Decisions, decisions...

[DocSavage]

All,

Been lurking for a while and now making my first purchase from an IP found on this amazing board, (Kudos, to all you whom I read and learn from.) and wonder what you all think good or bad of my decision? My choice is between the SigSauer P226 TacOps in 9mm, or the Beretta 92A1. Purpose in these weapons is HD and actual shooting at the range, On Target is a short drive for me. I will not CCW, but when the Zombie Apocalypse comes, (meltdown of the fabric of our society) I'm sure open carry will rule the land...

Thoughts or guidance from those learned souls would be appreciated! Which is the better investment? The price point difference is huge, $1100 for the Sig, and $650 for the Beretta, I expect the difference to be obvious to those in the know, I'm just not there yet...

Cheers,

Doc

 

[rouchna]

I have a Beretta 92A1 and I can tell you that it is the most accurate 9mm I have ever shot. I do not own the P226, but I have shot plenty of them. You cannot go wrong with either but considering price point, I would say the 92 + Lots of ammo.

 

[clandestine]

Berettas Quality is still amazing on the M9/92. Fantastic Handgun indeed.

The 226 is a Classic as well but SIG does not make guns as refined as they used to. If you get a SIG try to find a West German made one. Dont get a N.H. built one if you can avoid it.

I see SIGs for reliability issues consistently but I rarely see Beretta M9/92's.

 

[DocSavage]

Clandestine,

I just called and it's a USA made version, so of I'm reading you right, go with the 92A1? Do you have a opinion of the 9mm vs .40SW? My MSP buddy said they got rid of those 96s in favor of the plastic P9x "Storm" but those were terribly unreliable now there off to something else entirely...

I want drop in the dirt, zombie coming at me, reliable - reliable - reliable...

I personally don't care for polymer... So to that end... Barretta or Sig?

Thanks a bunch for sharing your knowledge and time!

Cheers,

Doc

 

[Semper Noctem]

Clandestine, Do you have a opinion of the 9mm vs .40SW?

My vote is for the 92 in 9mm.

Welcome to the forum!

 

[DocSavage]

Hey Semper,

Thanks... I was all set to go with my heavily researched choice of the 92A1... See if you follow my logic?

1. I firmly believe the zombie apocalypse (the impending financial collapse of society) will bring about the need for EVERY American to be armed to protect those of us who have from those who will take it from us...

2. It is my RIGHT to have firearms to defend myself and those I love. I must arm myself before those who disagree with this right try to legislate them away from me.

3. The 92A1 is the latest in Beretta's line of civilian version of the tried and true military workhorse in the M9 and my choice of 9mm makes it a snap to find inexpensive ammunition and when the SHTF it will not be a difficult or odd round to procure.

4. My personal view is that the steel weapon will be drop dead reliable over those poly weapons. I may be way off the mark, but there is something comforting in the weight of steel... (yes, I know the 92A1 weighs a ton)

5. Finally! All reviews are favorable to the 92A1, the early M9s had slide issues, and yes in testing had some KBs but these have been worked out IMO and the platform is way stable by now...

Am I right thus far, or way too noob to know what I want?

Thanks for the time, I enjoy the forum tremendously!

Cheers,

Doc

 

[BradMacc82]

Oh jebus, you asked Lord Chad his thought's on the .40 short & wimpy... - Seek shelter!!!

Kidding aside, for my money, 92/M9 all day, every day, and twice again on sunday.
I have a 96D, and it's the only .40 I'd admit to owning. Clandestine hit the nail on the head.

 

[LordSigdious]

Clandestine,

I just called and it's a USA made version, so of I'm reading you right, go with the 92A1? Do you have a opinion of the 9mm vs .40SW? My MSP buddy said they got rid of those 96s in favor of the plastic P9x "Storm" but those were terribly unreliable now there off to something else entirely...

I want drop in the dirt, zombie coming at me, reliable - reliable - reliable...

I personally don't care for polymer... So to that end... Barretta or Sig?

Thanks a bunch for sharing your knowledge and time!

Cheers,

Doc

I didnt care for polymer either! First handgun was a Sig Sauer and it is still my favorite but I got a Glock 21 SF two years ago and am a better shot with the glock !
Wife just did the paper work for a G19 as a late fathers day present, cant wait to get it to the range!
I also have a German made Sig X5 which is a thing of beauty onto itself but find myself worrying about scratching it!
Glocks are made to be abused!
Good Luck with one of the hardest choices we all make- WHICH GUN DO I GET NEXT! LMAO

 

[HT4]

Clandestine ... Do you have a opinion of the 9mm vs .40SW?

He loves .40S&W. I heard he is trying to figure out a way to build a gas piston operated .40 Ar-15... it's his dream gun.

 

[BradMacc82]

He loves .40S&W. I heard he is trying to figure out a way to build a gas piston operated .40 Ar-15... it's his dream gun.

This is true, matter of fact he's going to buy my gas-piston upper off of me, just to rebarrel it in .40S&W - and it's a good thing too, he used my rail system as a butt-scratching post, do a mag dump, smells like someone took a dump - oddest damn thing.

 

[smores]

I would go with the M9A1, it has a 1913 Picatinny rail slot, is made in Accokeek, and is compatible with all the parts currently available for the 92. The 92A1 has a different frame (it's basically the 90-Two) and recoil spring assembly (it's captive and not the same size as the 92 so you can't install the steel one).

That being said the 92A1 is a solid gun. The only ones I see with problems are cosmetic issues caused by rough handling during shipping, or damaged frames from ranges that NEVER clean the guns or swap out the recoil springs...

Get the Beretta.

ETA: For clarity the 92A1 is made in Italy, the [92FS Type] M9A1 is made in the US. They are very similar but not the same.

 

[clandestine]

Clandestine,

I just called and it's a USA made version, so of I'm reading you right, go with the 92A1? Do you have a opinion of the 9mm vs .40SW? My MSP buddy said they got rid of those 96s in favor of the plastic P9x "Storm" but those were terribly unreliable now there off to something else entirely...

I want drop in the dirt, zombie coming at me, reliable - reliable - reliable...

I personally don't care for polymer... So to that end... Barretta or Sig?

Thanks a bunch for sharing your knowledge and time!

Cheers,

Doc

I suggest the 9mm. 9mm Luger is the most cost effective compared to 45ACP or .40S&W. 9mm has less Recoil (Faster Follow up shots, especially on Zombies), 9mm cost less, and 9mm Weapons hold more rounds.

Its an easy choice. Unless you work for a LEO Agency that demands you use the .40, there is no reason to choose it over the 9mm.

FBI Ballistic Tests prove that theres no real world difference in stopping power between .45ACP, .40S&W, or 9mm Luger when GOOD DEfensive Ammunition is used.

Oh jebus, you asked Lord Chad his thought's on the .40 short & wimpy... - Seek shelter!!!

Kidding aside, for my money, 92/M9 all day, every day, and twice again on sunday.
I have a 96D, and it's the only .40 I'd admit to owning. Clandestine hit the nail on the head.

DocSavage probably hasnt read my ramblings against the .40.

He loves .40S&W. I heard he is trying to figure out a way to build a gas piston operated .40 Ar-15... it's his dream gun.

This is true, matter of fact he's going to buy my gas-piston upper off of me, just to rebarrel it in .40S&W - and it's a good thing too, he used my rail system as a butt-scratching post, do a mag dump, smells like someone took a dump - oddest damn thing.

I hate you guys!

 

[BradMacc82]

And we love you too.

 

[Lou45]

My vote is for the 92 in 9mm.

Welcome to the forum!

Looks like I'm way too late for this party.

 

[Mooseman]

I would take the Beretta over the Sig all day long.

 

[Indiana Jones]

Get an M9, not a 92.

 

[DocSavage]

Get an M9, not a 92.

Whats the reasoning for the M9A1 vs the 92A1? I would have thought they are the same weapon, save a few cosmetics, the internal recoil buffer, captured slide spring, hand grips, extra slot across the rail, and rounded trigger guard...?

I welcome the advice everyone has, it makes me a more informed purchaser...

Cheers,

Doc

 

[BradMacc82]

Whats the reasoning for the M9A1 vs the 92A1? I would have thought they are the same weapon, save a few cosmetics, the internal recoil buffer, captured slide spring, hand grips, extra slot across the rail, and rounded trigger guard...?

I welcome the advice everyone has, it makes me a more informed purchaser...

Cheers,

Doc

See smores' earlier post. Post #11

 

[DocSavage]

Ahhh sooo, says the grasshopper!

Doc

 

[Ski169]

Not sure if my opinion matters at this point. I have fired the M9 in military marksmanship competitions and as an aircrew member during my USMC days. Indeed, it is a nice pistol. However, I do own a Sig 226 and two 229s. Both of which are 40. Nothing against 9mm. One of my reasons for the Sig was the ergonomics. I flustered with the slide mounted safety of the M9 whereas the Sig has a well placed decocking lever. Not the mention, during my competition, I did not fully disengage the safety of the M9 and went to shoot and lost precious seconds before I realized my error. I understand that this can be overcome with training and practice. But at least with the Sig, pulling the trigger engages the hammer and it will fire. My choice to go with 40 cal was due to the fact that 357sig barrels are available and now I have the choice of two calibers from one weapon. Not to mention that the ballistics of the 357sig are impressive. I know that ammo availability is not like it is with the 9mm and that recoil can be a bit harsher. But none the less, I am happy with my choice as that what it all boils down to.