For T-Shirt info, contact: Warbirdbunker.com Join this channel to get access to exclusive members only content: ru-vid.com/show-UClZVCPZf1QOTEoxXKg-TPLwjoin
I like the 92fs inox. I've used many handguns it wasn't until I used the inox when I stuck with one sidearm. I won't find myself using any other handgun.
M9 would be even greater if they moved the safety to the frame. And re-design the locking mechanism slightly to improve slide strength and avoid cracks. Accessory rail and red dot sight attachment and that's it!
I have owned an M9 Beretta for many years and have often enjoyed shooting it. It has never jammed, is highly accurate and has little recoil.I believe it to be one of the best hand guns ever manufactured!
You are so correct I will state, CLEARY , to the author The M9 is MORE reliable than any Glock ever made. His points against the weapon are most weak and subjective His points are not strong enough to remove the gun John Browning the greatest mind of all time created the Browning High power Guess where the M9 came from? St Peter sais, little knowledge is dangerous There is good reason for this statement
I was a tanker and was issued a 1911. As a result, I carried one daily for over 40 years. After retirement I went to work as private security on an Air Force Base, issued an M9. I've always felt that I should carry daily what i carry on duty to avoid confusion due to muscle memory so i bought a 92FS (later upgraded to a 92X - WOW!). All I wanted to say here is that after a lifetime of packing the 1911, I feel in love with the Beretta.
@@jason200912 I want to carry something that I'm very familiar with, something that I have proven and I know will work flawlessly. Once I became familiar with the FS I was very comfortable carrying it. The X was a pleasant upgrade (capable of adding night sights too!) and I just like it. My body type makes it fairly easy to conceal and having always carried a full size pistol, the weight is not an issue. Mostly it's just personal preference.
@@jason200912 Holster selection is incredibly important. A rig like that, you don't just go with an Uncle Mike #4 from Walmart. I use a Galco belt slide and a good quality leather belt made for CCW wear. Cinch the belt security, holster just above the hip bone. It also pulls the butt in (the pistol's, not mine - lol) for concealment. I can sit, stand, drive, walk, run all day and I'm not a young man.
I was in the Corps when we changed to the M9. I had been enlisted in the age of the 1911, and became an officer through the MECP program as the change to the M9 was occurring. I qualed once with the 1911 and all subsequent years with the M9. My personal weapon at that time was a Browning High Power and so I had no grief with the 9mm. I personally felt that the M9 was doomed before it ever got a chance to prove itself. There was a large and loud group of hard corps .45 ACP and 1911 fans both inside and outside the services that loudly decried the change to 9mm . I don't think any 9 mm weapon chosen in those times would have been well accepted. I loved the 1911, but the M9 was a much easier pistol to shoot well and with which to qualify. This fact was supported when female officer groups in the basic school for Marine officers were scoring around 50% unqualified on first attempts with the 1911, but shot up to over 80% qualified first attempt with the M9. Truth be told, I always felt that it was a good indication of an ongoing snafu when officers were firing pistols tactically in combat, so this argument seemed sort of academic to me and frankly still does. Shoot what you love and don't worry about anyone else's opinion on the matter!
The problem we had with the M1911 is it might have been made In the 30's or 40's. With that being said since the tolerances were not as tight as they are now the weapon didn't jam as much especially in a desert theater.
Better qualification scores was helped by it being 9mm over .45. Throw in the fact the .45 was so old it jiggled. We were issued the M9 just before Desert Storm. In a clean environment it’s a decent pistol. In the desert it let too much dust and sand into it due to the open top slide. We also had female MPs who didn’t like it because of the size of the grip and not being able to easily reach controls.
Joined the Army in 93 and the M9 is the reason I still own Berettas to this day (92F and 2 PX4s). I agree about the ergonomics for smaller hands, but other than that it's a great sidearm. People tend to resist change. I understand the 1911 loyalists, but that doesn't make the M9 a bad choice.
I have two 92's and they are such a fine piece of engineering in my opinion. Not as cheap and light as my polymer guns, but not as heavy and un-ergonomic as my all steel pistols.
USAF SF: Carried the M9 throughout career. Never had an issue and appreciated the engineering of the weapon. I do remember a lot of user technical issues while using level 4 holsters in stress situations. Mainly, failure to flip to fire after releasing weapon from holster. The one other issue I had was night time ops. Even with tritium sights, you had to use the traditional flashlight in one hand and weapon in the other. Which restricted having a free hand particularly if it became a CQC ground game or doorknobs! In some situations, responding to restricted areas that were cramped, sometimes the M4 was too cumbersome so we relied on the M9 more. However the metal body design was a great backup blunt instrument instead of reaching for your asp. Also appreciated the weapon retention lanyard as well.
@@hrfunk For real. Not a bad choice by any means, even if it wouldn't be my first pick (then or now). It's an excellent, extremely reliable gun. I think 9mm was the right choice too (though it has some drawbacks, like every other round). edit: more rounds is almost always better. I doubt the enemy ever cares if he's about to take a 9mm or a 45.
Same here. Got rid of my 1911s after a range day with family. My nephew was handling one (verified empty) and snapped it while decocking... All semiauto hand guns now drop hammer safety types in my collection.
My father carried an M-16 in Vietnam, but he had the A1 upgrade. It didn’t fail him but he didn’t like 5.56 for heavy brush and he felt the AK was a better weapon for that environment and it had 30 round mags versus the early 20 rounders. His words, “We were outgunned and everybody knew it.”
The United States actually won the war military wise and destroying the communists but we lost politically because people don’t like it when you invade another country so we pulled out
@@Unknown_Meliodas it was an unjust invasion from the get-go. The US gov has meddled in other countries affairs since the dawn of the 20th century, whether justified or not
@@Unknown_Meliodasyeah invading another country for no good reason other than to destabilise them, steal their resources and set up base and proxy wars in their land tend to do that. And USA didn’t win in Vietnam, they came back with their heads down, mostly as heroin addicts, or PTSD nutcases. If you call that winning, the good ole US of A has lower standards that I gave it credit for. Same with Iraq and Afghanistan
@bigfunkyy There are no veterans in the modern periods asking for the taliban's rusty ak with smooth bore rifles and no optics. This was the case in Vietnam but it changed quickly as the m16 continuously got upgraded. Perhaps some troops wanted the zastava ak that Iraqi troops had in the 90s conflict. After that al queda and taliban were using bottom of the barrel worn out aks that were rusty and older than the user.
@@mattpeacock5208 You forgot the revolving door for leadership. I was USAF Security Police, from 1987-1997. During those 10 years I had leaders at all levels on both sides of the fence. I had a Col. at Clark that I'd have followed into hell if he ASKED, and I think the rest of the 3rd SPG would have too. But I also had a 2nd LT. there who didn't know his @$$ from a hole in the ground.
@@earlwyss520 2nd LT dipshits are the stuff of legend. Everyone that served had a story about the same shit head LT. Weird thing is, some of them actually became the Lt. Col. that you and others would follow through hell. Great senior leadership breads a new generation of the same.
That’s exactly the kind of info that gives me confidence in the weapon. I shoot a 12ga Browning Citori, I literally probably shot at least 10K rounds over 27 years or more it is reliable and functional on clays skeet,trap, sporting clays and upland birds and doves. If you shoot that many rounds thru the same firearm you have muscle memory and a high degrees of confidence in the results.
I have had my 92S for 31 years. It was my only side arm up until 5yrs. In all that time over couple thousand rounds, I have had mis fire may 2x. I love the firearm, I have never shot that well with it. But that is me, not the gun.
@@hrfunk92F never passed the 5000 round endurance test at the army small arms maintenance facility in Alabama. Slides cracked every time. Pistol grip double stack mag is too big requiring two hand grip at all times. Gun did work well consistently for hundreds of rounds. Needed to have light lubricant. Slowed down when too dry. Not a bad gun if you buy an Italian factory model. Those did not crack as easily as the Maryland pistol. Regards 😊
@@hrfunk We are discussing official Department of the Army maintenance and testing data so it would be up to you to follow appropriate protocol and procedures to inquire through proper channels. Possibly through the freedom of information process unless you know someone at ANAD. As a member of the law enforcement community we were in a position to be in close contact with those directorate maintenance personnel. They cleaned our M16 chamber lugs prior to department inspections. We also escorted them to metal shredders in Birmingham to dispose of hundreds of obsolete weapons systems. M16 barrels always burn out from the heat over time. More than one of them told us the Beretta from Maryland never passed the 5000 round endurance test. The slides cracked every time. They used a thousand foot concrete steel reinforced tunnel to test machine guns etc. They also tested tank gun tubes at our firing range on the north boundary. We won the national pistol championships in 1995 & ‘96. Regards
Back in the 90s as a deputy sheriff, we were ordered to transition from our revolvers to the 92f. It is a fine pistol and very reliable, but like you pointed out, my biggest complaint was the double action to single action mode. We did not receive enough training in our transition and I preferred staying with my revolver but it was not an option. Again, the 92f is a good gun, it just takes some mastering like you pointed out.
As a Marine & 22 Year LE Guy, I personally Love my M9A3 and my 3 Wilson Combat Beretta Pistols. They are clearly the Best to me!! I just do not like any of the Sig 320 pistols and I have tried several. I would pick a CZ75 or Glock 17,19,22,21 over the Sig P320 pistols. B9USA Sr.
this incident that he mentioned happens because he round pressure was not ok!!! watch ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-QnB5Upl66LQ.html the Beretta was the only Pistol to pass twice the trials!! Winchester had even to pay for the false accusation to Beretta! great video btw!
I agree. I'm a Brit and my issue was the Browning, which frankly I found to be an excellent pistol. I tried the baretta and I found it a good piece. I do not like the Sig at all. I fired one recently and changed it for a SW 45 ACP. Much nicer to shoot.
Thanks for your service and if your home welcome home no matter how long you’ve been home my father didn’t hear welcome home until 2008 and was in Vietnam
Amen to that brother, the first pistol I bought was a Beretta 92fs, never had an issue. They ironed out the problems through the years until near perfection.
@Dale Ross the Glock 21 carries 14rds of 45acp with a flush mag and doesn’t fire when dropped while the sig is 11rds and bigger while still firing when dropped 😂
The Beretta got a bad reputation in the 90’s from the magazines. I hated that sidearm not realizing why at the time. Now that I’m retired and aware of modern magazines, as well as modern updates to the base model, I no longer hate the M9.
My career crossed the M1911A1 to Beretta change. Always thought the M9 was too bulky for the round, and the grip was too big for the cartridge. Always preferred the 1911, and today, prefer it in 38 Super and 10mm, lol. That said, even doing 2 tours in Kuwait, never had a malfunction that was not self induced. Mostly a brain cramp because my mind was on other duties, and not focused enough at the range. The 92/M9 gets about everything you can get out of a 9mm in a handgun.
@@invisibletosociety8338 Armscor and Sig make FMJ at a decent price, and the Sig V-Crown is pretty nasty. I also watch for once fired used brass and reload. Bullet diameter is .356 vs .355 for 9mm and .380, so bullets are readily available. Magtech also makes some pretty goof 38 Super. Both Midway USA and Lucky Gunner are showing some in stock, so it is getting back on the market again. I purchased on RIA Gov't model, 5" in 38 Super, added some Trijicon tritium sights for low light level use, and some Altamont rosewood grip panels for nothing but appearance. While the trigger is not particularly light, it is very crisp, recoil is light, and all the grandkids prefer it to any other semi-auto I have. It is a typical 1911, very accurate even at 30+ yds. A 4-4.5 lb trigger is light enough on a tactical handgun. I have some lighter triggers on hunting handguns, but they are too light for carry or home defense work. One factor to consider is that average 38 Super ammo is pushing the same bullet faster than a 9+P and often faster than 9+P+. and doing at at standard loadings. Pushed a bit to SAMMI max pressures, the 38 Super will scorch any 9mm other than overload competition rounds.
A bigger pistol - like the Beretta - has less 'snap.' I imagine that women in the military - and there are more and more of them - prefer that particular advantage of the bigger Beretta, less snap.
I started with the 1911 and was phased in to the M9. I don't hate the M9 per say. The 1911 was a more natural manual of arms, and I always shot it well. All these years latter, and the 1911 is still my daily.
I was never phased into the M9. All these years later, the 1911 is still my favorite pistol too. Even so, I’ve also developed quite a good opinion of the M8.
Amen brother. With the exception of the old, crappy mags, our 1911's worked just fine. There was no need to change, except to appease the NATO commonality requirement.
I shot and carried both extensively. Learned the M1911 on the Electric Pistol Range at PI (though I was an Army guy). I think the M9 blows it away. Safer, more mag capacity, less recoil, more mass, longer sight radius. More mag capacity. Doesn't rust as much. It is a bit of a brick comparatively. Sort of like the difference between the jeep and the HMMWV. Lighter ammo somewhat makes up for that - and it makes a better club. I'd rather carry the M1911 in training, and the M9 in combat. I shot the M9 much better, that might be because I was a more experienced pistolero when the M9 came out. Oh and the M9 did tend to stick out of your kit more and get hung up on things. Particularly parachute risers.
@@andreinarangel6227 if you have to standardize ammo with your allies you have lost the war way before you use your pistol nato compatible. 22 years Airborne Infantry retiree. Currently edc ati titan 1911 3 inch barrel. Rotate with my glock 19.
I was in the US Navy from 1980 - 2000, I qualified on the 1911A1, M9, M14 and M16A1. Even though my Grandfather and Father used the 1911, I didn't like it, basically because Navy .45's shook. rattled and rolled. The M9 was well made and easy to control. As for the rifles, my biggest complaint about the M16 was that loud recoil spring. Strange, I don't have that problem with my personal AR's. It could be because I haven't put 10000 rounds through them. I have several hammer fired 9mm's but haven't gotten a striker fired one yet. Maybe this year.
After 19 years in when this administration took over and what they did to my commander in chief I called it quits I refuse to support this administration but I will always hold fast for the constitution and America Master Guns P Lightfoot 3rd Air Wing Recon USMC
They should've "Article 15ed" him and given him the option of; 1. Sign it & immediately separate at a reduced pay grade. 2. Sign it & stay in until retirement at a reduced pay grade. 3. Not sign it, and take his chances at Court Martial. What he did was wrong, and needs punished, but Uncle Sam's Misguided Children are going about it in the wrong fashion.
He knew his actions would get him arrested and prosecuted. He had the option to keep his mouth shut until he officially resigned, and he chose to be a martyr instead. Poor choice on his part.
I was a moaner when we adopted this Beretta 9mm in lieu of the 1911 series .45. Carried a 92FS on duty (M9) and it proved to be reliable and accurate. It seemed to fit most everyone pretty well and the 9mm was far easier for marginal shooters to use than my beloved 1911 in .45ACP as an example. Chief simply outstanding overview. I know Marines who hated the M16s due to early experiences. They wanted the M14 BACK not some plastic toy. We know what caused this but once confidence is lost, then credibility is extremely difficult to recover.
The Military ‘s Ordnance Corps has a long and checkered history with failure in the adoption and/or issuance of new firearms and ordnance and their implementation. The M-16 suffered from the belief it never needed cleaning. Using a non recommended powder and not having chrome barrels initially. Once these issues were dealt with and corrected it became a fine and reliable weapon with its variants still used today. Of course there was a golden age of success too with the adoption of the ‘03 Springfield (after the spotty performance of the 30-40 Krag) The Colt 1911 (after the failure of the 38 LC cartridge in the Moro uprising) and the implementation of the BAR, Thompson sun machine gun and the M-1 Garand. Culminating in the backwards evolution of the M-14 and then the successful M-16 and M-4 series.
Given how the US military hated the M9 (I own one and like the weapon) then it makes you wonder about the Army/Marines if they had adopted the 7.62 NATO FN FAL. If it's foreign then the troops tend not to like it.
@@Easy-Eight Country of origin really isn't all that important, honestly. The M4, M249, M240 are all made by FN, while the M320, and the USMC's new M27 are from HK. Only truly American made stuff we're using off the top of my head are the M110 SASS, the M82/M107 Barretts, and the M2 Browning. Most of these I like just fine! - One of the troops
Great Video, Thanks! Thousands of rounds through my 92G, Never a hiccup. Never. I love the subtle way you put across the concept of "Clean your damned Gun!"
I still have the Beretta 92f that I carried as a LEO (retired). It has always been extremely reliable. The "issue" with the safety in my opinion, was a non-issue. After training and practice just like anything else. The 92 was a big improvement over the S&W mod 66 I carried prior to the 92. My 92 I is still one of my favorite pistols to shoot. The only reason it's not my EDC is it's size. It is a bit large for concealed carry. Good honest video. Thanks. Blessings
I prefer my 92FS over all of my other sidearms. Its Reliability , Accuracy and Ergonomics are about as good as it gets in my opinion. I did have a ammo related failure of a M-9 while in the Army but it was 100% a Ammunition related problem . Just great sidearms in my experience
@Pawnee Nation The FS has a stop to prevent the slide from blowing back off the frame. This allegedly happened to some Seals who fire a LOT of rounds in training. I carried an FS on SWAT for many years and still love it, very accurate, very reliable.
I toted a issue M9 9mmNATO for 30mo, 1990s 🎗. I disliked the M9 9mm as a design, as a left hander. Mostly was the alloy frame compared to the thicker steel slide, which had a large cut on top. Loaded, 15rd, made the M9 Beretta lop-sided. Unbalanced. The Walther style ambi slide safety was 🤦♂️ by most sources. Even the LAPD which later got new 92FS models but authorized patrol 🚔 to choose either safety on or ambi safety off. I owned 2 nice 96D DA only .40 models. My excellent Police Special .40 96D had full NP3 Robar, 3 Robar NP3 11rd mags. The 96D was meant for a state LE agency; Pennsylvania. The state office even tried to "obtain" the 96D guns from the gun shops, FFL guys. 🤔 I like the Ernie Langdon LTT models & Wilsons but modern 92, 96, etc are not my 1st choice.
Once again Chris Bartocci over at smallarmssolutions goes into great technical detail about the M9 and what went wrong and right. if you don’t want to watch it, short short version, military incompetence, maintenance done poorly and on the cheap with 3rd party knock off parts, global war on terror in the desert showed problems that were quickly resolved, and finally, they don’t replace pistols with new ones fast enough so often you get armories full of Frankenstein pistols. And as to the xm17 program, again there is a lot of fishy stuff in there so perhaps in hindsight they should have gone with the m9a3 as a stopgap and do actual trials instead buying sig cause it was the cheapest (and probably bought off some people/promised jobs post-retirement)
Those trials were definitely suspicious at the least. It's strange because I personally like the sig better than the glock but the trial basically made no sense and had very little due diligence done. It seems to me also like the modular system they want while not a bad idea is precisely the type of thing that they won't take advantage of. Cool we got this pistol that you can configure several ways to better fit people...but we are only going to use an A or B config to simplify logistics.
I didn’t watch that video, but I think I covered all the same points in an abbreviated manner, and I might have hit on a few other points too.Thanks for watching!
@@watariovids1645 I'm a sig fan but more reliable than a Glock....not so sure about that. But the Glock was ruled out in 85 for the same reasons as now.
Just remember the Beretta is one of the most accurate pistols ever made fresh out the factory. Also the Military used sub standard parts such as magazines and such. I love my Wilson Combat Beretta! I just wish when I was on active duty as a Navy Corpsman I had the modified Wilson Combat Centurion pistol.
I was in when we transitioned from the 1911 to the M9. I liked the old.leather flap holster vs the green canvas one, but at least with the M9 you could hit what you aim at.
Being new to both, I'm reading that the 1911 requires a unique hand-hold to shoot it right. Guess I'll find out. One thing I have found is that I want to change out the main spring plate for the rounded one. My 1911 .22 has it, and it really helps me steady the gun.
Dumping the M9 was stupid. Handguns are rarely used in actual combat and the new Sig doesn’t launch a 9MM bullet any better than the M9. Non factory mags and poor maintenance are the reason for any bad rep for them. I’ve owned versions of the 92 for over 20 years. Nothing less than 100% reliability in all those years. The M9A3 dealt with any deficiencies the M9 had. Parts and training wouldn’t have to be changed if they stuck with the M9A3. Some general got rich approving that Sig, which somehow passed this rigorous testing yet dropping them on the back of the slide was causing them to fire in the hands of civilians. 36 years of service, 20 of them in a continuous war, says a lot.
@@Hialeah1925 not quite. The last 1911 to be produced for the military was in 1945 so they were 40 years old at that point. Not to mention the requirement to go to the 9MM NATO round rules it out. The Sig doesn’t have enough improvements to warrant the enormous cost of a whole new gun.
really well done. you covered all the angles. my personal opinion is that the m9 was a good pistol. i qualified with it many times and felt very comfortable with it. easy to drop and quick change the mag, intuitive operation.
Sir, this was an excellent presentation. You placed the issue in a context that I hope all of your viewers can understand. As an aging American, I was trained on the M1911A1. Mine had served in WWII and I barely qualified until I had a chat with the armorer, who happily (or not) took care of the issues. That Remington Rand served me well, after that. Today, I own several 1911s and have no interest in selling them. I was one of many, who were distressed when the M9 was adopted because of its wimpy caliber and foreign manufacture. I suppose that I have mellowed with age, but I do own a Beretta 92 and frequently carry it concealed, with a few modifications. I added a lighter mainspring and made the G conversion. I have no problem with the weight of this reliable and accurate pistol, given the effectiveness of modern 9mm ammunition. I consider it to be a graceful and dependable weapon. Still, it's not for everyone. No handgun is. Each of us is unique in many ways. Thank you for this thoughtful and well-prepared video!
You have it very clear Sir!! Agree totalmente with you, I have 2 1911 and a Beretta 92 FS,my son has a HP35 in 9mm we enjoy very much shooting them all, but each handgun has its own técnicas for shooting it proficiently!!!
I bought an Italian made Model 92F in 1988 to use as a duty handgun. Our department had begun allowing us to carry semi-autos in 1986 from a list of approved handguns. I had done my homework and chose the 92F/M9 as my duty handgun. When I eventually went into plainclothes duty, the Beretta was my backup and I used it for certain duties where concealment wasn't an issue but an extra couple rounds of ammo may be. For my usual plainclothes duty, I chose a SIG P228. I was used to DA revolvers, which I carried for 15 years, and had no trouble with the DA/SA trigger of either of the two handguns. I DID practice a lot with doing DA/SA drills, or DA only drills. I still have the 92F. It shows a lot of finish wear (definitely what they now call "battle worn") but works perfectly and it is MY favorite range pistol. It never had any rust, despite being carried exposed in a notoriously hot humid summer climate and cold, wet, snowy winter weather. There is a lot of silvery looking wear on the aluminum frame and a silver looking barrel where the slide reciprocates. My 92F does not have the "slide break safety feature"...for whatever that is worth. That said, my wife is an avid shooter. I am 6'-4" and have 2xl size hands. She is 5'-3" and has small/medium size hands. Though she shoots guns like Model 1911s and full size DA target revolvers with no trouble, she doesn't like the 92F/M9 because the "...grip is too fat, I can barely reach the trigger". 🤷♂ I haven't regretted buying the Beretta, it always served me well and I have no interest in the SIG P320/M17
I remember the slide failures. I think too many people were firing Sub-machine gun ammo in the Beretta, which is a +P+ high pressure round. Not meant for the handgun. Operator failure not handgun failure.
It is not because s i g is cheaper they knew within 10 years after adopting Beretta M9 it was garbage why do you think they came out with a brigadier but then everyone wanted to brigadier not a M9 if they quit offering the brigadier and then took it out of service
Personal ownership: I like mine and the M9A3. Wish the A1 had a front sight dovetail to exchange sights, but understand that’s a product of the contract. Change the D-spring and the double action is great. Master the double action and the single action pull is just a bonus. Swapped the grips for slim version of LOK grips and it remedies the swell of the grips. Switched to a g-model decocker. Only weird aspect is I think the traditional black has great aesthetics. I think the stainless versions of all beretta models are extremely ugly. Love the in-line feeding to the barrel. Fine weapon with routine maintenance.
Here is or was the problem with the M9, People do not know how to shoot and were given horrible instructions on mastering the Beretta. I took a SSGT aside as a Sgt who was also qualifying on the range since were were in the same unit and we went over to the Poster that shows you what you are doing when your rounds are consistently hitting in the same area. He noticed I was placing my shots in the black while he was shooting low right. He asked and I instructed. He shot expert at the end of the week and so did I. He was so thankful that I had helped him not only qualify as a first time Pistol shooter but that he had qualified expert. it took applying fundamentals, breath control, finger placement, Steady pull on the double action shot and then easier pressure on single action, also time management instead of mag dumping on rapid fire. Yes people in the military are horrible shots even after all that training. I could never understand why someone would qualify as pizza box and to see someone with a double pizza box is not just embarrassing but why even bother.
@@hrfunk The same goes with all professions or jobs in general. When my wife complains about one of her people not working right, I ask “Weren’t you the one that trained them”? Sometimes it pisses her off at ME for asking when she knows I’m right…
My son when growing up learned to shoot the Walther P38. When he qualified in the Navy with M9 in the Navy he hated it. 6 years latter we rented a Berreta 92 and loved it. He said the M9s he used were beaten up and not maintained. I had the opportunity to handle, but not shoot an M9 that belonged to veteran who had used one in Iraq and loved it. His M9 looked like it had just come out of the box, it had been loved and maintained, just like the one he used in Iraq. For an individual who is willing to train on it and for M9s properly maintained, they are the superior weapon. For the US Army who intends to give these to people who will not be throughly trained, and pistols that the Army will not properly maintain, get a cheap polymer pistol, with Striker and throw them away when they cease to work. The biggest problem with M9 and the Army is that the army changed its doctrine. In WW2 the pistol was for officers. Non front line troops got carbines or M3 Grease guns, not pistols. In Iraq troops were given M4s and M9s. The M4 served as the role of both rifle and the PDW that the M3 played in WW2. The M9 was the backup weapon. My friend who survived being a tunnel rat in Vietnam carried the M3 as his main weapon and a 1911 as backup. He said M3 never failed so the only time he used the 1911 was when he emptied his M3 magazines. So the Army made the correct choice. If I could make the choice I would choose the M9 for myself, but would not recommend it shooters who wouldn't learn the manual of arms and practice.
I was in the Army when we converted from the 1911 to the M9. There was a lot of trash talk about the M9 initially, but once we became familiar with them, they became liked.
I think that’s true in other branches too. It seems like most of the complaints didn’t really start until around the beginning of the GWOT. I’m not sure why that is.
I agree and you make many great points. The M9 was what they gave us when I first joined and we received the M17/M18 during my last year. I never had any issue with either one and loved both even though I know many people who served longer were unhappy with the shitty mags we were assigned for the M9. I also understand why the military decided to go with Sig's M17/M18. It's clear that we needed upgrades with something newer. The M17/M18 is polymer so it's lighter/cheaper to produce, you get the same trigger pull every time, it was made with many accessories in mind, it's modular so theoretically repairs/maintenance will be cheaper long term, and the military contract Sig won made the M17/M18 a steal. If it came down to money and you were responsible for arming more people with a high quality pistol, you'd be stupid to not choose Sig over your other options. I'm also glad Sig produces the mags for the military so hopefully we get better reliability this time around.
@@jstud999 safer under not ideal conditions. What you said is only safe under ideal conditions. What happens if you're shot in the leg in combat, and your buddy or medics are tearing your armor and cloths of and the gun falls out of the holster and the trigger barely brushes against something and discharges? A double action trigger is so much more unlikely to be pulled. Combat is very chaotic its not the same as conceal carry on your way to the office.
@@jstud999 Oh i thought the video implied only military use considering its about the army's issued gun. Just a thought experiment, would you think a striker such as a glock, be suitable for a infantry handgun?
@@tranderrick The DA/SA combined with the decocker with the rotating firing pin makes it a very safe gun and after firing a few shots it makes it really easy to drop the hammer and put it to a safe position. It seems many of the supposed shortcomings arise from people being unwilling to take the time to become familiar and learn how to use a firearm.
First and foremost a great video HR! I was a unit Armorer (small arms repairman) in an active duty Infantry company 1984 to 1985 pre-M9 or M16A2, and later overseas from 1986 to 1987. Your comments are spot-on in my opinion. Change is always the biggest issue especially when it comes to firearms, and at least a Grunts acceptance of them. It was the same when we transitioned from the old Jeeps to the Humvees! The M1911s were a weapon that had authority when it was fired no matter if one was able to hit a target or not haha! They were dependable as you know. With that said, Cost is the Number 1 factor if you ask me! Money makes the world go around as they say! And folks tend to forget its not just, OK here is a new firearm, it's the parts depot behind them across the globe and that's a lot of mucho denaros as well! So, cost is definitely Number One in my opinion. Personally I don't think weight was an issue back in mid-80s as it is today with handguns, BUT modularity IS! We didn't have optics as they do now on every platform and every configuration known to mankind, and the only optic if we did use was a night sight if at all. Even when I ETS'ed in 1993 we still did not have optics like todays Infantry units do. I also believe the M9 was chosen because of the 9mm NATO round and thus Beretta for whatever reason got the contract back then...follow the money and it will lead you to exactly why it was chosen however! I attended the Beretta Armorer school in 1992 and became well versed in the M9 as well as everything else in their arsenal at that time, so I had absolutely NO issues with the M9, and even purchased an Beretta 9mm in 92 series back then from the factory direct, and no I sold it long ago. It was in my opinion totally reliable and never seen many issues on a range during my time as an Armorer either. But your video explained the many reasons WHY the M9 was replaced and well done as well as always! Keep up the good work my friend!
Thanks for the very informative comment David. I suppose I’m just a nostalgic dope, but it seems sad to see the M9 relegated to the scrap pile. I think the new Sig pistols are pretty good handguns in there own right. Even so, we’re witnessing the end of an era.
The real reason is that someone wanted to make a ton of money, as the military didn't NEED to replace the entire system. The only real drawback is its size and weight, which honestly helps with accuracy when firing the weapon. The Sig, despite being a newer design, only weighs a few ounces less which would immediately be negated adding optics. Beretta makes the smaller Cheetah (Serie 80) in double-stack 380, so it could likely handle modifying that design for the 9mm, so I don't know why the M9 was adopted in the first place as big as it is, as the Cheetah has been around since the 70's and weighs almost 10oz less than the M9.. This is really the only issue, everything else is just sounds like whining and refusing to adhere to training.
My first training class about twenty years ago was at TDI, in West Union Ohio. I used a 92fs and did extremely well, they joked around and called it a “thinking mans gun” because of the safety/de cocker. Almost everyone there was shooting a Glock, but I loved that 92 and I did well as I mentioned before. I like the idea of the removable firing unit in the Sig pistols but Beretta had introduced that also (albeit a little late) for the military, but I think that the M9A3 would’ve been a good choice but then again, weight is a factor for troops carrying all that other weight. I bought an M17 a couple years ago, didn’t like it. I do own an APX Centurion and like it a lot, but there’s something special (to me at least) about that 92, maybe because it was the first handgun I bought and I always wanted even before I was of age to carry. Thanks for the video, Mr. Funk.
This is one of the best explanations of the M9 and it's reputation. Subscribed! You have an amazing channel. Very precise and scholarly videos each time and every time. Thank you!
I was in the Chair Force Jan 78 to Dec 83 when we had 38 specials. No 1911s at WPAFB. When the service switched, I was out but had a 1911 and eventually added a 92 to my private collection. Of the 3 weapons I have mentioned, the 92 is easily, and, by far, the best. I would not hesitate to it take into combat as a side arm.
Thanks and Great points as always Howard! I had to acquire my own M9 as mine served very well in the Navy. I still think it is one of the top full size 9mm pistols ever made! I also added Wilson grips and safety change that fixed two key elements you mentioned. All the difference in the world for little $$ and I love it even more.
Howard, though I've watched quite a few of your videos, this is the one I like the most by far. Your delivery is well-paced, clear and you are obviously knowledgeable on the topic. It's a straight, no BS list of well-thought-out arguments why the M9's days were numbered. You are also clearly familiar with the pistol and your muscle memory kicked in when you were racking the slide or showing the movements for clearing a malfunction. I think what I liked most, though, is that you were in "instructor-mode" rather than "entertainer-mode" and your knowledge and intent shined through. Very enjoyable - and for me - informative since I learned a thing or two. If the M9 made people feel they were carrying a museum piece, what would they think carrying a 1911? I think ease and cost of manufacture as well as optics-readiness are very good arguments for a future-oriented procurement. And the 9x19mm cartridge is well proven, inexpensive and widely available. I was curious to hear your message about "US forces not liking being subject to NATO" - I think other member countries regard NATO as being very much driven by the US. Many thanks for making this video! Thumbs up, subscribed. All the best, Rob in Switzerland
You are most welcome Rob. I can give you a little bit of background on that comment about capitulating to NATO. About 20 years before the M9 trials, the US essentially insisted upon the adoption of the 7.62 cartridge as the NATO standard. Then, just about the time all the member nations procured new rifles chambered for that ammunition, the US dumped it in favor of the 5.56X45mm. Some people viewed the US acceptance of the 9mm handgun cartridge as an attempt to make amends for that fiasco.
@@hrfunk Ah yes - the FN FAL (or British L1A1) story. Originally chambered in 0.280 but forced to change to NATO standard. 7.62x51mm. I am lucky to have one in my collection.
Very well put together. Points well taken. I carried the 1911 as a Military policeman. The old ball rounds. But it packed a punch. Since then I have owned a few Beretta 92s 96s and even the 85 cheetah 380. Not my only pepper is the Langdon Edition 92G. Good things never die. Thank you for your service Mr Funk.
My 92F is the oldest gun in my collection. No feed jams, no stove pipes, no misfires, no parts replaced, no issues, with very wide variety of ammo, all over 30 years. Fits my hand perfectly. Shoots damn well. Taking mine to the grave.
I don’t blame you. Have you ever changed out the magazine springs or the recoil spring? Also, it I may ask, do you have any idea of how many rounds you’ve put through your 92?
@@hrfunk no change in recoil spring. I have added more mags into the rotation over the years. It has around 13k rounds through it. When I first got it, was shooting it more, but I have more guns now and I actually keep a detailed log on my newer guns; since this was my first and I didn’t have that discipline, I never started one for it.
I like da/sa of my 92fs...very reliable and accurate. I morphed into the Beretta PX4 Storm 9mm Sub for EDC and rarely fire the 92fs anymore. Like to carry in da w/no safety since the weight of the da pull is safety enough for me. This was a great video...thanks. First pistol in my life was Navy issue Government .45 in the late 60's-early 70's (we had Thompson's too!...old fleet boat.
Most if not almost all firearm designs are over 100 years old and in my mind Moses Browning created a masterpiece in the 1911 and it is still a masterpiece. I had 10, 12 and 15 round mags until California messed that up and they worked fine. They are made to carry cocked and on safety and they are ready to go with a flick of the thumb and the trigger is still one of the best. So "ok boomer' me all you want but I don't want a pistol that feels like a water pistol.
Been shooting Glocks and 2011:s for over twenty years. They both have merit. A fine tuned 19/2011 will run very good. But so will the Glock. Both will be capable of hitting small targets at 50 yds. The Glock will be cheap, and all spare parts are just drop in, while the 19/2011s will need fine tuning and gunsmithing, for example new trigger parts or a new barrel. The polymer frames will flex a bit, making them smoother to shoot. That is the reason why many 2011:s have a polymer lower today. I see the polymer Glocks as very large step in firearms development, just as the 1911 was.
@@matsparhammar3967 Too light and I can take apart and replace most parts myself. There are as many or more parts for the 1911 as their are the Glock. I have a standard barrel and a 16" barrel for my 1911. That's right , I have a Buntline 1911. I know a lot of it is personal preference but I prefer a heavier pistol and I do not believe my gun is anywhere obsolete.
@@tomjackson4374 of course it isn’t obsolete. But it is much easier to maintain a Glock. All spare parts are simple drop in. Been maintaining my two 2011s and three Glocks for two decades. About 200 000 rds through them. If SHTF I will use the Glocks, no question about it. The 2011s are more for competition for me, but the Glocks do both well really well, if you manage to get proficient with the trigger pull. Love both designs.
@@matsparhammar3967 I don't like light pistols. You could have a hundred Glocks, I don't care. And I can assemble and disassemble the 1911 blindfolded.
There's a lot of Glock fanboys in the world. I'll start this off first by saying I respect the Glock. It does what it was intended to do perfectly. Take a beating, get ignored, and still go *bang*. I do not like them. I don't like the trigger, and I don't like the way the sights line up. I can shoot them just fine, and qualify just fine, no issues: other than personal preference. My mainstay private carry is a Beretta M1951. I like the single stack mag. I like the trigger pull. I like the sights. I like the safety. I like the mag drop. Everything about this pistol is pure true love to me. On good days, I can get a consistent group at 50 yards. Bad days, I got some flyers. Personal preference and confidence. There's a reason I don't really talk about guns with my co-workers. My SKS is a "Piece of shit!", even though I put the same groups on paper as they do with optics. Anything that isn't a glock is a "Waste of money!". I even made the thorny mistake of mentioning I practice shooting a one handed bladed stance, and somtimes practice shooting the arms, and heads of my targets, and they practically skinned me alive on the spot. Everyone trains to shoot "center mass", well, what happens when you take that center mass away, or cut that center mass in half? Makes me think of the video of that Correctional Officer that flawlessly disarms a robber at a gas station, clears the pistol, and...... hands it back to the robber. Training is good, but in my opinion, Practice is better. Carry what you practice, and practice for every situation.
Sir, thank you. I really was about to buy one, despite all my veteran buddies telling me not to. But seeing you do a slide rack and it engaging the safety, that did it for me. Excellent video. Glad you made it Home.
I love my Berettas, accurate, soft shooting, smooth trigger. And I really love that DA to SA option, especially for a home protection gun. Regarding the safety, for anyone that does accidentally engage the safety, Ernest Langdon shows a great technique using the safety 'ears' as grab points. His technique not only avoids that potential failure, but also aids in racking the slide if grip strength is an issue. Hope I'm not out of line referencing another person's work on your video, HR.
I was a young Lance Corporal at Marine Barracks Portsmouth NH in 86, when we finally received the Beretta. Most of us thought the thing looked & shot great, compared to the old/weathered 1911's!
Wow! You got them early. As an MP, I didn’t start seeing the Berettas until around January of 89. I remember during my last pistol qual at MCAS Iwakuni, there were a couple of young Marines down at the other end of the firing line who were shooting them. I was never issued a Beretta. Not even when I was recalled for Operation Desert Storm in 1991. Even then I was again issued a 1911A1. I wasn’t upset by that. I was,and still am, a 1911 fan.
Full disclosure, I've never owned the M9 and it came out after I left the Corps. I've shot many semi auto pistols, and professionally carried Sig P220 for many years. My personal opinion (and everyone has their own opinion), I have found the accuracy, dependability and simplicity of the Sig to cause me to buy a P226 and P400 Trend (AR15). This was the best videos about the conversion of the military sidearm I've seen. Great job Marine.
As an Army CID Special Agent, I re-initiated the compact pistol development program that resulted in the M-11 pistol, at the time the M-9 was adopted. Hence, I regularly met with the M-9 Item Manager at Rock Island Arsenal throughout the M-9 fielding and M-11 development process. Regarding the slide breaking issue, there were several catastrophic failures that led to injuries, not just one. When that one happened, even before it was reported to the Item Manager, Beretta put out a press release alleging that it happened when Seals were shooting "High-Pressure Submachine Gun Ammo." This was incorrect. They were shooting regular M-882 Ball ammo (which IS loaded very hot, but which was the spec which was established for the M-9). Moreover, these incidents led to metallurgical analysis of Beretta slides which resulted in ALL USA-made slides failing specs. For several years, Beretta was unable to produce ANY acceptable slides in their US production plant and continued to have to import slides from Italy to meet production schedules. THAT is why Beretta finally added the additional safety feature in case of slide failure. Sig eventually won the M-11 pistol competition with their P-228, which, I am told, was developed to meet my original XM-11 specs. The Sig P-226 also met the M-9 specs, but was not adopted because Beretta came in slightly cheaper in their final bidding for weapons and spare parts. Significantly, no P-226 slides were ever known to crack, and the grip diameter of the 226 was smaller and easier to grip with average and smaller sized hands. The 228 (M-11) improved on even this sized grip. IMHO, the military should have dumped the M-9 upon adoption of the M-11 and gone exclusively with the smaller, lighter pistol. At the expense of a couple of less rounds magazine capacity, they would have wound up with a reliable compact pistol easier for plain-clothes detectives to conceal, and easier to fit in tight spaces like fighter plane cockpits, armor hatches, etc. They would have given up nothing in reliability.
I was a 95B enlisted MP 1989 to 1993. The rumors of the period were the DoD & NATO wanted to chum up, butter up the 🇮🇹 armed forces, govt to expand air bases, sites in Italy. A huge contract for Beretta would mean 💲💲💲. I remember Beretta wanting a slim, 9 shot 9mm for CIDC 🕵🏻♂️ MI guys. SIG pushed the P228 9mm which later won the military selection, M11. A Fort Lee VA CID guy told me he liked the 9mm M11 & most field office agents, staff wanted it more than clunky M9 Beretta pistols.
@@DavidLLambertmobile Beretta submitted a single-stack version of their Model 92-C for testing. Interestingly enough, it was a jam-o-matic that couldn't be relied on to go through more than a couple of magazines without a malfunction, unlike the Sig P-225 which proved quite reliable. I owned a Model 92-C at the time, and found it quite reliable if still somewhat bulky. The Sig P-228 was, essentially, a double-stack P-225.
@@garygriffiths6998 the 225/p6 already had years of German police service to its credit. Its a fine weapon and years ago when a sizeable quantity of Polizeii surplus was imported, they were bargain priced and made great carry guns.
No, the issue with the slides cracking on Beretta pistols WAS due to the ammunition. Winchester was accidentally loading the 9mm ammo they were providing to the military to near proof pressures. After this was discovered, Beretta successfully sued the US military for wrongful damage to their reputation as a result. Beretta introduced the thicker "brigadier" slides to "fix" the "issue" only because they reasoned that it was easier to convince potential customers that the "issue", which didn't actually exist, was "fixed" rather than to explain the reality that the failures were caused by significantly overpressure ammunition.
Thanks for a superb discussion. As a not-deeply-experienced "general interest" long gun shooter looking for a first pistol, it's been difficult of course sorting thru the maze of options and choices to pick that first one. Always helpful to have discussions based on real factors not just "I like this I hate that". You discussed many things that are important down-select features but that I'd have never thought of (e.g., SA/DA vs SAO / DAO -- not "good vs bad" but here are the consequences for you of the choices -- choose which road you are happiest going down; and yes, right! -- you can't mount optics of that firearm!). You've earned another subscriber and I look forward to your other articles past and future -- I'll be reviewing them ALL before I make that purchase! Great discussions from your commenters too (even when disagreeing) -- that's always a good clue the general level of quality of a YT channel!
Thanks for the sub and welcome aboard! I think a have the best viewers on RU-vid . They are a fun and knowledgeable group. Im happy you’re one of them.
Beretta is almost 500 years old. Amazing. I love my 92fs. The single action is great, but I practice with the double action too. It is so reliable. I think it's because the mag sit high in the chamber. Rounds feed almost straight into the barrel.
Spoke to a couple soldiers from Iraq service and they said they couldn't hit a barn with it because the barrels were shot out. They said you can expect that from service pistols due to so much training. Just got a m9a3 for myself and have nothing but great things to say about it. I did put a compensator and flat trigger on it. Very happy.
Realistically more of a training issue than a weapon issue, accurate and super reliable, carried one for years overseas. Didn’t baby it and it functioned flawlessly.
One thing I wonder about the stories of clapped out M9s is why there weren’t any similar complaints of the 1911 at the end of its service life? The 1911 was the main sidearm for 74 years, twice the time that the M9 was in service, and from what I read, no new 1911s were manufactured since WW2, so that’s still 40 year old guns by the time it was retired. And yet the 1911 was still well liked and revered. Was that revisionist history where the 1911s were as clapped out or were the 1911s treated better in service than the M9s to avoid that reputation?
@@timw.9139 Makes sense, especially since there were more M1911A1s manufactured for just the US military than M9s/92FS’s for the entire world, so the military probably had a lot more spare parts for the 1911s in service.
Howard, I am looking forward to it. I am not sure why they dropped the Beretta a pistol that served me well in COMBAT & PEACE TIME in the US. ARMY INFANTRY for many years, as well as 1911 .45, did in years past . I must say I like the Sig pistol they are using today also. I carried the Beretta 92 FS & 92FS Compact as a Peace Officer, I handed them down to my son as the Springfield Armory XD .45 Tactical 5.25, XDM OSP 9MM 4.5", XDM OSP ELITE 9MM,& Springfield Armory Hell Cat 9mm are the only thing I carry for the defense today. I suspect some D-RAT politician sold out Beretta in our corrupt society FOR $$$ , I am surprised our pistol Today didn't come from CCP CHINA!
hrfunk sold me on The Hellcat, now a pretty much EDC for me 8 months of the year. The other months a 1911 or Hi Power. For the Hellcat, hrfunk also sold me on the DeSantis Criss Cross holster, and excellent way to carry.
My childhood friends, have experienced others, breaking their triggers on their m4's, by not disengaging the safety, when confronted with immediate deadly contact...my only fear would be, that the same 'may' happen with the new Sig, if the safety is not disengaged...under duress you will use more force than you may believe you would🙏
Great informative video HR. Many Seals liked the change to M9 due to magazine capacity. As they were transitioned to a much larger budget of their own and were afforded the opportunity to pick and choose their weapons many opted for (Sig, FN, and other sidearms). Mostly in 9mm as ammo was readily available in stock system. A side story: Seabees would go to the range to qualify before deployment. A Range Master (PO 1st) was receiving complaints from a Seabee that his .45 was too loose and rattled badly as he couldn't hit the target. Range Master took his 1911 and a fresh magazine and emptied the 7 rounds into his target in rapid sequence and all rounds in the 9 ring and xx. Handed it back to him, saying nothing, just walked away! Lol!
@@hrfunk he had heard other inexperienced Seabees say that the 1911 was inaccurate because it was sloppy and rattled! Guess the Range Master blew that theory out of the water! Lol!
@@Sam1628 many SEALS liked the Sig better, some went with Flocks. Some preferred FNX. Most said it was what they were comfortable with depending on the mission. There was also a difference whether they were DEVGRU or regular Teams. DEVGRU had the biggest budget.
Excellent video. As someone in the market for my first “new generation” handgun, your presentation and consideration of abstract reasoning was incredibly helpful. So often you hear the “I’d never own…” from gun owners quoting inaccurate statistics as you mentioned. My intended use is in no comparison to a service weapon. Weekend plinking, target shooting, and personal protection are the mainstay for my future purchase. Thank you for sharing your knowledge.
The military used aftermarket replacement parts that were not manufactured by Beretta. Once they stared using the OEM parts from Beretta, those issues went away.
I love that you touched on the parts service and maintenance. The US Army puts an extraordinarily low priority on pistol maintenance and training, even for their operations guys. The units I was at stayed on top of the maintenance cycle for our M9s and we had zero issues with function and reliability.
One thing I do wonder is whether the 1911s were as poorly maintained as the M9s, since I would imagine the 1911s would’ve been treated the same yet there were no complaints about those guns being clapped out. In fact, the opposite happened where a lot of guys stuck with the 1911 even after the M9 was adopted.
I’ve received many complaints from veterans who were issued 1911s. A lot of them claim their pistols were worn out/poorly maintained. Apparently I was lucky. All of the 1911s I was issued were in good working order.
@@gameragodzilla They did, at least with some of the people they were issued to. By that time, however, they already had about 50 years of good service.
😀 Like most young people, they believe that the newest is the best as well as you said those older prior military who had gone through the "kinks" phase of the M9 just aren't willing to listen to reason as well. For a 9mm the M9 was a good quality reliable firearm that deserved a chance to be properly upgraded for optics and other issues. Anyhow, thanks for the great video and continue making great content.
@@raptorkravmaga9977 If that were true they'd own the market instead of being behind so many others. It's a great gun, but best is a hell of a stretch.
The slide breakage issue is explainable. At Ft Lewis, an MP Company drew 9MM ammunition for range qual. The ammo point issued the usual ammo- 124gr SUBMACHINE GUN ammo. Why? Previously, only the Ranger Batt on post drew 9MM ammo - for their MP-5's. Multiple slide breakages occurred that day.
My first experience with a handgun was my dad’s blued 92F. I loved that gun. I thought it was the most beautiful gun in the world. When I got older, I purchased an M9A1. I don’t think it looks as sexy with it’s rail and candy coating. But it’s still a nice looking pistol. After a few thousand rounds, I really wanted to see if I could improve the DA/SA trigger pull and found out that you could go from the factory 20lb hammer spring to the 92D (DAO law enforcement variant) 16lb spring. What a difference! For reference, I’ve got an HK USP9 with match kit and M&P9 with an Apex trigger. Noticeably lighter DA pull and slightly lighter SA pull. I highly recommend trying it out. It’s only $3.99 at Brownells so if you don’t like it, just swap it back and you’re not out much money. Also, Langdon Tactical sells a VZ G10 Ultra-Thin LTT grip which finally made the grip comfortable for me. Not cheap! $69 but they’ve got lots of colors and personally, they’re worth every penny. Anyways, I finally love my M9A1!
I think the 1911 is such an iconic and familiar design with a very long track record, that any weapon looking to replace it, had a uphill battle to go against.
I have a 92FS and a 1911 Colt Government Model Both are fun to shoot, but I would take my 92fs over the 1911 for a defensive arm. Hard to argue with 18 rounds vs 8. Also, Wilson Combat makes an ultra thin G10 grip that really helps with the grip.
Still love my M9 pistol! It shoots amazingly well and I even carry it IWB for periods. Sig finally got in the game, who knows if it was due to a payoff or not. Most would believe they could have just upgraded to the M9A3, and kept mags, manual of arms, repair tools, etc and saved the taxpayer a lot of $$$
If I was in the military today and was given a choice between the Sig or the Beretta, I would choose the Beretta every time. First, the safety originally was designed on the frame, not the slide. That was a request made by the military, not Beretta. Second, the slide failures turned out to be hot 9mm that Beretta told them not to use to begin with. The ammo has since been modified and brought back down to sustainable pressures along with Beretta beefing up the slide to ensure that it would reduce these issues. Third, just as you said, the double action is a much safer action. There is no telling how many people have been killed from the Glock style trigger. Most of the guys carrying that action of trigger probably shouldn't have a pistol to start with. Mitigating that stress if very important both with military and police.
The Beretta 9 2FS aka M9 The grip is too large for some people in the military need a slimmer grip with 15 to 20 round magazines I SigSauer M18 and SigSauer 365 I also have a Beretta 92 FS aka M9 and a 1911A1 I was told my A few veterans from World War II Korea and Vietnam if you need to adjust to the weapon. But some people still have small hands for the M9’s. Ruger pistols American made with thump safety. The government asked for a thumb safety which is a good thing because you only need one hand to fire with a thumb safety if you carry a round in the chamber without a thumb safety you must be very careful. And if you do not have a round in the chamber is difficult to rack and stack a round in the chamber both hands are required. Glock said they would not put a thumb safety on their pistols So that mark them as a competition of a new firearm for the military. I seen the RU-vid video about Army Ordering some Glock 17 or 19 and Glock 23’s.
@@thom4446 USAF Security Police carried their M-9s with a 14 round magazine in the grip, a round in the chamber, and the safety off, in a fashion similar to the S&W M-15 .38 Special revolvers that it replaced. While there were teething issues during the transition from the M-15 to the M-9, they were attributable to clearing procedures, not the weapons themselves.
@@joshlarsen9650 It’s a great pistol for home defense. Dependable and you can mound a white light. Personally I think it’s perfect in that role because it’s a little to wide and heavy for daily carry.
Thank you, HR. All of the popular double stack guns will present the ergonomics issue for the folks who like a single stack like the 1911 (like me). I owned a Taurus copy of the M92 that was a very fine shooter, and was $150 at a gun show. Never a hiccup. I'm a Glock19 fan among the double stackers because it's so easy to train novice shooters with it. Thanks again for your videos
I just want to throw this out there Howard since I'm not sure if anyone took this factor into consideration. In all the statistics I've seen, female participation in the military has doubled since 1985. Not as much in the Marine Corps, but in the Navy, Army and Air Force the female enlistment has grown to as much as 25 % of the total force. While the M9 fits my hand just fine, I think it would be difficult for a female with smaller hands to feel as comfortable using that platform as I do. Transitioning to a simpler, lighter design such as the Sig M17 that is able to fit a much wider range of hand sizes just makes a lot more sense. Plus, the M17 has a faster learning curve, a much quicker training time, and is much lighter to carry. We can sit back and pontificate and armchair quarterback all day on this topic, but if we're really interested in having the best equipped, best trained military force in the world, we need to provide our service men and women all across the board the most effective tools to do their jobs. I think just as we saw the M9 replace the 1911 because the technology had improved since the early 20th century, the M17 is doing the same thing to the M9 today. My personal opinion is, there just is no downside to upgrading and updating our military forces with the best weapons available.
Thanks Brad. That's precicesly the point I was trying to make in the video whan I said the grip is just too big for some shooters. I didn't specify the demographics of those shooters because truthfully, at this point, that's irrelevant.
@@alanharrison573 Not the cause, the demographics of the cause. The composition of the US military is not likely to change. Continually complaining about the fact that certain members of our military are smaller in stature than used to be the case is a waste of time. The only relevant question is how to we best equip this new military.
One of the things that contributed to the decision to adopt the Beretta, was that there were numerous cases of female service members who sued in federal court because they were unable to qualify with the .45 Technically it was a requirement that NCO's and above had to qualify with the pistol (although not always practiced) in addition many MOS's required one to be pistol qualified. Most organizations that get stomped on by a Federal Judge don't do a lot of public complaining afterwards.
I've lately gone back to carrying my 92FS. It fits my hands, and its weight doesn't bother me, though I'm not carrying heavy gear for long marches. As a side benefit, I can watch Die Hard without feeling like a bad guy. I do like Jeff Cooper's remark that decocking a pistol isn't something you generally need to do in a hurry and might as well be done with a skate key.
Out of all the wonder nines I've held and shot, the Beretta is the most comfortable. What concerns me about the new m17/18 pistols is that it seems that Sig is trying to make a Glock when Glock has been making Glocks for 30+ years. Whatever problems the new pistols have I'm sure will be ironed out, but it shows that the Military doesn't learn from its mistakes
When Beretta started making the pistols that eventually evolved into the M9, I wonder if somebody said: “Beretta is trying to make a P38 when Walther has been making them for years”?
Very interesting video. I wasn't in the service myself, but in chats with folks who served in the Army and Marines who used the M9 and had a negative opinion of it, most of them had served more recently and had received severely worn, poorly maintained pistols and despite their complaints about the condition of the pistols being poor, they blamed the firearm instead of effective maintenance programs -- or rather lack thereof -- for the problems they had with the pistols. This gets back to your point that when people have a negative experience with something, it's easier to fault a tangible object than it is to understand and to correct the nebulous circumstances that led to their unhappy experience.
