a look and decide.
The 40 is a much better round but 9 is cheaper to shoot, also the 40 for some can be recoil heavy.
Like the others if it’s for carry the Glock is the better choice, but if you were looking for carry to me the Glock 26 is a much better gun.
Let’s face it, you’re trying to choose between two very good guns and both will fill your needs. You need to find one that fits you best. I personally don’t care for the 40. If it was my choice and I didn’t go with the 9mm, 45 ACP would be my choice, I just don’t care for the sharp recoil of the 40 in light guns like the Glock.


http://www.beretta.com/Pistols-Carbines/Defence/Full/90two-Type-F-G/index.aspx?m=82&f=2&id=791&foto=1

[rsxr22]

i think it really depends on what you are planning on using the gun for. That said, i think the 23 is the most universal gun and can fill the most roles. It is a good size for a carry gun and also can be used at the range. The Beretta is a great gun but it is extremely large.

I like the design of the M9 a lot, but what has always kept me from buying one is that they dont really fill a role for me. I have range guns, carry guns, and competition guns and the Beretta to me, i would only use as a range gun so it isnt very high on my priority list. Maybe when i get older and have more money, i will be able to buy pistols that really serve no purpose for me

[Nowhere Man]

greensteelforge wrote;
Glocks are designed from the ground up with economics in mind. They are very reliable, and relatively accurate, but should not be overstated as being a superior weapon on any grounds. The Beretta is a well made, and proven weapon with far better control characteristics than the Glock. It is a bulkier gun than most 9mm's, but makes up for it with speed and consistancy. Beretta makes a .40 version of the 92, but I'm not sure if they offer it in DA/SA. I've had lots of experience shooting lots of pistols in lot's of matches (mostly combat simulation speed matches), and the Beretta 92 is still my favorite. Granted, most of my matches were military, and the Beretta was my only option. The only gun that was really even competitive with the Beretta was the Browning Hi-Power clones that some of the international teams shot, and a few Sig P226's that the Air Force brought. We always had a few law enforcement groups, and special ops teams with Glocks, but they just couldn't maintain very good accuracy at speed with the violent muzzle snap.

:barf:

Try going to a pistol competition were shooters can choose what they want to shoot. At any IDPA competition you will see 10 to 1 Glocks over any other pistol design. Glocks have proven themselves time and time again to be one of the most reliable and long lasting firearms available. Long after the Beretta, HP's and Sigs have worn out, a Glock will still be going strong.


Dave

[Dave T]

We always had a few law enforcement groups, and special ops teams with Glocks, but they just couldn't maintain very good accuracy at speed with the violent muzzle snap.

gsf,

I'm still trying to figure out the above. Generally, for a given caliber Glocks will give a lighter or easier felt recoil than other models. This is because they are generally a little wider, meaning the recoil is spread over a wider area of the hand...and the plastic frame (OK, polymer frame - LOL) acts as a giant shock absorber because if flexes with the slide's movement.

Oh, and to the original post, it would be more realistic to compare the Beretta 92 to the Glock 17 or at least the G22.

Dave

[MLeake]

The Beretta 92 is ultra-controllable in 9mm, and comfortable in .40; this is partly due to its heft.

The Glock 23 is snappy but not uncomfortable in .40; this is partly due to its light weight.

Both have big fat grips.

For me, the Beretta would be the better range and HD gun, but the Glock would be the easier CCW.

Then again, neither would be my personal first choice for either function.

[comn-cents]

Nowhere Man "Glocks have proven themselves time and time again to be one of the most reliable and long lasting firearms available."

That's some funny stuff. They won't outlast any other quality firearm. I've heard of more Glocks blowing up than any other gun.

As for Glock over Beretta. I like that you can put the safety on, on the Beretta and rack a round in and it's still on safe. I like the manual safety also.
Glock doesn't fit my hand very well but I can say the same for the Beretta. The Vertec version fit my hand much better. Just my .02

[drrpg01]

Thanks for all the replies. I am actually more of a collector and range shooter. I do not carry a weapon on my person for SD. I only carry one in the car on road trips, and I use one for HD. I already have more than one gun for those purposes, so this is really just a pleasure buy. I am aware of the size difference between the two models. I don't find the larger Glocks to be very pleasing on the eye frankly, which is why I didn't include one in comparison to the Beretta. I am accustomed to shooting a snub 357 mag, so the snappy recoil isn't really a factor. I must say that the Beretta to me is a much nicer looking gun that can be dressed up with wood grips and so on. I just wanted to get some feedback about both models, and seems like folks are pretty evenly divided about them both being fine guns. Somebody mentioned a 45. I have also considered the Sig 220 elite, but a person could buy both a Glock and a Beretta for the same price as one Sig 220 elite, so I'm not really sure it's worth that.

[rsxr22]

SIG 220 ELITE---Get that! Sig's are amazing guns and the 220 is beautiful. I especially like their stainless SAO's for range/competition use.

IMO if you want a range gun go with a 220 in .45 or 226 in .40. I like Glocks more than Beretta's, and Sigs more than glocks

[Russ5924]

I have the Beretta 92 and from what you have said I would go with the 92 like my Glock but like the Beretta more:D

[Tim728]

Pretty much as other replies have said. This is a comparison of apples and oranges, both are great guns but very different. First off you are talking 2 differsnt calibers and 2 different sized pistols. My opinion is what will u use it for? the Glock 23 is a .40 and better for CCW as it is smaller while the 92 is a 9mm and all steel and much larger is a better range/home pistol. What is your intended use?

[KShaft]

If you want a range gun for shooting in a league or the like, get a Smith 686 or a Ruger GP100. The GP will maybe put you back 500 and the Smith $700 at most, and they will out shoot most fancy "match" Autos mechanically(sometimes even the crazy race guns just because of the heavy fixed barrel), and the SA trigger on both are amazing out of the box. a 4" is great, a 5" is perfect if you ask me, but 5" can be hard to find. Its like they skip it and go straight to 6", which for me is too long. Just a thought.

[JohnKSa]

It's been my experience that the Beretta 92 series pistols will outshoot a Glock by a bit. I'd typically give the Glocks an edge in durability but in your comparison I think the caliber difference may negate that advantage.

I find the Glock grip easier to deal with than the Beretta grip.

The Beretta is definitely better looking.
http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv206/JohnKSa/EII_newgrips_small.jpg

rjrivero's post made me do that... :D...the 92 is a 9mm and all steel...Aluminum frame. ;)

[IanS]

9mm is cheaper so you'll probably practice more with the Beretta.

The G23 is smaller and lighter so you'll more likely actually carry it.

Oh, I know. Glock 19.;)


Both great pistols that each have their loyal following. But they are so different and appeal to different shooters.

It's been my experience that the Beretta 92 series pistols will outshoot a Glock by a bit. Intrinsically that might be true but it was frustrating how I could never shoot my Beretta 92FS's as well as a Glock 9mm. I like the 92's but sometimes there are certain pistols that just don't seem agree with you. I've been having the same experience with my wife's S&W M&P. I like it but it doesn't seem to like me. I don't know what gives.:( I might buy another 92FS some day (my 3rd) and keep banging my head against the wall.

[swk314]

I have shot both and own the G23. The Beretta's grip is too thick for me to get a good grip on it.

[drrpg01]

KShaft - I know what you mean about the full-frame revolvers. I have an S&W mod 19 with a 4" barrel that will shoot the pants off of just about anything. Sounds like you're implying I should stick with revolvers. I could be persuaded to purchase a 5" S&W model 10 or something along those lines. I'm kinda trying to step outside my box and try something new, which for me would be the semi-auto world.

[Nowhere Man]

comn-cents wrote;
That's some funny stuff. They won't outlast any other quality firearm. I've heard of more Glocks blowing up than any other gun.


My first thought, was to tell you to prove it. Common sense (:rolleyes:) would tell me when there are 5 times as many, or more, Glocks being used and abused every day, there's bound to be more failures.


Dave

[ShipWreck]

I have a Glock 17 and a Beretta 92FS.

My 92FS is my carry gun. With a good kydex IWB holster - it hides just as well as the HK 45USPc I was carrying for a year before I swopped over to the Beretta. The grip lengthw as the same - it was just the barrel difference.

I like my Glock a lot at the range. But I just prefer the beretta

http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g320/mistershipwreck/Beretta-89000-1.jpg

[45Gunner]

Just throwing in my 2 cents....

I find that the Beretta is heavier than the Glock which makes the Glock more desirable for CCW. However, both are good weapons and again, it comes down to personal taste. One mans trash.......

[amd6547]

I have owned a Glock 23, and never shot with the accuracy I am used to from other service pistols.
I currently own a Beretta 92FS and love it. It is my main HD weapon.
And, to the guy who says Glocks will still be shooting when Browning HiPowers have worn out...I have owned and shot HiPowers that were NAZI surplus, and Canadian Inglis Hipowers that came from China. Pistols that fought in WWII and, in the case of the Inglis, maybe a revolution or two. Both functioned perfectly and shot accurately. When a Glock has achieved that, let me know.

[comn-cents]

Nowhere Man "My first thought, was to tell you to prove it."
Prove what. What you said about Glocks? O ya you can't :eek: That would by your opinion and nothing more.

O ya five times as many Glocks out there? Hasn’t the XD been the number one selling gun for 4 or 5 years now? I think it has.

[Oldjarhead]

I have shot the m92 in the Military for years, and have carried the Glock m23 for years as an LEO. The m92 is not a bad weapon, but for me the 9mm has a very spotty reputation for stopping ability. The .40 caliber is used by seventy-five percent of law enforcement in the US. It has a lot of stats on it, since it has been around now for about twenty years. It has been a good stopper, with ballistics almost the same as the .45acp. The Glock m23 is great for uniform and concealed carry. I have put about three thousand rounds through my m23, without a single malfunction. I'd say choose the Glock.

[JohnKSa]

O ya five times as many Glocks out there? Hasn’t the XD been the number one selling gun for 4 or 5 years now? I think it has.ATF's stats for 2007 show Glock USA manufacturing about 4x more autopistols than Springfield Armory. 61,703 to 13,687

Neither one of them is in the running for first.

S&W made nearly a third of a million autopistols and Ruger came in second with around 140,000. Sig was third.

[comn-cents]

JohnKSa ATF's stats for 2007 show Glock USA manufacturing about 4x more autopistols than Springfield Armory. 61,703 to 13,687

Neither one of them is in the running for first.

S&W made nearly a third of a million autopistols and Ruger came in second with around 140,000. Sig was third.

Thanks John good to know.

[rjrivero]

It's been my experience that the Beretta 92 series pistols will outshoot a Glock by a bit. I'd typically give the Glocks an edge in durability but in your comparison I think the caliber difference may negate that advantage.

I find the Glock grip easier to deal with than the Beretta grip.

The Beretta is definitely better looking.

http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv206/JohnKSa/EII_newgrips_small.jpg
rjrivero's post made me do that...
I like that Elite II. Very nice. Did the grip screws come with hex heads? I would rather have them than the slotted screws that came on my 92FS Inox back in "the day."

[Nowhere Man]

I still stand by my statement that Glock manufactures many more pistols than any other manufacturer, including S&W and Ruger.

You've only listed Glock pistols made in the USA. What about foriegn manufacture?


Dave

[QBall45]

If this were my choice...

I'd go with the Beretta. Its a 9mm. I find that the 40 is to snappy. So for me its 9 or 45. I also like the manual safety.

Not knockin the glock. It just don't work for me. Grip angle is wrong & no manual external safety.

Chose the one you like best. Their both fine choices.

[Homerboy]

I have shot the m92 in the Military for years, and have carried the Glock m23 for years as an LEO. The m92 is not a bad weapon, but for me the 9mm has a very spotty reputation for stopping ability. The .40 caliber is used by seventy-five percent of law enforcement in the US. It has a lot of stats on it, since it has been around now for about twenty years. It has been a good stopper, with ballistics almost the same as the .45acp. The Glock m23 is great for uniform and concealed carry. I have put about three thousand rounds through my m23, without a single malfunction. I'd say choose the Glock.

Probably 75-80% (at least) of PD's use the Crown Vic as their patrol car. So I guess that's the best car out there?


I own THREE 92's. I agree they aren't so great for carry, but you can get the 92 Centurion which is the same frame as a 92 but a shorter barrel and slide, or Beretta 92 Compact, which has the Centurion frame and barrel, plus a shorter grip. They carry far better than a 92 standard. I have owned 2 Glocks and sold them both. Other than not liking polymer or striker fired in general, I find Glocks to be superior in only a few areas :weight (since they're polymer), Tennifer finish (My Glock 19 looked almost new the day i sold it after being my duty gun for 10 years. Bumped around a lot, but still looked great), and cost. They lack the refined feel and pride of ownership that the 92 has. rack the slie on a 92 and it feels like it's rolling on ball bearings. without fail, every new shooter I have taken to the range with my 92, SIG 226, Glock, or S&W, has always said "OOH! This is nice" after shooting my 92.

Beretta is a class above Glock, period.

[Homerboy]

I still stand by my statement that Glock manufactures many more pistols than any other manufacturer, including S&W and Ruger.

You've only listed Glock pistols made in the USA. What about foriegn manufacture?


Come on! The Beretta M9 is the standard sidearm for one of the biggest military forces in the world. No way does Glock crank out more guns.

[Snakum]

I used the 92 with Uncle Sam and I own a G23 now. I'll take the .40 cal stopping power and Glock reliability any day. But if it were a beauty contest a two-tone stainless 92 with nicely figured wood grips would be numero uno. The Glock has to be the butt-ugliest handgun ever conceived. :p

[JohnKSa]

Come on! The Beretta M9 is the standard sidearm for one of the biggest military forces in the world. No way does Glock crank out more guns. The total number of Beretta M9 pistols delivered to the U.S. armed forces to date (according to a quote from American Rifleman TV) is under 600,000. That's a lot, but S&W makes that many in only about 2 years. I don't know what Glock's total world-wide annual sales figures look like, but it was recently reported that they had reached the 5 million sales mark since they started manufacturing pistols. It wouldn't surprise me to find that Beretta and Glock have roughly similar sales figures.I still stand by my statement that Glock manufactures many more pistols than any other manufacturer, including S&W and Ruger.I guess it's possible but I can't find any reasonable way to make the comparison without having to make too many assumptions. I can't find annual global manufacturing figures for Glock.I like that Elite II. Very nice. Did the grip screws come with hex heads? I would rather have them than the slotted screws that came on my 92FS Inox back in "the day."Thanks! It's really not an EII anymore if you want to get technical... :D


The grips are modified Hogue aluminum grips and the grip screws are also aftermarket but I can't remember where I got them for certain.
The barrel is a standard stainless 92FS barrel instead of the Elite II bbl.
The controls and trigger bar have been changed to stainless/NP3
The mag release is a stainless oversize Beretta mag release.
The rear sight is an adjustable sight made by LPA.
The trigger is a Langdon Tactical Speedbump trigger.
The plastic recoil spring guide has been replaced with a stainless steel guide.
The D-spring has been swapped out for a standard weight hammer spring.
The trigger spring has been replaced by an "INS" trigger spring.

[KShaft]

drrpg01,

I was coming from the angle that you wanted a range type gun, and it seemed like you didnt want to go to high for price. So I put down what I felt what was the best option.

I didnt know you had some revolvers already. Sooooo.....

Ive owned 4 Berettas. A centurion 96, which I didnt like.
Then, a Vertec, which shot great! Then I got this 92M model. Haha. Man, If you had me pick between that and a SIG 229, I love the SIG, but Id probably get the 92M.
Its a single stack 9mm centurion sized Beretta. It was sweet. I now have a 96D. Well to be honest Ive owned probably 4 or 5 times more Glocks. They just fit my hand better. I can recommend either without hesitation. I think the 92 is nicer, smoother shooting, and more mechanically accurate to be sure. However, you cant carry it concealed.

I think youd really like the 92fs.

[drrpg01]

I think I would like a 92 with some exotic wood grip replacements. I might hold out for a sig 220 elite. Speaking of the revos, I took my model 19 S&W to the range today. It is crazy accurate, a beautiful gun, and the kind of power it can harness with a 357 mag out of a 4" barrel is pretty amazing too. My other revo is a ruger sp101 357 snub. I replaced the plastic grip inserts on that. It's a fine gun, but the front sights are a bit dark, and I need to get a fiber optic front sight replacement. If I ever wanted to carry concealed, I think the sp101 would perform quite well in that role.

[BusGunner007]

Just get a Studebaker...and be done with it! :D

[drrpg01]

What?

[BusGunner007]

...get something REALLY DIFFERENT!

If I didn't prefer the Beretta pistols in .40, I'd probably own a GLOCK 23.

As for different, a Browning Hi-Power in .40 would be very nice.
For CCW, maybe the SIG 239.

Sorry to throw you a curve with the Studebaker comment. ;)

[drrpg01]

Hah, ok, gotcha. Yeah, I'm all for different. My favorite guns as far as appearance are the s&w revo models from about 1960 to 1985 or so. Model 10, model 36, you get the idea. I just hate to ALWAYS show up at the range with a revo. Makes me look a little too old school. So how about sig 220 elite vs Beretta 92? Granted there is a huge caliber difference here. Leaving the Glock out, anybody have any comments on that?

[MLeake]

is actually not uncomfortable in a good IWB holster; the Beretta 92 really needs OWB, it's just a bit too thick in the slide and grip.

Either pistol requires some effort to conceal.

The P220 has an alloy frame, and is lighter and more comfortable to carry overall, but as you noted there's a caliber difference, and with that a capacity difference.

You own other handguns, so you know .45acp is getting ridiculously expensive lately.

Having owned both handguns, (not the Elite but an older, German P220; and not the full-size, but the Centurion Model 92), plus having done a reasonably amount of shooting with the M9, I'd say the accuracy potential of the two is about even; the DA trigger on the older SIG was much nicer than the DA on the Berettas, but the current SIG trigger doesn't have as much of an advantage; the Beretta, being heavier and firing a lighter caliber, is slightly easier to shoot rapidly, but the SIG is no slouch.

So, from my perspective, the SIG is more comfortable to carry, and slightly easier to conceal; however, both pistols are fairly large and both require some effort and a good holster/belt combo to conceal well and comfortably. The Beretta may be easier to shoot quickly, by fractions of a second. The SIG has a slightly better DA trigger.

The P220 does have one definite advantage (for some people) - the grip is not as big as the grip on the M9. I have big hands, so neither one is a problem, but I know a lot of people who don't like the Beretta's double column grip contour.

As always, try to find an example of each at a range, preferably among the rentals, so you can see which fits better, and find out which one shoots better for you.

[JohnKSa]

The P220 has an alloy frame...So does the Beretta 92.

[MLeake]

the Beretta 92 does have an alloy frame.

It just doesn't feel like it, due to a) higher perceived weight (CON) and b) slightly less muzzle rise (PRO).

The SIG P220 weighs in at just over 30.4 oz with empty magazine; 8 rounds of 230gr ammo weigh in at approximately 6.1oz, for a total weight of 36.5oz. The Beretta 92 is 34.4 empty; 15 rounds of 115gr ammo weigh in at approximately 6.24oz, so call the loaded weight of the Beretta 92 40.6oz.

So the Beretta is heavier by 4.1oz, or slightly more than 10%. To me, it actually feels heavier, but while that weight can be annoying on the belt, it's nice when shooting.

[roy reali]

Some of you are stating that you prefer one pistol for range shooting and one for CCW. Shouldn't both guns be the same? Shouldn't you use your carry weapon as often as possible for target practice?

[JohnKSa]

That would be true if my primary reason for owning firearms was self-defense. It's not.

I own and shoot firearms because I love shooting. It happens that the skills I learn and the firearms I own may come in handy one day for self-defense but that's not my primary focus.

[drrpg01]

Same here - I am a collector and shooter primarily. Don't even have a CCW license at the moment. Do have one prepared for home defense or when I'm traveling on a road trip in a car, but don't carry one on my person.

[l8apex]

It really depends on your deployment. CCW, HD, IDPA etc. You also have two different calibers. You first have to decide on how you will deploy this pistol then decide on which caliber gets the job done for you. Answer those questions and then it should be clear.

Both are very capable, as most modern pistols are.

[shortwave]

Another vote for the Berreta. Both mine are older,accurate,smooth operating and extremely reliable . One is a nine, the other a forty. I prefer the external safety and ergonomics I can`t get out of Glocks.

[MLeake]

Roy, that's not a bad idea in principle, but it's not the easiest to execute in practice.

Whatever my CCW gun is for a given time period (factors that influence this are location and climate, more than anything), I'll shoot at least 50 rounds through it at any given range session, and often as not more like 100-200. However, the bulk of my shooting is with my S&W model 18 revolver, because I can afford to shoot a LOT more rounds through it. .22LR is still fairly cheap.

Besides, I have never had a problem transitioning from DA to SA to DAK. It just doesn't bother me. Trigger control is trigger contol; keeping the focus on the front sight is keeping the focus on the front sight; balance is balance, breath control is breath control.

I do agree that carrying a CCW that one hardly ever practices with is a very bad idea.

[shortwave]

+1 MLeake. All handgun range sessions always end with running a box or three of ammo through my CCW. In winter when I`m about to switch up to my winter carry, its re-awareness time. My winter carry will be one of the guns used mostly in those sessions.

[Nightowl]

I have a Beretta 92FS and must say it is very comfortable. I believe it is the large grip that fits nicely in my hand. I also have a friend who swears by the Glocks. Soooo, again personal preference will prevail.

[BusGunner007]

...now, there's a NICE GUN!

It occurred to me that a trip via the internet to BerettaForum.net would be a good trip.
Check out the Centurions ROCK! thread.
http://www.berettaforum.net/vb/showthread.php?t=39412

There's a bunch of Centurion 'D' SlickSlide models for sale at this time.
That would be a superb choice for a sidearm.

If you get a good price on a used pistol like that, even spending a bit of $$$ to get it 'personalized' with a refinish; grips; etc. would still be a good deal.

That's my recommendation.

The Beretta Centurion 96FS .40 was my first 'real' handgun.
As I like to say, "Hogue & Trijicon" ... added to the enjoyment.

Worth a look-see.:D

[rjrivero]

If I could find a centurion I'd buy it. There is little doubt about it.

[drrpg01]

I saw a Glock 23 in a store a couple days ago. It looked pretty darn cool actually.

[Homerboy]

Cenurions are around. I got one LNIB for $550 shipped, and I saw one recently on gunbroker that sold for $575. As much as I love ALL of my 92's (I have a standard 92 and an INOX as well as my Centurion), I gotta admit that the Centurion is better balanced and just better looking.

I would never buy another Glock. Life is too short to own ugly guns.

[IanS]

I would never buy another Glock. Life is too short to own ugly guns.

Indeed they are ugly little beasts. No one cares to see softly lit pictures of them. No once will write sonnets or odes about their beauty. Even their owners abuse them like a mangy mutt tied to a post guarding a junk yard. Occasionally beating them and dragging them behind a pick up truck. A sad abusive thankless existence for most of their lives while their prettier sisters enjoy a more pampered existence and proudly shown off to their neighbors. Slander, abuse, and derision is their daily lot. But they don't complain.:( They endure.

A real Cinderella story if ever there was one.

[hickok45]

Unless things have changed dramatically, I don't think you'll see many Berettas at IDPA or IPSC matches, where people are free to choose the best production guns on the market. I think Glocks still dominate, but I don't make them much anymore, so I could be wrong to some extent.

That said, I rather miss the Beretta 92 I had in the 80s. It was way too big for a 9mm, I thought, and I didn't like the difference between the first and second shot, but it does feel really good in the hand and is totally reliable.

It's a pretty cool gun, even though it's not my first choice.

[IanS]

Beretta 92FS was my first handgun too (Technically BHP but I only had it for a short time). The fact the 92FS was just adopted by the U.S. Military and featured in the Die Hard/Lethal Weapon was a big selling point at the time. The way it looks is also a big draw for initial first time buyers. Luckily, the gun is more than its looks or reputation. It is a supremely reliable self defense pistol. The fact that is it large, thick, and heavy for a 9mm are the most obvious draw backs compared to more svelte DA/SA pistols. But if its not an issue it is a handgun I often recommend to others. The fact that they're ubiquitous and Beretta probably won't stop making them or their parts anytime soon is a big plus.

[Father Time]

I have shot both and find that I MUCH prefer the beretta over the glock. Part was because the beretta fit my hands better, part was because the beretta is all metal and has a saftey. And most of it was the beretta was easier to shoot. My groups with the 92 where half the size of my groups with the glock.
But thats just my two cents.

[drrpg01]

So what's the scoop on bullet weights with 9mm and 40 S&W? What are preferred loads here? 180 gr out of 40? 125 or 147 gr out of 9?

[Firepower!]

You cannot comapre the two from a practical aspect. One is STF and polymer in 40, and other is all metal, DA/SA in 9mm????

[drrpg01]

I wasn't really comparing the two ballistically or tactically. I was talking more about people's opinions as to their reliability and just subjectively which one people like better. I realize that the 40 S&W is clearly ballistically superior, and I've said that I'm aware of the size and weight difference. This is by no means my first pistol :) I am a collector and range shooter primarily. I don't really buy a handgun trying to fill a particular niche such as CCW. I couldn't carry in the environments where I spend 95% of my time out of the house anyway. What is STF though? Not familiar with that.

[headbangerJD]

:D but only because I bought one today :D

[evan1293]

For just range shooting, it really doesnt matter, and in fact, I'd probably say go with the 92fs to save money on ammo. For defensive shooting the glock is a better choice. The glock is basically point and shoot, no safeties, no decockers, just finger on the trigger and finger off the trigger. The beretta will require you to either have to disengage the safety (depending on how you carry it) or at least have a long, heavy pull to begin with, followed by ligher, mushier pulls. After the shooting stops you have to remember to decock and deactivate the safety (again, if you carry safety off).

In my opinion, thats just too much work for a carry gun. I've owned both. I still have a beretta which I like, but not for a carry gun / duty gun.

That being said, the beretta shoots real soft and is a tack driver. I guess it all depends on what your looking for.

[BusGunner007]

I like to shoot .40 / 180-gr. ; it was designed for that weight projectile in a 1:16" twist of the barrel, I believe.

SHTF stands for: "Fecal Matter" Hits The Fan.

The 'D' model 'Slick Slide' Beretta Centurions on the market recently are from various LE Agencies that have traded them in for something else.
Their condition varies.
They, too, are 'point and shoot' but are DAO ( double-action-only ) with the same pull for every shot.
No safety lever.

"Just like a GLOCK!!!" :p

In other words, the Beretta 'D' will work similarly to the GLOCK in that regard.

[Larry V]

I Changed the guiderods and springs to stainless steel and my 23 now has the recoil of a Glock 19. These changes have made it my carry weapon over the Beretta.

Glock 19
Glock 21SF
Glock 22
Glock 23
Glock 26
Glock 27
Glock 30 SF
S&W MP 45
S&W MP 40
S&W MP 40C
HK 45 USP
Springfield XD M 40 and XD 45 ACP Service

[N.H. Yankee]

Oddly I just got in from my range outback test firing a Beretta 92FS a friend bought used for $400.00, though the gun looks new. I have to say it is a bit more accurate than the Glock 40 I owned. I also noticed that it handles recoil quite well compared to most of my other 9mm pistols.

I was able to shoot three 5 shot groups, getting a 15 shot 3 inch group at 25 yards from a solid rest using 124gr ball from 3 different brands. Offhand firing as fast as I could the sights back on target, I got a 6 shot 4 inch group at 50 feet, Zero malfunctions.

Having owned a Glock 23 and testing this Beretta, my vote goes to Beretta. I think the ergonomics of the 92 are better suited for me which helps getting back on target faster and more accurately.

[Squidward1965]

After handling a Beretta 92 9mm for many years in the Navy, I have found that I have no desire to change from it, being my primary handgun of choice. I am extremely accurate with it. I've gotten past the extra weight and size aspect. The external safety is a concern, and yes, I have forgotten a few times to take the safety off while firing at the range. I am getting better at remembering the safety, the more I practice. I changed out the polymer spring guide with a stainless steel one, and use Mec-Gar 20 rnd mags.:D

That being said, I have chosen a Glock 26 as my ankle backup. Glock makes fine handguns and I have come to respect and love them as well. I like the fact that there are not any extra safeties built into them, just grab, aim, and shoot. Also, I chose a 26 so I would not have to carry different ammo. Glocks are ugly, that's OK because I keep it hidden. Hah! I think the Beretta is much more serious and intimidating looking, worn open for all to see! :rolleyes:
http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o226/manderson2112/MyBeretta92FS2.jpg
http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o226/manderson2112/MyBeretta92FS.jpg

[Kraziken]

I like the discussion on this thread, but I don't see too many people talking about the natural pointing grip.

With the Beretta, I can switch to Sig, 1911, what have you, and most of those guns point pretty naturally for me.

I think Glock is a great weapon, but I can't stand the grip angle. I guess you can train yourself to get used to it, or maybe switch easily back and forth? For that reason I won't buy a Glock, except maybe in consideration in the future, I may buy one of those modified Glocks, like a Robar, where the grip angle is changed. It just points high to me.