Beretta M9A1 vs 92FS

Triple · 01-21-2010, 01:08 PM

...

Speedracer42 · 01-21-2010, 01:19 PM

Just an FYI I have a good friend ready to sell his 92fs .45 in nickel that has I believe less than 50 rounds through it.

Dragonpaco · 01-21-2010, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Speedracer42

Just an FYI I have a good friend ready to sell his 92fs .45 in nickel that has I believe less than 50 rounds through it.

92fs only comes in 9mm IIRC. the .40 and .45 versions are the 96.

Rider · 01-21-2010, 01:20 PM

M9A1 is the military spec version of the 92FS. It's really the same gun. I would't waste your money on the M9A1 unless you want a Picatinny rail. Then I'd go with the M9A1

smileyman · 01-21-2010, 01:25 PM

Yup whut he said!

Rider · 01-21-2010, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Triple

This much I knew. I wasn't sure if the M9 was somehow constructed differently or with higher quality internals or something. I often see them selling for $100 to $150 more than the 92FS.

They go through the standard mil spec testing... temp cycling, humidity cycling, salt spray, and so on. It's just guaranteed to hold up to the environmental elements more. Form, fit, and function they are identical.

Dave · 01-21-2010, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Triple

This much I knew. I wasn't sure if the M9 was somehow constructed differently or with higher quality internals or something. I often see them selling for $100 to $150 more than the 92FS.

the only 92s that are ''different'' are the vertec and the brigadier.

fnfalman · 01-21-2010, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Triple

This much I knew. I wasn't sure if the M9 was somehow constructed differently or with higher quality internals or something. I often see them selling for $100 to $150 more than the 92FS.

Because there are morons out there that would buy anything USGI-marked for a considerable price difference.

The standard 92FS is the same as the M9. The carbon steel models have the same "bruniton" finish as the M9.

The M9A1 has rails and I think that thus far only the USMC is using it while the US Army still sticks with the standard M9.

Naturally a carbon steel unit with "magic dust coating" will not be as corrosion resistant as a stainless steel unit. Coatings get worn off or chipped off eventually. Stainless steel is stainless steel. However, unless you decide to leave your gun without ever putting on a lubrication coat then you should stick with stainless steel.

I have handguns that are 100-years old with half of the bluing worn off yet don't rust. What's the secret? Wiping the damn things down once in a great while with a light coat of oil. It ain't rocket science.

derf · 01-21-2010, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fnfalman

The M9A1 has rails and I think that thus far only the USMC is using it while the US Army still sticks with the standard M9.

M9A1's are coming to the Army. A buddy of mine in the 82nd was told they will be issued prior to his deployment later this year

Phenix_Rider · 01-21-2010, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cutty72

Beretta M9

I have one on my side right now, you can have it.

01-21-2010, 01:08 PM	#1
Triple uncomfortably numb Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: JOH-JAH! Moto: WR250R & Bonneville Posts: 409	Beretta M9A1 vs 92FS ... __________________ Last edited by Triple; 04-07-2010 at 11:54 AM..

01-21-2010, 01:25 PM	#5
smileyman White Trash Hero Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: NW Arkansas Moto: Buell 1125R Porco Rosso Edition Posts: 4,895	Yup whut he said! __________________ Arkriders.com To be the best you must first be willing to risk the worst!

01-21-2010, 01:19 PM	#2
Speedracer42 Kneedragger Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: PDX Posts: 170	Just an FYI I have a good friend ready to sell his 92fs .45 in nickel that has I believe less than 50 rounds through it.

01-21-2010, 01:20 PM	#4
Rider Moto GP Star Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 12,156	M9A1 is the military spec version of the 92FS. It's really the same gun. I would't waste your money on the M9A1 unless you want a Picatinny rail. Then I'd go with the M9A1