Glock vs Beretta 92

[Kalashnikovkid]

Howdy, ladies & gentlemen of Pistol Forum!

Long time lurker and regular reader. Been marinating on a topic for a few years, and finally have reached the point where I needed to register so I could ask what's on my mind. I like that this is a dedicated space for serious handgun users, and though I am a member of a few other forums, I reckoned my question would be well received and best answered by such a wonderful group of professionals like yourselves.I'd like to also use this post to work through a few thoughts, so if you aren't inclined to read a man's ramblings, I'd reckon you'll want to stop now. A few relevant facts before I dive into the meat of the matter, and because this is my first post;I'm in the military, have been out of the country for a few years overseas (I'd rather not say where for personal reasons), and ironically (initially) joined because I thought the military could help me become the master of arms (maybe one day I'll post on what a crock-of-you-know-what that one turned out to be!) I've aspired to be for as long as I can remember .The country I currently reside in completely bans access to firearms outside martial/law enforcement use, so I am unable to practice outside my daily duties/work. However, lucky me, I get daily access to the general issue weapons of Uncle Sam's arsenal, and have used that time over the last 2.5 years with a focus of effort on making Master in IDPA when I (finally!) return to the states here in several months.

I am finally coming to the light of the wisdom, "Beware the man with one gun", and though excessive use of Gunbroker and a kind FFL will have me returning to a nice little stockpile of firearms here soon, I understand that I really need to pick a platform and stay with it for awhile if I am to accomplish my goal. I would like to solicit your advice in deciding between the 92FS & Glock 17, both of which I own. I'd also like to add that in addition to eventually making Master in IDPA (SSP), I'd like for this handgun to also be my daily carry gun (I have no issues with concealing a service sized weapon) and just general go to.

Beretta 92FS
Like I said, I get daily access to Uncle Sam's arsenal, so I've focused my effort on working with the M9. I've got massive hands, so most of the usual burdens people gripe about with the M9 do not apply to me. Here is my reasoning for potentially selecting the M9:

PRO
-Besides the "D" spring, doesn't need any other modifications or additions out of the box (IMO)
-Additional safety of being able to ride the hammer when holstering to prevent ND's
-Double action trigger facilitates clean press outs for fast first shot hits, along with a bit more of a margin for error should I get into a situation that warrants me presenting, getting on the trigger, and potentially disengaging.
-I know someone will likely contest this, but the gun just naturally points better for me due to the *wait for it!* more natural grip angle. Should I ever need to utilize unsighted fire, this could potentially come in handy. I do very much understand that I can train around this, but I think it warrants consideration.
-I also shoot Bullseye competitions, of which the Glock is not going to be useful.
-I've already got magazines and a good mag pouch
-I own other DA/SA guns I could potentially utilize for social purposes, and the carryover has utility.

CONS
-Single action. Though my pistol qualification scores are a few points from perfect (doesn't mean much, because the course itself is a joke made by people with no sense of humor, but it's all I've got to go off right now), I just haven't found single-action to be the magic fairy dust the 1911 guys make it out be. Truth be told, in the DA/SA transition, single action is going to be the shot that's off the mark for me. Again, I could probably train through it.
-Addition to the above- just having to learn a separate trigger pull PERIOD. I've found that my finger placement for a good double action shot is a bit different than for a good single action shot. I don't think it's a good thing that I have to be unnecessarily conscious of this so I don't shoot any Charlies and drop points.
-Beretta customer service doesn't have the best reputation, and I strongly dislike their policy of charging you out the wazzoo for maintenance Glock would do for free because you aren't the original owner. That 1+2 warranty thing is complete garbage :mad:, and they should stand behind their product in every situation except blatant neglect or abuse (then again, Buck knives and Zippo lighters don't seem to have to much of an issue). The guns don't break that often, and the parts that do are easily replaceable, so this isn't huge
- I don't own a dedicated .22 conversion kit, and there's no way I'll be paying the $385 for the magical unicorn .22 factory conversion kit that could get me another 92FS or 2500 rounds of 9mm. Personally, I don't find .22 lr to be very useful for defensive/offensive training due to the lack of actual recoil (except for just general slow-fire marksmanship), and can largely get it done on the cheap by snapping in DA with a penny on my slide. .22 LR does have it's other uses, however.
-I don't currently have a good IWB holster.
-If I ever had to pass the gun off to my wife, she is unable to utilize the long DA trigger.
-I've only used Checkmate magazines and Beretta factory, but they don't go in as easy as I would like off speed reloads. Haven't tried Mec-Gar anti friction, though...

Glock 17
Here is my reasoning for potentially selecting the Glock.

PRO's
-Consistent trigger pull
-Lightweight
-Aftermarket support/ factory support easy to access and widespread (not that Beretta parts are expensive or hard to find, but they do cost a bit more)
-I have an Advantage Arms .22 conversion kit
-I already have a good IWB holster, magazines, and magazine pouch.
-My wife could use it if she needed to.

CON's
-I'M A SPECIAL SNOWFLAKE, AND I SOMETIMES DON'T WANT TO SHOOT THE GUN EVERYBODY ELSE DOES!!! The Glock has no style. You can't add any pretty walnut grips to it, or any cool Wilson Combat logo'ed out parts.It's about the equivalency of a handgun power tool. The individualist in me doth rebel, though I have K-frames for when I want to be classy.
-In working my press outs, I've had the gun go off a little earlier than I wanted. Again, trainable.
-The whole grip angle thing I alluded to before. Unsighted fire/point shooting is not going to be as easy. Take it for what it is.
-The sights SUCK out of the box. Already replaced them, but on principle it shouldn't be this way.
-The 2 other DA/SA guns I own that I could potentially use for defensive applications. Me spending an inordinate amount of time on this system means I wouldn't think it prudent to use something that requires de-cocking before holstering.
-I don't want to buy a gadget (sorry Todd!). I'd have to spend more training time ensuring I really look at my holster before I put the gun away.

So, there you have it folks. I understand that I've probably overcomplicated this (hey, I never said I wouldn't:D), but I'd like your input. Thanks!

[john c]

A lot of guys here on the forum agree with everything you mention about the G17. It's not the most accurate, it's not the fastest, it's not the prettiest pistol out there. But it's the most accurate, fast, pretty pistol out there. It's the blend that makes the pistol what it is.

I have the same problem you do with DA/SA transitions. Those that master the DA/SA platforms can shoot very fast and accurate, but it's not for me.

That said, check out the DAO Beretta 92. The DAO pull is excellent, with the ergos you like on the Beretta 92 platform. Plus it'll fit your existing magazines and holsters. Pick one up used on Gunbroker, the police trade-ins are cheap, and you're not out much money if you don't end up liking it.

[fixer]

Are we choosing between the 17 and the 92? or the 92 and the whole glock platform?

I find the 92 easier to conceal than the 17 by a wide margin. In fact with a low profile/ flush mag the 92 conceals as easy as a G19 for me.

The DA/SA transition is as trainable as anything else.

I like the DA as a simple and effective layer of protection against ND.

I've used a few different Glock platforms in local matches. I've used the 92 as well (albeit more often). I find I almost always get more match points and higher percentage with the 92.

My learning curve with the 92 has been shorter and has less ammo behind it than the Glock.

I may not only have one platform, but I'm learning that the DA/SA trigger system works better for me. And could live with only having the 92.

[Kyle Reese]

You can really make the 92 sing by fitting / installing the Wilson Combat trigger bar kit (http://shopwilsoncombat.com/Wilson-Combat-Ultimate-Action-Tune-Kit-Beretta-90-Series/productinfo/748/). It all but eliminates the stack during the DA press, and with a modicum of practice, you should be able to maximize the accuracy potential of this platform.

[JHC]

Tough call. I'm deep into Glock for over 15 years but I've shot a couple thou through a 92 my eldest absconded with. 92 is a fine pistol. Well, you've narrowed it down nicely.

I'd say 92 for the next 3 years so you WILL master the DA and SA trigger. If not now, when? Glocks can always be picked up later and they'll be pretty easy to get up to speed with. Besides the Gen 5 that will be out by then will probably be pretty cool.

[Kalashnikovkid]

Fixer- Between the Glock 17 and 92FS. As cool as all the other 92 variants are, I'd rather spend my money on ammo, rather than another gun.

JHC- good point on mastering the trigger. The 92FS will always translate over the Glock (minus decocking), where as the Glock won't translate over to the 92FS.

[LSP552]

So much of this is personal preference and either of these will serve you well. The biggest disadvantage of the 92 is there just aren't many instructors out there who can teach DA/SA. There are an entire generation that grew up thinking a Glock has a good trigger. Learning to master the DA/SA is NOT as hard as many would have you believe, but taking a class from someone who understands the system will pay huge dividends.

One thing Glock has going is the scalable platform size if that's important.

[TCinVA]

The key to the SA trigger on the 92 is to reset and get the slack out during recoil and then press the trigger to the rear with the same sort of progressive consistent application of pressure you would use on the DA trigger.


There are an entire generation that grew up thinking a Glock has a good trigger.

Like all the kids who think Starbucks is good coffee. It's maddening.

[YVK]

JHC- good point on mastering the trigger. The 92FS will always translate over the Glock (minus decocking), where as the Glock won't translate over to the 92FS.

Having shot both a bit, I actually disagree somewhat. SA pull of B92, especially with D- or Wilson springs, is not as demanding as Glock's pull. DA pull doesn't translate into Glock's pull either.

Somewhere in your original post it says you don't have a problem concealing a service size gun. Neither do I. However, concealing is one thing. Carrying a gun that's almost 40 oz vs a gun that's 28 oz, or something like that, is another. I have carried B92, the Elite version of it, for 7-8 months. I could do it again if I had to, but I'd much rather prefer polymer.

[GardoneVT]

Are you still with Uncle Sam in a professional capacity? If so, stick with the Beretta. Should the balloon go up you might be sent downrange first and told to get handgun training later. In that event , if you're skilled with the 92 not only will you be individually better off but you can act as a one man Firearms Training Unit when your fellow troops stumble on the firing line. As others have said, DA triggers have become a proprietary skill .

Further , issue M9s I've handled were crap on account of lackluster DoD maintenance . Just a bunch of parts held together by wishfull thinking and prayer. Being familiar with the Beretta 92s internals can't hurt,especially if you sign out a Problem Gun.

The 92 also has this going for it- why choose between reliable and pretty when you can have both?

[Kalashnikovkid]

So the general trend seems to advocate the 92FS. I'm leaning that way specifically for the reasons highlighted by GardoneVT- I still wear a uniform and work for Uncle Sam, so should I end up going downrange, knowing how to run the gun I could end up with has its merits. As for teaching other troops, though I'm one of the few people around with the credentials to do it (by military standards, not necessarily Pistol Forum's or my own), I am leaving a unit where I can potentially utilize that capacity to go to an assignment in the States where I will essentially work by myself off in a corner for a couple of years. That being said, I still agree the 92 has its merits (it being pretty AND reliable being one of them).

I lol'ed a bit about DoD maintenance, because I'm directly responsible for it (I happen to think I don't do too bad of a job given that I actualy understand the gun's operational shortcomings), and have a few thoughts on that one I may post in a different thread. I've seen a few things that'll get some laughs around here.

[LostDuke]

So the general trend seems to advocate the 92FS. I'm leaning that way specifically for the reasons highlighted by GardoneVT- I still wear a uniform and work for Uncle Sam, so should I end up going downrange, knowing how to run the gun I could end up with has its merits. As for teaching other troops, though I'm one of the few people around with the credentials to do it (by military standards, not necessarily Pistol Forum's or my own), I am leaving a unit where I can potentially utilize that capacity to go to an assignment in the States where I will essentially work by myself off in a corner for a couple of years. That being said, I still agree the 92 has its merits (it being pretty AND reliable being one of them).

I lol'ed a bit about DoD maintenance, because I'm directly responsible for it (I happen to think I don't do too bad of a job given that I actualy understand the gun's operational shortcomings), and have a few thoughts on that one I may post in a different thread. I've seen a few things that'll get some laughs around here.


True, but you only need one such instructor, and he is often on this Forum: Ernst Langdon. Problem solved.

[Jeep]

My view is that if you are young and still in uniform, go with the M9/92FS. There probably will come a day when you look at the idea of carrying around that much weight on your hip with close to horror, but if it doesn't bother you yet, go with it for the reasons Gardone so ably stated.

[jondoe297]

Like all the kids who think Starbucks is good coffee. It's maddening.

Preach on, brother!

On Topic: While I'm sure many people on here have put many more rounds through both platform than I have, I have still put many many many thousands of rounds through them both. That being said, I prefer the 92-series over the Glock platform. I don't dislike Glock at all, but it's no Beretta to me.

[JHC]

I like Glocks a lot and have grown fond of their triggers coming off of 1911s, BHPs and P7. And I like Starbucks' dark roasts only. Because I like really harsh burnt tasting coffee. Black.

DeVO

[rauchman]

I'm far from the expert that most on here are, however, I own multiple examples of both pistols. Aside from the weight difference in actually carrying the gun ( I live in NJ and carrying is not a realistic option), I like the B92 better for impractical reasons. It's pretty, it's metal, it's got soul (however that's defined). With D spring and Elite II hammer, it's got the nicest DA I've yet experienced. The 2 biggest differences I see between them, metal or plastic, DA/SA or SFA. They are both pretty easy to work (Glock is a little easier), both respond well to thoughtful trigger parts selection, both are reliable, both have cheap mags/parts, both are very accurate, both have solid aftermarket support. For me, it's easier to be a little more accurate on the B92, but it's easier to run the G17 a little faster. If I do dry fire drills on the B92 with DA, my trigger time on the Glock seems to be better. Something about getting the muscle memory of the smooth consistent DA stroke that translates well to the Glock trigger.

As others have said, since your carrying the B92 for your job, stick with it. I don't see a downside to staying with the Beretta. I don't find the DA/SA transition to be all that limiting.

[Totem Polar]

Like all the kids who think Starbucks is good coffee. It's maddening.
I never thought about the parallel before, but you're spot on.

[DocGKR]

If you are still in DOD, then stick with the M9 for now. Otherwise, over the long term, your back will probably like you more if you go with a polymer frame pistol like a G17...

[GardoneVT]

If you are still in DOD, then stick with the M9 for now. Otherwise, over the long term, your back will probably like you more if you go with a polymer frame pistol like a PX4 9mm

Corrected for accuracy . ;)

[Sal Picante]

Here's my $0.02:

I don't think it matters at all.

What matters:

Getting a supply of ammo/reloading
Finding a range that'll let you practice
Scheduling budget and time to make it to the range to practice
Understanding what your goals are and how to break them down to get there



One thing I can say for sure, knowing your stated goal: Don't buy a DAO Beretta. That is terrible advice.

[Chris Rhines]

Here's my $0.02:

I don't think it matters at all.

What matters:

Getting a supply of ammo/reloading
Finding a range that'll let you practice
Scheduling budget and time to make it to the range to practice
Understanding what your goals are and how to break them down to get there



One thing I can say for sure, knowing your stated goal: Don't buy a DAO Beretta. That is terrible advice.
This right here. If you practice twice a week, and dry fire on your off days, it doesn't matter what gun you have.

[john c]

Fixer- Between the Glock 17 and 92FS. As cool as all the other 92 variants are, I'd rather spend my money on ammo, rather than another gun.


Spend the money on a Dillon Square Deal B, especially if you have ready access to range brass. Then with the savings on ammo, buy yourself another gun!

Seriously, reconsider your position on buying more/different guns. I've shot competitively for decades, and am in charge of my department unit's pistol team (when we have one). I frequently see shooters fight their equipment, which holds them back. They don't want to change for cost reasons (understandable) or that they want to "master it" or "overcome it". That's admirable, but if you could spend the couple thousand rounds mastering new skills, rather than overcoming equipment that doesn't fit you to begin with.

My point is that if the B92 or G17 works, perfect. If they don't, forget about them and get something that does. There's no need to be doctrinaire about platform, like "1911's rule". It's just a tool. A tool to get rounds on target.

I'm not strong enough to wield a 54 oz framing hammer like my shooting buddy who's a carpenter. No worries, I have a 32 oz hammer that works for me. Why would I struggle with trying to "master" the 54 oz'er? Is the purpose to master the hammer, or put nails in wood?

Now, all that said, since Uncle Sam doesn't give you any choice on the matter of sidearms, focus on that now. But when you have a choice, get what works best for you.

[Kalashnikovkid]

John C- I'm very much looking into a Dillon progressive for the very reasons you mentioned. Whatever platform I end up choosing, the more time behind the trigger I can get, the better off I'll be. I've got a Lee turret and the necessaries already stockpiled for that very reason.

With that being said, taking the good advice I've received into consideration, I'll be continuing my experimentation phase when I get back to American soil to find the bullet launching platform that'll best help me do what I've set out to do. I did a little considering on the personal merits of the 92FS to those of the Glock 17, and a PX4 in 9mm is starting to look really attractive...

[Clobbersaurus]

I was going to post some drivel about why I like Beretta's and then I remembered about this video, which says it way better than I ever could.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Db8t-f54Im0

[45dotACP]

Put me in the "It doesn't matter." camp. The real question is this:

Do you value performance or aesthetics? I think about dumping the Glock from time to time and then I realize that I am pretty decent with it, so there's really no reason other than "ZOMG Beretta looks kewl"

And yes, I drink Starbucks

:D

[GardoneVT]

Put me in the "It doesn't matter." camp. The real question is this:

Do you value performance or aesthetics? I think about dumping the Glock from time to time and then I realize that I am pretty decent with it, so there's really no reason other than "ZOMG Beretta looks kewl"

And yes, I drink Starbucks

:D

He still works for DoD. Being knowledgeable about the DoDs issue sidearm is what puts the 92 ahead of the Glock for the OP.

If the shoe were on the other foot, fanboy or no I'd advise the G17 for the same reasons. What good will being a Glock expert do should the OP end up in Godforsakenstan and needs to teach his wingmen how to operate the M9, in the event his boss decides a Cultural Awareness PowerPoint is mission critical over handgun range time?

[45dotACP]

I see the point you're making, though the case you make seems to be more for an instructor development course. The concept of training one's peers to shoot is more difficult than the concept of learning to shoot a TDA pistol. By all means, more practice with the nation's service arm is never a bad thing. I enjoy my 92FS and use it in my "off season" when I get sick of shooting Glock for a bit. It's not a difficult gun to shoot well though, and it is not difficult to ingrain the concept of running a TDA pistol. Shooting one at a high level will require practice of course, as will shooting any pistol at a high level.

But like it has been said...It doesn't really matter which. The important thing is that there is regular practice involved. For personal sidearm, I'd worry more about which ammunition to buy and which instructor to train with before I worried about picking a gun from any of the reputable manufacturers (Glock, Sig, HK, S&W, Beretta, CZ) because as a rule, they will all do what is asked of them.

[JSGlock34]

- I don't own a dedicated .22 conversion kit, and there's no way I'll be paying the $385 for the magical unicorn .22 factory conversion kit that could get me another 92FS or 2500 rounds of 9mm. Personally, I don't find .22 lr to be very useful for defensive/offensive training due to the lack of actual recoil (except for just general slow-fire marksmanship), and can largely get it done on the cheap by snapping in DA with a penny on my slide. .22 LR does have it's other uses, however.


I don't think the availability of a .22 kit should sway your decision one way or another, but with the holidays approaching I recommend keeping an eye on the Beretta USA website. Last year I was able to order a factory Beretta .22 kit for over 50% off sometime between Black Friday and New Year's...no guarantee that they'll run the same specials this year, but worth checking out.

[Sal Picante]

Personally, I don't find .22 lr to be very useful for defensive/offensive training due to the lack of actual recoil (except for just general slow-fire marksmanship), and can largely get it done on the cheap by snapping in DA with a penny on my slide. .22 LR does have it's other uses, however.

Having a .22 conversion is not necessary - for either gun - if you've got one, cool, use it and do Garcia Dots at 10 yards, but if you don't, meh...

[GardoneVT]

I see the point you're making, though the case you make seems to be more for an instructor development course. The concept of training one's peers to shoot is more difficult than the concept of learning to shoot a TDA pistol.

The military ,sadly, does not have a consistently positive attitude regarding handgun skills. Some regular units make sure their troops are squared away, while others are so PC they get the bureaucratic hives at their members so much as owning a pistol off post.

If the OP is posted at a unit where handgun practice is prioritized below the Annual Dependapottamous Social, he'll wind up being the only truly experienced shooter in the group.Which means he gets to be instructor by default. In an ideal military Uncle Sam wouldnt put a sexual harassment meeting ahead of firearms training and each unit would have a designated pistol SME ; but we live in interesting times.

[45dotACP]

Ain't that the truth. Pretty damn sad to see the liberal PC attitude in the profession of warriors.

Sent from my VS876 using Tapatalk

[Jeep]

If you are still in DOD, then stick with the M9 for now. Otherwise, over the long term, your back will probably like you more if you go with a polymer frame pistol like a G17...

Is your back mad at you for all those years carrying a 1911? I don't even have that excuse, but my back has expressed to me a very strong view that too much weight on a belt is no longer going to be tolerated.

[Dave J]

I am almost in agreement with those who say it doesn't matter...almost.

From a marksmanship perspective, sights and trigger is still sights and trigger, and skill carries over from other platforms. However, IMHO, if there's a chance you'll deploy with a pistol, I'd vote for the Beretta, for two main reasons.

First, if you wind up in a situation where your chain of command forces you to carry it "on safe", you want to have plenty of practice deactivating it during the draw. (I am old enough not to have to worry about what most people think, so this hasn't applied to me in a long time.)

Secondly, if you actually have to use it, you want to have the decocking habit down pat...as in completely ingrained to where it's so automatic you don't even consciously think about it. That is not a habit you develop by shooting Glocks.

HTH

[Kalashnikovkid]

GardoneVT,

I'm not trying to derail this thread, but do you still wear a uniform or recently get out? I lol'ed really hard at your spot on comments about the true bureaucracy of the military and prioritizing sexual assault training over getting personnel trigger time or quality tactical training, because it so perfectly answers why I'm debating really hard at denying my next assignment and getting out.

I'm just a regular troop who has been lucky enough to be able to complain into an ear sympathetic and powerful enough to grant my wishes of attending some semi high-speed training that does not remotely relate to what my unit actually does. Even then, if I want to seriously train, I have to leave the country on my own dime and time, where absolutely no officer supervision is going to suck the utility out of my efforts under the pretension of "safety".

[GardoneVT]

GardoneVT,

I'm not trying to derail this thread, but do you still wear a uniform or recently get out? I lol'ed really hard at your spot on comments about the true bureaucracy of the military and prioritizing sexual assault training over getting personnel trigger time or quality tactical training, because it so perfectly answers why I'm debating really hard at denying my next assignment and getting out.


Staying in or getting out is between you and Uncle Sam. I kept an open mind about being a 20 year man through my Air Force stint, but the day my "Hell 2 The Naw" lightbulb lit was this day.

I came into work and noticed the HQ folks were going to un-block Facebook and Instagram from the .mil computers. I went "eh, whatever" and shuffled to the supervisor's desk for the day's work.

We get to talking about guns, and he blabs about covering a Springfield SOCOM .308. At that time my gun knowledge began and ended with the AFMAN 10-100.

At my clueless look, he said "screw it I'll show yah." He fires up Internet Explorer to punch in Springfield .com when this happens

"ERROR XYZ : UNAUTHORIZED WEBSITE. BLOCKED BY DOD ORDER blahblahblah- whatever. FORBIDDEN CATEGORY:GUNS ,VIOLENCE "

We tried it again.

Same screen.

Now it was his turn to look dumfounded. Here we were, law abiding servicemen in uniform on an active duty military installation in a time of war, blocked from viewing a gun website like we were in the Washington DC Brady Campaign main lobby.

Good thing we could check our Facebook status though!

[azerious]

I just sold my last 17 to buy a 92G....Got an AIWB holster for it, and TONS of parts from WC....I'm happy!

[Kyle Reese]

I just sold my last 17 to buy a 92G....Got an AIWB holster for it, and TONS of parts from WC....I'm happy!

Enjoy! I love mine, especially after adding the excellent WC trigger bar & 12# mainspring.

[azerious]

Enjoy! I love mine, especially after adding the excellent WC trigger bar & 12# mainspring.

It has re-ignited my love for shooting again, and adding/upgrading parts is sooo much more rewarding on the Beretta than the glock. As far as performance changes. I.E. Trigger, steel parts, grips, etc etc!

[Mr. Goodtimes]

I have one pistol... a Glock 19. It's my carry gun, my comp gun, my range gun... You get the idea. I like guns, and if I had more money I'd have more guns but, I have other expensive hobbies that consume my money and if my one pistol does the trick why waste money on another?

Even if I was a bottomless pit of cash and had a room full of guns, I'd really only shoot/carry one at any given time.

Most of the people I see who own a ton of guns and shoot them all can't seem shoot any one of them particularly well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk