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 , 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), 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. 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?