Beretta 92A1, Glock 17, M&P 9F....Which should I Choose?

[ToddG]

I have a sincere fondness for the 92-series and contrary to other comments, never had corrosion, reliability, or durability issues. The triggers are usually very nice and the unique slide design not only dramatically reduces the chance of ejection failures but also means the gun can have a much lighter recoil spring than its peers in the marketplace. That would ordinarily make it a good choice for people who have less upper body strength, but such people also tend to have smaller hands. The trigger reach on the 92 is very long (can be alleviated somewhat with a factory short trigger) and the grip circumference can be difficult for some people to handle.

Between the Glock and the M&P it's almost more a matter of taste than anything else. Before the gen4-era fiasco, Glock certainly had the edge in terms of reputation for durability. Today, I'd say they're pretty much on par with one another. I'd give the nod to the M&P in terms of slightly better ergonomics -- as long as you don't rely on the right side slide release lever -- and the Glock has a better trigger out of the box. If you spend enough money swapping parts, you can improve either one of them to the point that it should be fine for you.

The M&P also has the 9mm lockup/accuracy issue, which candidly would be the main reason I'd personally steer toward the Glock if forced to choose between the two in 9mm.

[Suvorov]

You get a Beretta and you will constantly have people telling you you should have bought a Glock and telling you how they are unreliable, break all the time, rust, are impossible to shoot accurately because of the DA trigger pull and on and on. I'll echo Todd's experiences in that I have had nothing but good experience with the Beretta as my primary handgun for almost the past 20 years. Reliability has been as good as anyone can reasonably expect and I have never had issues with malfunctions despite going through my "firearms need to be shot dry phase." It was also my issued firearm in the military and the only ones I saw with issues were due to either poor maintenance (the title "armorer" at company level is an absurd joke), crap magazines, Joe finger banging it too much (taking the grips off and then running rags through the mag well), or Joe just not knowing how to operate a handgun. My personal and issue guns have been absurdly reliable for tens of thousands of rounds. The only parts that I have ever had any corrosion issues with have been the grip screws due to sweaty paws. Now I will grant that I have not wallowed through the mud for weeks at a time with it (I was a tanker thank God), but I have gotten them pretty dang dusty and subjected them to far more than a typical LE or EDC user would and they have always gone bang when the trigger was pulled.

The only legitimate arguments against it are that it is probably too big for daily concealed carry (a glock 19, HK USPc /P2000, or Sig228 would be better if this is a primary issue for you), and the DA/SA system may not be the best trigger system for you.

[fixer]

I like the 92 and the gen3 g17.

On paper the 92 looks like the lamest pistol ever conceived. Hpwever, when actually operating the pistol, it is impressive.

[phidelta308]

My experience with my police trade in Beretta 92FS has been great. It has had one malfunction in 3,481 rounds (since I got it). It is soft shooting, and very accurate. The DA/SA trigger is not hard to get used to. If you get a newer model with the polymer coated trigger, I think you may benefit by swapping it for a steel trigger. The polymer doesn't seem to smooth out quite the same way as the steel trigger. Also, installing a "D" spring makes the DA pull much more manageable.

That said, it is quite large and heavy. With a proper holster and belt, and dressing around the gun, I can conceal it, and I suspect most people can. But due to its size and weight, you probably won't want to carry it all day if you don't have to.

If you want a night stand gun for things that go bump in the night, I think a 92A1 would excel in that role. If you want to carry it, you may be better off going with polymer gun, or a slimmer/lighter alloy framed gun.

[DocGKR]

I went through the Police Academy with a beautiful Italian made 92F that did not have a malfunction in the approx 25,000 rounds I put through it. Nonetheless, the 92 series is overly big, unergonomic, has a lame safety, is hard to work on, has several small parts prone to breakage, and a DA/SA trigger.

If you are going to CCW the pistol for real get a G19; other wise go with a G17 or M&P9 w/Apex parts...then stop worrying about handguns, take some great training classes, go put 50,000-100,000 rounds through the pistol over the next 5 years, and let us know how much you have improved.

[JonInWA]

I tend to fall somewhere in the middle here. Regarding the Beretta, I think that they're a well made, accurate gun, but somewhat "old school"-i.e., somewhat large-probably larger than needed; screw-attached grips; coming out-of-the-box with an adequate, but superceded finish (teflon-based spray on/bake in Bruniton versus melonite, ion bond DLC, tenifer, etc), and a somewhat fragile trigger return spring. Most, if not all of these shortcomings can be addressed-i.e., Wolff Trigger Conversion Unit replacing the OEM trigger return spring (but newer 92-series guns with a polymer trigger will need to replace that trigger with the original Bruniton-coated steel one for the TCU to be installable), Trausch grips significantly slim down the girth, et al. I've kept the OEM Bruniton finish on mine, and other than some slight wear on the high points, it's held up remarkably well-but if I was subjecting the gun to truly heavy duty in an adverse environment, I'd probably give a hard look at NP3 or ion bond DLC. I personally have come to prefer to long out-of-production 92D varient, which provides a smooth, relatively light (approximately 8 lb) triggerpull (albeit with a fairly long reset distance), and eliminates the manual safety issues. I competed with in IDPA and carried my 92D daily for six months earlier this year, and was pretty pleased with it.

Overall, however, Glocks are my favorite out of the palette discussed, and the platform with which I clearly shoot the best with. They are exceptionally user friendly in terms of shooting, maintenance, and field/detail stripping. Gen4 and concurrent Gen 3/Gen4 extractor issues considered, I think that Glock is fairly effectively addressing these issues systemmically. On a recent Gen 3 gun, I simply replaced the "dip" MIM extractor with a new older one, and have had zero problems (and, in all fairness, I might well have had zero problems with the OEM MIM unit-I just had a solution on hand which I immediately applied). Glock seems to be being pretty aggressively committed in terms of dealing with and resolving reported customer service for reported issues with new Gen4 and Gen 3 guns.

Despite some glowing endorsements of the MP line by people that I respect, I still reluctantly consider the M&P to be a bit of a work in progress-with Smith & Wesson not as aggressively seeking solutions/resolutions to endemic and pervasive issues as Glock seems to be doing. I'm frankly a bit more tolerant of a parts-replacement approach to an older-generation platform like the Beretta 92-series than I am regard the newer M&P line; I'm a bit skeptical of spending monies for "new improved" solution gun, and then immediately have to go to the aftermarket (i.e. Apex) to achieve what should have been present at the point of purchase trigger-wise; and then there are continuous reports of accuracy and parts issues with the M&P platform, albeit more in some caliber chamberings than in others.

At the end of the day, I'm inclined to recommend Glock as my first choice, but would not necessarily disregard a Beretta 92-series gun, with modifications as discussed-particularly if the intended user indexes well with the platform, and shoots well with it. Yeah, it's a bit old-school, but construction and reliability seem to have been maintained over the years, which is more than can be said for some of its competitors, old and/or new. While some components, previously steel, have been replaced with polymer (trigger, guide rod, mainspring cap/lanyard loop and safety levers I believe) these parts replacements appear to be well engineered and have not compromised operation, reliability, and/or durability.

Best, Jon

[RockBottom]

The M&P also has the 9mm lockup/accuracy issue, which candidly would be the main reason I'd personally steer toward the Glock if forced to choose between the two in 9mm.

Is there a way to know if your M&P has this issue if you're an average (or worse) shooter? Also, is there any word if S&W is working on fixing this issue? From what I've read it seems like a great gun overall, but I'm too much of a newb to know how serious this issue is. I've shot a G19 and M&P40 at the range this Monday - but really wanted to try the M&P9 and G17, but they were out of rentals for both of them (it was a MADHOUSE at the range - totally packed!). I like the M&P40 a lot better than the G19 (I know they are different calibers) but want to get a 9 not a 40 due to ammo cost.

By the way, this is a great site!!!

[LittleLebowski]

Is there a way to know if your M&P has this issue if you're an average (or worse) shooter? Also, is there any word if S&W is working on fixing this issue? From what I've read it seems like a great gun overall, but I'm too much of a newb to know how serious this issue is. I've shot a G19 and M&P40 at the range this Monday - but really wanted to try the M&P9 and G17, but they were out of rentals for both of them (it was a MADHOUSE at the range - totally packed!). I like the M&P40 a lot better than the G19 (I know they are different calibers) but want to get a 9 not a 40 due to ammo cost.

By the way, this is a great site!!!

It only affects standard size M&Ps in 9mm at distances over 15 yards. I've heard rumors of a fix but nothing concrete.

[TGS]

I think only considering those three choices is quite limiting.

If the Beretta 92 size isn't workable for you, consider the 92 Compact for $557. If it were available in a "G" decocker only model, I would rather have that than the M&P or Glock (provided it's reliable like it's bigger brother...I've no experience with the compact).

If it's not available in the G type, I would consider an M&P Compact. It's not the same size as a Glock 26 or P2000sk. It's in between those and the P2000/Glock 19, and is still big enough for me to establish a full proper grip. Big enough to fight with, small enough to conceal everyday. The plus is it doesn't suffer from early unlocking like the M&P fullsize.

Also, don't forget the Steyr M9's (designed by a Glock engineer) or the Walther P99. I personally would rather have a P99 AS due to it's trigger and striker indicator as opposed to the PPQ, and would prefer it to any SFA pistol.

[JSGlock34]

It only affects standard size M&Ps in 9mm at distances over 15 yards. I've heard rumors of a fix but nothing concrete.

It might not be as common on the compacts but it still can happen. One of my friends has a 9C that was shooting nearly 12" high at 25 yards during a class with Todd (he diagnosed the problem). Even a return trip to S&W hasn't completely solved the problem (it still shoots high but not as pronounced). Appears to be a problem with early unlocking - and is exacerbated with lower powered practice ammo.