Beretta 92X Performance

[10mmfanboy]

I agree, 92 series will just get more popular now it was a once service military sidearm. One of the reason's I believe Bill Wilson likes them and started making their own versions.

The Vertec frame does take a little getting used to but for me it works really well, I can really choke up on that grip size. I do believe many shooters will benefit from a vertec grip and I wouldn't poo poo the new grips until I tried one. And I'm sure companies will start making various different grip panels anyway.

The bang for your buck is excellent in this series of pistols! I love the px4 as well but when you start getting into $800 plus it gets to be a hard pill to swallow for one.

My prediction is the 92x will sell like hot cakes and probably attract newer shooters to the platform as well, it is now more conducive to a wider spectrum of people that may have been interested in the 92 but was just physically too big for them to properly handle.

[Trooper224]

After my Saturday morning shooting session, I dropped in next door at the Wichita Gun Club. They happened to have one of the new 92X models in stock. The standard full size, not the Performance model. My main point of interest lay in the new plastic grip module. I have to admit, it's a great improvement over the previous Hogue version found on the M9A3. It's very thin, so those who prefer the ultra thin grips on the standard frame will probably like it. It wasn't mounted on the gun and I didn't ask to do so, so this is just conjecture. For myself, I suspect it still might be a bit thin but perhaps not too much. A similarly shaped set of two piece G10s might be the answer for me.

Overall quality of fit and finish was good, commensurate with my Wilson Centac. The trigger was equal as well, as my Centac didn't come with Wilsons action job. The 92X obviously had a D Spring installed so it's a wash on that. The 92X also came with Beretta's G conversion lever installed. Wilsons claim of increased tolerances seems to consist largely of bovine feces, so the point is moot. Other than the addition of a tritium front sight on the Centac, there really wasn't much of a difference. Considering comparative prices of $795 and $1250, I'd be hard pressed to choose the Centac over a 92X Centurion if given the choice. I might still do it due to the Centac's tritium sight and standard grip frame (no need for a retrofit), but I'd have to think hard on it.

Unless you're looking for an action job and NP3 coated parts, I think the 92X steals a lot of thunder from the Wilson and Langdon guns.

[Beretta1526]

G10 Wraparounds intended for Vertec full size frames will be available within 2 weeks on the website. Black w/medallion.

Working on doing more G10 options soon as well.

I definitely want a set of these for the 92X Type G inbound.

.

[JTQ]

Considering comparative prices of $795 and $1250, I'd be hard pressed to choose the Centac over a 92X Centurion if given the choice. I might still do it due to the Centac's tritium sight and standard grip frame (no need for a retrofit), but I'd have to think hard on it.

Unless you're looking for an action job and NP3 coated parts, I think the 92X steals a lot of thunder from the Wilson and Langdon guns.

I agree. Quoting myself again from that Langdon M9 thread from a couple of years ago...

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....tta-M9-Project

I think "the folks" would just like to get a G-model - with anything else on it - that doesn't cost over $1,000.

The price difference between a 92FS/G (though I don't really know what a 92G costs since I've never seen one in the flesh) and a Wilson 92G Brigadier Tactical or 92G-SD is pretty much the cost of a Glock. That's a pretty big delta for a lot of folks.

of course e_stern made this comment in the same thread...

Watching feedback with interest guys

I think folks are just glad to get a G model with dovetailed sights that isn't over $1,000. The guys (and gals) with smaller hands can now find a Beretta to their liking that the 92A1 and other models offered for those with bigger hands.

It is good to have these options, though I do agree with GJM's post earlier, there will be some buyers, but it is a polymer/striker fired world and no matter how much folks like these new Beretta 92 options, poly guns will out sell them by a bunch.

[Trooper224]

though I do agree with GJM's post earlier, there will be some buyers, but it is a polymer/striker fired world and no matter how much folks like these new Beretta 92 options, poly guns will out sell them by a bunch.

I'm not disagreeing. If I wanted to be rude I'd tell you both, "Thanks for the heads up Captain Obvious."

I don't think Beretta's expecting to turn the market around either. However, there are plenty of avenues for gun sales outside of LE and military work. My two examples of the revolver and the 1911 bear that out. Neither has been a strong contender in those markets for many years, yet they still show strong sales. Beretta is already making similar guns for Wilson and Langdon, so it isn't a big logistical stretch to add guns with similar features to their own inventory. If there was no room in the market for designs other than the top contenders, we'd all be shooting nothing but Glocks and ARs.

Stating that something won't outsell a plastic fantastic is like warning someone that jumping off a skyscraper might leave a mark. Well, no shit.

[jeep45238]

Placed my order. Looking forward to shooting it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Caballoflaco]

I don’t think Beretta is probably “investing” that much money in the 92x. It’s not like they haven’t payed of the r&d and tooling costs of the 92 looong ago. From Beretta’s standpoint it makes sense to update the product line by assembling “new” model pistols with parts they already developed for various other models. Keeping the production lines that have already been paid for making your company money makes since.

As we have seen with newer pistols like the Hudson if they were to start making the 92x as a new model pistol today it would probably retail for close to what a Wilson does straight from the factory.

[AJD21]

More revolvers are actually sold annually today than in the 1980’s. People buy a lot more guns these days and population growth.

[GyroF-16]

I don’t think Beretta is probably “investing” that much money in the 92x. It’s not like they haven’t payed of the r&d and tooling costs of the 92 looong ago. From Beretta’s standpoint it makes sense to update the product line by assembling “new” model pistols with parts they already developed for various other models. Keeping the production lines that have already been paid for making your company money makes since.

Except that Vertec Centurian and Compact frames are NEW parts (somebody correct me if I’m wrong), and Compact\Centurian-length slides with dovetailed front sights were only made for Wilson prior to the 92X line.
And the new (reportedly thin) wrap-around grips to emulate the traditional 92 frame’s grip shape are new, too.
I’d submit that Beretta IS putting some time and money into the 92. I sincerely hope they get some good profits in return.

[Jared]

I'm not disagreeing. If I wanted to be rude I'd tell you both, "Thanks for the heads up Captain Obvious."

I don't think Beretta's expecting to turn the market around either. However, there are plenty of avenues for gun sales outside of LE and military work. My two examples of the revolver and the 1911 bear that out. Neither has been a strong contender in those markets for many years, yet they still show strong sales. Beretta is already making similar guns for Wilson and Langdon, so it isn't a big logistical stretch to add guns with similar features to their own inventory. If there was no room in the market for designs other than the top contenders, we'd all be shooting nothing but Glocks and ARs.

Stating that something won't outsell a plastic fantastic is like warning someone that jumping off a skyscraper might leave a mark. Well, no shit.

I don’t get the idea that it needs to outsell a Glock to be a success either. About the only thing the line really needs to do is make money for Beretta. I think it’s got the feature set to do exactly that. I also think the M9A3 and the Wilson Brig Tac showed Beretta there was a market for a well featured 92 if they’d just build the damn thing. And they’ve built a bunch of them since the introduction of those models.

It’s funny, but I don’t remember this much hand wringing about how Sig was investing in yesterday’s tech when the Legion guns hit. I do remember the mocking of the Legion marketing, but not the idea of a well featured DA/SA. Actually, I think this 92X line stomps the Legion series. Better finish, I’d wager the trigger quality will be more consistently good, and they’re about $400 bucks cheaper than a Legion. That leaves plenty of room to upgrade sights and buy mags and holsters.