Why is the Beretta 92 so popular, if it's a shit gun?

>>34379884
>I've never seen a gun in real life, but
Stopped reading right there

File: 1441771132412.png (111KB, 480x600px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 480x600px

>>34379884
>I've never seen a gun in real life
I want Eurofags to leave

File: tec-9.png (1MB, 1394x736px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1394x736px

>>34379884
For reference, pic related is the Tec 9. Has about half of the amount of parts the Beretta 92 does, and also they're much simpler. Caliber is the same and muzzle velocity is barely 20 m/s lower (this difference is enough to make it that at sea level the Tec 9 doesn't fire supersonic bullets, unlike the Beretta 92), it weights like 300ish grams more, and it's somewhat bigger. The point still stands, because this is not only about the Tec-9, but about other guns too. Also, I don't want to be that guy, but you can turn the Tec-9 into an automatic pistol, or even a SMG easily; be it legally or illegally. Enlighten me on the popularity of the Beretta 92 /k/.

>>34379884
>I've never seen a gun in real life
sage report and hide

>>34379884
How have you never seen a gun?

File: This-thread-gave-me-cancer-60s-spiderman-ICjTSM.jpg (40KB, 500x364px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 500x364px

>>34379884
>I've never seen a gun in real life
>Only experience you have with guns and what you are solely using as a basis for your opinions is a fucking video game

fucking leave

>>34379899
>>34379926
>>34379934
>>34379947
>>34379957
Get your heads out of your asses idiots. The board doesn't require that you're a gun owner, and posts aren't even limited to guns anyway. I am posing a legitimate discussion about guns, based on observations and objective technical information. Whether I have seen/owned/fired a gun or not is irrelevant to the truth, for if a person who owns guns posed the same question, the content of it and the logical conclusions wouldn't change. Isn't this board supposed to be full of people who understand how guns work? I just want to know what the knowledgeable opinions on this topic are.

File: 1468624441854.gif (1MB, 290x189px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 290x189px

>>34379927
>this difference is enough to make it that at sea level the Tec 9 doesn't fire supersonic bullets, unlike the Beretta 92

File: 1486997980516.jpg (63KB, 500x695px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 500x695px

Berettas are pretty fuggin reliable, have you ever held on-

>I've never seen a gun in real life

Oh, it's retarded.

It's not shit, it's just extremely average. It was adopted by the US Mil because it was the cheapest gun to pass the trials.

>>34379988
Nice dubdubs and thanks for taking the thread seriously, but this is not really an answer. First of all, the fact that one gun is very reliable doesn't mean that it's the best gun, because other ones could be yet more reliable. Also, I mean no offense, but your post is anecdotal evidence. I just want to know.

File: theboyaintright.jpg (35KB, 334x500px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 334x500px

>>34379884

File: Beretta8.jpg (208KB, 887x710px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 887x710px

>>34379884
>Beretta 92
>shit
Let me fucking tell you about Carthage

>But their internal workings are overly complex

I've had mine a year and I haven't had a reason to fuck with the hammer or trigger mechanics, except to install a lighter hammer mainspring (the one along the backstrap of the grip)

File: IMG_20170525_205451.jpg (4MB, 3869x3006px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3869x3006px

>>34379884
>>34379927
I carry a Beretta at work and a different one as my concealed carry. They shoot very flat, the ergonomics are an excellent fit for me, and neither has ever let down.
Are there a lot of parts? Yes, but they are off comparable complexity to other locked-breech pistols.
Are they good in their class? Very. 1975 saw the advent of both the cz75 and 92. It was a good year.
Was it pop culture and military choices that made them popular? In part. Several countries and countless law enforcement agencies chose the 90 series. That is largely why they show up in games about military and LEO stuff. Same with movies.

Seriously, comparing one of the most enduring DA/SA pistols to a blowback junker synonymous with junk guns...just wow man. I like that you are learning, keep at it.

>>34380055
>They shoot very flat

>>34380049 here, out of curiosity what do you feed yours? Mine seems to like Sellier 124gr.

Summer.

shit thread OP

To the two owners that have them ITT, is getting a brigadier inox model worth it? I've been eyeing them for a few weeks now

File: m9a1compactbruniton_zoom002.jpg (58KB, 840x586px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 840x586px

>>34379968
>Get your heads out of your asses idiots
make me :)

>>34380017
So, if you want a somewhat serious answer consider a few things.

>quality of materials
>quality of manufacturing
>availability for parts

The Tec-9 is a dogshit dumpster tier firearm, and while the open bolt version is fairly reliable, it suffers from manufacturing issues. The quality of the metal in the fire control mechanism, springs, etc aren't up to par compared to your typical 92FS, nor is the quality control. The magazines on the Tec-9 are hot dogshit, and I consider myself a bit of a George Kellgren fanboy, but his guns always have feed issues when using non-standard magazines. The Tec-9 was no exception to this.

Of course there are more simple firearms which have become more prolific to the Beretta 92. The Glock and basically any polymer framed striker fired handguns have far fewer parts and are more sealed actions and slides. The Beretta 92 carries over a lot of techniques used in the Early-Mid 20th century and will have issues associated with designs from that era.

The Beretta isn't an unreliable gun by any means, nor is it shit. In fact they're fantastic handguns of great quality and that quality of manufacturing is partly why they're so great compared to crude stamped steel tubeguns like the Tec-9.

On the off chance you're actually just an underaged yuropoor and not baiting, it was once extremely accurate and reliable for its price point. Anything competitive with it cost at least 30% more per unit. Its fuckhuge size is not a disadvantage as a duty weapon and its popularity among huge organizations made it popular in media which made it popular among civilians.
More internal parts does mean more things that can fail but the odds of any of those individual parts failing is so stupidly low it does not matter whereas simple designs can have very high failure rates on specific parts. (Hello every single part of the Browning action!)

>>34379884
I have a beretta 92. It has never jammed. It has never failed. It is the most reliable gun I have ever owned (and I am 42, and bought my first hand gun when I was 18)

>>34379884

1. Nogunz should refrain from posting
2. Video games are no substitute for real guns
3. The Beretta is actually a very simple design that originated in the P-38
4. It's popular because it's a great gun, had huge adoption, is the standard American sidearm, and it's very competitively priced for a gun without any MIM in it.

tl;dr
Fuck off

File: 1492206226502.png (376KB, 602x599px) Image search: [Google]

376KB, 602x599px

>>34379968

>>34380081
Its really just personal taste, I own a normal 92 and found the Brig nice and it has its own pros and cons. Im jus a retard that likes the classics

File: 1388358549298.gif (1MB, 270x214px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 270x214px

Because it's pretty.

File: 12746124_10153742184960660_240926593_n.jpg (77KB, 800x534px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 800x534px

>>34379884
>I've never seen a gun in real life

>>34379884
>ive never seen a gun in real life

/k/, a magical place

>>34379968
Maybe you should make sure you dont sound like youre obscenely retarded and or stupid before trying to wax technical about firearms.

File: 1497044763292.png (593KB, 775x623px) Image search: [Google]

593KB, 775x623px

>>34379968
Cry more Europoor

>>34379968

There's a huge fucking difference between reading about a gun on Wikipedia and actually shooting it. Knowing the internals from a video game means jack shit if something like proper positioning and trigger manipulation, as in, the things that actually matter when shooting, is simply beyond you.

You're a retarded faggot.

>>34379968
>>34379968
You're right, this board doesn't require you to own a gun. But making a post like that and acting like you actually know shit, does require some real world experience, otherwise you're just some retard talking out of his ass.

>>34380636
>>34380655
That's why all the replies are ad hominem or propaganda against the Tec-9 right? Nah, you guys clearly don't know shit about guns. You own them in the same way a kid owns a toy, but you evidently lack the understanding required to discuss these kinds of issues. You can own all the guns you want, but the only thing this thread proves is that I -without ever having seen a gun- know more about guns than all of you combined.

>>34380706

Keep telling yourself that autismo

>>34379884
You're comparing a double-action hammer fired pistol with a locking block to a simple straight blowback striker fired SMG design
Of course the Tec 9 is simpler, but that simplicity comes at the cost of weight and bulk.
The entire point of a handgun is that it's something small and light to be carried where a rifle or shotgun is impractical or uncomfortable.

>>34380706

"knowing" guns is not about memorizing it's stats from Wikipedia. Discovering how to fire it properly and what needs to be tweaked based on your shooting habits is far, far more useful as a gun owner than being able to name every part in a gun or whatever bullshit you think "experts" do.

There's a reason why Ernest Langdon is considered a Beretta 92 expert; he's shot the thing for a long-ass time and has won competitions with it to the point he damn well knows what parts need improvement and what works best in a high-stakes, competitive shooting tournament, not because he played a video game that let him dissemble it a few times. If we based being an expert on simply knowing a gun's disassembly and how it works, then Wilson Combat would hire any random anon that's dissembled the 92 in WoG enough times to advise their Beretta 92 custom shop, not one of the best 92 shooters in the world.

This is an obvious troll thread you fucking idiots

>>34379884
the Beretta has superior ergonomics, is damn reliable, has an ample aftermarket for parts, and actually is fairly simple to maintain.

The other thing about a Beretta 92 vs your garage Tec-9 is the big one...

QUALITY CONTROL

So much of what makes a weapon good and reliable is QC. This is why Taurus 92 clones are awful and the Beretta is not.

Now, for actually shooting, it's a joy. The trigger is very smooth and breaks cleanly, and it's heaviness is a plus as it absorbs virtually all recoil when firing. Again, it's also damn reliable to boot.

Your Tec-9 frankly has terrible ergonomics, nor is it easy to carry. My Beretta has a fairly simple holster it goes in when I'm not shooting it.

>>34380706
Alright you got me. I actually thought you were serious until this post

>>34381469
I thought he was legit too until he showed his hand haha

>>34380706
/smith/ here. I also have certs for 92fs armorer. tec-9 is trashcan.

92fs is old, heavy and the slide has issues. Also, no, I can't put a god damn fiber optic front sight on it so stop fucking coming into my shop and telling me too.

but it's relable as shit. the only problem 92 I've had was one with 100k+ rounds thru it from a range, and that only needed new springs.

Tec-9 I won't even look at. Shit's not safe. I don't care, I'm not touching that pile of shit, get out of my shop.

File: IMG_20170607_210838828.jpg (4MB, 5344x3006px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 5344x3006px

>>34381580
92 guy here. What sort of slide issues have you seen?

Own a 92fs & love it. Super reliable, easy to use, for the cheap price point. It also has some swag to it.

I replaced all parts of mine, literally everything is steel on it. The extra weight on the gun & steel trigger makes it a nice & easy DA pull. I can put hits in target easily no matter how fast I fire with the weight of the gun

>>34381611
Poor heat treat on some early batches of military m9's resulted in cracking on the rear half of the slide at the weakest point. It's only on a some batches. I've seen about 3 or 4 with cracks and one that separated like in pic, but it's a standard check on every one that comes it. I've had around 150 92's in my shop for scale.

Also people like taking the damn safety apart and losing the pins. and then getting mad at me. I dunno man

File: Beretta_M9_FAIL.jpg (6KB, 259x194px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 259x194px

>>34381665
fuck me i guess

>>34381665
That safety is a trip. I did the G conversion on my 96 transitioning to 92. That thing was a pain. Other than the feed ramp on the frame and the barrel, are there any differences between the .40 and the 9?

>>34379884
Ive taken the 92 apart completely.. every single pin spring ball everything. It is not very complex and does not have very many parts. Its smoother than silk to shoot and it never fails you. You can get a surplus 92 for almost nothing.

>>34381687

I know I take them apart inside big 2-gallon ziplocks.

uh off the top of my head I think the slide is beefier on the 96, the recoil spring assy is different and the takedown lever is a bit different. I have a list somewhere in the armorer's manual, but i dunno where it is.

I don't see the .40's that much (central tx)

>>34381747
Are you talking about the 92 vs the 96? Because the recoil spring and guide rods are identical. Maybe the 92a1 has a different buffer from its .40 sibling.

>>34381793
yeah the 96.

92 is 9mm unless you convert it, but I never see converted ones. Maybe the people that convert them don't need to pay me $60 to clean their gun.

>>34381875
My 96 Vertec is now a 9mm courtesy of a M9 barrel liberated from military service. It runs flawlessly. I was curious about any other differences between the models.

>>34380221
1. Half of /k/ is nogunz, also you're a retard.
2. WoG is a disassemble/reassemble game with every single part of a firearm included, not a shooter, so this doesn't apply.

>>34381678
Isn't this why brigadier slides were created?

>>34381925

neat. you should have the upgraded slide on that, so should be no issues with that. normally caliber conversions will have slightly different weights of parts and springs strengths, but your running 9mm in a .40 frame and spring right? if it cycles fine that should be okay, but don't run .40 in a 9mm even with the correct barrel it will probably crack something.

If your worried take it to a smith to check it out but most of them will just run a mag thru it as say "seems good to me"

File: 1495402931856.jpg (15KB, 300x200px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 300x200px

Stupid to compare the 92 with a TEC in the first place. Compare with a Glock for ex.

>>34381952
Kind of. The actual problem was a little bit heat treating and a whole lot the DoD fucking around with ammo specs. Again. Basically, the mil spec called for thicker case walls than the supplier was used to. The supplier used thicker case walls, but neglected to account for the lower internal volume of the case, resulting in wildly overpressure (think just shy of proof loads) rounds. Several slides cracked, and the SEALs actually managed to break about five. No serious injuries (2 face lacerations, 2 bruised chests, one guy chipped some teeth), and the DoD got sued for damaging Beretta's reputation. Ammo got fixed, Beretta added a head on the hammer pivot pin to retain the slide in case of catastrophic failure, and endless stories about how bad the M9 is got told for 30 years.

>>34382006
Oddly, Beretta specs the same spring for the 9 and .40. I get the impression the put very little effort into the 96.

>>34381469
>>34381492
I got you hard retards. I was like 25% serious anyway; I did learn things from this thread.

>>34382006
>you should have the upgraded slide on that

There's no "upgraded" difference between the .92 and 96. The 96 is literally just 92 with the necessary adjustments in dimensions to cycle the .40.

the gun isn't amazing, but definitely serves a purpose and some people like them. for full size metal 9mm pistols I'd rather have a CZ, but it's just personal preference. the tec-9 isn't like most pistols, more like a semi auto micro-smg so it's hard to compare the two.

>>34382317
fugg i fell for the b8

>>34379884
Because like compared to other handguns Its goddamn laser at the price point and caliber

>>34379884
I know you're a yurofag, but
> I've never seen a gun in real life
How is that even possible?

File: incredulous doggo.jpg (31KB, 316x340px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 316x340px

>>34379968