Beretta 92FS vs. Sig P226

[Zero One]

So, looking for my next handgun purchase... I have tried out a bunch and narrowed it down to these two.

There have undoubtedly been many topics with this title. I've read through a huge amount of information in such topics. The difficulty is that 95% of the posts feature one of the following fallacious arguments:

- 1. "92FS is better because the military uses it." "P226 is better because some Special Forces use it." I see this one most of all.

- 2. "I own a P226 and have no experience with a 92FS. Therefore, I recommend the P226." Or, vice versa. No question that they both deserve a recommendation, but I can really only afford one of them.

- 3. "The 92FS only won the XM9 pistol trials for political reasons." Unproven, but even if true, it does not speak against the quality of the pistol as they both passed those trials.

- 4. "The 92FS is an absolute piece of junk that I wouldn't recommend to my worst enemy. Get the P226." Or vice versa. I think it a bit suspicious when I see a comment like this. I think that most people would agree that these are both fine weapons. When I hear something like this, I suspect that someone had an unusually bad experience or is repeating a rumor that they heard.

- 5. "I heard that 92FS break after 5,000 rounds." "P226s will crack after any extended use." This would be relevant, but these appear to be untrue, and I have never seen any proof beyond hearsay.

Of course, there's plenty of useful information from knowledgeable users as well. But it seems like widespread weapons tend to develop their own mythology. It can sometimes be difficult to sort through all of the misinformation. This forum, in my observation, tends to feature more thoughtful discussion.

That said, I'm looking for opinions from people who have used both the Beretta 92FS and the Sig P226. I have fired both via rental, and found both to be quite nice. They each had a couple ups and downs. Though there is certainly a price difference of about $200, I am not too concerned about it and am not going to factor that into my decision.

Obviously these aren't primarily for carry, though I will likely carry it sometimes during the winter as I live in a very cold area (big coats mean some easy concealment).

So, those who have experience with both... what do you think?

Thanks in advance for the thoughtful commentary.

[TCman]

I have a 226 and a beretta 96, both in .40. I like them both. Neither have ever jammed, but I rarely shoot the beretta. The sig just feels better to me. Handle both of them, and shoot them if you can before you decide on one. Or you can just get both.

[dondavis3]

I just bought a Beretta 92F a month ago.



I've shot it a lot 200 + rounds and it is very accurate.

I didn't expect any, but no problems at all.

[Gary L. Griffiths]

1. If you like a thick handled, large pistol, by all means go Beretta.

2. Sigs haven't had to be modified to keep the slide from going through your head when it fails.

Other than that, they're both reliable.

[Zero One]

No doubt that they're both reliable, as far as I can see. I mean, they've both undergone some pretty serious testing.

I have fired both, and I liked both of them. I'm a little more accurate with the Beretta, though I like the feel of the Sig a little more.

At the moment, I'd have to flip a coin to decide... any more input?

[Xanith]

My first pistol was a Beretta 92FS my second pistol was a SIG 226ST.. That being said I have since sold my Beretta 92FS and still have the 226.

I really didn't dislike the Beretta, it was great and I had no complaints but the SIG just felt a little more 'right' for me. When I went to the range I shot a little better with the SIG and it felt like a better fit for my hands.

Again, they are both great pistols and I don't think you can go wrong either way.

[Uncle Malice]

Sig P226 and Beretta 92FS are both good guns. Yes the military contract went to the 92FS(M9) and yes the Navy Seals dumped the M9 in favor of the P226.

The P226 also was 2nd runner up against the 92FS for the full military contract and lost out against the Sig because of cost alone. Both were great guns... beretta came in cheaper.

I am personally a huge Sig fan. Sigs and Glocks are 2 favorite guns. I have owned a number of many other guns such as M&P, XD, XDm, H&K, Kimber, etc... and multiple styles and calibers of those as well...

I like to switch it up and try out new toys... there are some guns that I've had that I would love to have again... but without having sold/traded them off I never would have had the different guns that I have had to this point.

So I guess the moral of the story is that you really need to feel them both out and see which one YOU like better. Get it.. try it out for a while... if you decide you want something else... sell it or trade it off... That's the beauty of the firearms hobby. Yes, it can be expensive... but guns will hold their value very well.

[Boats]

You can search my posts on here or on The High Road. I have owned both the Beretta 92FS and the SIG P226 in the past.

I like the Beretta better, but in my mind these two are like choosing between chocolate and strawberry ice cream. However, on the retail market there is no way that the SIG ice cream is worth $200 worth more.

If you really must have one of the two, get the one you like holding better because that is likely the one you will shoot better.

If I were into buying a metal framed service size 9mm pistol today the answer would be a CZ-75B or SP-01 so I could roll cocked and locked. Steel is also better than aluminum alloy.

[lechiffre]

i have or have owned both.

pick up one of each, then buy the one that feels best.

for me it's the beretta.

[IanS]

I've owned both and I like both. But the one I'd lean toward is the P226. Its lighter more compact and for me more accurate. The P226 only has a decocker while the 92FS has a decocker/safety (which I feel is redundant) and on an awkward location, the slide. They're not necessarily deal breakers but things to think about. Both are pistols I'd recommend to just about anyone along with 9mm Glocks and M&P's.

[Zero One]

Several have recommended that I try them out for myself, but as I mentioned above, I did that already - was the first thing I did.

I was a bit more accurate with the Beretta, but the Sig felt better in my hand and handled a bit better. Not sure which one I should value more.

... hence why I'm on the fence and asking for input. Cost doesn't concern me, but I have a heard that Sig quality control has been having problems lately, which is one thing that might tilt me toward the Beretta.

---

[Uncle Malice]

I think we have all "heard" that Sig QC has had some issues... and I think the vast majority of it is simply hyperbole. People love to shout out about their negatives and rarely inform people about their positives, since that is what they were expecting in the first place. No one buys a gun expecting it to fail and then is so ecstatic when it actually works.

With that said, I have owned 4 Sigs and have a 5th on order... P229 standard, non-railed in .40... P239 in 357sig.... P220 Elite Stainless.... P229 standard with rail in 9mm... I also have a P229 Elite Stainless that is on order, fully paid off... just waiting for delivery.

The P229 is my favorite Sig pistol. It feels the best in my hand and I shoot it well. I would like to pick up a P220 Compact as well.

I have extensive experience with one of my best friends 92FS stainless. It's a great gun. I have never seen it fail. I personally do not care for the slide mounted safety/decocker levers. The USP did it right with the combination of a safety and decocker. I feel the Sig also did it right with the DA/SA and decocker only(especially with the SRT trigger). No reason for a safety on a long hard pull.

We know that you said you have held and shot them all already. You said it yourself that the Sig feels better in your hand... you shoot the Beretta a little more accurately. Accuracy can be fixed... the feel in your hand cannot. Not to mention, the beretta has smaller(more precision) sights where the Sig has somewhat larger, combat style sights. This will make a difference with concerns to accuracy. If this gun is for defensive use, the combat sights should be more than adequate.

[Sig_229_Elite]

I'm partial to Sig

[Uncle Malice]

Originally Posted by Sig_229_Elite

I'm partial to Sig

Ya don't say?

[raven11]

I perfer the Sig 226 mostly due to the grip and the great DA pull. The 92FS was the first handgun I shot in the military and I passed pistol qualification but I put every DA shot into the dirt ( no fault of the pistol , as it was my first time with a handgun) years later when I decided to get a handgun I like the SIG trigger. Right out of the rental counter I could make a ragged hole at 15 line even with a DA first pull

[Chris_B]

I never understand these threads very well

The US military uses the Beretta. I am sure it's a fine pistol, and it's been in service a long time, and there's a galaxy of knowledge and development behind it

The P226 has been around a long time too, and the military considered it. For whatever reason, they passed

But...you're not the US military, and your requirements for a handgun may- or may not- duplicate theirs. In your world, you're free to choose what sidearm you carry

So choose the one you like better and feels beter to you, and the one you like to shoot more. I love my SIG Sauer P226. I've never fired a 92FS. I've held one...and it was a very nice feeling pistol. The SIG 'spoke' to me, especially the trigger. But I'd own the Beretta in a heartbeat

[sailskidrive]

I own a P226 and a FS92 Centurion, both in 9mm. Personally I prefer the SIG over the Beretta simply because of the size of my hands. The Beretta is a little smaller in the grip in both width and length. My pinky hangs off of the bottom of the grip. Also, the travel of the trigger seems a little longer on the Beretta.

I have owned the SIG for a few years now and the Beretta for about a year. I have fired several thousand rounds through each and neither have had any component failures of any kind. The SIG had a few FF and FE issues the very first time I took it out but has functioned flawlessly after I cleaned and lubed it for the first time.

I know that some of you will probably find this appalling but I'm not sure I've ever cleaned the Beretta, it's guts are as black a WV coal miner's lungs.

~Sail

[Dust Monkey]

Either one will serve you well.


BTW Beretta DIDNT HAVE TO modify the pistol to catch the slide. Just don't be dumb enough to shoot hotass machine gun rounds through it and you'll be fine. The military ordered Beretta to make the change because they knew service members would be stupid at some point, usually after someone says "watch this".

[starbuck]

I love both guns. I've owned over a dozen 92-series pistols, and almost as many P226's. In my opinion they are each other's equals. Either one will serve you well. That being said, the determining factor for you may be ergonomics. The P226 has a smaller grip than the 92FS (although the 92 Vertec has an even smaller grip than the 226). So, if you have smaller hands you may prefer the SIG. If you have bigger hands, it'll just boil down to which one feels better. Bottom line: Handled them both, and choose one that fits you best.
Personally, I prefer the 92FS over the P226...but not by much.

[DBAR]

I prefer how the P226 feels in my hand. The Beretta feels blocky to me. I also prefer how much better the Sigs action feels, and I'm of the opinion that Sigs basic design is more efficient than that of the 92fs.

BTW Beretta DIDNT HAVE TO modify the pistol to catch the slide. Just don't be dumb enough to shoot hotass machine gun rounds through it and you'll be fine. The military ordered Beretta to make the change because they knew service members would be stupid at some point, usually after someone says "watch this".

and yes Beretta had issues with their gun after it was issued to our military, and there's more to the story than that.

[defjon]

I've owned both and sold both.

Beretta inox 92 and a West German Sig P226 9mm.

I've dabbled in replacing the Sig if I could ever find a decent deal like I did when I purchased it (around 500 bucks with 5 mags).

They're both over sized for the caliber, which is both good and bad. Both are good guns, well made, reliable.

The sig, in rapid fire, handled itself better- EG, on target quicker, faster on reload, more accurate. I'm not sure why. I think the Beretta, especially italian inox like mine was, is much prettier. The sig 226 is my favorite 'fightin' nine.

For my realistic needs I couldn't see NEEDING anything more than a glock 26...I'm not military or police.

Anyway, like I said I've sought to replace the Sig, and I really only miss the Beretta sometimes because boy howdy was it purty!

I would say sig unless having a safety is important to you.

[wingspar]

At the moment, I'd have to flip a coin to decide... any more input?

Get out a quarter, and flip it. If you don’t like how it lands, go for two out of three. If you still don’t like the results, go for 3 out of 5.

Since money is no object, get both. I’ve zero experience with either, but the P226 being used by the Navy Seals just has to be a very strong selling point. Neither is a slouch, as you know. I have held a couple of Sig’s, and am about to purchase one.

[sonick808]

I owned a 226 and 220 for years, but have only rented a 92FS for an hour.

Skews my opinion a bit, but I still heartily prefer the sig after that exposure.
I don't like the 92 trigger, and the exposed barrel concerns me

the sig just feels better, or I was more used to it. Nevertheless, I prefer it.

jmo

[Coltman 77]

I own both Sigs and Berettas. They are both great sidearms in my opinion.

Comparing one to the other is an apples to oranges deal.

Both are accurate and reliable. Buy the one you shoot best.

Good luck, let us know how things work out for you.

[Sturmgewehre]

I would get the P226, here's why.

The P226 is better because Spec-Ops tend to use it. But honestly, I don't own the 92FS so I can't really comment on it.

It's my understanding the M9 only won the military trials due to political reasons and for cost. They low balled the bid thereby getting the contract because they were the cheapest.

The 92FS is an absolute hunk of junk and really shouldn't be considered. If you shoot more than, say, 5,000 rounds through it the slide will separate. Granted, they have a device in there now to keep it from hitting you in the face, but who wants their pistol breaking in half even if you do get to keep your teeth?

I hope this helps.