Just bought a Beretta 92A1 from Engage Armament (Thanks Andy!) and I figured I'd do a bit of a tabletop review of the gun in the limited amount of finger-banging I've done while I've been waiting for MSP to not disapprove me. As always, Andy was quite helpful in my shopping process (namely, showing the pistol to me).
Now, ostensibly the biggest difference between the 92A1 and a 92FS/M9 is the rail, but there are a number of other functional differences that separate the 92A1 from the other Beretta 92-family guns (including the M9A1). While the 92A1 and M9A1 both come with a rail, but the M9A1 is far more similar to the 92A1 and M9.
The 92A1 is different from the rest of the 92-family in the following regards:
-Rounded trigger guard. Big aesthetic draw for me. I like the rounded trigger guards.
-Replaceable rear AND front sights. Finally, the fellas at Beretta decided to give the 92 a dovetail for the front sight. Trijicon makes a night sight set for the 92A1, and I may have to get them at some point.
-1913 rail with two slots. I think the M9A1 only comes with one slot (ironically?).
-Recoil buffer. Looks like a little piece of blue plastic/rubber inside the frame. I'm not sure if this will reduce frame wear all that much, but it's a nice thought.
-Captive guide rod. Yes, it's polymer. I'll probably end up replacing it with a steel one if the plastic guide rod breaks at any point.
-17 round magazines, standard. Not a big deal to me, but it does come with 3 17 round magazines, which is nice.
As far as the feel of the gun, it handles much like any other Beretta 92. The added weight from the rail actually makes the gun feel better balanced to me. It's only an ounce heavier than a 92FS, but it is noticeable.
Overall, there's a lot of value-added features with the 92A1 over the standard 92s, and I'm pretty content with my purchase. I still need to shoot it, unfortunately. One unfortunate aspect of its relative newness is the relative lack of holster options. I'm probably going to get a custom OWB holster made at Engage, and hopefully more holster makers will start producing things fitted for the 92A1. Range report forthcoming.
Now, ostensibly the biggest difference between the 92A1 and a 92FS/M9 is the rail, but there are a number of other functional differences that separate the 92A1 from the other Beretta 92-family guns (including the M9A1). While the 92A1 and M9A1 both come with a rail, but the M9A1 is far more similar to the 92A1 and M9.
The 92A1 is different from the rest of the 92-family in the following regards:
-Rounded trigger guard. Big aesthetic draw for me. I like the rounded trigger guards.
-Replaceable rear AND front sights. Finally, the fellas at Beretta decided to give the 92 a dovetail for the front sight. Trijicon makes a night sight set for the 92A1, and I may have to get them at some point.
-1913 rail with two slots. I think the M9A1 only comes with one slot (ironically?).
-Recoil buffer. Looks like a little piece of blue plastic/rubber inside the frame. I'm not sure if this will reduce frame wear all that much, but it's a nice thought.
-Captive guide rod. Yes, it's polymer. I'll probably end up replacing it with a steel one if the plastic guide rod breaks at any point.
-17 round magazines, standard. Not a big deal to me, but it does come with 3 17 round magazines, which is nice.
As far as the feel of the gun, it handles much like any other Beretta 92. The added weight from the rail actually makes the gun feel better balanced to me. It's only an ounce heavier than a 92FS, but it is noticeable.
Overall, there's a lot of value-added features with the 92A1 over the standard 92s, and I'm pretty content with my purchase. I still need to shoot it, unfortunately. One unfortunate aspect of its relative newness is the relative lack of holster options. I'm probably going to get a custom OWB holster made at Engage, and hopefully more holster makers will start producing things fitted for the 92A1. Range report forthcoming.
