Beretta 92X Performance

[Manbearspider]

The original Beretta grip is one of the largest ones in the 9mm family.

You can always take a smaller grip and make it fatter for big hands, but you cant take a big frame and make it smaller.

I must be in the minority, because I love the Vertec grip, and have one of the original models.
My first ever pistol purchase was a standard 92, and I can use it just fine, but i sill prefer the smaller grip.

This. Less metal on the frame means more volume for Beretta or the aftermarket to do different things in whatever material they want. Are there any pictures going around of what this new hard plastic full grip looks like?

[Medusa]

I confess I’m hoping any LTT compact will take a new dovetail slide and run it on the traditional frame.

[JonInWA]

I argue that the perceived girth of the original 92F grip has much to do with the girt of the grip plates, and simply by switching to some of the thinner aftermarket options now easily available can make a significant difference in handling and feel, without having necessarily going to the re-sculpting of the receiver frame itself that the Vertec and similar do.

Personally, I like the curvature and fit in my palm of the "standard" 92F (both on the initial early 92F/92FS/M9 receivers and on the subsequent niched-in grip tang Beretta transitioned to later in 92FS/96 production). But I also tend to prefer a curved mainspring housing as opposed to a flat one on my 1911s....

Another beneficial ergonomic add that I like is to go with an extended magazine release, which minimizes hand/finger shifting necessary to access and activate the magazine release.

Best, Jon

[EB71]

The original Beretta grip is one of the largest ones in the 9mm family.

You can always take a smaller grip and make it fatter for big hands, but you cant take a big frame and make it smaller.

I must be in the minority, because I love the Vertec grip, and have one of the original models.
My first ever pistol purchase was a standard 92, and I can use it just fine, but i sill prefer the smaller grip.

A compact with a vertec frame is exactly what my small hands have been waiting for.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Xrslug]

This. Less metal on the frame means more volume for Beretta or the aftermarket to do different things in whatever material they want. Are there any pictures going around of what this new hard plastic full grip looks like?

If you look closely at the picture of the compact 92X on the website it has a “wraparound” grip on it, although it seems to have a less pronounced hump at the base (maybe just because it is a compact grip).

[Bucky]

Honestly, it's just a marketing thing... X denotes their latest line building off the original 92X. I kinda see it as Beretta's way of reaffirming their validity of the 92 series in modern times where polymer is king.

Yeah, but it's just lazy. 92F, 92FS, 92G, 92D, 92DS all have meanings regarding their safety / trigger configuration.

[spinmove_]

This is all great and really nice for the 92 series and I love my converted 92G, but how about mounting a red dot for carry to one of these beasts? Granted I’m not carrying red dots now, but I’d have a hard time investing in a platform that can’t accept them in 2019. My eyesight is still pretty decent, but it’s not getting any better and that doesn’t account for all of the other benefits of using a red dot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jared]

I argue that the perceived girth of the original 92F grip has much to do with the girt of the grip plates, and simply by switching to some of the thinner aftermarket options now easily available can make a significant difference in handling and feel, without having necessarily going to the re-sculpting of the receiver frame itself that the Vertec and similar do.

Personally, I like the curvature and fit in my palm of the "standard" 92F (both on the initial early 92F/92FS/M9 receivers and on the subsequent niched-in grip tang Beretta transitioned to later in 92FS/96 production). But I also tend to prefer a curved mainspring housing as opposed to a flat one on my 1911s....

Another beneficial ergonomic add that I like is to go with an extended magazine release, which minimizes hand/finger shifting necessary to access and activate the magazine release.

Best, Jon

I spent some time reading the specs on the website, looks like all 92x models are supposed to come with standard and wrap around grips. D spring standard as well. Those two things combined make me think this is damn near perfect lineup and something people have been begging beretta for for years

[MattyD380]

Interesting the "X" is going to be a "line" now. Makes sense to me.

I still like my Italian, non-railed 92C... but if I were buying a new one, more ergonomic grips and better sights are definite pluses. They say "enhanced fire control" in the description... I would hope that means a non-hitchy, catchy trigger bar (like the one in mine). But, I'm guessing it probably means they just put a D spring in it. I'm also very happy they left the rail off the compact X (for now) AND they gave it a rounded trigger guard. Us "clean, smooth lines" kinda people commend you, Beretta. And it looks like maybe the dust cover is straight? That's cool.

I would have wanted low-profile levers on the compact. That just seems like a no brainer. A 92 needs zero extra help in the girth department--especially one you might stick in your pants. Other than that, I love what they've done with the compact. Well done, Beretta.

[MolonLabe416]

https://www.thetacticalwire.com/rele...8-8cd992a43dd6