Which handgun do you think will replace pic-related POS? Which do you hope does?
Well, honestly probably with the way politics are going if it's replaced either a S&W M&P, or a One of those new striker fired SIGs whose name escapes me right now.
Well, completely out of left field, but one of those full auto CZ-75s, or a Jericho/Tanfoglio handgun.
But that'll never happen.
yeah, 15 round standard capacity, or 17 round with more modern mags, is pretty bad. the m9a3 would have done the military just fine, especially seeing as how they wouldn't have to change training at all. but a new handgun won't really affect much anyway.
-Apparently 9mm was getting shit reviews from the ME. And this is why its open caliber competition.
-The US military seems to have it out for the Beretta. The m9a3 could've been introduced seamlessly. US still noped without really saying why.
Glock already got a contract for MP's and SOF use in all 5 branches. US SF and Army MP's are getting Glock 19's (SF have had them as an option for 10 years now), Navy SP's and SEALs are getting Glock 19's, USAF SOF (PJ's, CCT's) are getting Glock 17's, MARSOC is ditching their 1911's for Glock 19's, and USCG is switching branch-wide to Glock 17's.
It's literally a matter of time til they change the criteria for a service-wide standard issue pistol and do away with the manual safety.
I thought they wanted something with more oomf, and were eyeing up .45acp again.
If they're sticking with 9mm, why not glock 17L with the 33 round magazines. Could they not perform as a service pistol? I'm only familiar with glock and sig s>>28877501
>slide mounted safety
>completely non-adjustable sights, not even drift adjustable
>still required to use the 15rd mag
The civilian 92FS and 92G are fine pistols. The military M9 and M9A1 are giant pieces of shit that only superficially resemble civvy-available models.
>without really saying why
It's heavy, still absurdly low capacity for its bulk and weight (the government bid for the M9A3 still had the 15rd mag from 1986 and the government would be contractually prohibited from using aftermarket mags), literally nobody likes a slide-mounted safety, and the grip was big enough around that the females couldn't hold it properly much less comfortably.
All of that came from official DoD statements.
>US still noped without really saying why.
It was because of the fucking stupid slide mounted safety that no one likes, but beretta still uses for some unknown reason.
if they just went back to the actually good frame safety, it would have probably been accepted.
the army said soldiers engaged the safety during malfunction drills. beretta made it so the safety could just be a decocker instead, but ultimately it probably would have been better to change the design completely.
>slide mounted safety
It was required by the Army and it's not really a big deal. You're sweeping your thumb down in the same motion you use for a frame safety either way.
The only difficulty with it is accidentally engaging the decocker/safety when you charge the slide, and it's really not like it happens super easily even if you do.
>completely non-adjustable sights
Only the front sight is machined into the slide, the rear sight isn't, and no other service pistols have adjustable sights, nor would they be necessary as long as the pistol is factory zeroed, which virtually all decent ones are.
>still required to use the 15rd mag
>The military M9 and M9A1 are giant pieces of shit that only superficially resemble civvy-available models.
Please stop posting.
>The civilian 92FS and 92G are fine pistols. The military M9 and M9A1 are giant pieces of shit
they're literally the same fucking gun. military m9s are just in horrible condition from retards bashing the shit out of them for 30 years.
They are wanting something with more oomph, but are most likely either going to change the NATO pressure requirements for a higher grain weight bullet at similar velocities (perhaps a 135 or 147gr supersonic load), or do away with ball ammo for combat use just like they recently did with 5.56 (brown-tip mk262 is a Barnes TTSX expanding bullet).
>it's literally not even that hard to manipulate...
Until you have to do it with the hand holding the fucking gun because it sits a full inch above the tip of most non-ET-handed people's thumb.
>the only difficulty with it is accidentally engaging the decocker/safety
Don't forget reaching it, since it sits so fucking far above the grip. There's a reason almost everybody has to use their off-hand to manipulate the safety.
>only the front sight is machined into the slide
True, but every military M9 I ever touched had the rear sight pinned in place so it couldn't be drifted side to side in its dovetail. Furthermore some of them were pinned so far off zero they were hitting several YARDS to the side of a fullsize silhouette at 25 yards.
Find me one single instance of a military organization issuing a 17rd Beretta mag. Please. I beg you.
And until you do, sit down and STFU.
No they're not. They're similar. They use a different (weaker) locking block and the safety is somewhat difficult.
>MFW I forgot I have larger hands than most people
>There's a reason almost everybody has to use their off-hand to manipulate the safety.
You're so painfully nogunz it hurts.
Just admit it, you've never been in any military and you've never touched a Beretta.
>There's a reason almost everybody has to use their off-hand to manipulate the safety.
you're a manlet, right? I'm completely average height with small-medium gloves, and I have no problem working the safety.
>No they're not. They're similar. They use a different (weaker) locking block and the safety is somewhat difficult.
except you're wrong, and just proved how fucking stupid you are in this entire post.
christ, I bet even this kid could reach the safety no problem one handed.
why is everyone bitching about capacity? when did 15-17 rounds become low capacity?
are you confusing the slide stop with the safety? I have to adjust my grip a little bit to hit the slide stop one handed. but I can't imagine anyone can't reach the safety
I do agree the slide safety is not as good as a frame safety.
They just need to use a low-profile safety, and that pretty much solves the problem.
>Don't forget reaching it, since it sits so fucking far above the grip
Not even my 5'5" cousin had any trouble reaching the safety lever...
>Furthermore some of them were pinned so far off zero they were hitting several YARDS to the side of a fullsize silhouette at 25 yards
.... no, whoever were shooting are just bad shooters with terrible skills.
Also, you need to provide several pictures to prove you handled a real military M9 at a military base, and that the rear sights are off.
>Find me one single instance of a military organization issuing a 17rd Beretta mag
It is very difficult to say none of them are using the 17rd mag since there are a lot of mil-organization using Beretta 92/M9
>20+ rounds in it.
No, you couldn't.
But you could have 18rd. flush or 20rd. with slightly chunky baseplates, both of which are commonly available for Berettas and have been for a long time.
The military just hasn't bothered to upgrade.
15rd is fairly low cap for current standard.
However, Mec-Gar does sell 18rd flush fitting mag for the M9/92, so I don't see the problem
Not that guy, but that picture implies that you need to flick the safety down to take it off, when it's the other way around. And his hand is still off the grip. It's just extremely awkward and unergonomic unless you've got thumbs like E.T. This is why the 92G is the best of the line.
the m9a3 ships with 17 rounders, doesn't it?
dude, stop. the problem isn't that the safety is hard to use. it's that people sometimes have a problem with engaging it when clearing a malfunction.
> but that picture implies that you need to flick the safety down to take it off
No, it implies you need to move your thumb in a forward and down motion to take the safety off, which is the proper way to deactivate the safety.
>It's just extremely awkward and unergonomic unless you've got thumbs like E.T.
I have absolutely dead center of average size hands if Google is to be believed, and it's not even remotely a stretch for me to use the safety with a full grip, I could still hit it if it were even higher and further forward.
You haven't held or shot a Beretta, this much is obvious from your posts.
Have you handled a 92/M9?
You barely have to change your grip to engage or disengage the safety.
The tension of the safety lever is very weak, hence why it is easy to engage or disengage it unintentionally.
The best solution for a standard model is to have a low-profile lever.
Or, like you said, a G model. But with a standard size safety, it is still easy to engage it, having a double stage trigger when you don't want it to. (of course, it is better than a dead trigger)
Fuck you. The 92 was _never_ the problem. The training and management by the DoD was, has, and always shall be.
When will the meme end? Use a slide mounted safety sometime. There is literally no difference. Holy shit.
M9A3 pistols do come with 17rd mags.
In the civilian world, having that option had long been a possibility.
However, that is the very first time Beretta ships their pistol with them.
After all these years Beretta finally decided to add 2 extra rounds, and proposed to the Military their 'new upgrade'.
On the side note, it was the military that decided to cheap out on the M9 mags which caused many failures and stirred up a bad rep for the M9
But I have. My dad owns an early 92f and I've shot it countless times. You can like it all you want but you'll never be able to convince me that the safety isn't slow clunky aids.
That's only true if you're supporting it with your off-hand. It is undeniably slower than a frame-mounted safety. You simply need to move your thumb further. And if it's coming out of a holster, it's even worse. I would also disagree with you on how easy it is to flick on/off. The one I've shot was fairly stiff.
I really like the frame mounted safety.
I've handled a 92 Billennium and a 92 Steel II.
Beretta did the right thing on their original M92, but like you already know, it was the military contracts that called for a slide safety.
They should really just put a low-pro safety on the pistol... that would solve the biggest issue with the M9/92
I love the M9/92 and I like the PX4... but damn is the APX ugly looking holy shit.
>M-m-my dad's gun!
That's what I thought.
> It is undeniably slower than a frame-mounted safety.
God you are an unbearably petulant faggot.
>Oh no, I have to move my thumb fractions of an inch more!
Doesn't seem to be an issue if you're even remotely competent.
that's not standard capacity, and berettas have 20 round mags too.
>After all these years Beretta finally decided to add 2 extra rounds, and proposed to the Military their 'new upgrade'.
they didn't just slap two more rounds in and send it in. you get a lot of gun for the money really.
>You simply need to move your thumb further
To engage the safety, yes.
To disengage the safety, no.
There is a moderate amount of force from the spring that helps to spring back the lever to the fire mode. It is extremely easy to put it to fire.
Not going to argue anymore since obviously you still need to learn more about the M9/92
the Px4 _is_ a Beretta, nogunz
'standard capacity' is a moving target. Police carrying brand Z are going to get the magazines that fix the need best. Trying to apply the same logic to the us military is useless.
How am I getting bullied? Your're the only one butthurt about your gun's terrible safety design. I don't even dislike the gun overall, but autists like you who go out of there way to defend their purchase from any insult are a pitiful spectacle.
No, it's just obvious you've never shot a Beretta, so unless your pictures prove otherwise, no. Really, just stop trying.
>You can't even tell if his safety is on to begin with faggot
Stoeger and Langdon both ran 92fs when they won USPS championships.
Stop trying so hard.
>You need to own a gun to prove that it has undesirable qualities! Firing one simply won't do!
>Stoeger and Langdon both ran 92fs when they won USPS championships.
Am I supposed to care? I said the safety was bad. I didn't say you couldn't shoot paper with it.
>he had to
you're really fucking stupid.
this guy made a video just for people as dumb as you.
notice how he doesn't change his grip at all to disengage the safety, regardless of the way he disengages it.
he even wrote it out for you.
>The fastest, most positive way to disengage the Beretta slide mounted safety. Summary: Center the pistol in the web of your hand, ie assume the correct grip. The thumb starts up high, bumps the safety forward with the first joint, and finishes in a down and forward motion.
That's the point, you've never fired one and it's obvious.
Again, stop trying so hard.
>I didn't say you couldn't shoot paper with it.
Oh boy, please tell us all about how you know which guns are good for TACTICAL FIGHTING COMBAT.
One of these days I'm gonna get a 92fs and channel my inner Martin Riggs
>they never went with pic or at the least the m11
Whatever, as much as slide mounted safeties are shit, there is literally no real reason to replace the m9 at this point.
Be like me and find an early '92 inox basically new in the box and live out all of your '90s action movie fantasies in style.
>There's simply no way someone could fire the same gun as me and dislike what I like!
How do you function with autism this severe.
>Oh boy, please tell us all about how you know which guns are good for TACTICAL FIGHTING COMBAT.
The ones with no safeties are ideal. Other stuff can be good too, but I don't think that it's as good.
Mid/late '80s through '90s, either way works really.
The inox always reminds me of "Rush Hour."
>Get called out for blatant lies
>Muh muh dad owns one!
>Y-y-you're an autist!
Reaction images next?
>The ones with no safeties are ideal. Other stuff can be good too, but I don't think that it's as good.
Obviously opinions formed under extensive combat experience.
you said the safety was bad, having no real experience using it. I prefer 92s with frame safeties. I don't really like the slide safety. but you went full retard and claimed you need huge hands to use it without changing your grip.
Any gun safety be it on the frame slide or non existing is really preference. If you have a firearm , any firearm you stake and will trust with your life then you will know how to draw it and aim in fire condition.
In all if it's a range toy then it dosent matter and you can bitch about it but it dosent mean that the gun is in any way bad or inferior. If it's a CCW or a HD gun then it goes without saying you better know that gun better than your own cock and train with it.training , training and training will eliminate the whole "slide safety is shit " crap and will perform the same as a gun without it. Again , training is key and muse be done with all guns , but extra training must be done ontop of that if it's a gun you will stake your life on. Goes the same with the whole striker/DA/SA crap to.
I already told you I did though. You said that I was lying because I have a negative opinion of it. Literally worse than glockfags and czfags combined.
I can't manipulate it one handed without changing my grip. But as I discovered in an earlier post, some others have safeties that are apparently spring loaded which seems to help that problem. I still think it's retarded to have the safety go up to fire.
>that are apparently spring loaded
you mean like literally every single one of them?
you can't manipulate it one handed because you've probably used it maybe one time and never tried to manipulate it one handed. fuck, even if you disengaged it the wrong way that most people use, it's easy to do one handed.
Bro, just let it go.
The kid has been backtracking and tripping over his own posts for the last 30min. now trying to save face.
Just let him go back to CoD or whatever containment board he came from.
>mfw my carry gun does require you to push up on the safety, and I still have no problem with it because I'm not a little bitch nigga
>you mean like literally every single one of them?
No, since the one I fired doesn't disengage when you flick down like in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0VxLkqm--U
>you can't manipulate it one handed because you've probably used it maybe one time and never tried to manipulate it one handed.
I said I couldn't manipulate the safety one-handed without moving my grip. You don't need to make things up, my earlier posts are right there.
>fuck, even if you disengaged it the wrong way that most people use, it's easy to do one handed.
My fuckin nigga
I fucking love my p64. I don't EDC it but it is by far my favorite pistol. I bought an extra set of used grips just so I could mess around a little bit and paint it dark green. Shit is cash
I don't think you're old enough to own guns. Your big brother probably showed you an old John Woo movie and you decided you liked the Beretta because it looked cool. Now here you are shitposting on /k/ about your favorite movie gun. Guess what? There's better stuff in real life.
who jizzed in the ejection port?
Genuinely, I think a high-capacity .45 would fill the void pretty well.
you're a funny guy.
1911 is a great design, and .45 is definitely not off the table, although the same can't be said for the 1911 design.
Genuinely thinking a decent modern .45 offering could take the cake if anyone bothers to enter one into the running.
I love my 92fs. I was shooting a glock the other day and realized how inferior it is. Plus, I know everyone is tacticool, but the 92fs is the best looking 9mm there is bar-none.
That's not even a thing, you idiot.
>P226 Mk25 which has been dumped by the Navy Seals due to reliability issues.
They haven't dropped anything, the 226 is just slowly being phased out because it's old and if you're going to carry a sidearm it might as well be light, proven, and already in the system, which is why they're sticking with the G19 and Mk.24 for the handful of times it's necessary.
Yeah, I agree. Even though I don't shoot as well with it and I wouldn't trust the reliability as much as a glock or something, I think it looks way better than any other 9mm pistol besides maybe the p210.
>Don't forget reaching it, since it sits so fucking far above the grip. There's a reason almost everybody has to use their off-hand to manipulate the safety.
The fuck. If you can't reach that safety you won't be able to reach a frame mounted one either. You've obviously never held the gun. Stop posting.
I vill cut off your johnson!
>Beretta and Glock are the only choices BRUH!
Fuck me running I hate this site.
You know I've seen a shitton of Glock, Beretta, and Sig threads.
I almost quit this site. Almost. I was a year sober. And then I thought, "Hey, one more time won't hurt."
You can check out anytime you like, but you can never leave.
Fuck everything in the handgun world except KRISS, they're just too expensive for this application though.
>no 10mm Sphinx 3000
>life is suffering
I think all of us are forgetting the obvious solution.
To me it isn't either, but it is still good to have 3 more rounds in the mag. And with a little bit more protrusion under the grip, you can get a 20rd mag, so that is 5 extra more rounds.
A lot of people agree jumping from a 8rd 1911 mag to a 12rd USP45 mag is a big deal, and that is 4 additional rounds.
>A lot of people agree jumping from a 8rd 1911 mag to a 12rd USP45 mag is a big deal, and that is 4 additional rounds.
As if that matters, you capacity faggots will never quit, just develop a belt fed pistol and fuck off already.
U wot m8?
I owned one and it held 17+1, how is there a capacity problem? The only thing I didn't like was it was too big for my bitch mits.
The m9a3 toned down the grip and magwell and is a much more comfortable gun.
>and the grip was big enough around that the females couldn't hold it properly much less comfortably
yeah but when it comes to big black dick they grip that just fine
>play original insurgency mod
>muhreen brings up his M9
>uses left hand to disengage safety
>realize it would probably be done the very same way irl by a muhreen with short fingers
This is now a dependa thread
You disengage the safety on the draw stroke bro, when you drive your hand down along the gun you push your thumb forward and the spring tension helps flick it off. The people that hate the gun are actively trying to do so. It's not my personal preference either but it's nowhere near as big of a problem as people make it out to be
Behold, the hardest safety to manipulate of all time.
But seriously, I don't get the hate. And much like this anon said >>28884032
generally speaking, you disengage the safety as you reach down to unholster the pistol, or as you bring it up. It takes absolutely no time at all and is quite fluid.