Recently, for some inexplicable reason, I seem to have developed an itch for the gun everyone loves to hate. Wouldn't you know it, I was in Cabelas and there on the shelf was a 92FS at an attractive on-sale price. (a rarity for Cabelas in my experience) Needless to say, since then I've been indulging my inner John McClane.
I was in the Navy when the decision was made to replace the 1911, hereafter refered to as "God's Gun", with the Beretta 92. I still remember when the Master Chief, a crusty old devotee of God's Gun himself, stormed into the compartment one afternoon with a cigarette waving in one hand (it was a grown mans Navy then) and a copy of Stars and Stripes in the other. Emblazoned in full color across the entire front page was a photograph of a soldier holding a Beretta and the title, "Military replaces 1911". All work then ceased momentarily as we all lamented the obvious fall of western civilization as we had known it.
The last half of the 80's was the era of the wondernine. Pistols only holding seven or eight rounds were considered a bit quaint and revolvers were, well, what could one really do with a six shooter? Few other pistols figured in the time as prominently as the Beretta. It was all over the silver screen in the Die Hard and Lethal Weapon franchises. Even today it's still widely used in movies and televison. Back then I simply wasn't going to have a use for the thing no matter what. The fact of issues arising with the pistols use by Naval Special Warfare only fueled my contempt. My job gave me a bit of contact with NSW meat eaters at the time, and even though I knew the issues seemed to be relatively isolated it didn't matter, I just knew that Italian pistol was an abomination. Its 9mm chambering? In the words of the Master Chief, "You might as well carry around a bucket full of long neck Budweiser bottles and throw'em, for all the good that thing will do you." I left my Navy service thanking the Lord that I had never been forced to carry the thing. Through the proceeding years I would run onto one here and there but never gave it much consideration. Instead, holding true to God's Gun and the .45 caliber commandment.
Now, with the passage of more than two decades and an increase in objectivity on my part I've come to revise my view of The Beretta 92. No machine is perfect and the 92 has its share of quirks like every other firearm. On the other hand it also has its fair share of positive attributes. While the pistol has had its share of issues in military service, those issues seem to stem from maintenance and training procedures, or more directly a lack thereof. As anyone who has served in the Big Machine can attest, maintenance and training procedures on equipment are usually lacking in peace time. When the operational tempo increases during war time these things can all too often be cast aside. This is especially true with a low priority item like a pistol. Examples are all too often kept in service well past their operational life span. Parts are purchased from aftermarket suppliers instead of directly from the manufacturer and are often of inferior quality. Service members are often issued a handgun with minimal, if any, training in its use or maintenance. Given these factors it isn't surprising when a weapon, any weapon, exhibits issues. This has become such a common theme that I typically take a service members statements on such things with a grain of salt. During the pistol trials that resulted in the Berettas adoption, the Sig Sauer P226 came in as first place loser and is often touted as the better choice by its fans. During my law enforcement career I've had my fair share of experience with Sig Sauer firearms. While I find them to be at the upper end of the qualitative scale, I have little doubt the Sig would have faired no better than the Beretta in identical circumstances. A Sig in the hands of a special warfare operator recieves a better level of attention than a Beretta in the hands of a grunt with little training in its use.
I find the 92FS has more working for it than against it. On the downside it's a big fat ghetto bootie of a pistol, there's no getting around that. At the time of its introduction it was considered large relative to its calibre. This is even more true today given the wider array of options available. If one possesses lilliputian hands I can see this designs size as an issue. Fortunately I have large hands and more importantly, long fingers. I find the Beretta to be quite comfortable in my hand, and the controls are easily reached by the thumb of my shooting hand, without a shift in my grip. This applies to the oft maligned slide mounted safety/decocker. I can easily manipulate it without fuss. One common criticism of the safety lies in the fact that it can often be inadvertently engaged while power stroking the slide, or during a malfunction clearance. While this is true it can be mitigated with proper training. Beretta does make a 92G variant in which the lever serves only as a spring loaded decocker, not a safety. Unfortunately, these are rarely if ever released onto the commercial market. However, Wilson Combat has recently enered the 92 arena and offers a "G" modification. This might be something to consider if the Beretta is carried for serious social purposes.
The Beretta 92 is also a heavy pistol by 21st Century standards. The company has chosen to replace some of the parts with ones made of polymer, such as the guide rod, with others like the trigger and safety lever being made of steel reinforced polymer. This is done in an attempt to save weight. Still, this only goes so far and there's no denying the gun is a chunk. While this may make it a chore to carry, it also results in a very soft shooting pistol. I have carried the Beretta concealed on several occasions under nothing more than a polo shirt. My body type allows me to do this with just about anything short of a Desert Eagle. However, there's no denying it's a big weighty piece of ordnance. Due to back issues I recently replaced one such heavy weight, the 1911, with a polymer pistol as my off duty piece and don't intend to step back up into the heavyweight division. Consequently, I won't be using the Beretta in that roll on a routine basis but it will work if required.
On the positive side I find much to like about the 92 in terms of quality, accuracy and reliability. When I purchased the pistol there was an M9 version on the shelf next to it. Other than slight cosmetic differences the two are primarily the same. Given the 92FS was on sale at a fifty dollar discount it wasn't hard to decide. 92A1s were also available with accessory rails and dovetailed front sights. (The 92s front sight is machined into the slide and is often quoted as one of the designs deficencies.) Given that this piece will primarily served as a fun gun, I have no need for a rail or the neccessity of night sights. Upon getting the pistol home I broke it down for cleaning and lubrication. I was immediately impressed by the quality of fit and finish. There are no machining errors anywhere inside or out, and the level of fit is excellent throughout the build. The mechanism exhibits a very smooth feel during operation. The overall build simply exudes quality. The double action trigger pull is smooth but heavy at 12 pounds, while the single action pull is a clean and even five pounds. One common modification is the installation of a "D" spring. The 92D is the double action only variant that uses a lighter hammer spring, Apparently, using the D spring in the 92FS usually results in a double action pull of around eight pounds and a single action pull of around three and a half to four. I have a D spring on order and intend to install it upon arrival. While the Berettas double action/single action trigger mechanism has fallen out of mass favor in the striker fired era it still has much to recommend it as a service weapon. It's been many years since I spent serious training time with a DA/SA pistol, but found myself quickly remembering my old habits. In fairly short order I found that it wasn't holding me back in my shooting performance.
Thus far the 92FS has functioned pefectly with any 9mm ammunition I have choosen to feed it. Like any all metal pistol the Beretta *must* be lubricated, and when properly maintained seems to possess a truly outstanding level of reliability. There isn't much more to be said on this particular point except that it just works. One area where the pistol honestly surprised me was in its accuracy. During my first range session I was shooting for groups at twenty five yards, when a man who turned out to be a former marine complimented me on my performance with a, "Damn bro, that's some fine shooting." and asked about the gun. When I motioned to the bench and replied "A Beretta 92FS." his reply was a bit humorous. He immediatly displayed a shocked expression and stated, "Really, a Beretta? I used to hate that thing!" I told him I once felt the same way but it was rapidly growing on me. A good example of differing experiences with a well maintained example versus a worn out service piece, road hard and put away wet? Perhaps. Lately I have been contemplating the switch from .45acp to 9mm in my Monday night Bullseye League. The cost savings even with handloaded ammunition is a plus. The fact of growing arthitis in my strong hand wrist from an old injury is another motivator. If the Beretta shows its current performance to be something other than a fluke it may very well be seen on the line on Monday night. The pistols weight may be a detriment as a carry piece, but it does make for a very fast and incredibly flat shooting 9mm. All in all the Beretta has shown itself to possess a better than average level of accuracy for a service pistol.
The design has its quirks that make it a bit of an anachronism in the 21st century, but no more than some of the classic designs, like God's Gun, that are loved by legions. (including me) Are there newer designs that seem to be more practical in many areas? Certainly. But again, the same can be said about many of the sacred cows of the firearms world that are still quite popular. In the end I find the Beretta 92FS to be a reliable and accurate, quality firearm. One that is not totally, but largely undeserving of the hatred often heaped upon it. If I was to be told to carry one as a duty weapon tommorow I wouldn't lose a seconds sleep over it.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by 1911guy
