Beretta 92 vs Ruger P89

[Cirdan]

Shoot both and buy the one you like.

For me the 92 has too big a grip. I bought a PX4 instead, and it's fantastic. Fits my hand well and the rotating barrel makes it a very soft shooter.

I like Rugers, and their customer service is great. It's not a Beretta though.

[JohnKSa]

For parts support, aftermarket parts availability, accessories availability, the Beretta is going to come out on top. Trigger quality, accuracy and fit/finish favor the Beretta too.

The Beretta is also a more refined design. I have owned a few P89s (still own one) and own a few P95s. They are good, solid guns, and good shooters--I have no problem relying on them for self-defense, but the Beretta is nicer, although a lot more expensive.

Things might be a bit different back before Ruger decided that supporting its discontinued designs wasn't a priority and sold off a lot of its spare parts stock on the wholesale market. At least then there was no concern about being able to get replacements in the unlikely event something broke or wore out. But now, for example, I can't even get replacement recoil spring assemblies for my P95s any more.

[Jack D]

I was also looking at 9mm range guns recently.
I just took possession last week of a Beretta 92G Elite and it is one sweet shooter!
Yesterday afternoon I installed the Trigger Job in a Bag from Langdon Tactical.
Have yet to get back to the range but now DA pull is 6.5 and the SA 3.2
Comes with nice slim grips.
No regrets!

[supersport939]

Got a Beretta 92x about a month ago. I've put about 500 rounds through her. It's my first gun in about 25 years and I couldn't be happier with it. No experience with the Ruger or S&W, but i can't imagine any regrets with the 92.

[stephen426]

I'd say the Beretta over the Ruger, but what about the Sig P226 or 229?

[jman841]

+1 on the Beretta, TONS of aftermarket support to tweak it to your liking and some of the 92x now has a 1911 style safety on it which resolves the one issue a lot of people have with the 92 series (safety on the slide).

[zoo]

Sorry, total babble on my part and deleted.

[DnPRK]

Beretta 92FS

[OneFreeTexan]

I’ve had a Ruger P90 for years, in 45 acp. Love it,, soaks up recoil great, of course it is as heavy as a brick,,,and can be used as one when your run out of ammo...It shoots anything I put in it, and feels good.
Then last year got an older Beretta 92, and oh, wow, where has this gun been?? It’s a 9mm, it’s a fairly heavy gun, which soaks up recoil, have a laser on it, and it is the smoothest, finest shooting gun I have ver known....the quality of fit and manufacture is fantastic. I love it.....

[Wag]

I have both and love them both for their own reasons. That said, I use the Beretta a lot more than the Ruger.

As mentioned above, try them both, then get the one that suits you.

--Wag--

[jmstr]

I couldn't feel comfortable with the Beretta 92, due to the grip circumference. My short fingers couldn't do the DA trigger pull and then transition to SA without shifting my grip.

The Ruger P89/90/93/94/944 all felt too big in my hand also.

I did get a Ruger P97 around 20 years ago and it works very well. The trigger is smooth and light, but has a long takeup, too much overtravel, and requires a longer reset than I now like.

Yet, DA pull of around 8lbs and SA pull of around 3.5lbs, without me doing any work on it.


I like the Beretta design, but approached it sideways: I bought a Taurus 99AF. Mine is one of the pre-1989 versions that allowed you to carry it Cocked and Locked, or hammer down [like Beretta 92 series from origin to about 1982, when they moved to decocker only]. I prefer the frame-mounted safety/decocker [on new Taurus 92s], due to my 1911/BHP experiences.

Since I am comfortable with C&L carry, the Taurus 99 is just right- even if the grip is fat.

I know- taurus? Yes. The 92 is considered one of their all time most reliable designs.

For those unfamiliar with the story, Taurus bought the Beretta 92 equipment from Beretta and continued making the pistol after their initial contract expired around 1978/79.

The earliest Berettas had a grip safety and a heel mag catch. By 1983 the Beretta had shifted to the slide safety and 'normal' mag catch. Taurus changed the mag catch but kept the frame mounted safety location. around 1990, Taurus changed their safety to a safety/decocker: up for C&L carry and all the way down to decock [and carry hammer down on loaded round].

Since my Taurus is worth about $150-200, I consider myself ahead. A Beretta IS a nicer gun, but for my needs, the price difference is a LOT of ammo!

[jman841]

jmstr,

This seems like your perfect Beretta, (If price was no issue) https://www.beretta.com/en/new-92x-performance/

Thinner grip with 1911 style thumb safety.

[tallball]

I have one Beretta 96 and one Taurus 99.

I also have 9mm, 40 S&W, and 45acp P-series pistols (one of each).

The Beretta (and the Taurus "clone") are far more sophisticated pistols. They look better, balance better, and have much better triggers.

That being said, all five of those pistols go bang every time, and I wouldn't feel unarmed with any of the Rugers.

[jmstr]

JMan841- You are right- that is about perfect for me.

Except I am weird. I prefer the 1911A1 type arched MSH, instead of the 1911 flat MSH. The flat one is the most popular in the past decade or so, but, what can I say?


That is NICE though!

Of course, as a california resident, I am sure I can't get it. I doubt it makes the 'handgun list' I am allowed to buy off of [unless it is 50+ years old].


TallBall- I agree. The beretta and taurus triggers are much nicer than the Ruger.

I think of it this way: I would have NO doubts I can hit what I want/need with the Ruger, when I want/need to. And, I won't be stressed about it being in police custody until they verify it was a good shoot. I don't need to worry about it being dinged up or 'lost'.

I would be upset if that happened to a Wilson Combat, for example- but not a Ruger P-series.

[Death-Ninja]

A trick question? Beretta 92FS vs a Ruger P-anything doesn't even qualify as a no-brainer, unless you are decidedly poor, or between jobs, I would never even consider a Ruger P89 or Ruger anything, let alone choose such over the vastly superior Beretta 92FS pistol. Ruger is a decent company these days, they stand behind their stuff and that counts, but folks, they are best described as budget brand pistols, positioned almost directly between Highpoint and low end polymer pistols such as the S&W40 & S&W9 pistols....

[Fishbed77]

Beretta 92 vs Ruger P89

I would seriously also consider a surplus/trade-in P226 or CZ-75B

Either of these are surprisingly affordable on the used market, and IMHO, much nicer to shoot and more ergonomic than the options you mention. But between the 92FS and P89, the Beretta is a no-brainer.

[Forte S+W]

Funny how the budget brand Ruger P-Series for the decidedly poor and between jobs have a reputation for durability and reliability while the vastly superior Beretta 92 had to undergo many revisions in order to address numerous shortcomings including slides cracking in half, striking the shooter in the face.

Don't get me wrong, I like the Beretta 92, I just felt the need to point out the flaws of placing it on a pedestal while painting the Ruger P-Series as an objectively inferior pistol that falls between the Hi-Point and the Sigma Series just because it was cheaper and less refined than the Beretta 92.

[Don Fischer]

I've got two 9mm's. A P-89 and a S&W shield 9c. My carry gun everyday is my S&W, the P-89 is simply to heavy and big. I shoot normally at lrge trget's close, withing maybe 20 paces at time's. There is only one reason for a 9mm and for me that is self defense. If I were to go to an area like Portland, I'd take the P-89 simply for the greater firepower! I would not even consider taking my S&W with it's 8 shot mag into a bad area like that. If you want very eacy shooting, using 124gr JHP The S&W is very controllable. For most practice though I shoot 124gr Keith Type SW and very very controllable. I have a strong belief about recoil. If it comes from a gun that bother's you to shoot, your not gonna know till after it it bothered you under pressure, that's not really the place to find out! I'd like to have a Beretta based just on their reputation! But my Shield does everything I need it to do and was no where near as expensive.

BTW, other than self defense loads everything I shoot in any of my handguns are cast bullet's.

[Fishbed77]

Funny how the budget brand Ruger P-Series for the decidedly poor and between jobs have a reputation for durability and reliability while the vastly superior Beretta 92 had to undergo many revisions in order to address numerous shortcomings including slides cracking in half, striking the shooter in the face.

Don't get me wrong, I like the Beretta 92, I just felt the need to point out the flaws of placing it on a pedestal while painting the Ruger P-Series as an objectively inferior pistol that falls between the Hi-Point and the Sigma Series just because it was cheaper and less refined than the Beretta 92.

There are plenty of reasons many folks will prefer the Beretta 92-series to the Ruger P89 that have nothing to do with the name on the slide.

Is is a reliable and durable pistol, and its history shows Beretta’s commitment to continually developing and improving the design. From the perspective of most shooters, the balance, ergonomics, and overall feel are simply superior to the Ruger P-series guns. Whereas Ruger has essentially stopped support of the P-series pistols, Beretta still makes the 92-series, and it is well supported by Beretta and the aftermarket. It has a service pedigree that has never been matched by any Ruger pistol. The P89 is still a good gun. But for many reasons, a lot of folks will find the 92 to be superior.

That said, as indicated in my previous post, there are other DA/SA pistols that I prefer to the 92. As always, your mileage may vary.

[357 Python]

I have an old Beretta 92F and carry it quite regularly. I changed a few parts to make it more suitable for me. When I worked as a federal police officer I was issued a Beretta 92FS (M9). I was also sent to the Beretta factory to be an armorer so I am quite familiar with the design. My vote would be go for the Beretta. You may also be able to pick one up cheap if the military surpluses them soon since they are going to the SIG 320.

[lee n. field]

Originally Posted by Forte S+W

Funny how the budget brand Ruger P-Series for the decidedly poor and between jobs have a reputation for durability and reliability while the vastly superior Beretta 92 had to undergo many revisions in order to address numerous shortcomings including slides cracking in half, striking the shooter in the face.

Don't get me wrong, I like the Beretta 92, I just felt the need to point out the flaws of placing it on a pedestal while painting the Ruger P-Series as an objectively inferior pistol that falls between the Hi-Point and the Sigma Series just because it was cheaper and less refined than the Beretta 92.

the P89 underwent some changes, I'm pretty sure, and it is itself a "replacement/upgrade/fix" for the P85, which had a couple versions.

I doubt anything in this field is perfect from the get go. Though, "Perfection!" is a better motto than the more true "constant iteration towards improved adequacy".

[Don P]

My late $.02, Beretta 92. I have a 92 FS and a 40 S&W top end along with a 22 LR top end, so hence 3 guns in one.

[tallball]

An incomplete list of favorite 9mm service pistols lately:

1) 1911

2) Sig P229

3) CZ75

4) Walther P99 and PPQ variants (especially the PPQ)

5) Beretta 92 variants

6) Glocks

7) Ruger P series

[GaryED50]

Beretta 92 is best! I've owned both and Beretta is tops!!

Gary

[CleanDean]

I surely have shot a lot of 9mm.'s CZ is Fav. #1...Sig 229 is Fav. Sig. 226 good.
Beretta is marginally good ( wide grip).
Glock is marginally good ( wide bulky grip) Buttugly
S&W M2, & S&W shield both acceptable.

Put all the rest -to- rest !