Beretta 92FS vs M9 [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Beretta 92FS vs M9


gatorglockman
04-08-2012, 19:09
Okay.....did a prior thread on Beretta. I am close to pulling the trigger on a NIB Italian made 92FS that I can get a very good deal on where I moonlight (I get a pretty good employee discount).

That said, I served in the Army and carried an M9 so it has some sentimental value to me.

I am not an expert on the differences between the pistols except for the finish and that the M9's are made in the US. I can get the 92FS for about $50-60 less than the best deal I have found on the M9.

Feedback, opinion or guidance?

JaPes
04-08-2012, 19:23
The big difference is in the grip, where the beaver tail is. The 92fs usually has more of a radius there than the M9. The 92fs dust cover is slanted, whereas the M9 is flat/straight.

This is not always the case, because I've seen 92fs' built with M9 frames at the chain retailer.

The front sight blade on a 92fs is fixed to the frame. I'm not sure about an M9's.

Shipwreck should be around soon enough to give you the rundown. He's the resident 92-addict. :D

Have you considered either a 92A1 or M9A1? I believe they have a picatinny rail and dovetailed front sights.

TalkToTheGlock
04-08-2012, 23:05
I am shipwreck junior.


I have a bunch of 92fs and a M9.

I like the grip better on the M9. That extra radius makes the gun sit deeper in my grip. It feels better.

Also, the markings are a lot nicer on the M9.

Some people will say fit and finish are better on the Italians. I don't see the difference in fit at all. Finish I would give the slight edge to the Italian, but it might just be my mind olaying tricks on me.

I carry my M9 mostly in the winter with a shoulder rig under a zip up hoodie and I an comfortable with it.

I put around 1,000 rounds through my 92fs and 1,500 through my M9. Both are accurate and a oleasure to shoot. I do however like the feel of the 92fs trigger more. Feels more crisp.

My opinion... Snag a 92fs Italian now before they run dry. I am a sucker for pistol manufactured in Italy. And since it is cheaper, that's a plus!



iPhone 4

collim1
04-08-2012, 23:09
The only difference that matters to me is the is the M9 does not have all the roll markings of the civie 92fs version.

I dont need "do not point gun at your own head" and "will fire bullets" stamped all over my gun. Put that crap in the manual, not on the frame of the gun.

TalkToTheGlock
04-08-2012, 23:12
The only difference that matters to me is the is the M9 does not have all the roll markings of the civie 92fs version.

I dont need "do not point gun at your own head" and "will fire bullets" stamped all over my gun. Put that crap in the manual, not on the frame of the gun.


That's one thing I hate about my all of my 92fs. It especially ruins my INOX for me. I love that gun, but when I see the right side I cringe.

For looks, the M9 wins with markings.

iPhone 4

Navitimer
04-09-2012, 08:38
I went through the same analysis a few months ago, and ended up with the 92FS-A1, which is the latest version with an accessory rail. They also make an M9-A1. There are several differences as the other posters have mentioned. I believe there is a sticky thread on a Beretta forum (just do a google search for the forum - I can't recall the actual name). I also believe the Beretta website has a .pdf you can download that breaks down the differences. Have fun in your search! That's one of my favorite parts of getting a new firearm is learning so much about the different models, features, etc. Hope this helps.

gatorglockman
04-09-2012, 08:47
THX gents. I know the Beretta will be like a Lay's potato chip...once I get one, I will want another. For the price diff and savings, if I do this, I will wade in with the 92FS I think.

Shipwreck-The-Sequel
04-09-2012, 08:48
See, I prefer the 92FS with the curved dustcover and the rear strap indentation over the M(. I have small hands - that little bit of difference on the rear strap brings my hand closer to the trigger. Not much difference, but it is noticeable.

I can tell the difference right away when I hold them both.

I bought a 92FS built on an M9 frame last year - just because I collect 92s. But, it's not my preference for the frame.

I also do not care for the dot and post setup of the M9 - I like the 3 dot sights of the 92FS better.

Here are some pics, though...

http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g320/mistershipwreck/M9.jpg

http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g320/mistershipwreck/92FS.jpg

NeverMore1701
04-09-2012, 09:25
I much prefer the radiused backstrap of the 92.

Glockdude1
04-09-2012, 09:44
No collection is complete without a Beretta 92.

:cool:

Sheepdog Scout
04-09-2012, 17:20
No collection is complete without a Beretta 92.

:cool:

Or 6.

Alizard
04-09-2012, 17:50
I recall that Beretta guaranteed interchangeability of key parts (slides, barrels, locks, etc) on the M9 but not on the 92FS. In other words, tolerances are held better on the MIL gun.

NeverMore1701
04-09-2012, 18:02
I recall that Beretta guaranteed interchangeability of key parts (slides, barrels, locks, etc) on the M9 but not on the 92FS. In other words, tolerances are held better on the MIL gun.

That's a new one to me....

RWBlue
04-09-2012, 18:08
See, I prefer the 92FS with the curved dustcover and the rear strap indentation over the M(. I have small hands - that little bit of difference on the rear strap brings my hand closer to the trigger. Not much difference, but it is noticeable.

I can tell the difference right away when I hold them both.

I bought a 92FS built on an M9 frame last year - just because I collect 92s. But, it's not my preference for the frame.

I also do not care for the dot and post setup of the M9 - I like the 3 dot sights of the 92FS better.

Here are some pics, though...

http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g320/mistershipwreck/M9.jpg

http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g320/mistershipwreck/92FS.jpg

My really old 92FS looks like the M9 frame. Have they changed over the years?

.45Super-Man
04-09-2012, 18:08
I have older92fs as well as a few newer ones. While I do like the aesthetics of the original more, along with the all metal parts, the newer model with radiused backstrap DOES feel better in the hand. While it's not a huge difference, the radius is perfectly placed and is noticeable. And while I cant offer up any proof, the newer version feels just a tad heavier at the muzzle.

JaPes
04-09-2012, 18:21
Or 6.

That's just daring Shipwreck to pull out the infamous "Wheel of Beretta" pic. :supergrin:

maniDAR
04-09-2012, 18:33
Or 6.

Very well said and YES thanks to this forum i am a proud owner of 92FS.

.45Super-Man
04-09-2012, 18:39
I recall that Beretta guaranteed interchangeability of key parts (slides, barrels, locks, etc) on the M9 but not on the 92FS. In other words, tolerances are held better on the MIL gun.
That dog wont hunt.

fnfalman
04-09-2012, 18:50
The minor cosmetic differences between the two variants don't really mean much to me at all.

Sheepdog Scout
04-10-2012, 00:42
My really old 92FS looks like the M9 frame. Have they changed over the years?

Yes. The slanted dustcover is something that evolved from the straight one. Supposedly, it's to help maintain the strength and service life of the frame. They did this in the early 90s for the .40 caliber 96s. And since the 92 and 96 use the same frame. Though you still see some 92s pop up with the straight frame, like we did last year (contract overruns I believe). If the military specs and contracts weren't set in stone, there could be no more straight dustcover 92s made. But I for one prefer the look of the straight dust covers.

Sheepdog Scout
04-10-2012, 00:46
That's just daring Shipwreck to pull out the infamous "Wheel of Beretta" pic. :supergrin:

Every chance he gets.:supergrin:

Alizard
04-10-2012, 01:07
That's a new one to me....I called Beretta factory to ask if I could buy one of those surplus .40 top ends and drop it onto a 92 frame and they said they don't guarantee slides from a different Beretta will drop onto the 92s but they do on the M9. That's what they said.

It did work on mine no problem, BTW....

They said there are MINOR differences between a 92 and 96 frame..... but obviously not enough to be significant. A slight difference in the feed ramp cut? Anyway, Beretta used to sell a "dual" gun that came with both a 9mm and .40 top end, and the factory guy said it was a standard 96 frame used with both. I used a standard 92 frame with both tops and it worked.

I also used the Beretta factory 9mm magazines to feed .40 and they worked as well. I was told the mag shells are the same, slight variation between 9mm and .40 follower but worked in mine.

faawrenchbndr
04-10-2012, 01:08
I recall that Beretta guaranteed interchangeability of key parts (slides, barrels, locks, etc) on the M9 but not on the 92FS. In other words, tolerances are held better on the MIL gun.


Bahullcrahhhp!

Alizard
04-10-2012, 01:14
Bahullcrahhhp!Like I said, take it up with the factory.

Alizard
04-10-2012, 01:18
The M9 is a short recoil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recoil_operation#Short_recoil_operation), semi-automatic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-automatic_firearm), single-action / double-action (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trigger_%28firearms%29#DA.2FSA) pistol which uses a 15-round staggered box magazine with a reversible magazine release button that can be positioned for either right- or left-handed shooters. The M9 is used with the Bianchi M12 Holster, though other holsters are often used. The specific modifications made from the Beretta 92 includes:


Design of all the parts to make them 100% interchangeable to simplify maintenance for large government organizations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M9_pistol

I was told the interchangeability was required to meet the govt contract, it was NOT extended to civilian guns.

This topic got beat to death over on the original Beretta forum, it came up every time CDNN ran a $100 special on the surplus used 96 slide/barrel combos they would have from time to time. Beretta gave the same answer: unless it's a MIL gun, it's only guaranteed to work with the slide it came with.

NeverMore1701
04-10-2012, 06:40
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M9_pistol

I was told the interchangeability was required to meet the govt contract, it was NOT extended to civilian guns.

This topic got beat to death over on the original Beretta forum, it came up every time CDNN ran a $100 special on the surplus used 96 slide/barrel combos they would have from time to time. Beretta gave the same answer: unless it's a MIL gun, it's only guaranteed to work with the slide it came with.

So you're not even talking about the same model/caliber. Got it.

ashecht
04-10-2012, 08:19
love my Inox
224405

zackwatt
04-10-2012, 15:31
love my Inox
224405

Nice! :cool: