I too would have like a compact frame with the full barrel, but with the way the bsckstrap and backstrap retaining clip works, I doubt it.Originally Posted by fatdog
I too would have like a compact frame with the full barrel, but with the way the bsckstrap and backstrap retaining clip works, I doubt it.
I don’t see why it wouldn’t be possible. You’d just lose the interchangeable back straps and would be stuck with whichever one was cut down with the frame and permanently attached.
My posts only represent my personal opinion and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or official policies of any employer, past or present. Obvious spelling errors are likely the result of an iPhone keyboard.
I have no knowledge of any polymer frame program on the 92 that's being called a 94. And if that were a thing, I would know about it. Generally, I'm pretty sure we've decided that a polymer frame 92 won't work on a lot of levels (technical feasibility, cost to consumer, brand impact, etc). Generally if you like a 90 series trigger with a smooth action type on a polymer frame for a bit less weight and more abuse it can handle, well that's why we made the PX4 20 years ago. So that rumor a hard deny from me.
On the PX4 front... I want to set expectations correctly and make clear that any and all near-term PX4 stuff would have to be incremental work on the current platform as we've somewhat recently gotten international LE contracts that require 10 years of service commitments for parts. So on one hand any PX4 owners or purchasers have nothing to be concerned about for parts availability or the gun being discontinued, but nobody go expecting something like a new frame next year. I know we all want updated ergos and texture, but that's a very high resource requirement bar to clear when stacked up against the other stuff we're working on.
All that said, 2024 will mark 20 years of PX4, and I can confirm that Ernest and I have traded notes on PX4 configurations we'd like to see for the better part of 6 years now. And while I couldn't do much about any of that as the designer for US R&D, I did get moved to Product Manager over Collaborations and Special Programs a little while back.
Product Manager: ProShop, Collaborations and Special Projects
Former R&D designer
Beretta USA
Thanks for sharing that. It makes me a lot more comfortable about investing in the platform as a non-LE consumer. I plan to, based on my very recent experience as a first time owner of a PX4.
Support the Second Amendment Foundation and the Firearms Policy Coalition, join and give!
I would love a thinner PX4,not a micro, but maybe something in between, enough grip, but thinner and lighter.
A lot of people lose sight of that little tidbit. As I have said often enough in the past year or so, if Beretta would tweak the Px4 line like they did the 92X RDO line, I'd return to the PX4 like a shot (so to speak). I may be dead or in some glorified cattle pen for geriatrics by the time it actually happens, but it'll still benefit someone.
In the meantime, I shall continue to endeavor to persevere with the 92X. It's a burden, yes, but one I can live with.
gn
"On the internet, nobody knows if you are a dog... or even a cat."
While it has been a relationship with ups and downs, the PX4 that ended my disdain for Berettas remains in the rotation. Not the most durable of pistols as it turns out, but of a compactness which the 92 is unable to duplicate.
gn
"On the internet, nobody knows if you are a dog... or even a cat."
I jumped in for the rotating barrel, so while I have a latent love for the SC, I passed over two chances to buy one at reasonable price, too. As for parts, that was never my worry --- two clicks and I can get any replacement part I'll need for the 1999 Cat Pak 8045 (except sights! but I have the default 3 dots anyway)
So maybe work on improving the APX carry! Give it some capacity, really improve the trigger, and offer it in small, med, large like Sig P365 series.
Reply With Quote