Thank you both for the replies!
What technique do you all use for decocking the PX4? On other DA/SA I use my off hand thumb. Is this effective on the PX4?
The one I messed with at the store was an F type so I couldn't get a good feel of using the docker as I do on other guns.
I find that carrying the 45 PX4 concealed is easy. It feels slightly lighter than the 40, or less dense. The Compact or SubCompact don't feel advantageous to me because the magazine weight compared to the leverage of the barrel length give a different feel.Originally Posted by JTQ
However, one does get used to what they do a lot.
My wife likes her SubCompact for concealment.
Last edited by PX4 Storm Tracker; 01-20-2018 at 09:47 AM.
That will depend on several things, rating from hand size of an individual, to which decockers one has on the gun. (not the same with the 92 style to either one of the other levers for me)
TheNewbie, When a PX4 is a type F the left lever's shaft has a detent ball and spring that drag and fall into a hole in the slide. This causes resistance. The point being that when a Storm is converted to type G (decocker only, no safety) that ball & spring are removed. Therefore the levers move a lot more easily!
The standard (stock) levers, converted to type G are easy, but slightly forward where they stick out. If your hand is smaller, you have to reach. Larger and it's right there.
Model 92 style levers, converted to type G are as easy as you get! They have good surface to contact anywhere.
The Low Profile (Stealth) levers are more difficult to operate. The smaller the lever the less "leverage".
My wife has used all 3 on her modified PX4 Compact and settled on the M-92 levers. She just reaches up with the shooting thumb (we do everything righty and lefty). With standard levers she has to reach and think about it more. With the Low Profile levers she uses 2 fingers over the top with the non shooting hand to do both levers at once.
My shooting partner has Low Profile on his modified .45 SD and it took practice and his tongue hanging out for a little, but he just reaches up and thumbs them down.
Using your off hand thumb can work. We don't train with that, because we want each hand independently capable of all fighting functions if the other is injured.
Last edited by PX4 Storm Tracker; 01-20-2018 at 02:32 PM.
Are you shooting factory ammo or reloads ?
What type or what load ?
HCM, In .45 I use Winchester white box, 230 grn FMJ for target work and Federal Premium HST 230 grn +P for defense. I almost went to American Eagle, because Federal primers are easier to ignite and Winchesters are inconsistently tough, but they (American Eagle) are copper dipped, not jacketed. Leading and fouling are possible.
I used to reload, for many years, back in the revolver days, but currently the cost of components is even more than Wal-Mart prices for cartridges.
Actually, the only dimension the .45 differs is front/back of the grip... considering 9mm/.40 is shorter. The .45 slide will also fit on a 9mm/.40 frame (fits on the rails), but will not move backwards.
I will add that the .45 PX4 is very easy to shoot, similar to the 9mm or .40 version. Only issue for me was that it was only available in full size, with 9 or 10 round magazines (when I had mine, I traded the 10 rounder and standardized on the 9 rounders). If they did a Compact, I’d have been more interested... so, I got rid of it when I got my Glock 30S. Smaller gun, better magazine options, and at the time I made the move... more support than the PX4 line.
The big thing with the .45 PX4 was the design of the magazine/frame. Beretta didn’t go overboard with it, and it feels closer to the 9mm/.40 than a Glock 21 verses 17/22. If you look at Glock’s design history of their .45 pistols, you’ll notice that if they could do it all over again, the 21 would likely have a 9/10 round capacity instead of 13. They went from the standard 21, tried the 36, went with the SF frame... then did the .45 GAP to get back into the 9mm/.40 size (utter failure for them). If they weren’t as heavily invested in that 13 round magazine, I’m sure you’d see a major redesign.
When it comes down to it, the same reason I liked the .45 PX4 (comfortable grip) was the opposite reason I went with the 30S (better magazine options). I would like to see smaller versions of it, whether a Compact or a S/C... but would like to see them keep the rotating barrel (even a longer slide/shorter frame combination). But I’d love to see them take the APX and offer it in .45, with a magazine that utilizes the PX4 magazine body design.
Thanks for the input! I will however, need to disagree and offer evidences for everyone's consideration. I appreciate your patience.
I have in front of me a full-sized .40 and a couple of .45s. The .40 is decisively thinner and the barrel is .10" shorter. Evidences anyone can check? Yes.
The cam block for the .45 (available at Brownells) is much wider than the 9’s or .40’s. It won't fit in there.
Next I call to witness () Ernest Langdon, who offered the .45 SD trigger bar in his Trigger Job in a Bag. Folks putting it in had trouble and it did not work. He acknowledged that the .45 part would not work outside of a .45.
Next, I have cataloged photos of trigger bars and parts for size (and shape) comparison.
Next, I have Beretta Customer Service (Eric- been there for many years) saying that the .45 is designed with more tolerance room because of more carbons.
When I ordered a spare extractor for my .45 (just in case), it is a different, larger part than the full size 9s or .40s
I could go, but don't want to come off as rude (I am not, I am enjoying your opinions and input), so I conclude with your statement, "The .45 slide will also fit on a 9mm/.40 frame (fits on the rails), but will not move backwards." If it will not move backwards, they are not the same size.
There are many parts that are common to the .45, full size 9s & .40s & Compact. There are parts in common with the SubCompact. They are not all the same size.
As to the magazines, they are made by Mechanica Del Sarco and are not double stack (technically), but "staggered". & Yes, I fully agree that the thinner grip is great!
Please don't mistake my zeal or attention to detail for hostility. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
Last edited by PX4 Storm Tracker; 01-20-2018 at 06:02 PM.
Huh?
Think you took my post a little out of context. I was specifically speaking on your point about the .45 being wider. Didn’t imply that the frames/designs are identical other than width. And considering that most of my post was about magazine stacking/thickness of the grip... I figured it would be clear enough. Sorry if it was not.
Years ago, a member on BerettaForum was asking about converting his .45 with a .40 slide available on GunBroker. I specifically tried the slides on both guns to confirm it wouldn’t work for him. One combination... forget which... would allow the block to lock on the takedown lever, but still, the slide stopped from moving backwards. If the .45 was dimensionally wider, one slide wouldn’t have fit on the other frame, and one would be loose. The fact that the backstraps and magazine release parts being standard for all three calibers reinforces that the frames are similar in that dimension.
Are the barrels, extractors, blocks, and other parts effected by caliber sizes the same? No, never implied it. A .45 slide has to move farther back to eject and chamber the longer .45 compared to a 9mm slide ejecting/chambering a 9mm. The hammer on a .45 needs to be further back for a similar reason, so yes, the trigger arm needs to be longer on the .45. The actual hole in the frame for the magazine has to be longer (not wider) because the .45 magazine is longer (front to back) than a 9mm magazine. I also wouldn’t think I’d be that dense to say they are completely identical, but the slide would not move rearward. Width is shown that the slides can get on the rails between calibers... but obviously the ejector and other caliber specific parts/clearances are keeping the slides from cycling.
To also add, MDS has been making Beretta magazines for years... pretty much, they are identical to PB magazines. It is a factory magazine, just made in a different location than Beretta. MDS is actually owned by Beretta. With the 92/96, the MDS magazines were just a few dollars cheaper than PB magazines. Unsure how they are priced currently, or if they have specific models being made at MDS/PB... but MDS is Beretta.
To be clear, I’ve been out of the .45 PX4 for years... and no regret for it. It is a good firearm, but there are better options for me out there. With that being said, I’m not saying I’m better than you or know more about them. Didn’t have a round count close to yours on my .45 when I traded it... but I did own it and a 9mm at the same time for a few years. Both were ran in the same holsters, both were shot side by side, and even once sat there for a couple seconds trying to load a .45 magazine into a 9mm pistol. Sorry, but just giving an additional viewpoint... which pretty much supports yours. Only point I made was regarding width, which isn’t really calling you out... just expanding.
Last edited by Screwball; 01-20-2018 at 07:39 PM.
I wonder how the PX4 (SD) .45 would compare to my HK45...hmmmm. Might have to pick one up to see.
Shoot more, post less...
Reply With Quote