"This is THE Most Underrated Pistol in 2023" ( The PX4)

[CSW]

@CSW - You can get most of the improvement on a PX4 relatively cheaply. Reducing the DA trigger can be done by replacing the mainspring with either the D version (the one for the PX4 is different from the one for a 92) or a lighter one from LTT. I'm running the D spring because I ran out of enough small pistol primers for both my 9x19s and my .38 Specials, so I used small rifle primers for the 9x19 loads and the D spring pops those reliably, as well as NATO-spec factory ammo. Converting the F version to a G is supposedly just a matter of disassembling the safety and leaving out a bearing when you reassemble it; I had LTT do it when I had sights installed so I don't know from experience.

Thank you.
I've dove into the videos on the Px4, and I'm also very familiar with the disassembly of the 92 series.
The only things I'd want to do would be ;
D hammer.
D, or just a touch lighter hammer spring.
Lower profile levers, but I'm rockin a 92 now without issues.
Swap the mag release to the other side.

All the rest could be a project in the making.

[LangdonTactical]

I came to a realization this past weekend. I was at a shoot for one of our dealers, and we had quite a few of our guns on the range for people to shoot. I was surprised at how few of the shooters noticed how nice my personal PX4 full-size shot, or the PX4 Compact for that matter. In my head, I am thinking, "Don't you see how great that is, how fast the dot comes back to the same place, how easy it is to shoot it very quickly and accurately."

Then I had a GM shoot it that was there representing another company. He was amazed at how well it shot. He stopped shooting it after a couple of mags and said, "I am stopping, it is just making me mad, and it is going to get expensive if I keep going."

I realized most of the shooting public, and I do mean most of them, have no idea if a gun shoots really well or not. Most people likely do not see the sights lift when the gun fires, much less really call their shots. Most people don't track their sights in recoil, so they don't really know how quickly it comes back. They jerk the shit out of the trigger, so they cannot tell how precise and consistent it is. That means that they cannot really see or feel how well the PX4 shoots. Or, on that note, how badly some other guns shoot.

This explains to me why Beretta has had such a hard time selling this gun in America. The 92, for example, is a beautiful gun. Like it or hate it, it is a really good-looking gun. Most people look at the PX4, maybe don't like how it looks, and then move on. Regardless of how well it shoots, they cannot even tell, so they shop for guns based on what looks good or what others tell them is good.

I have no answer here, just an observation.

[TheNewbie]

I came to a realization this past weekend. I was at a shoot for one of our dealers, and we had quite a few of our guns on the range for people to shoot. I was surprised at how few of the shooters noticed how nice my personal PX4 full-size shot, or the PX4 Compact for that matter. In my head, I am thinking, "Don't you see how great that is, how fast the dot comes back to the same place, how easy it is to shoot it very quickly and accurately."

Then I had a GM shoot it that was there representing another company. He was amazed at how well it shot. He stopped shooting it after a couple of mags and said, "I am stopping, it is just making me mad, and it is going to get expensive if I keep going."

I realized most of the shooting public, and I do mean most of them, have no idea if a gun shoots really well or not. Most people likely do not see the sights lift when the gun fires, much less really call their shots. Most people don't track their sights in recoil, so they don't really know how quickly it comes back. They jerk the shit out of the trigger, so they cannot tell how precise and consistent it is. That means that they cannot really see or feel how well the PX4 shoots. Or, on that note, how badly some other guns shoot.

This explains to me why Beretta has had such a hard time selling this gun in America. The 92, for example, is a beautiful gun. Like it or hate it, it is a really good-looking gun. Most people look at the PX4, maybe don't like how it looks, and then move on. Regardless of how well it shoots, they cannot even tell, so they shop for guns based on what looks good or what others tell them is good.

I have no answer here, just an observation.

Excellent observations from a brilliant mind in the firearms world.


In my view, this relates to how people only focus on how nice the trigger “feels” or how “easy” it is to shoot. This versus all the other attributes that make a handgun viable for carry and self defense, I.e DA trigger pull, hammer to thumb, decocker and/or safety, etc.



Do you think that the full size offers much advantage over the compact?

[TeflonDon]

I have a PX4 Compact Enox. It's one of those underrated pistols that only real gun nuts and aficionados recognize them for what they are. A Beretta Px4, Walther P99, and HK USP should be a staple in every collection IMHO.

[medmo]

Regardless of how well it shoots, they cannot even tell, so they shop for guns based on what looks good or what others tell them is good.

You answered the question that I've been asking for over six years. Light bulb just lit. The overwhelming majority of people buying and shooting pistols have zero cognizance of performance and might not even care about it. It would be interesting to know what percentage of the market actually use a timer, run drills and quantify performance. I bet it is super slim. Another thought just popped. What percentage of the market have skills/abilities and the ability to appreciate a performance pistol? I bet that is even thinner. My guess is that the majority of the market would shoot similar sized groups at 7 yards using either a SCCY CPX or a performance pistol. They just don't know any better. What about all of the "experts" on YT uploading "expert pistol review" vids demonstrating a range session of a slow fired half mag of mediocre grouping at seven yards then ten minutes of what they most subjectively love or hate about a particular pistol with their "expert pistol reviewer" opinion. That doesn't help anything.

[Ben_G]

I realized most of the shooting public, and I do mean most of them, have no idea if a gun shoots really well or not. Most people likely do not see the sights lift when the gun fires, much less really call their shots. Most people don't track their sights in recoil, so they don't really know how quickly it comes back. They jerk the shit out of the trigger, so they cannot tell how precise and consistent it is. That means that they cannot really see or feel how well the PX4 shoots. Or, on that note, how badly some other guns shoot.

That's always one of the hard parts about developing guns here. Balancing all the features and requirements for the 0.1% power users we talk to and see as the market we want to satisfy, while still appealing and communicating properly to the other 99.9% in a way that doesn't lose their interest. On the pistol said aka the market in the US? Well the 92 made it over the hump because of the M9 and pop culture in that era.

I'd love it if we could crack a wider market with the PX4 for its 20th, but it'll take something special.

[EVP]

That's always one of the hard parts about developing guns here. Balancing all the features and requirements for the 0.1% power users we talk to and see as the market we want to satisfy, while still appealing and communicating properly to the other 99.9% in a way that doesn't lose their interest. On the pistol said aka the market in the US? Well the 92 made it over the hump because of the M9 and pop culture in that era.

I'd love it if we could crack a wider market with the PX4 for its 20th, but it'll take something special.

I like Beretta as a company and their firearms but to be honest they suck at marketing the px4. They suck at the marketing the 92 even. Good thing Hollywood took care of that. Which is stupid if you ask me. I don’t care what guns are used in movies or what not.

Nobody is talking about the guns pros, nobody from Beretta is talking about the reliability and some of the engineering that went into it.

When Ernest did that video with TFB, that was the first time I heard some of the engineering and other cool stuff about the px4. Best thing Beretta has is a guy like Ernest who can explain and articulate some of the positives.



Beretta needs to forget about the apparel(or lifestyle) side of things and bring stuff that American shooters want. It’s a shame because I think Beretta has the engineering and quality to do whatever they want and back it up.
Just my 2 cents.

[TicTacticalTimmy]

IMO a huge hurdle to the PX4 is simply the stock configuration just turns people off. I personally picked one up at a gun show once, hated it, and stopped considering it. Years later with a lot more shooting experience and reading about them here on PF, I bought one. I liked shooting it but not enough to actually compete or carry with it, so it sat for 2+ years. Recently I got the LTT RDO cut and, along with carry levers, grip tape, and a lighter hammer spring, totally transformed the pistol and now its in the running for favorite to shoot, and I have a bunch of nice expensive handguns.

I guarentee you that even moderately experienced pistol shooters pick up a PX4 and are immediately turned off by its giant pointy slide levers, confusing decocker/safety, smooth yet thicc grip, heavy DA pull, and overall ugliness.

The Compact Carry solves most of these issues but it is not the model most buyers will handle in a store.

Beretta could easily have them come G from the factory, with a lighter hammer spring, and carry levers, and it would massively increase the appeal, without any increase in production costs.

If Beretta really wants the PX4 to compete and reach its potential they should make an updated model with a slim grip (perhaps using 92 magizines, no one cares about .40 or .45), updated grip texture like the APX A1, and factory optics cut, perhaps licensing the LTT design.

[fatdog]

to be honest they suck at marketing the px4. .

100%, because they only care about selling shotguns to sporting clays snobs and bird hunter fud's

[gato naranja]

I have already - redundantly - given my $0.02 about what the PX4 needs at this point in time, and aside from comparatively expensive injection molding dies for an updated grip frame having revised contours, better texture and multiple weaponlight slots, nearly everything else is basically either a couple extra machining steps or a small part (some of which already exist in the Beretta universe). There is absolutely nothing wrong with the basics of these pistols, with the exception of a sub-optimal locking block in the SubCompact.* Mechanically, still the most underrated line of pistols out there, but badly in need of an "X" or "Gen 2" update.

The PX4 is a more modern and more rugged* handgun than any 92, and is, IMHO, a much better pistol for a new or casual shooter insofar as ease of maintenance. It is hard for me to describe, but they are not as "fiddly" as the 92. Standard items like factory RDO cuts, iron sights similar to the 92X, "D" hammer spring, "G" Carry levers and the aforementioned revised grip frame would probably return me to the PX4 fold because there would be nothing more needed for a cat like myself. Everything you need, nothing you don't; those who want or need extended mag catches, different levers, FS or D conversions, threaded barrels, etc could easily scratch their itches with what are essentially drop-in parts.

(REAL drop-ins, not "1911 drop-ins.")

*Yes, I am bitter about the apparent low round count limitations of the PX4 SubCompact; I still own a few and am now loathe to practice with them as I ought.