Pistolsmith

Go Back   Pistolsmith > Pistol Forum > SIG Pistols


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-18-2002, 09:21 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PA
Posts: 35
What do you think and why?
 
Remove Ads
Old 05-21-2002, 01:36 AM   #2
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Vancouver, WA
Posts: 9
The Sig 226 I would judge to be the better of the 2 pistols. Both are fine guns but I prefer the design of the Sig more. For example it has less parts, just as good of a trigger pull, and the barrel is fully covered, and the most important is the lock up. If you notice the Sigs barrel locks up very tight in the front and back. Where as the berettas barrel moves, although it can be fixed by using the Jarvis barrel. And when performing failure drills the barrel on Berettas get hot, and if you touch it you will get burned. I also don't like to have to replace the locking block every 3000 rounds or so. My sig has had over 6000 rounds through it without a hickup. Have also had a double charge using +P ammo and the gun just barked a little louder (Ha ha) than normal. In the military I had the Beretta break on me after fireing 10 proof rounds. My Sig went all day digesting proof rounds. Any how that is my 2 cents worth. Good shooting

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: rmbaba on 2002-05-21 03:42 ]</font>
 
Old 05-22-2002, 05:22 AM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Michigan
Posts: 69
I don't own either model, but I do own a sig, and overall, sigs are known for their accuracy, and reliability.
My sig certainly has not done anything to blemish their reputation with me.
I shot a 3" 10 shot group offhand yesterday with my 2340 at 25 yds.
My friend, with his 96 inox, was hard pressed to keep his groups at the same distance on a 6" circle.
The beretta is a fine gun, and his has never jammed or anything, but doesn't seem to be as accurate out of the box as sigs, glocks, H&K's, etc.
I think their nines are probably more accurate than their fourties. (Just guessing.)
With the addition of a fitted match grade barrel, I'm sure the groups would tighten to the same level as a sig, glock, H&K, etc.
Just my .02
 
Old 07-14-2002, 09:17 AM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 69
Best thing is, with a Sig, you cannot pull the slide off - quite a large advantage I'd say.
 
Old 07-14-2002, 09:20 AM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 69
Oh yeah, and the Brits use the Sig too, and since the SA80 unreliability nightmare, they refuse to buy second rate merch for their military now.
 
Old 07-14-2002, 06:10 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Texas!!!!
Posts: 827
Both the SiG and the Beretta 92 are great pistols. The SiG will probably have the edge in reliability and is slightly lighter. The 92 has the slightly longer barrel and is somewhat heavier.

I went through the same decision process and chose the 226. And I have never regretted that decision.
 
Old 07-14-2002, 10:37 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: BC Canada
Posts: 159
The Beretta is actually more reliable if you look at the test the INS did and the US Army did you will see this. How much more reliable? I heard the SIG had one or two more failures than the Sig. As for the slide being taken off, any of you are welcome to try and take the slide off of my Elite II, won't happen and the only place it has actually happened is in the movies. There is not one documented case of this happening in real life, not one, it is an urban myth. Now for accuracy with the exception of the Sig 210 (I think) I would put any 9x series Beretta up against any Sig. To go against the 210 I would use my EII or even the Beretta Stock (same rough price range as the Sig). I love Sigs, but prefer Berettas as they fit my hand better. Both guns are great, and I would place them as even in a true test.

rob e
 
Old 07-15-2002, 08:36 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Somewhere in the wild, wild, west
Posts: 258
The funny thing is that if you asked this same question in a Beretta forum, they would say the 92fs is the superior pistol.

I own both. I like both. Each has it's own idiosyncracies.

Either gun will perform reliably and accurately. It becomes more a matter of personal preference. Which pistol fits your hand better? Which one points more naturally? Shoot both, and then decide. If you can't have both, that is

--Mark
 
Old 07-17-2002, 07:48 PM   #9
Junior Member
 
Devestate Bravo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Mesa, Arizona
Posts: 7
It boils down to which pistol fits you best. I do have some other objective reasons why I prefer SIG to other pistols, including the Beretta 92.

In no actual reliabliltiy tests, be they by any defense agency, INS, Ohio state police, Texas state police, Secret Service, DSS, FBI. The above list is only the objective reliablility tests I am aware of, The Double stack SIGs are 1, more reliable to all other available pistols in 9mm, 40S&W and 357 SIG. Please observe this is only for the Doubles Stack SIGs, Both in personal experience and in several of the above tests where single stack SIGs were tested, they, the single stacks, 220 and 225 have not shown the reliability of the double stacks.

The Berettas, Glocks, S&Ws, et al... are good pistols and I would not feel unsafe or poorly armed.

But when I have a choice, I will go with demonstrated and proved reliability and accuracy.

Devestate Bravo
 
Old 07-18-2002, 04:24 PM   #10
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 23
beretta

Save your money and get a beretta, I have one and love it. plus preban mags are cheaper and easier to get. My 2 cents...
 
Old 07-18-2002, 05:25 PM   #11
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 59
I had a stainless 92FS and then bought a 226 (and 220) from some buddies when the Texas DPS went to .357 sig. (The troopers carried the 220 and the license guys had the 226). I no longer have the 92FS. It always felt big for a nine, but I grew up on highpowers.

David
 
Old 07-19-2002, 02:54 AM   #12
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Georgia
Posts: 75
Well, here we go again with my boat is better because, in truth the beretta is a good gun. In truth the Sig is a good gun, both are accurate, both are reliable and both cost a fair piece of coin... having stated that I will tell you that since I began training others in 1989 I have witnessed TWO SIGs acting up when they shouldn't. In my expierence a very slight edge would have to go to Sig on reliability. Accuarcy ..well if you have the time to find cover , get a good sight picture , manipulate the trigger correctly, you will find that both guns group well. In a down and dirty gunfight either will save your life if you do your part. I own a worn but useful P-226 and an Italian 92f. I trust both and both shoot equally well. IT ALL BOILS DOWN TO YOUR PERSONAL LIKES AND DISLIKES. With two quality guns such as these worry more about ammo selection than which gun is best. Just my humble take on the matter.
 
Old 08-06-2002, 02:07 PM   #13
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3
Slavex wrote that pulling the slide off an M92 is "urban myth". It is not.

I've not only pulled the slide off a Beretta M92 handgun once, but many times. In fact, one rainy day at the Army's Small Arms Challenge at Ft. Dix as we waited indoors for the rain to let up, a Major fresh from Bosnia actually taught an improptu class in the rapid, easy, removal of the M92 slide, from in front, one handed. We teamed up in pairs and soon everyone could do it with ease. There was some uneasy laughter because this is the weapon the Army would send us off to combat with.

That's not to say I'd like to find myself in a postion to need to try it.

But it's no myth that it can be done.

I prefer the SIG Sauer P226.

James
 
Old 08-16-2002, 07:08 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 1,580
I never had much luck with the M9, 3/4 of the ones I was issued were unreliable with NATO ball ammo.

I'd pick the SigSauer over the Beretta any day.
 
Old 08-19-2002, 07:49 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 208
I have both but prefer the Sig only because I shoot it better. I feel safe with either.
 
Old 08-19-2002, 01:13 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Texas!!!!
Posts: 827
Which one feels better to you?

Which do you shoot better?

They're both great pistols so I'd go with the one that YOU like the best.
 
Old 02-05-2004, 02:43 PM   #17
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5
I have a Beretta Elite and a Sig 226. Both have particular qualities that I like but I would give the Sig the nod as an overall package. I like the fact that you can get your hand close to the bore axis on the Beretta but thats about it. The Sig is superior in every other department. The Beretta is an accurate pistol but I do not like the locking block design and this has proven to be a weak point for Berettas. I will buy another Sig but I don't think I will pick up another Beretta unless the lock up design changes.
 
Old 02-06-2004, 08:10 AM   #18
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 81
Sig or Beretta

Of course every one has personal preference...My preference is Sig...Nothing against Beretta..I like the looks and function of the Sig pistols...

tonys
 
Old 02-07-2004, 09:31 AM   #19
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Memphis TN.
Posts: 61
Another vote for SIG, and yes I also have watched a demonstration on rapid breakdown of the 92 series!!!!!!!
 
Old 02-13-2004, 08:21 PM   #20
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 3
Well, I loved SIGs all my life.

Last year I decided to buy a SIG. I patiently waited for USA export permit and finally bought P226 and imported to Canada.

I was so excited until I came to the range. The sights were first pushed to the left; I fixed it. Then I started to shoot for IPSC. The impact point was 2 inches away when shooting on 10 meters. I can only dream about getting good group at 25 yards.

I let some other people including my Black Badge instructor to shoot it. And they told me something is wrong , go and see a gunsmith.

So I tried to first see if I can send it back to New Hampshire SIG headquarters. Unfortunately, delaer in USA could not help me. Canadian SIG distributor, Asshole form Quebec, did not want to send it to the States even though they are able to do it. So I went to a local gunsmith who even did not want to charge me for examination because he said that the gun is a total screw up.

So what do you think how do I feel. I noticed on several other forums that people complain about quality of P226 with Made in USA slide. And a guy from canadiangunnutz.com PM'd me that he had the same problem....

Then I got very pissed off and I called a biggest Canadian gun dealer and told them that I want German made SIG and nothing else. The group on target was different story.

Sorry , Canucks, think twice before you decide to import a gun from abroad. If trouble errupts, you are stuck.
 
Old 02-16-2004, 09:52 AM   #21
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 14
Both are great guns. To me its just a matter of which one you like better. AS for the slide being taken off the gun in aCQB situation- If the person is close enough to take the slide off your gun,then they could just as easily take the whole gun. With this in mind would it really matter what gun you were holding? Why take the slide when you can take the whole gun? Just my two cents.
 
Old 06-09-2004, 10:18 AM   #22
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 285
Locking Block

Quote:
Originally Posted by EBeckwith
The Beretta is an accurate pistol but I do not like the locking block design and this has proven to be a weak point for Berettas. I will buy another Sig but I don't think I will pick up another Beretta unless the lock up design changes.
They have changed the locking block design.
http://beretta.squawk.com/blocks.html
It is supposed to be much more durable, though I've never had any problems with the original locking block on my pistol.
 
Old 06-12-2004, 07:39 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 285
:)~

And by the way, I spit on the SiG, ptuey! Teaming up with Germans, using an acronym for a name, bah! And why'd they make the .40 Short and Weak even smaller? A .41 Sig would've been gold! :wink:
 
Old 06-19-2004, 01:06 AM   #24
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Posts: 14
SIG 226 vs Beretta 92FS

I own both a Beretta 92FS and SIG 226.

I was issued a new 226 in December of 1989 when I came on my current department. I cracked a frame rail in September of 2001 after about
30,000 rounds. SIG replaced it.

I bought a used 226 sometime in 1997 and cracked both frame rails in May of 1998. I was the 5th owner. Unknown what the round count was, but the serial number prefex was "176" so it had the thinner frame rails. SIG replaced that one too.

I bought my first 92F in April of 1986. Cracked the frame on Valentine's Day 1997. Had over 30,000 rounds through that one. Beretta replaced it with a new 92FS with night sights. Broke a locking block in November of 1992 after about 20,000 rounds or so.

(I run about 3000 rounds a year through each of my primary working guns)

I'm a retired Combat Arms Instructor from the ANG. The Air Force is beginning to experience frame failures on M9s. The guns that have broken have at least 90,000 rounds through them. (I am unaware of the Air Force ever having any catastrophic slide failures)

I used to teach at the local regional police academy. We broke the frames on a couple alloy frame S&W 3906s that we bought in 1989 as loaner guns. They broke after 10 years and somewhere between 30,000 and 40,000 rounds. (1000 rounds per academy class, usually 3 but sometimes 4 classes a year)

So, as far as durability goes, in my experience all the common alloy frame guns usually crack something in the frame after 30,000 rounds.

As far as reliability goes, I've had really good luck with both the Beretta and the SIG. Outstanding luck. I shoot the Beretta slightly better because the axis of the bore is lower in relation to the shooter's hand, resulting in less muzzle flip in recoil, but it's not a huge difference. I really like both guns. They tied in reliability and selection criteria in the military tests of 1984 and the Beretta won on price. (there may have been some political issues involved as well)

The Beretta is a BIG gun with a long reach from the backstrap to the face of the trigger. I have big hands and long fingers and shoot it just fine, but it is NOT a good choice for somebody with average or smaller hands. That was one reason I didn't like it as a standard-issue military gun. Too big for the average user. I love it to death, but it is not an appropriate tool for most users.

I hear lots of people bad-mouth the M9 in military service, bitching about it's durability. Considering that most military handguns only get used a few hundred rounds a year or less, durability shouldn't be a problem. People make comments about the Beretta being "disposable" but I have yet to talk to anybody with first hand knowledge of a major failure. I do know that the government bought cheap after-market magazines that have caused failures to feed in Afghanistan and Iraq ('checkmate" is the brand I hear the worst about) but that's a preventable and inexcusable failure based on poor equipment selection. If they had stuck with OEM magazines, it probably wouldn't be an issue.

Most people in the military who don't like the M9 don't like it because it's too big for their hands. They have a valid complaint. But that doesn't mean that the gun is bad, it's just not a good choice for THEM. The US military should've made a better choice, like a gun with an 8 shot single column magazine. I thought a steel framed S&W 39 series would've been about right ergonomically.

One advantage the Beretta has is that the Beretta factory .22 converter is a very reliable unit, when kept clean and well lubed, and allows cheap practice for those on a budget.
 
Old 07-19-2004, 06:55 PM   #25
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Tucson
Posts: 53
Sig. Simpler, better made, more ergonomic. more accurate.
 
Old 07-19-2004, 06:58 PM   #26
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Tucson
Posts: 53
Re: SIG 226 vs Beretta 92FS

I'm sure thats true in the Air National Guard but not in the Marine Corps.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeff22
I'm a retired Combat Arms Instructor from the ANG. The Air Force is beginning to experience frame failures on M9s. The guns that have broken have at least 90,000 rounds through them. (I am unaware of the Air Force ever having any catastrophic slide failures)
I hear lots of people bad-mouth the M9 in military service, bitching about it's durability. Considering that most military handguns only get used a few hundred rounds a year or less, durability shouldn't be a problem.
 
Old 08-18-2004, 09:33 AM   #27
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 257
Here we go again...

Checked w the local base that trains specops troops (among other things). They have at least 30,000 rounds through each of their M9 training guns w no major problems. Have never broken a slide, never broken a block under 15,000, and it's rare. The M9s are no worse than the M11s (SIG P228) as far as reliability and durability. Have heard of cheap contract mag problems w SIGs too BTW.

Let's not forget the original M9 contract only specified a min service life for one part, the frame, and it was for just 5,000 rounds. Last results I heard showed the M9s avg 35K for frames, 75K for slides, and 22K for blocks, so they got more than they asked for by quite a bit.

I read the USMC's MEU/SOC rebuilds their M1911A1s for about $2,000 every 100K rounds or so, throwing out just about everything but the frame. Some frames (not all) have 500K rounds on them. Some slides replaced at 70K. You could issue each guy 11 M9s for the same price as the rebuilt 1911s. If they are as good as the M9s at the local base, will get at least 330K rounds from them. Of course, they would still be 9 minimeters, not .45s.

Have folks had probs w the M9? Yes. Have some folks had probs w the SIG?. Yes. Baltimore County PD broke 52 of their 1300 P226s. Guess they were tougher on them than Navy SEALs are on theirs? Some Swiss cops broke the slides on new P229s; one was hit in the chest w the back piece. Sound familiar? Stuff happens to everybody sooner or later.

I like em both, have been isuued both (M9/M11). Both were more reliable than the M1911A1s I was issued, but those were at least 40 yrs old at the time too. Lets see how 40 yr old M9/M11/P226s do in 2025-2040?

SIG is keeping, picking up more new contracts than Beretta though. Gotta be a reason?

OTOH, Glock is kicking both their butts, so it must be better yet? :lol:
 
Old 09-15-2004, 12:12 PM   #28
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Southwest USA
Posts: 6
Since you asked this question in a Sig forum, the P226 is obviously the better pistol. However, if you post this in the Beretta forum, the the 92FS is the best. The best pistol for you is the one YOU like and shoot best. Go rent both of them at a range and buy accordingly. Don't worry about the longevity issue. Most people won't shoot enough rounds to come anywhere close to wearing either one of them out. And both pistols are more accurate than most people can hold offhand.
 
Old 10-12-2004, 01:53 AM   #29
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 6
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmcmahon
Slavex wrote that pulling the slide off an M92 is "urban myth". It is not.

I've not only pulled the slide off a Beretta M92 handgun once, but many times. In fact, one rainy day at the Army's Small Arms Challenge at Ft. Dix as we waited indoors for the rain to let up, a Major fresh from Bosnia actually taught an improptu class in the rapid, easy, removal of the M92 slide, from in front, one handed. We teamed up in pairs and soon everyone could do it with ease. There was some uneasy laughter because this is the weapon the Army would send us off to combat with.

That's not to say I'd like to find myself in a postion to need to try it.

But it's no myth that it can be done.

I prefer the SIG Sauer P226.

James

So Jim.....When you and your buddies were practicing your expertise over the Beretta...How many times did you do it with loaded pistols and an operator who tried to discourage you by pulling the trigger during your attempts....Sometimes the stuff I read from guys like you simply astonishes me...Seriously....Zebulon
 
Old 10-12-2004, 07:23 AM   #30
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 257
BS!

So how many times has this really happened? That many?

Is it possible? Should you consider it? Yep.

Is it probable? Should you worry about it. Nope!

What's the worst that can happen? Ya both end up w half a pistol that doesn't do either of ya any good.

Doesn't really change much on the downside. They get the whole gun, half a gun, or no gun: 1-1-1. Any other gun, they get the whole gun or no gun: 1-1.

If they are close enough to do that, they are close enough to take the whole gun ... better they have half your gun than all of it. Or waste their time trying to take it apart instead of just trying to take it...

There is a quick n easy fix too; Beretta has a modified take down lever you can install.
 
Old 10-14-2004, 12:11 PM   #31
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 4
I swear, if one more person uses this argument to bash Beretta, I'm going to puke. Went through Academy with a Beretta 96G. Our SWAT Team members were also our firearms instructors. We were instructored that when someone goes for our weapon, we dissaude them by making it very difficult and very painful to hold onto the weapon, which could include a bullet in the chest. In addition, with the standard weapon retention techniques, one cannot manipulate the take down lever to disassemble the gun. The idea of weapon retention is to not just stand there while someone dinks with it. Look, if someone is going for your gun, it is very safe to assume that they will be using it against you. They want the whole gun, not the slide, barrel and recoil spring. The chance of you running into Jackie Chan, who simply wants to disarm you because you misunderstand his intentions is just not going to happen. :wink: Don't get me wrong, I love the SIG 22X series, but I think that there is nothing at all wrong with the Berettas. They are accurate, they are reliable, they are durable. They will do whatever you expect them to. I doubt that the typical shooter will put enough rounds through it to worry about breakage. Just my two cents. Stay safe.
 
Old 11-30-2004, 04:43 AM   #32
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: indiana
Posts: 105
sig 226 vs beretta 92fs

I am a military small arms technician and carry a beretta (unfortunetly) every day on force protection duties. I have seen the beretta fail when wet and dirty.Berettas come in the shop almost like clockwork for failures and I am tired of fixing them.I think berettas are so popular because of the tv and the dooming statement ''The military uses them''.It ergonomics are not very good,it is not a very reliable pistol in the field(ok on the rangethough, as if that matters), the locking block routinely fails,its prone to rust,gets dirty easy,is a little too big and bulky for a weapon of its intention,and it has too many exposed parts(hit it with a hard object above the takedown lever and you will know what I mean) .I would defintely choose the sig over it. I have had alot of maintenance and live fire training with the sigs and they have a leg up on the beretta.Beretta owners and lovers just keep in mind "your weapon is always built by the cheapest bidder"and a weapon on the range is not the same weapon in teh field" Sorry is I have offended anyone but it is the truth.
 
Old 11-30-2004, 06:54 AM   #33
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 257
Here we go again...

I retired from the USAF in 98. I was issued various M9s off and on from 1987 to 1998. Some M11s form 1994 to 1998. Some M1911A1s before either of those. Never had a major problem w any of them, and I had several interesting SDAs where I shot them much more than usual. The M9/M11 were more reliable than the M1911A1s they replaced BTW. Of course, they were not at least 40 yrs old at the time either.

Checked w the local base not long ago.

They have on avg over 30,000 rounds each through all their M9 training pistols. They have very few problems w them at all. As reliable as the SIG M11s that get shot on the same ranges, if not better.

They have never broken a slide, rarely break a locking block, and never under 15,000 rounds. So far anyway.

I guess they got a better lot of pistols, and/or take care of them better, or...

The "truth" isn't the same for everybody?
 
Old 12-05-2004, 10:26 PM   #34
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 7
Well...
I, too, could care a deuce-and-a-half-load of fertilizer less about the "slide snatch" thing with Berettas. I prefer the SIG for the following reasons:
1. Smaller overall.
2. Fits my hands better.
3. I don't like slide-mounted controls, but they're less of an issue if not also a safety.
4. I don't like any type of manual or magazine (HP, S&W, Ruger) safety on a DA handgun, just a decocker, please.
5. Slightly simpler.
Now, I think think a DAO Vertec would be okay. A vertec with a frame-mounted decocker (only) lever would be the dog's bollocks as far as Berettas go.
I've heard about more durability problems with the Italian pistol, but how many really shoot that much. I know I don't.
I guess it boils down to personal preference and which one can be better operated under stress for the individual chooser.

Regards,
Lee E. Murphy III
 
Old 12-26-2004, 09:04 PM   #35
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Tucson
Posts: 53
Re: Here we go again...

Oh well the Air Force....I doubt if you Air Force guys carried Berettas to the field or treat them rough the way we did in the Marines. They don't hold up. The youngest 1911's we were issued were made in 1945 and had lasted that entire time. They also shot alot more than 30,000 rounds and that wasn't under range conditions.
You won't see any of that with a Beretta. This is not a combat pistol. Super long first DA pull, unprotected barrel, 9mm ball. More parts than a 1911! POS as far as I'm concerned. Its really a cop gun and even they don't want it any more. I have never seen anyone who has been in rough conditions with a Beretta for months on end and has anything good to say about it.
Either stick with the 1911 as some Marine units have or go with a Sig. Beretta support is awful and Sigs is known to be very good.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelOrick
I retired from the USAF in 98. I was issued various M9s off and on from 1987 to 1998. Some M11s form 1994 to 1998. Some M1911A1s before either of those. Never had a major problem w any of them, and I had several interesting SDAs where I shot them much more than usual. The M9/M11 were more reliable than the M1911A1s they replaced BTW. Of course, they were not at least 40 yrs old at the time either.

Checked w the local base not long ago.

They have on avg over 30,000 rounds each through all their M9 training pistols. They have very few problems w them at all. As reliable as the SIG M11s that get shot on the same ranges, if not better.

They have never broken a slide, rarely break a locking block, and never under 15,000 rounds. So far anyway.

I guess they got a better lot of pistols, and/or take care of them better, or...

The "truth" isn't the same for everybody?
 
Old 12-27-2004, 09:11 AM   #36
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 257
There is that...

Ah, the Air "Farce"; loved every minute of my 20 yrs!

Yeah, even I would take the word of a jarhead over a flyboy too! Most of the time anyway.

The 1911 is very tough. According to articles in the S&S and by Pat Rogers (USMC Ret), some USMC MEU/SOC 1911 frames have gone over 500K rounds! Most are rebuilt around 100K with all new parts at about $2K each too. Unfortunately, the 40 year old M1911A1s I/we were issued from 84 - 87 were not. Mine needed an ejector, firing pin stop, slide stop, bushing and bbl link while I had it. None of my M9s from 87 - 98 broke anything BTW.

True, the Beretta/M9 does not have the avg service life of the M1911A1. It was not intended too either. The contract only specified a service life of 5K rounds, and that was on just the frame. If "they" wanted more, they should have asked for more? As I said, I/we did get much more (over 30K), and still are getting it. Random govt testing now has has M9s averaging over 35K for frames and 75K for slides, 7-15 times what we payed for. In places where it is hot, dry and dusty in the summer, cold, wet, muddy/snowy in the winter... but that is mostly on training ranges, little actual field use/abuse. Could make a difference; but that is what testing is supposed to test for?

During the XM9 trials the Beretta was actually more reliable than the M1911A1 and durable than the SIG in testing (none of the Berettas broke any parts during the endurance testing, the SIGs broke frames under 7,000 rounds).

So some 80s model SIGs that couldn't make it past 7K rounds in testing, or 5 - 15K rounds w the Secret Service/FBI/DEA, and broke 52 slides in service w the Baltimore County PD are (according to some internet war stories) going over 100K w USN SEALs w no problems? Things that make ya go hmmmm... I guess Baltimore County PD was tougher on 'em than the SEALs?

And the newer SIGs that some claim are going over 50K rounds w the Secret Service/FAM in 357 are breaking slides like the Berettas did w Swiss cops in 9mm when brand new...?

So we have the Beretta M9 that proves itself more reliable than the M1911A1 in testing, and more durable than the SIG in the same testing, then has both reliability and endurance problems in service that some (not everyone) complains about... and SIGs w problems in testing and service getting raves... so much for the testing, testers, and the internet, eh?

But I do know what ya mean... went from Berettas/SIGs when I retired to mostly 1911s/Glocks... recently traded away my old 1911s and Glocks for some new SIGs/FNs...
 
Old 01-23-2005, 12:25 AM   #37
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Posts: 14
the Beretta M9 revisited

I always liked the 92F. But I have big hands and long fingers.

For many/most users, the grip circumference of the Beretta is too big and the reach from the backstrap to the face of the trigger is too far. Even adult men with "average" size hands sometimes find that to be a problem.

I have a very few rounds through a Beretta Vertec and I was inpressed with that because of the different contour of the backstrap and the shorter reach to the trigger.

I recently read that high-milage Berettas in military service are breaking the safety/decocker levers from much use, because they metal gets crystalized with age and shatters. And the decocking/safety mechanism is pretty complex, with lots of little pins and springs and gears and stuff. I have never yet had a problem with mine, but I remember from armorer school that they were a nightmare to disassemble.

Anything will fall apart with enough rounds through it.

I hope the next general-issue military handgun has a steel or polymer frame and they pay a little more attention to the ergonomics to accomdate people with smaller hands. Magazine capacity is irrelevant if the grip circumference renders the gun unshootable for many of it's users.
 
Old 01-23-2005, 07:14 AM   #38
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 257
Was looking at the trend in pistol specs for the military and LE service in
Europe and the USA... what the Germans want, what the DHS wants, what the US Army wants for it's FHS (Future Handgun System)... throw 'em all together, seems "we" want:

1. Lightweight; alloy or polymer frames
2. Corrosion resistance; polymer frames and/or stainless steel parts, super
finishes (Tenifer, HE, etc)
3. One size fits all; ambi controls, adjustable grips
4. Multiple sizes; sub-compact, compact, full size
5. Consistent trigger action; Safe Action, LEM, DAK, RSS, USA, etc
6. Modular construction; w parts, sights, trigger options, etc for ease of
maintenance and adaptability w min tools/training
7. Threaded bbls; for suppressor attachment
8. Frame rails; for lights/lasers

Some are pretty close. Even the 1911 still comes close.

For the Army's FHS, Glock would need adj grips and threaded bbl for example. The HK USP45CT adjustable grips... the HK P2000, FNP, SIG P250, Walther P99 a threaded bbl...
 
Old 01-23-2005, 09:24 AM   #39
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 285
One gun I bet will meet all those criteria is the new Beretta modular pistol: Px4, I think it's called.
 
Old 01-23-2005, 12:25 PM   #40
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 257
It's not any closer than the others I mentioned; need a model w a threaded bbl.
 
Reply

  Pistolsmith > Pistol Forum > SIG Pistols


Search tags for this page
beretta 92f magazines in a sig p226
,

beretta 92fs vs sig p226

,
beretta 92fs vs sig sauer p226
,
bore axis beretta 92 vs sig m11
,
p226 durability
,

sig p226 endurance test

,

sig p226 locking block

,

sig p226 vs beretta 92fs

,

sig sauer p226 endurance test


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
BERETTA 92FS-USA vs ITALY firstshot Workshop 1 09-11-2006 03:58 PM
which is a better springfield xd9 or a berreta 92fs ,s&w logan Springfield Armory Pistols 4 02-19-2005 12:52 PM
help on CZ75/92FS or Glock26/9000s kfc Gun Talk 13 07-19-2004 08:31 AM
1991A1 9mm or Beretta 92FS Inox gldP01 Colt Pistols 8 05-30-2004 03:23 AM
Glock 17 vs Beretta 92FS jrtex Glock Pistols 11 12-17-2003 03:53 AM

Top Gun Sites Top Sites List


Powered by vBulletin 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1
Copyright © 1999-2012 Pistolsmith. All rights reserved.