From JJs Facebook.
It really is that different. Multiple companies made the 1911 for the military. A single company made 92s for the military. One. The point I'm trying to get across is that the M9 is reliant upon a single company (Beretta) to reach a similar progression as the 1911.
Name 4 reputable companies making a 1911 pattern pistol. Wilson Combat, Les Baer, Ed Brown, Dan Wesson. That's just the semi-custom market. You could name 4 high end gun smiths, and 4 production grade companies on top of that without much effort.
Name 4 reputable companies making a 92.
Not the same is it? And while there might be a few companies making 92 series knock offs, everyone recognizes them for what they are: knockoffs. They don't have the support, after market, interchangeability, reliability, quality, track record... They're just not equals to the Beretta 92 in any way. Most of them are a joke. Taurus is the closest to a real 92, but it lacks the serious testing of Beretta.
Because the M9 wasn't made by several different companies, no company other than Beretta has any clout or lineage with the 92 series. And even if there were others who were willing to give the 92 a go without having made one in the past, my bet is Beretta would have them in court in very short order. There isn't a plethora of companies who have the ability to produce 92s and actually market them in the US, like the 1911. The 92 might become a similar aficionado gun, but it's never going to be like the 1911.
-Cory
Could you point out any innovations by companies (other than Colt) that made 1911s for the military? I'm not sure that analogy holds.
And at what point did people start making 1911s that weren't modifications to Colt guns? I don't have a good historical perspective (I'm not old enough), but it was at least the 1980s, right?
There are differences between the situations of the 1911 and M9, not the least of which is that there never was a glut of surplus M9s for people to modify, but I don't think you're accurately identifying what they are.
Last edited by perlslacker; 07-05-2019 at 06:18 PM.
"When the phone rang, Parker was in the garage, killing a man."
There are no other companies making 92s. Period. Unless I'm wrong, no other compabies can begin making 92s.
My point is that the 92 will always be reliant on Beretta, the 1911 is no longer reliant on Colt.
Im seriously interested in your point of view, but we should start another thread I think. I like thinking about the 92s future post M9, and it's compariaon to the 1911 in that regard. I don't want to derail this too much more though.
-Cory