Is the M9/92FS the most dependable handgun in the world?

[peterparkerv2]

On their website they say "there is no pistol today that is as durable, reliable, dependable, easy to use, safe and accurate as the Beretta M9"

It also says "The Beretta 92F survived exposure to temperatures from −40 to 140 °F (−40 to 60 °C), being soaked in salt water, being dropped repeatedly on concrete, and being buried in sand, mud and snow. Additionally, the 92F proved a MRBF (mean rounds before failure) of 35,000 rounds."

That sounds pretty impressive. Sure the gun is big and heavy, but as far as reliability is it the best?

[4 Paws]

Easier to use or more dependable than a Glock? I would think not.

[Corrections Cop]

Check out what this guy has done to a Glock.

http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=462537

I would imagine that most companies would say that their pistol is the best. I'm not saying the Berretta is or is not the best but their are a lot of quality pistols out their.

I am a big time Sig Guy, but since I got my G26 I do like it. I also shoot the G22 at work.

[pappybug]

I don't know much about the Glock personally. However the only 2 9MM. pistols to pass the XM9 trials in the 80s were the M92 Barretta and the SIG Sauer P226. The only reason the US military went with the Barretta over SIG was Barretta quoted a lower cost per pistol price than SIG. Despite the results the SEALs used part of there budget and bought them anyway

[TunnelRat]

I don't know much about the Glock personally. However the only 2 9MM. pistols to pass the XM9 trials in the 80s were the M92 Barretta and the SIG Sauer P226. The only reason the US military went with the Barretta over SIG was Barretta quoted a lower cost per pistol price than SIG. Despite the results the SEALs used part of there budget and bought them anyway

Actually the P226 failed the mud test.

[LockedBreech]

What fanboys of brand X, Y, and Z don't care to hear is that our selection of handguns is so broad with such great quality today that it's essentially impossible to ever definitively say one is "the best".

Beretta is my favorite brand, and I certainly believe the 92FS/M9 is one of the most reliable, accurate, and dependable production service arms in the world. Absolutely my first choice. However, can I say with anything resembling objective proof that it's better than the Sig 226, Glock 17, HK USP, etc. for anyone but me? No I can't. Sig, Glock, and HK owners can't say so either, nor can fans of any other brand. Not even owners of a $3,000 Wilson Combat.

As for the website claim, you'll find similar claims on all firearm sites, even Taurus, which has a reputation a far cry away from service-grade reliable. While the advertisements may have many true statements contained within them, they are in final analysis advertisements and puffery and should be read as such.

We have so many great choices today. All the time spent debating which is best should be spent deciding which ones are best for you.

[SHE3PDOG]

I don't know if it is or not, but it is most certainly one of the most tested handguns in the world if not the most tested handgun in the world after going through the XM9 trials, being in military service for so long, and Beretta's exquisite testing facilities.

If you ever get bored, you should look up the way some companies test their new designs. Some companies are pretty insane with it.

[9x19]

Not in my experience.

The only pistol I'd be comfortable saying that about is the 9mm Glock.

NONE of the pistols submitted to the USAFs first XM9 trials passed... but the legiscritters wanted a different answer, so they used t h e same results and just adjusted the criteria until two pistols passed... which led S&W to file suit and that forced a new round of tests.

[Kevin_d77]

No.

[Tactical Jackalope]

Negative. Not by any means at all.

Tunnelrat, it did? The P226 is back to being my main sidearm again. I know I won't put it in mud.. But still sucks to hear that. I want to Google it now.

I'm at 4,700+ rounds through my SIG with only 4 malfunctions. God I love this thing... Anyways. I'll Google it.

The SF guys at work had the M9 issued to them and they gave the select few who actually carried a sidearm extra locking blocks. When a rental M9 at the local range went down and I brought that up they said it like it was a very common thing, like why am I surprised.

So that'sa big no no for me. It locked the gun up..

[TunnelRat]

To my understanding yes. The results of that were thrown out because the DoD wanted at least two bidders at the end. Not saying the P226 is "bad" by any stretch, but the trials did lead to the so-called "mud rails" on the P226 for a bit that were scalloped to supposedly mitigate the issue.

Hating on the 92FS is about as American it seems as the rivalry between the 1911 and a Glock. IMO, which is worth what you paid, there are pistols that are just as if not more reliable with longer service intervals than the 92FS. That said it's a pretty decent gun. A lot of of folks have negative impressions from the ones they handled in the military. Those pistols still function despite a serious lack of TLC and years in the inventory. I can't think it's all bad.

[Tactical Jackalope]

Gotcha, thanks for the response. I can't Google the test results. What was the name of the trials?

[JohnKSa]

What you probably want to read is the GAO report on the trials.

http://gao.gov/assets/210/208564.pdf

[RX-79G]

There's nothing wrong with a Glock in general, but the idea that they are somehow more reliable than all the quality guns on the market when the Glock came out is pure marketing. I've seen plenty of jams with Glocks.

Berettas are ridiculously feed reliable. They feed directly into the chamber, the linear motion of the barrel is less disruptive and the ejection port is the entire top of the pistol. Plus, Beretta mags are about as good as they get.

That sounds good on paper, but this is still a gun that ended up the service pistol of quite a few active militarys, including South Africa and France. South Africans don't mess around with junk, and the French had previously only adopted domestic designs - yet they both built 92 factories. I think that really says something.

[TennJed]

You said most dependable HANDGUN, so I say a Ruger Blackhawk

[lamarw]

It is easy for some to point to Glock, but Glock never entered into the competition for the U.S. Military Pistol.

I have to assume they either did not have a pistol meeting the requirement or felts as though their product could not compete.

I have nothing against Glock other than its visual appeal to me. I can not praise or bash it since I have absolutely zero experience with one.

Can one of the Glock experts tell me why Glock chose not to compete?

I am sure the commercial price for the Beretta 92 series is helped tremendously by the sheer quantity of pistols produced for the military. The same would of helped any other company having won such a huge contract.

There would of been plenty of incentive for Glock to compete. Why did they choose not to?

[JohnKSa]

I have to assume they either did not have a pistol meeting the requirement...Correct. There was a firing pin energy requirement that I do not believe Glock could have met. Common implementations of striker fired guns usually give up firing pin energy compared to common implementations of hammer-fired designs.

[magnut]

the 92 design is an all time favorite of mine but they are not bullet proof. Locking blocks fail, slides fail, and even frames. properly maintained though they are about as reliable as you can get. There are a whole host of other guns that can fit into this category though.

Toughest designs I have seen probably go to the Makarov and the HK VP70z. VP70z s can fire even the hotest loads without problems by design. If Hi-points were made from steel and had good quality magazines they would probably run forever. The problem they have is that of materieal. Slides wear out and barrels shoot loose. The design is very sound though and they can run dirtier than almost any pistol I have encountered.

A well maintained Beretta though is very very dependable. You just have to know what your dealing with.

[iraiam]

I would have a hard time labeling anything the "most dependable" I would say that the 92 is certainly among the most dependable, it will digest 9mm ammunition that other pistols will choke on, for example; max COAL 147 grain ammunition. They will also endure extensive use of 9mm NATO an 9mm +P ammunition.

[kraigwy]

I don't know if the Beretta 92FS is the most reliable gun in the world. I haven't shot all the guns in the world.

I do know mine is extremely reliable, its the only 9mm that doesn't care what junk cast bullets I load. I've shot thousands of rounds threw mine with only one hiccup. Seems someone forgot to put a primer in one of the cases so I got a failure to fire.

It fits my hand perfectly, but then again all hands are not created equal.

I didn't have to buy another barrel so I can shoot cast bullets.

One thing I do know, if every one liked the same gun, life would be boring because there would only be one gun out there.

[TailGator]

What fanboys of brand X, Y, and Z don't care to hear is that our selection of handguns is so broad with such great quality today that it's essentially impossible to ever definitively say one is "the best".

I think that is the key. I will refer to a pistol as being top-tier, but not The Best. I like Beretta a lot, and my 92FS Inox is a gem to shoot. But to say it is the most reliable is to say that other pistols should be expected to fail, and I have found others, including my Glock 26, to be equally reliable. There is the occasional lemon from any manufacturer, but the major players are producing extremely reliable pistols these days.

[10mm4ever]

In my experience nothing is more reliable, not even w. german SIG's.

[jmr40]

I've owned a couple and don't particularly like them. But the Beretta has to be very near the top of my list for dependability and accuracy. if I'm buying, it won't be Beretta, but If I'm issued one I'll use it with complete confidence.

Given reasonable maintenance and care I don't think you'll find anything that will beat one. There are probably several that will equal it though. But I'm absolutely convinced a Glock will withstand more abuse and still work.

[Gats Italian]

You do realize you are over analyzing marketing copy?

What competent marketer fails to claim that their products are the "most" or "best" at whatever?

Is the 92FS/M9 the most reliable pistol ever made? They have stats, like the MRBF one that suggests it might be, but it's still just a claim.

I agree with the poster who said it was a Tier One duty sidearm. There are only a handful of sidearms with extensive combat records in that tier.

[pete2]

The 92FS may be the 2nd most reliable, the S&W revolver is the most reliable handgun in the world, the 92FS is the second best. I've seen Glocks, XDs, 1911s, malfunction, haven't seen The FS92(including the one I own) malfunction.

Just based on my experience.

[Slamfire]

My gun club was briefed by the Program Manager (PM) who successfully brought the 9mm handgun project through source selection. The whole process was very interesting and something that should be discussed as a case study for those involved in Government procurements.

The PM had a number of problems, one of which was that everyone in the chain of command had his own opinion on what was the best 9mm sidearm. There was also an amazing number of high level individuals exceptionally interested in this procurement. You are talking about a Colonel briefing a room so full of stars that you would have thought it a planetarium.

The money interests behind the selection of a US service arm were also numerous and all of them knew that if their handgun was selected they were going to be in the money big time. Americans like to have the same firearms that the services carry, and incidentally, that means a lot in foreign military sales.

As an example of how the money interests can delay or change a procurement selection, the replacement for the KC 135 is a great example. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KC-X http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_KC-46_Pegasus

Congress shut down the 45 ACP replacement program a number of times and it was a “scandal” back in the 80’s.

Anyway, at the end of it, the SIG and the Beretta pistol were evaluated to be equal in performance, but the lifecycle costs of the SIG, primarily due to the high price of SIG of parts, was higher than the Beretta, and thus, the Beretta pistol was chosen.

Talking to veterans, once they got good magazines, they were happy with the reliability of their Beretta’s, not so happy with the 9mm round. Congress mandated the 9mm round, given the clueless idiocy of Congress thoughout the centuries, it was one of their typical bad mandates. (I think the number of good Congressional mandates could be could be counted on one hand, with a few fingers missing) Given good quality ammunition and good quality parts/magazines, the M92 is a reliable pistol. It has been fielded world wide and that should mean something. I think the Beretta a fine pistol, just too complicated to disassemble beyond the field strip stage.

[JohnKSa]

Anyway, at the end of it, the SIG and the Beretta pistol were evaluated to be equal in performance...Per the GAO report, the SIG failed the performance tests (specifically the dry mud test) but was allowed to continue to the bid phase because it was considered to be a good pistol in spite of the failure, because the evaluators weren't sure that the dry mud test was a truly practical, real-world test, and, more importantly, so there would be a competitive bid (at least two companies bidding against each other) to help keep the final price down.... lifecycle costs of the SIG, primarily due to the high price of SIG of parts, was higher than the Beretta...Correct. Many people think that the SIG lost out because the SIG pistols were more expensive than Beretta's. In reality, Beretta charged more for their pistols in their bid but beat SIG on magazine and spare parts costs.Talking to veterans, once they got good magazines, they were happy with the reliability of their Beretta’s...Correct again. Ironically, the military didn't go with Beretta's magazines initially. They went with a supplier called Checkmate which turned out to be a spectacularly poor decision.

[RX-79G]

Was that Checkmate's fault, or the fault of Army who mandated parkerizing the inside of the mag tube?

[JohnKSa]

I wasn't aware of that mandate.

Even assuming the mandate is fact, I would still have to say it's Checkmate's fault given that:

1. Subsequent suppliers have managed to make functional magazines within the bounds of the U.S. military's specifications.
2. Other magazine makers (not just for the M9/92FS) seem to be able to make functional parkerized magazines.

[AdamSean]

This is one of those debates that will never die. I have always been a Glock man. Love them. I recently had to get a pistol for security work that had a manual safety and a decocker so I went with the Beretta 92fs. I have not had it long, but as far as shootability, they are equal. As far as reliability and durability, I think 30+ years as the US Military's side arm has proven that. As long as a firearm has proven reliable by the individual shooter, it as all that is required for the actual individual. Its not about what the masses think. In my experience, both the Glock and the Beretta are top choices for a reliable and durable carry weapon. Shoot whichever one feels better to you and enjoy.

[RX-79G]

Along those lines, this was interesting:
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=235588

[tipoc]

The specifications that resulted in the selection of the M9 as the service sidearm of the U.S. Army, etc. were drawn up before Glock pistols existed.

The also specified that the guns have an external hammer, a decocker, be da/sa, have an alloy frame, hold more than 10 rounds and a number of other specific features that would have precluded the Glock just as they precluded the 1911 and other single action pistols.

tipoc

[JohnKSa]

Along those lines, this was interesting:Indeed it was. I remember reading that thread when it was new but (obviously) had forgotten the comment about the parkerizing.

I suspect that Checkmate learned some lessons and I imagine that their product line is better for the lessons learned.

Even so, I think I'll stand by my original analysis. Others have made parkerized magazines that work and Checkmate should have been able to do so as well.

[TXAZ]

In an attempt to directly answer PPv2 questions:
Is the M9/92FS the most dependable handgun in the world?
On their website they say "there is no pistol today that is as durable, reliable, dependable, easy to use, safe and accurate as the Beretta M9"

It also says "The Beretta 92F survived exposure to temperatures from −40 to 140 °F (−40 to 60 °C), being soaked in salt water, being dropped repeatedly on concrete, and being buried in sand, mud and snow. Additionally, the 92F proved a MRBF (mean rounds before failure) of 35,000 rounds."

That sounds pretty impressive. Sure the gun is big and heavy, but as far as reliability is it the best?

I used to develop products for a very large company you'd recognize. Depending upon the market needs delineated by the marketeers, we would look for specs to use to show a superior product. Product X may be more reliable at 90F using a standard, but inferior at the same temperature using a different test or standard. As such, you can have multiple products making very very similar claims about being 'the best', and they're all literally correct. All of these claims are run through more lawyers, engineers and marketeers than TFL has... :) and there is usually a very thick binder / disk folder with the raw test data showing superiority. Further, a manufacturer may run their and competitive products under scores of standardized test to find *the one* where they are superior.

Anyway, the answer is the Beretta claim is probably is an honest statement, based upon very specific criteria that the manufacturer's development and legal teams came up with. Yes, one was probably in a -40F environment with an internal temperature gauge. No spec on how slow or fast it was dropped to temperature or brought back up, or if it was a practical test at all. How high was the drop on concrete, twice from 1/4" or 1000 times from 100 feet? When it was buried in sand, mud and snow, was it all at once, or was it in a plastic bag when it was buried? (FYI there are companies that will develop and publish a specific testing regime to make your product look good vs. competitors when that test if formally run)

I believe the 92FS is a good weapon, and their testing was probably standards based (there are more mil-spec environmental standards than TFL has ...).
But unless you know the specific reliability testing regime and standards applied to the 92FS and competitors, it's hard to dispute most any claim like that.

[TunnelRat]

But unless you know the specific reliability testing regime and standards applied to the 92FS and competitors, it's hard to dispute most any claim like that.

If you read the GAO report you'll get a very good luck at the testing that was done. It's not really a secret. Now internal claims from Beretta, that's a different story. But in this case we do have third party test results.

[NavyVet1959]

You said most dependable HANDGUN, so I say a Ruger Blackhawk


And I would hazard to guess that a single shot breech load break action handgun (e.g the Thompson Contender) would be even more reliable. The less the number of moving parts, the higher the potential for reliability.

[RX-79G]

Even so, I think I'll stand by my original analysis. Others have made parkerized magazines that work and Checkmate should have been able to do so as well.Hey, no argument. The soldier who served in Korea made a pretty convincing case for Checkmate mags of some vintage being well out of spec, above and beyond the sand problem.

[Model12Win]

Frankly I think this thread is a lil' silly!

Almost every gun manu out there wants you to think their gun is the hottest things since freshly sliced baked bread, and they often resort to... exaggerations... to "prove" it. LOL! :D

[Mike38]

I'm at 4,700+ rounds through my SIG with only 4 malfunctions.

I’m right around that number with my Beretta 92FS and do not remember one malfunction. Not one.

Is the Beretta 92FS / M9 the most dependable handgun in the world? I can’t say that. But it’s equal to anything mentioned in this thread. Personal choice, pick one and have fun, be safe.

[herdman]

I don't have a M9, Sig P226, or Glock.

But, really what pistol in the last decade or so has prove themselves like the M9? Reality is it is the most proven battle tested pistol since the original 1911. Yes, there are Sig's out there, but not on as large a scale and they are typically with elite units(Seals, etc) in much smaller numbers. Most of those high speed units get what they want and just get another new weapon if something goes wrong. Yes, the GLOCK is out there with other militaries and police. But, with all due respect our troops have been in the thick of things far more than the other militaries. Many cops are not gun guys and their weapons are not in harsh conditions all the time(mud, sand, infantry unit, etc.)

Nobody knows how a GLOCK would do if they issued 500,000 of them and they went through a decade of war all over the world.

[Colt46]

Most reliable? I think a lot of firearms makers lay stake to 'Most reliable service pistol ever' verbiage.
Marketing.

[Gats Italian]

The specifications that resulted in the selection of the M9 as the service sidearm of the U.S. Army, etc. were drawn up before Glock pistols existed.

The also specified that the guns have an external hammer, a decocker, be da/sa, have an alloy frame, hold more than 10 rounds and a number of other specific features that would have precluded the Glock just as they precluded the 1911 and other single action pistols.

tipoc

This is simply not true.

The HKP7M13 did not have an external hammer. It was not DA/SA nor have an alloy frame. The Steyr GB was also an all steel handgun submitted for XM9.

The P80 (G17), was adopted by Austria in 1980. Plenty of time was available between then and the RFP for the definitive XM9 trials held a few years later.

[tipoc]

The initial discussions and guidelines for a replacement for the 1911 were carried out in 1948 and into the 1950s by the JSSAP. These called for the guidelines I mentioned. The plans were shelved. The guidelines as well, though they kept resurfacing.

These were rediscussed in the 1960s and again shelved.

In 1977 the discussion was revived. In 1978 the Air Force initiated a search and in 1979-80 the JSSAP began trials at Elgin AFB run by the Air Force. The older criteria were set aside. Unlike the case of the 1911, where the military in essence built the gun they wanted, this time they were looking at commercially available guns that could fit the role. So many of these were looked at and tested. These included the H&K VP70 and P9S, the Beretta 92S-1, Star Model 28, the ColtSSP, S&W 459A, three guns from FN (Hi-Power, a HP with a "fast action" da trigger and a HP based gun with a da/sa trigger. In these trials the Berretta finished strongly others not so much.

In Austria the military search for a new gun to replace the P-38 was announced in 1980. Gaston Glock decided to enter the contest in 1982. Within three months his team of consultants and he developed a gun, produced it and entered it in the trials. The Glock 17 was adopted by the Austrian Army in 1982. Glock had to gear up to produce them, expand, etc. All too early for the initial round of U.S. trials.

In 1981 the JSSAP held a new round of trials run by the Army. These were the XM9 tests. New criteria were introduced. Manufacturers were told to send da pistols only with da described as "the ability of the shooter to get a second strike on a malfunctioning primer without having to use his support hand to recock the hammer or reset the slide" ("Modern Beretta Firearms" page 105). The Army held to this definition of DA through all future testing. This required a hammer on the gun and a da/sa operation. They also required there be a hammer decocking ability that involved not using the trigger. There were a number of other considerations as well. The Army established 80 criteria for the guns to have and 72 were mandatory. It removed the Glock and S&W dao guns from consideration. They did allow the H&K P7M13 to enter waving the hammer requirements for it apparently. Only 4 guns were entered.

In 84 another round of trials were held. The stringent requirements from the Army tests were lessened. More guns were entered. Glock did not enter and would not have met all requirements if they had tried. It was from these trials that the Beretta and Sig were chosen.

While the military did allow the H&K P7M13 and the Styr GB to enter all other entries in the 84 XM9 trials had alloy frames, hammers, decockers, etc.

The XM10 trials were held in 87 following controversy over the previous rounds of testing. The Beretta M9 was retested. Because the Army wanted a double strike capability the Glock 17 was not acceptable again. S&W entered the upgraded 459. Ruger the P-85, FN the Browning safe action da/sa model, the CZ85 was entered and did well in initial tests but was unacceptable politically and on some technical points. Again the Beretta and teh Sig did well.

tipoc

[kcub]

was the 92 compact considered

[In memory of dad]

Love to read pure sillyness on here. If everybody remember or I just old it came down to beretta opened a plant here and where the cheapest of all per unit.
All where great handguns and most are still with us today except for two or so.
Is beretta the best? I think not but there great.

[JohnKSa]

If everybody remember or I just old it came down to beretta opened a plant here and where the cheapest of all per unit.Incorrect. I posted link to the GAO report in an earlier post.

1. Beretta actually charged more per pistol than SIG. It is true, however, that the overall cost of the Beretta bid was less due to the specific fact that they charged less for magazines than SIG. [Ironically, the U.S. later chose to use another magazine manufacturer. If you crunch the numbers from the GAO report, it turns out that the Beretta bid for pistols and parts (not including mags) was $63,009,711.06 while the SACO(SIG) bid for pistols and parts (again, excluding magazine costs) was $62,714,948.37 So, in reality, when you look at what the government actually bought from Beretta, the cost was actually higher than what SACO would have charged for the equivalent product delivery.]

2. "Cheapest of all" implies more than just two bids. In fact, all the other competitors failed the acceptance testing process. Even the SACO (SIG) entrant failed a component of the testing but was allowed to proceed to the bid portion of the competition so that there would be someone for Beretta to bid against. So there were only two bids submitted.

As for the plant in the U.S., that was an across the board requirement. The acceptance of any of the competitors would have mandated that they have, or open a manufacturing facility in the U.S. to produce the pistols and parts.Love to read pure sillyness on here.Interesting, isn't it. I have been marveling lately at how many people want to be taken seriously but won't even put in a minimum amount of effort on fact checking before posting.

In some cases, the information is already available on the thread they're responding to.

[flintlock62]

IMO, the H&K P30 is more dependable. A torture test was performed where over 94,000 rounds fired. The ergo's of the H&K beat both the Beretta, and the Glock.

[LockedBreech]

^ ergonomics are largely a subjective, personal criterion, not something that can be objectively measured.

[iMagUdspEllr]

Having now read the report it blows me away that Sig passed the wet mud test but failed the dry mud test. It blows me away even more that the 1911 was 100% in both wet and dry mud-testing.

This makes even less sense to me because the Sig had fewer malfunctions than the Beretta and much fewer serious malfunctions than the Beretta under normal shooting conditions.

Beretta (20 malfunctions)
Type 1: 10
Type 2: 1
Type 3: 9

Sig (12 malfunctions)
Type 1: 11
Type 2: 0
Type 3: 1

1911 (216 malfunctions)
Type 1: 180
Type 2: 11
Type 3: 25

What was the dried mud blocking in the Sig? Does anyone know why dry mud takes the Sig from most reliable to least reliable? Even in the wet mud testing Sig matched Beretta (98% vs 98%). Oh and why does mud (wet or dry) magically make a 1911 the most reliable pistol?

The report clearly shows that the M9 is the most reliable of all the handguns that competed in the trials. But, I would have to disagree that the M9 is the most dependable handgun in the world without having a type G version (decock only).

I know nobody seems to believe that people (even trained people) activate the safety accidentally when they work the slide on the Beretta... but it happens and you can Google plenty of video evidence of people either slowing down to rack the slide on their Beretta or accidentally activating the safety and then wasting time to deactivate it again. So, unless you buy or convert to a type G Beretta I wouldn't call it the most dependable handgun in the world... even if the reliability testing is outstanding.

P.S. The Beretta is the most reliable pistol in the world (without having official and comparable reliability testing data available for Glock pistols). Don't misinterpret my post.

[TunnelRat]

I know nobody seems to believe that people (even trained people) activate the safety accidentally when they work the slide on the Beretta... but it happens and you can Google plenty of video evidence of people either slowing down to rack the slide on their Beretta or accidentally activating the safety and then wasting time to deactivate it again. So, unless you buy or convert to a type G Beretta I wouldn't call it the most dependable handgun in the world... even if the reliability testing is outstanding.

With a Beretta I personally would either run it using the slide stop or the pinch and release method to release the slide. The issue with the safety comes from using the overhand method. No doubt you can accidentally engage the safety then.

[iMagUdspEllr]

@TunnelRat: That only works when you are loading the firearm from slide lock. If you have a malfunction you must work the slide using the "overhanded" method.

No matter what gun you have, they have all malfunctioned. You will have to work the slide overhanded in order to clear it.

Also, the "pinch and release" method is inferior to the overhanded method. The overhanded method is what is taught because you can grip the slide effectively even if the gun is wet or dirty.

I haven't seen people rack the slide with the pinch and release method, which is again, only effective if you are trying to release the slide from slide lock.

[Dirty_Harry]

I would put my M9 up against about anything. I have a little bit of everything.

I love how the Glock guys immediatly jump on the claim and can BS. Glock guys are annoying. The blind devotion gets old. Glocks are an excellent pistol, but they arent the best.

Who is?

Dont know, I dont think anyone ever will.

The m9 is one of the best looking pistols ever though.

[TunnelRat]

@TunnelRat: That only works when you are loading the firearm from slide lock. If you have a malfunction you must work the slide using the "overhanded" method.

No matter what gun you have, they have all malfunctioned. You will have to work the slide overhanded in order to clear it.

Also, the "pinch and release" method is inferior to the overhanded method. The overhanded method is what is taught because you can grip the slide effectively even if the gun is wet or dirty.

I haven't seen people rack the slide with the pinch and release method, which is again, only effective if you are trying to release the slide from slide lock.

You must? You mean it's physically impossible to do it otherwise? Nope, that's not true. It's certainly easy to use the overhand, but far from required.

Actually I have a few firearms that have yet to malfunction, most likely will but unless I cause one they currently don't. Not saying you shouldn't train for it, but saying all guns malfunctioned is a bit of a misnomer.

Never said the pinch and release was superior. I said it is merely a way to run a pistol with slide mounted safeties.

You're preaching to the choir about the overhand method. It's what I use. I don't even use the slide release on my HKs, even though it is a true slide release and not a slide stop. But the overhand method and the 92 are not good friends. This has to be taken into account when using that platform.

[iMagUdspEllr]

@Tunnel Rat: Using the slide catch/release to chamber a round is only possible from slide lock, yes. Using the pinch and release method to chamber a round from slide lock or not is completely possible, but inferior to the overhanded method.

I apologize for not being clear.

All guns can and will malfunction and they will do it at the worst time. Murphy's law.

Every firearm design has malfunctioned. Not necessarily every single gun ever made. But, if I never let my gun get dirty it shouldn't surprise me if my gun never malfunctions.

Adapting to your firearm is a must if you have to use it. But, civilians don't have to adapt to a firearm, they can just pick a different one that doesn't require as much adaptation/training/skill.

[TunnelRat]

Using the pinch and release method to chamber a round from slide lock or not is completely possible, but inferior to the overhanded method.


A fact you already said and I agreed to.

All guns can and will malfunction and they will do it at the worst time. Murphy's law.

Every firearm design has malfunctioned. Not necessarily every single gun ever made. But, if I never let my gun get dirty it shouldn't surprise me if my gun never malfunctions.

Never claimed otherwise, merely said that plenty of folks on this forum have firearms that have never malfunctioned. I admitted it's probably going to happen.

But, civilians don't have to adapt to a firearm, they can just pick a different one that doesn't require as much adaptation/training/skill.

True, or they can choose to adapt. It's a free world.

[iMagUdspEllr]

Right, people can do what they want.

My point was that a non-type G converted M9/92 forces you to slow down to rack the slide, inadvertently engage the safety, or use an inferior method to rack the slide should a malfunction occur. That makes performing the steps to clear a malfunction slower or less reliably executed.

I thought you were trying to dismiss that point by saying that people can just use it a different way. They can, but as I mentioned, the way they are forced to use it slows them down or is less reliable than the overhanded method you are free to use with nearly every other design. That is an objective disadvantage whether the user wants to gamble with how likely it is for their gun to malfunction or not. I was also under the impression that you were trying to dismiss that point by implying that guns don't malfunction that often. But, correct me if I'm misunderstanding you.

[TunnelRat]

I thought you were trying to dismiss that point by saying that people can just use it a different way.

I'm saying it can be mitigated to an extent.

. I was also under the impression that you were trying to dismiss that point by implying that guns don't malfunction that often. But, correct me if I'm misunderstanding you.

If I was then I am not sure why I said:

Actually I have a few firearms that have yet to malfunction, most likely will but unless I cause one they currently don't. Not saying you shouldn't train for it, but saying all guns malfunctioned is a bit of a misnomer.

Never claimed otherwise, merely said that plenty of folks on this forum have firearms that have never malfunctioned. I admitted it's probably going to happen.

[iMagUdspEllr]

@TunnelRat: Mitigated from accidentally engaging the safety to using a grip that doesn't give the user as much traction on the slide. Which, doesn't seem very good to me.

Oh, okay.

...but saying all guns malfunctioned is a bit of a misnomer.

That sounded like an explicit disagreement until I realized you were referring to individual firearms that may or may not see much strenuous use versus the design itself.

...plenty of folks on this forum have firearms that have never malfunctioned.

That sounded like you were using how likely/unlikely it was for a firearm to malfunction as an excuse to not worry about having to clear a malfunction. But, I misunderstood you. I just can't hear your voice over the internet is all.

[TunnelRat]

Sigh, amigo I am not sure where you are still trying to go here. I feel like we have mutilated this poor horse at this point.

Mitigated from accidentally engaging the safety to using a grip that doesn't give the user as much traction on the slide. Which, doesn't seem very good to me.


Whatever floats your boat. People can and have done it. It's not the end of the world. If you find it less than ideal I think that message has been received loud and clear.

That sounded like you were using how likely/unlikely it was for a firearm to malfunction as an excuse to not worry about having to clear a malfunction.

Which is exactly why I followed it with:

I admitted it's probably going to happen.

And originally with:

Not saying you shouldn't train for it, but saying all guns malfunctioned is a bit of a misnomer.

[iMagUdspEllr]

@TunnelRat:

Well, an objective negative observation that I am trying to communicate is being dismissed as a personal, subjective viewpoint is what I'm trying to avoid.

There have been other threads about the Beretta before that have either been locked or what I have pointed out has been dismissed as personal bias against the M9 instead of fairly debunked with a sound counter-argument.

People can and have done it.

And, that is where what you say is left up to interpretation again. It sounds as if you are saying people have overcome the flaw that I pointed out... when that isn't the case. Dealing with it or adapting to it doesn't mean it is no longer worse than a pistol with a slide designed so that it may be freely manipulated with the more effective overhanded grip at full speed.

So, that is all. It's just difficult with ambiguous statements is all. It just seems like several people are being dismissive of what I'm saying. I mean, you wouldn't like it if I just dismissed something you were trying to communicate, right?

[Dragline45]

I was also under the impression that you were trying to dismiss that point by implying that guns don't malfunction that often.

I will go as far to say that they don't. I own and have owned guns that have never had a single malfunction, and many of those guns have been shot alot. Even guns that have had malfunctions, I would say that as a whole they have malfunctioned a fraction of a percent compared to the amount of times they have fired perfectly fine with no malfunction.

[TunnelRat]

Well, an objective negative observation that I am trying to communicate is being dismissed as a personal, subjective viewpoint is what I'm trying to avoid.

It's not being dismissed. I am listening.

It sounds as if you are saying people have overcome the flaw that I pointed out... when that isn't the case. Dealing with it or adapting to it doesn't mean it is no longer worse than a pistol with a slide designed so that it may be freely manipulated with the more effective overhanded grip at full speed.

Say what? Dealing with or adapting is exactly how you overcome something. It's in the definition:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/overcome

There is a big difference between dealing with an issue and somehow stating that something is superior. No where did I say the 92 was superior to other pistol designs. All I said is that the flaw in question has been dealt with before. That doesn't mean other pistols aren't preferable.

It just seems like several people are being dismissive of what I'm saying. I mean, you wouldn't like it if I just dismissed something you were trying to communicate, right?

There is a difference between disagreeing and being dismissive. You have a very unusual way of taking what I am saying and deriving meaning from it that to me is neither implied nor intended.

[iMagUdspEllr]

@Dragline45:

I agree, actually. But, if someone is about to die and the gun did malfunction, I assert a decided advantage goes to the gun that allows you to just overhand-grab the slide and clear the malfunction at full speed. Sometimes the malfunction isn't even the gun's fault. It could just be a bad primer.

I don't mean to make a mountain out of a mole hill. It shouldn't take so many posts to get my point across. As small as this mole hill is, it is an issue that is there and makes the shooter's job harder... in the unlikely event that a malfunction occurs.

That is all. Nothing more, nothing less. When you are comparing the best designs in the world splitting hairs is all that can be done. And, the Beretta is definitely Tier 1.

@TunnelRat:

You are listening and labeling my point as an opinion. Or, I thought you were, until after I asked for clarification.

Successfully dealing with a problem is how it is overcome. The issue is that using a thumb and forefinger slide-grip technique is a marginal success when compared to a regular overhand grip on another firearm. So, the problem with the slide-mounted safety is mitigated... like you said at one point... but not completely overcome... that you said moments later. See what I mean?

No, I think people who read what you said could easily see the same implications I am seeing. Which is why I asked you to just clarify what you intended to say. But, it is just tricky to clarify with ambiguous statements is all. You might not have intended to imply what you implied but how do I know? I don't, so I ask. Easy peasy.

[TunnelRat]

You are listening and labeling my point as an opinion.

Anything anyone says is opinion to a certain extent. No more you than I. Take note that I never even used the word "opinion". So how do I label something as such without even using the word?

So, the problem with the slide-mounted safety is mitigated... like you said at one point... but not completely overcome... that you said moments later. See what I mean?

Where did I say "completely overcome"? You keep mentioning how I am making ambiguous statements, but I would consider you guilty of adding and removing adverbs from my postings at will. I said this:

People can and have done it.

[Guv]

So Beretta has the "unintentional safety issue"
Glock has the "unintentional discharge issue"

Make your choice and train on it.

[iMagUdspEllr]

@TunnelRat: You started off stating that you can just use the slide lock or pinch and release method in order to discount my point that the Beretta forces you to use those methods over the superior overhanded method.

I then asserted that the Beretta is inferior for this reason and civilians can just use another firearm that is superior in this regard.

Then you tried to dismiss this by saying that they could adapt.

That is besides my point and I'm fairly certain you knew it.

So, since we are going to play this game... well you are. I'm not.

All I wanted to say is the Beretta is inferior in the realm of ease of clearing a malfunction. Why? Because the overhanded method (the most reliable and fastest method whether the gun is wet or dirty) can disable the Beretta's trigger while on other firearms this isn't an issue due to their differing designs.

That's it. Do you want to dispute that? I think you already agreed to that. But, your comments seem to attempt to undermine that point that I was trying to make. That is all.

@Guv: Every gun has the unintentional discharge issue. So that would be at least two faults on the Beretta and only at least one fault on other designs.

Also, it is better to shoot yourself than it is to be shot several times by an attacker because your gun didn't fire when you needed it to. Sure, either way it is your fault, but one result is much worse than the other. Also, lots of people can draw any gun without a safety without putting their finger on the trigger. It is harder to clear a malfunction under stress while someone is shooting at you while you are trying to use the thumb and forefinger method with a dirty or wet gun.

Also, why Glock? Why not Sig, or HK, or 1911 or just about any design that doesn't have a safety on the slide?

[Guv]

I will attach any striker fired gun to that statement. Is the Sig striker fired or a true double action?

[iMagUdspEllr]

@Guv: Sorry, I wasn't specific. The TDA Sigs... like the P226 or P229.

[Guv]

I think those are double action only, I have no problem with those.

[iMagUdspEllr]

@Guv: Are you serious right now? The P226/9 are TDA a.k.a. DA/SA... just like the Beretta... but without a safety.

Also, why do you think DAO guns don't require trigger or muzzle discipline? You sound like a gun is only good in your eyes if you can "safely" (it isn't really safe) walk around with your finger on the trigger.

[TunnelRat]

Then you tried to dismiss this by saying that they could adapt.


Bringing up a counter point is being dismissive? If your definition of dismissive is arguing, than yes I am dismissing you I guess.

So, since we are going to play this game... well you are. I'm not.


This is either the second or third time in this conversation that you have used these passive aggressive comments, and frankly they're unnecessary.

Your comment was that the slide mounted safety meant that using an overhand method could induce complications. I agreed with you, but stated I thought the user could adapt. You seem dead set to convince me that either the user can't adapt or shouldn't bother adapting, I still haven't figure out which yet. You also seem convinced that either of those assertions is simply beyond debating and that my attempt to do so is somehow personal. It isn't. I disagree with your assertion, but you seem not to want to let it go. I simply suggest we do. Assuming you don't want to I will so that this conversation can get back to the matter of what I am inferred from the OP's question of mechanical reliability.

I agree with your stated concern, albeit it is less of a concern to me personally than to you. This is just my opinion.

[10mm4ever]

So if the location of the safety(which is intended to be used as a decocker)is such an insurmountable problem, one can only imagine how long it must have taken to operate the most common of household appliances without error??!! If you can't trust yourself to "master" one simple lever without problems, find another hobby ASAP!;)

[RX-79G]

Or you could get a 92G and not have a safety lever problem. Ta da!

But overall, this argument about the Beretta safety is a bit overstated. This is about as feed reliable a gun that's ever been made. Short of a bad magazine, not much is likely to happen, and if it does the open slide is the easiest to clear.

And the 92FS is certainly not the only combat gun with a slide mounted safety/decocker. It is probably the single most common set up on DA/SA guns. It's nice for duty weapons because it gives you the ability to decock upon loading, decreasing the chance of an AD.

[TunnelRat]

Or you could get a 92G and not have a safety lever problem. Ta da!

Do they make one in a compact?

[RX-79G]

Does the 92 come in a version that is compact in anything but name?

[TunnelRat]

Does the 92 come in a version that is compact in anything but name?

Naming convention aside I am asking an honest question.

[RX-79G]

No. None of the smaller 92 series is remotely compact.

[TunnelRat]

No. None of the smaller 92 series is remotely compact.

That wasn't my question. My question was are any decocker only?

[Guv]

iMag,
When did I ever say anything about walking around with my finger on the trigger. Just because you have problems with a 92's trigger or safety doesn't mean everyone else does.

[RX-79G]

The Centurian and Compact L were available in G versions. Beretta doesn't like to import G varients that look like the standards, so most Gs are Brigadiers and Vertecs.

What you can get in other markets or under contract is a different story.

[iMagUdspEllr]

@TunnelRat: Your counter-point didn't hold water. I explained why. But, you clearly just forgot... and dismissed it. I will explain it again. The shooter can adapt and can clear the malfunction. I was not arguing that the shooter is incapable of clearing a malfunction on the M9. My point was that the shooter is either slowed down or forced to use an inferior grip to clear the malfunction. That wastes time the shooter doesn't have and/or can cause the shooter to lose his grip on the firearm and fail to clear the malfunction the first time they attempt to clear it (and this is all while you are being shot at). That is the down side. Even though you are "adapting"... you are still at a disadvantage. Can you acknowledge that point please, instead of playing games?

So, to be absolutely clear, like I have plainly explained multiple times, the "adaptation" required to use the M9 puts the shooter at a greater risk/disadvantage than if they were using nearly any other design. I'm am fairly confident that you are an intelligent person. I am under the strong impression that you are being intellectually dishonest instead of having an honest discussion with me. I find that very offensive and immature for anyone to behave that way. I am certain I have attracted the moderators with this post. This will also somehow be my fault even though I'm the one trying to have an honest discussion. This really isn't fair, I can't make a legitimate point on this forum without people playing games. Can we please act like adults long enough to finish a discussion? You can play your games with other people on this forum if you want.

@10mm4ever: I never made that argument. Using the safety isn't an insurmountable feat. It is a clear disadvantage for the reasons I have clearly expressed multiple times across multiple threads. You have parroted the same old flawed quips across all of them instead of acknowledging my actual point.

Guns are very simple to use. They are extraordinarily simple to use. The thing is that when you are comparing one gun against another they have to be judged relative to each other... not how easy they are relative to performing brain surgery. Also, you are being completely dishonest by not acknowledging that you aren't using a circular saw while you are being shot at. You might not ever injure yourself with a circular saw... but if you were being shot at and forced to use one at the same time you might screw up and injure yourself. It isn't about "mastering" the lever. My point is that even if you master it you will be slower or less effective than other people with other guns. People can master double action revolvers. But, they would be faster, more accurate, have quicker reloads, et cetera if they were using a 1911 instead. It isn't about whether you can "do it" or not. It is a matter of one is better or worse relative to another competing design.

Seriously guys, I know you know this. I know I don't have to explain this. But, you are making me. Why? So that you can use your propaganda to mislead new gun owners? Stop using underhanded, childish non-arguments to defend something that is objectively worse. People might actually want to learn about firearms, not read through you playing childish games with me.

Or you could get a 92G and not have a safety lever problem. Ta da!

I said this multiple times in this thread alone. You wouldn't know it because we have master strawmen builders here who misunderstand what I say on purpose and seem to spend more time operating in the "grey area of the vernacular" than they do shooting or having legitimate discussions about guns. They have no interest in acknowledging any point that I make. They just want to browbeat me out of enlightening other members on the forum with their bravado.

Oh, and this is all my fault, I'm sure. I'm not the one who is trying to make a legitimate point or anything.

@Guv: My point is that you don't need a DA trigger or a safety. Another point (my main point) is that it is demonstrably better to use a design that doesn't have a slide-mounted safety than one that does.

Everyone has this problem/disadvantage when using the M9 whether they care about it or not. Some people don't care how long it takes to reload a revolver, but it is still a disadvantage whether they care about it or not.

Let's not operate in the subjective realm. I'm trying to be objective even though nobody on here wants to do that.

[iraiam]

How did this thread go from dependability to the pros and cons of having a slide mounted safety?

I can say I have absolutely no trouble with the design of the Beretta 92, slide mounted safety and all. I've trained with the 92 series since 1992.

Even when I was a rookie with it, I had no problems with it. I will grant you that I grab the slide slightly different than my Glocks, but this is simply a matter being aware what kind of gun is in my hand.

[iMagUdspEllr]

@iraiam: Can you depend on a gun that gets a dead trigger just because you manipulated the slide? Would you be more likely to depend on a gun that doesn't have that issue at all?

I don't have a "problem" using it per se. Which one would you say you could clear faster and more reliably? If both guns became dirty or wet which one would you rather have in your hands when you have to clear a malfunction. This all has to do how much someone can depend on the weapon to help them protect themselves.

[TunnelRat]

Can you acknowledge that point please, instead of playing games?


I'm having an argument, not playing games. Instead of resorting to left field comments on my supposed intentions, you would notice that I have agreed that there is a disadvantage to the 92 system.

I'm am fairly confident that you are an intelligent person.

Thanks.

I am under the strong impression that you are being intellectually dishonest instead of having an honest discussion with me. I find that very offensive and immature for anyone to behave that way. I am certain I have attracted the moderators with this post. This will also somehow be my fault even though I'm the one trying to have an honest discussion. This really isn't fair, I can't make a legitimate point on this forum without people playing games. Can we please act like adults long enough to finish a discussion? You can play your games with other people on this forum if you want.

Your impression is misplaced. I have no doubt you would say it's not. To that I would reply I truly believe I am trying to have an honest discussion.

You seem to be of the mentality that disagreeing with you is "playing games". You also seem to be of the mentality that at some point in every argument one party must acquiesce to the other. That's simply not true.

[Guv]

A "Subjective Realm" is speaking for everyone else? Train on your weapon no matter what it is, whats best for you or me may not be best for the next guy.

[RX-79G]

This isn't a Beretta "problem". It is a Walther, HK, S&W, Tanfoglio, Star, Astra, Ruger, Browning problem, and it's 85 years old.

How are slide mounted safeties all of a sudden a major Beretta issue?

The optional slide safety is not germane to the topic. Clearly, people aren't dying in droves because of slide safeties and jams.

iMag, can you cite instances where military or police have been killed because they cleared a jam and put the gun on safe in any of those 85 years of slide safety production?

[Guv]

RX,

Exactly.

[Oruglock]

Well the Beretta 92FS may or may not be the most dependable semi-auto tested by the US armed forces back in the early 80s, or not, but I'll still have to get one eventually for its historic interest.

And a Walther PPK, and a Browning Hi-Power, etc. etc.

[iMagUdspEllr]

@TunnelRat:Disagreeing with me isn't playing games. Ignoring the points I make or forgetting the counter-arguments I make is playing games. You aren't acquiescing my points and I'm not asking you to. I took this discussion to PMs so as to not distract any further from this thread.

@Guv: No, I'm not speaking for everyone else. You just can't counter objective facts with personal viewpoints (which are subjective). If you do that then you are speaking for everyone else based upon how you feel instead of how reality is. Reality is how it is regardless of personal opinion. Getting burned hurts whether you personally feel it doesn't hurt or not.

RX-79G: The military admits it is one of its limitations even if none of you do.

http://www.armytimes.com/article/20110828/NEWS/108280315/Pistols-shot-replacing-M9

http://www.airforcetimes.com/article/20130727/NEWS04/307270003/Testing-M9-replacement-start-next-year

I don't know of a report that states, 'Cop/soldier killed because they cleared a malfunction, engaged their safety, and then were shot down.'

Probably because the police department or military unit aren't going to be too keen to blame the victim for being shot to death by a bad guy. Also, how would they know? A shootout is pretty hectic and a battlefield isn't a neat crime-scene. Also, do you think the investigator is going to make it a point to blame the cop/soldier for failing to clear a jam effectively? Do you think they would even know enough about firearms to notice or even bother to put it in their report? Do you think they are going to see the M9 dropped on the ground with the safety activated and say, 'Look. It was his own fault!' Get real.

But, maybe there are such reports. I just haven't seen them. I haven't looked either. But, every person remotely familiar with the pistol are aware of the issue.

Also, I didn't mean to imply that this was an issue unique to Beretta. The standard M9 and the standard 92FS do have this issue and those models in particular were called out in the thread title itself. My point is that there are a large variety of competing designs that don't have this issue.

The slide safety issue seems germane to whether or not the gun is going to fire when you need it to. Which... is kinda the main question in the thread, right? How reliable is the M9? Well, because you can accidentally activate the safety without your knowledge it can just stop being able to fire when you are relying on it to function. That is a reliability hit. The flaw doesn't come from the design being unreliable, the issue comes from how the shooter can interact with it that makes it an issue.

If this thread was about how the Beretta performs in a vacuum then I'm sorry and I will leave immediately.

[Frank Ettin]

More than enough.