Suppressors why no beretta love?

#101
Re: why no beretta love?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sorry mistaking the JSSAP for the XM9; I guess the VP70 didn't make it that far? </div></div>

You can do better than that. You googled JSSAP and opened a wikipedia article. You failed, however, to notice that at the top of the page it states

-"This article does not cite any references or sources"

The Joint Service Small Arms Program was not a test. They are a working group that is supposed to manage and coordinate aquisition, procurement, and other "stuff". The finer details I'm not really sure of but I do know it was not a "test"

I think what you are refering to is the original test the Chair Force did. Haven't really read much about it other than the Army won that pissing contest. At least nothing I might say is credible.
 
#102
Re: why no beretta love?


You are correct in that JSSAP is not a test, but they did conduct testing predating the XM9 program that did include the VP70 (and the Steyer GB and a few others). The USAF at the time was in charge of JSSAP and were the ones who did the initial research and RFP’s for a new handgun in the late 70’s. Their early testing found the Beretta was the best choice of the guns tested and recommended it for adoption. The Army found fault in the test procedures the USAF used; specifically the type of mud/dirt used and what they felt were too lenient overall test procedures. Either way, the Army refused to accept the test results and so the next round of trials were begun with the Army in charge, more stringent test procedures and the "right" dirt used. This time none of the guns passed and so they were forced to test yet again. This time Congress killed all funding for .45 parts and ammo to make sure a new gun was chosen. The new tests were called the XM9 and the results were nearly the same but for the Sig 226 coming out equal with the Beretta. Eventually Sig lost in the bidding war and the Beretta was chosen. A couple of the maker s that lost sued and due to appeals by either S&W or Colt (I can’t recall which) another round of tests were done called the XM10. By this time, however, the Berettas had already been bought and issued as the M9 so at the conclusion of the XM10 tests (where the Beretta won again) more Berettas were bought and the M9 designation was kept on.

As far as the slide separations go, I have copies of the GAO and DoD reports at home and have actually read them. I know my number is off but I seem to recall the number of slide separations involving injury of any type being at or about 7 and there were never any fatalities. The problem was in the metallurgy of the slide steel and high pressure ammo (M882). So again, yes there were problems 20+ years ago. Are there still problems? That’s VERY debatable. I’ve personally never seen a slide separation or even a cracked slide on a working M9 (those that were shot, blown up, run over, or DX’d for other reasons I don’t count) but it probably has happened. At this point, it’s far less a design and materials problems as it is a maintenance one. If proper records are kept and replacement schedules followed, there should never be an issue. If that will ever happen is up for debate… Well maybe not as we all know how Soldiers/Marines/Airmen/Sailors are with that kind of stuff. Anyway the point is we have the M9 and it works well enough. My best guess is that my Grandson will probably get one when he goes in and people will still be bitching about how they need to bring back the .45 (my son is 9 btw).

Also, I’m not trying to change anyone’s mind about the M9 or the 9mm or whatever. I don’t have to. The US military is content with it and its here to stay. End of story. I just want to make sure people I give the facts of the story to the best of my knowledge.

And just as aside, I have spoken with several old school armorers who told me stories about working on 1911’s and all the slide/barrel problems they had as well with fitment, soft slides, and mis-cut locking lugs. I’m not bashing the 1911 by saying that, just making the point that reliability and build issues aren’t exclusive to the M9.
 
#103
Re: why no beretta love?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bjdm151</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sorry mistaking the JSSAP for the XM9; I guess the VP70 didn't make it that far? </div></div>

You can do better than that. You googled JSSAP and opened a wikipedia article. You failed, however, to notice that at the top of the page it states

-"This article does not cite any references or sources"

The Joint Service Small Arms Program was not a test. They are a working group that is supposed to manage and coordinate aquisition, procurement, and other "stuff". The finer details I'm not really sure of but I do know it was not a "test"

I think what you are refering to is the original test the Chair Force did. Haven't really read much about it other than the Army won that pissing contest. At least nothing I might say is credible.</div></div>

damn BJ, read less, shoot more
 
#104
Re: why no beretta love?

Au contraire: 'some' in the US Military are satisfied with the M9. They tend to be people who type up alot of PowerPoints and don't shoot guns for their ratings.
The single largest problem with current M9s: locking block failure. Of which I have personally seen dozens. Less common but no less notable are malfunction of the safety/decocker and trigger bar spring malfunctions. I won't go into the magazine problem. The fact that the weapon system safety lever can be unintentionally turned to 'safe' thus rendering the weapon a
'dead mans gun' during a tap/rack/bang drill is serious enough for me to forego its combat use.
Hence the M11. Or the issuance of various Glock models. Or how about the Navy types who dropped the M9 like a scalded monkey jabbing his finger with a singer sewing machine needle and found that the SIG really is a better mousetrap? HK USP models sling lead downrange for Uncle Sam. Shall we persist?
The M9 is certainly not the end of the story.
 
#105
Re: why no beretta love?

curious......anybody have a link to true account on the last enemy killed with a pistol in combat after vietnam, and not heresay? and what pistol was it, again just curious.......
 
#106
Re: why no beretta love?

Furthermore; comparison of the M1911/M1911A1 metallurgy and fit issues is not a valid comparison. Steel forging and heat treating technology has advanced beyond the early 20th century timeframe the M1911 was developed in, in addition, production of WW2 era pistols underwent upgrades to include slide hardening once battering and peening issues came to light. Those M1911A1s were produced during a time of total war and there certainly was little concern at the time for their lasting decades into the future. Since M1911's were not procurred beyond 1945 except for parts/modern slides, they really shouldn't be included in a comparison to modern issue weapons. The point being, if the USG wanted modern M1911 type pistols with improved fit and metallurgy, they could easily announce bids and acquire new production pistols.
 
#108
Re: why no beretta love?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Shooter5</div><div class="ubbcode-body">VAJJP: see battle of Falluja in Nov 2004. Many others over the past 10 years tend to be in units that don't have alot of CNN time.</div></div>

ok so what was the pistol used?
 
#112
Re: why no beretta love?

that was my only point, they work and get the job done! are there "better", perhaps but they've been gettin the job done, everything else is argumentative and subjective.
 
#113
Re: why no beretta love?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Shooter5</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Au contraire: 'some' in the US Military are satisfied with the M9. They tend to be people who type up alot of PowerPoints and don't shoot guns for their ratings.
The single largest problem with current M9s: locking block failure. Of which I have personally seen dozens. Less common but no less notable are malfunction of the safety/decocker and trigger bar spring malfunctions. I won't go into the magazine problem. The fact that the weapon system safety lever can be unintentionally turned to 'safe' thus rendering the weapon a
'dead mans gun' during a tap/rack/bang drill is serious enough for me to forego its combat use.
Hence the M11. Or the issuance of various Glock models. Or how about the Navy types who dropped the M9 like a scalded monkey jabbing his finger with a singer sewing machine needle and found that the SIG really is a better mousetrap? HK USP models sling lead downrange for Uncle Sam. Shall we persist?
The M9 is certainly not the end of the story. </div></div>

+1

You just summed up most of the issues I have with it.

-Had a barrel crack at the locking blocks. I think thats the same spot your refering to (I'm not an armorer)
-"Dead mans gun" is major issue for me
-I saw an Army SgtMaj and a MSgt with USP's and I was furiously jealous. If I was in their unit I would have been pissed.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: VAJayJayPunisher</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
damn BJ, read less, shoot more</div></div>

Yea I know.

I just got tired of the mudslinging and decided to do some actual research and cite some credible sources. Maybe I'll swing over to Buds and get some range time today.

EDIT:

Yes they currently get the job done
frown.gif
 
#114
Re: why no beretta love?

unfortunately there is alot to be said about getting the job done. I once asked a senior officer about why we continue to purchase beretta's when other systems have more desirable characteristics/have been proven to work better. I was told that there were studys done on how many times pistols were used in OEF/OIF through 2007. The number was very low, but escapes me at the moment. Basically since so few people were using their M9's in combat, the army does not see a reason to switch at this time. Especially with the ridiculous personnel and budget cuts.
 
#115
Re: why no beretta love?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Shooter5</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The fact that the weapon system safety lever can be unintentionally turned to 'safe' thus rendering the weapon a
'dead mans gun' </div></div>

are there any guns that have a safety lever on them that this also couldnt happen with
 
#116
Re: why no beretta love?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 1shot2kill</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Shooter5</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The fact that the weapon system safety lever can be unintentionally turned to 'safe' thus rendering the weapon a
'dead mans gun' </div></div>

are there any guns that have a safety lever on them that this also couldnt happen with </div></div>

Lots of them. Its kind of three issues wrapped into one.

1) The safetey is on the slide
2) Due to the open front of the slide there isn't a whole lot of real estate for an overhand rack, neccesitating getting your hand real close to the safety.
3) Pushing down/ back engages the safety. Can't say for sure if reversing it would fix the issue (I've never handled one with a reverse safety cause they don't come that way.)

So pretty much anything with a frame mounted safety and especially if it is an "up is safe". IMO

And on that note I am going to the range.
 
#117
Re: why no beretta love?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 1shot2kill</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
are there any guns that have a safety lever on them that this also couldnt happen with </div></div>

Offhand....the M1911. It's almost impossible to engage the safety during an immediate action drill.

I carried an issued M9 as my sidearm in the Corps. I am a multiple award expert with it. I have no problem competently shooting it. I dislike it greatly. The safety/decocker is in a poor position and the DA/SA trigger is horrible. I never had any mechanical issues with them. Ours were seriously beat, but they worked fine. If I could find a smoking deal on a 92FS I wouldn't mind buying one.

I would have to suppress the urge to punch you in the mouth if you seriously suggested I trade my G21SF for a M9 as a duty weapon.
 
#118
Re: why no beretta love?

Definately agree, I would love nothing better than for us to switch to another weapon. I still bought those police trade in $250 92FS's last year when they were on sale at jgsales if nothing than for memorys sake.

All this 1911 talk, the 1911 isn't the answer either. It's already demonstrated that it is not reliable enough and takes a greater strain on our armorer's than the 92FS(which as we've already covered has its own problems).
 
#119
Re: why no beretta love?

I had 2 Berettas. My first pistol ever was a 96FS. The ergonomics of the gun were great for my hands and the gun shot very well, but as others stated, that whole first shot trigger pull was a deal breaker. Other than that, the slide was smoother than any other pistol I have ever owned. This was when Beretta was using steel spring guides instead of plastic, but I'm not sure if this made any difference. I sold that gun and later bought and sold a 92FS vector. I don't think I will buy another one in the future, but overall I do like the gun.
 
#120
Re: why no beretta love?

Just to throw in my two cents from the side of a person forced to use the M9 from time to time...

-I am not going to complain about the magazine capacity as it is sufficient.
-The size while sizable is manageable.
-The slide mounted safety is inconvenient but it is workable, although far from optimum.
-Accuracy is plenty good just most people who carry them are barely capable of even piss poor results.
-Every "malfunction" I have seen with a mechanically functional pistol has actually been from a complete lack of lubrication.

All that being said, mechanical breakages and the resultant lack of reliability and therefore lack of faith in equipment is why I don't like the M9/92FS series. Over the years I have seen too many trigger reset springs break to remember the actual number. These are M9s I speak of but my uncle has broken 2 in his 92FS and he isn't a frequent shooter.

Another major issue is the locking blocks. It is a known problem that was supposedly fixed years ago. I can promise you that it wasn't. Out of a class of about 20 shooters shooting an average of around 400-500 rounds a day for a couple weeks we recently had about a dozen locking block failures. Mind you these weren't worn out Army inventory pistols that had been used for years upon years. They were all close to new or completely new. One pistol which was brand new cracked its locking block the first day within 200 rounds.

This performance is totally unacceptable in a modern military combat pistol.
 
#123
Re: why no beretta love?

I'm relatively new to the Beretta 92, but since I've had mine I've shot the crap out of it. Mostly cast bullets cause I'm a cheap sucker.

I've practice from the holster and every such way you can imagine.

I have yet to figure out how one accidently puts on the safety. I admit I'm a 1911 guy and like to rest my thumb on the safety of the 1911 but the fit of the Beretta makes it uncomfortable to do that.

Just don't see how it could happen unless you work at it.

Actually I'm starting to get impressed with the 92FS.
 
#124
Re: why no beretta love?

As stated before, I have never been able to shoot another pistol as well as a M9/92fs. I shoot the living shit out of mine, train with it excessively every year before a big match that requires the use of a "service" pistol. I havent had a single breakage or problem with MINE except needing a new barrel from said round counts wearing out barrels. Also been around them for years as an 11B, never issued one personally, only our top two carried them. Have I seen locking blocks break, yes I have but not in numbers reported here(MY experience mind you, not talking for others here).

I'd wager to bet theres not a design out there we wouldnt be having a similar discussion about "flaws" or "problem areas" talking about a pistol that is so widely issued, used, carried, shot, abused. think about it, what would be comparible, glocks? Well sure but the number of rounds fired a year by LE on Glocks is probably far less than that of berreta M9's by the military, I could be way wrong on that guess but I dont think I'm too far off. Regardless, we all here know how much people love or HATE glocks as well. Personally dont believe a Glock could stand up to the day to day abuse our weapons took in theater..... jus debatin
 
#125
Re: why no beretta love?

The M9 impressed me too. Ours were in terrible shape mostly because they are neglected in an infantry unit. The only people issued them are M240B gunners and maybe the CO or 1SG. The medics bring their own from their arms room.

Anyway, ours were well over 10 years old. Very little to no bluing and the magazines were in rough shape and had fairly weak springs. They always worked though and were suprisingly accurate even with the semi-crude sights.
 
#126
Re: why no beretta love?

My whole point maybe in chiming in here was that when the M9 was accepted (whether I got truly factual information or not) it had quality issues. Congress put a stop to use of the .45 during the tests to make sure we got a new pistol. So, IMO, at the time we got the thing shoved down our throats. In case some of you pro-M9 types, didn't notice, that doesn't sit well with me. And, I'm not the only one.

Meanwhile, there were newer, better designs coming along. A number of advances in both bullet and firearm technology produced handguns today that blow away the M9. Maybe there would still be that "do we need it/need it replaced" argument. But, as noted most who say the M9 has an outstanding record are not the ones using it in the field. It seems that most of those are individuals who have an eye on a bigger pie. And procurement of a better sidearm, system-wide, is counter to their agenda of getting what they want done.


I would venture to bet a lot more spec-ops/operator types have had to use a pistol as their primary weapon in situations than the average soldier. To a man, almost none of them choose the M9. Although they know they can make it work.


Just because it works doesn't mean it's the best. I don't give it my vote of confidence.
 
#127
Re: why no beretta love?

VJPP: There is no debate. Glocks and SIGs in military units, on average, have pounded down tens of thousands of rounds without issue. Yes, they can and do have breakages and malfunctions just like any other mechanical device. On average, far less to none compared to the M9. That is one of many reasons why other units forego use of the M9.
Kraig: imagine doing a tap/rack/bang drill. When grasping the slide and slingshoting it back usually under the influence of adrenaline induced gorilla gripping the thumb and forefinger can and will grasp the ambi safety on the M9 and while pulling back the safety catch is also pulled down and back thus activating the lever to 'safe' and subsequently during the 'bang' part of the drill the weapon does not fire because its safety is on.
The safety can also be inadvertently activated in the holster during convoy ops merely by shifting around while riding in a cramped vehicle with lots of gear or during vigorous CQB action.
 
#128
Re: why no beretta love?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Shooter5</div><div class="ubbcode-body">VJPP: There is no debate. Glocks and SIGs in military units, on average, have pounded down tens of thousands of rounds without issue. Yes, they can and do have breakages and malfunctions just like any other mechanical device. <span style="text-decoration: underline">On average, far less to none compared to the M9</span>. That is one of many reasons why other units forego use of the M9.
</div></div>shooter, I'd like to see some hard data to prove these statements. Just hasnt been the case in my experience, just because you heard this doesnt mean it is so, please dont take offense I'm just saying it'd be interesting to see a study or something of the sort comparing stoppage, breakage issues of M9 verse model X, and not heresay
Click to expand...
 
#129
Re: why no beretta love?

Not hearsay: I and others break M9 locking blocks every month. I think Beretta has a cottage industry going just keep their CNC machines going in the off cycle. None of my issue Glocks have ever broke on me. Ever.
(The M9 is generally very accurate and does not malfunction when cleaned, lubed and use with QUALITY magazines...just like any other firearm)
Any other work done with Glocks and SIGs is what it is. I shoot them alot and have no issues. Anyone else who may care to add is going to say the same thing...however, they are not going to say who they are or who they work for.
Such 'studies' don't exist for such units. This really is a dead issue for them. They don't 'compare' the M9 because the don't use it. NO ONE/NONE/ZERO of the pros even use the M9, and haven't for a very long time. They use what works. The issue got settled a long time ago.
Name any Federal Law Enforcement agency that uses the M9. I cannot think of any that do. It is ALL either SIG, HK or Glock nowadays. Name any high Tier unit that uses the M9; except for maybe the Carabinieri-if they still do but that may have as much to do with National Pride.
Use what the pros use.
 
#130
Re: why no beretta love?

What is wrong with the 40 cal versions? I love 40 cal, and prefer it over both 45 and 9mm.

I am looking at getting the new 40 cal Beretta, anything wrong with that?
 
#131
Re: why no beretta love?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Shooter5</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...except for maybe the Carabinieri-if they still do but that may have as much to do with National Pride.
</div></div> They do, at least the ones I see here.
 
#133
Re: why no beretta love?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Shooter5</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Use what the pros use.</div></div>

Im glad you said that, what gun was, has, and IS used by the AMU pistol team to win at the NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS every year? its a berreta M9. I cant think of any set of guys being labeled as "pros" more than them.
 
#134
Re: why no beretta love?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Im glad you said that, what gun was, has, and IS used by the AMU pistol team to win at the NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS every year? its a berreta M9. I cant think of any set of guys being labeled as "pros" more than them.
</div></div>

The USAMU National Match M9 is nowhere near an off-the-rack Beretta. It takes six weeks of heavy modification and hand-fitting to get it to standard.
 
#135
Re: why no beretta love?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sinister</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Im glad you said that, what gun was, has, and IS used by the AMU pistol team to win at the NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS every year? its a berreta M9. I cant think of any set of guys being labeled as "pros" more than them.
</div></div>

The USAMU National Match M9 is nowhere near an off-the-rack Beretta. It takes six weeks of heavy modification and hand-fitting to get it to standard. </div></div>
Sinister, if anyone would know the answer it would be you; but exactly wtf is done in those six weeks? Seems mind boggling for it to take six weeks to modify a single pistol; heavily modified or not???
 
#136
Re: why no beretta love?

that article doesn't say m9 does it?

In any event there are isolated incidents. But the fact remains that few people get killed with sidearms. There are alot fo people going without pistols. I'm with you on switching, that much should be obvious to everyone.
 
#137
Re: why no beretta love?

Tony used an M9 during that action.
As for the AMU M9?! Hats off to all of them for the work they do, however, they HAVE to use it and their shooting is not the same as tactical combat shooting.
 
#138
Re: why no beretta love?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Shooter5</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here is a real deal example of the M9 in combat.
PS Dear Taliban; Don't mess with Tony in H2H, he can bench over 500 pounds.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-10-19-silver-star-cover_x.htm </div></div>

Decent article, the author seemed to keep the "hype" to a minimum.

Never mentions the M9 though. The only pistol reference I saw was "9mm". I could be wrong, I read through it once and then scanned back through it.

Guess I'm late on that one.
 
#140
Re: why no beretta love?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sinister</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Im glad you said that, what gun was, has, and IS used by the AMU pistol team to win at the NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS every year? its a berreta M9. I cant think of any set of guys being labeled as "pros" more than them.
</div></div>

The USAMU National Match M9 is nowhere near an off-the-rack Beretta. It takes six weeks of heavy modification and hand-fitting to get it to standard.</div></div>

very very true Sinister, but the fact is, they CHOOSE to use a berretta M9/92
 
#141
Re: why no beretta love?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Shooter5</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Tony used an M9 during that action.
As for the AMU M9?! Hats off to all of them for the work they do, however, they HAVE to use it and their shooting is not the same as tactical combat shooting.</div></div>

they do not HAVE to use it, they choose to. nothing can compete with an accurized M9 at 50 yards on a bullseye, they've proved that.

And SF using an M9, interesting.......very interesting.......
 
#142
Re: why no beretta love?

AMU and others who compete in the service matches MUST use issue weapons. They do not necessarily "choose" to use it. Other options include shooting the M1911A1 but anyone using them gets spanked these days. I suppose someone could use the M11 or Mk23/Mk24 but those are not widely available or issued.
Many regular Army SF forces use the M9. That in and of itself is not news. Many others use other models available.
Although I haven't asked him per se, Tony maybe used an M9 because it fits his hands better and a Glock would be too small.
Picture Wesley in the Rogues Forest looking at Andre the Giant's hand in "The Princess Bride"; thats the size of Tonys hands.
 
#144
Re: why no beretta love?

good point, kinda forgot the fact that they use it for the CMP matches where it has to be a "service" gun, but hey, they do choose it over the 1911. I never have seen an M11 at perry, and I used a RACK M9 cough..when I got my Pres hundred...cough,

look I'm not a M9 seller or anything of the sorts. Enjoying the friendly debate. It's always worked very very well for me, and havent seen first hand any real problems with them at work either(work being a fat mech 11b). I'm not tryin to sell it for anyone else, they need to make their own conclusions.

I just personnaly believe there has been a long growing mystique and frowned eyebrows on the weapon that guys really dont understand other than thats all they've ever heard. All of which I find to be BS anyhow. Sure it's not the best suited combat pistol, but its what we have and it works. I just dont understand the unjustified hatred for the pistol.

I will say this, I've won IDPA events usin mine and never seen or had any "dead man" gun issues with the safety, thats a concern I havent heard before but see how it could be one.

P.S. my older brother is in 5th GR and he carries an M9, and they do have choices, he just chooses that one, says the other options are too big(HK) and dont shoot as well(M11)
 
#145
Re: why no beretta love?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Outerspace</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What is wrong with the 40 cal versions? I love 40 cal, and prefer it over both 45 and 9mm.

I am looking at getting the new 40 cal Beretta, anything wrong with that? </div></div>
 
#146
Re: why no beretta love?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: VAJayJayPunisher</div><div class="ubbcode-body">good point, kinda forgot the fact that they use it for the CMP matches where it has to be a "service" gun, but hey, they do choose it over the 1911. I never have seen an M11 at perry, and I used a RACK M9 cough..when I got my Pres hundred...cough, </div></div>

Not trying to be a smartass here, I actually want to know. What is the "Pres hundred" (I do know what Camp Parry is)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: VAJayJayPunisher</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I just personnaly believe there has been a long growing mystique and frowned eyebrows on the weapon that guys really dont understand other than thats all they've ever heard. All of which I find to be BS anyhow. Sure it's not the best suited combat pistol, but its what we have and it works. I just dont understand the unjustified hatred for the pistol. </div></div>

I think the average user ("military issued") just doesn't know and is generally satisfied with it. How many people come into the military either never having fired a weapon or with limited exposure to firearms? I would venture to say the majority. (If this was your point anyways I misread your post)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: VAJayJayPunisher</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I will say this, I've won IDPA events usin mine and never seen or had any "dead man" gun issues with the safety, thats a concern I havent heard before but see how it could be one.</div></div>

Do you use an overhand rack for reloads?
 
#147
Re: why no beretta love?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not trying to be a smartass here, I actually want to know. What is the "Pres hundred" (I do know what Camp Parry is)</div></div>

president's hundred tab, google it for more in length history but essentially it is the "president's match" done both in service pistol and service rifle and is generally the last match of the week for both. If one places in the top 100 of that match they earn their president's hundred tab, sounds easy enough right? well pistol is a smaller sport(read-HARDER LOL) so you compete against anywhere from 900-1500 people. Rifle is more popular so youd be shootin against 2,000 or so people.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Do you use an overhand rack for reloads?</div></div>

nope, I use the slide release
 
#148
Re: why no beretta love?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Outerspace</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Outerspace</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What is wrong with the 40 cal versions? I love 40 cal, and prefer it over both 45 and 9mm.

I am looking at getting the new 40 cal Beretta, anything wrong with that? </div></div></div></div>

dude seriously, read this thread, only difference will be the caliber, all the other likes/dislikes are the same
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
You have to love Beretta/Sako customer service.......or lack of
Replies
10
Views
587
carbonbased
carbonbased
ThirtyOne
SOLD FOR SALE: **REDUCED** Langdon Tactical Beretta 92FS Italian Model
Replies
5
Views
543
cjmartin315
C
Nubba0681
SOLD Beretta 694 B Fast
Replies
5
Views
495
Macirsh
M
I
Red dot at 100 yrds
Replies
6
Views
451
ironman56
I
M
My own experiences with Garmin Xero C1 vs Labradar vs Magnetospeed
Replies
0
Views
819
metroplex
M
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts