Beretta 92 Compact-why didn't it catch on?

[Blue Duck357]

Sig made a smaller version of the 226 (the 228 and 229) both models are popular and highly respected. Glock made the smaller version of the 17 the model 19 and it sells like hotcakes. Colt had the 1911, commander models sell very well, etc..

So why did the 92 Compact turn out to be so unpopular???

 

[Ben]

I don't think it was pushed very hard by the company... probably never really needed to push it because the 92 has always been a pretty good seller. Looks like currently the lightest one is still 30 oz and only holds 8-10 rounds.

The G-19 (21 oz) could hold 15+1 and the "smaller" Sigs could still hold 12 or 13 rounds. I'm sure the Beretta is just as good a gun however.

Just my opinion,
Ben

 

[Zundfolge]

I think Beretta shelved it to prevent it from cannibalizing sales from the 9000 series guns.

 

[blades67]

I think it was because it really wasn't all that compact when compared to the SIG Sauer and Glock compacts. It wasn't a bad gun, but it just seemed like it showed up for the race a day late.

 

[croyance]

Beretta actually has a few attempts at a semi-compact gun.
The 13 round FC wasn't that compact. It does fit smaller hands better, and their magazines, when found, don't cost too much.
The L is a 10 rounder, and kind of thick for a compact.
The L type M is an 8 round single stack that is a bit bigger than a Kahr K9. If I had the money right now, I would get one.
None of these were marketed well. Given how well thought of Beretta's are by gun magazine writers, and the amount of ads that Beretta places, it would have been pretty easy to get good write ups for those guns. Follow up articles would have been common also. Just look at the 9000s articles making the rounds through each gun magazine.
After handling a 9000s I don't want one, although I am a Beretta fan. I do want a compact though, and when I get the cash together will jump on the next one I find.

 

[dsk]

Beretta 92 series pistols are too fat in the slide area IMO to make good carry guns, regardless of how much they chop off of the grip and barrel. In fact the lack of size efficiency is the chief problem with the 92's. Other than that, they are good guns.

 

[Ala Dan]

Greeting's All,

I had a Beretta 92fs "Centurion" model. While it was a
delightful firearm to shoot; it was just too dang large
for comfortable, all day carry.

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

 

[ctc]

I agree with general consensous - as compacts go it wasn't.

-- Chuck

 

[IRock]

TOO BIG!

 

[Blue Duck357]

Thanks for all the replies

 

[otomik]

actually I think it's because of the 8000 series which came before (1994 i believe) the 9000 (2001). They just weren't as compact as other compacts and thats the reason they developed the 8000 series. The compact SIGs (the p228 and it's replacement p229) also got a boost of reputation from it's M11 gov't contract.

 

[Blombo]

92 Custom Carry

I purchase a Custom Carry and really like the gun. It is very accurate for me and probably the gun i shoot the best.

Unfortunately it's the G30 & G26 that i end up CCWing the most. I guess that i just don't care about banging them around and they are extremely reliable and tough.

The Beretta is great at the range and is also good for ccw.

Blombo

 

[HKguy9]

I think when it came down to it, you could stuff more rounds in a smaller and lighter Glock 26.

 

[Blue Duck357]

Won't argue the smaller and lighter part, but I believe standard mags for the 26 hold ten rounds (even pre-ban) and the Beretta Compac holds 13 with pre bans.

 

[HKguy9]

Hey Blueduck,

Oops, I was thinking the Type M compacts, which are single-stack.

 

[Malpaso]

My friend just bought a 92FS Compact L, as Berettas are now legal again here in MA. I find it to be an excellent gun. I agree, it is mis-named as a "compact", and really isn't a carry gun. Pain in the a$$ to find factory mags for too.