In addition the 92s Model is talking about has pretty minimal sights.
~ Then there's the lack of a firing pin block. Now yes there is a manual safety, but for me personally on a DA/SA pistol I typically carry hammer down and safety off. I don't really want to do that without a firing pin block.
Those are perfectly legit reasons for not wanting a 92s, So the gun is simply not a good fit for you new or used.. it just seemed like a couple people had issue with it's age/origin.
as for the firing pin, ya the "S" lacked a block, I have never had the chance to handle one of these but I suspect the slide safety works much like it does on later models where the firing pin striker rotates out of the way of the hammer.
If Im correct then there's really only 2 concerns.
1. would be a sear failure dropping the hammer with the safety off.
2. inertia causing the firing pin to strike the primer.
Neither are very likely, especially if the firing pin is like on newer models (spring loaded return.. so not free floating)
A 3rd possibility would be user error, loosing control of the hammer while cocking it manually but before getting to half cocked notch.. not sure if the hammer would have enough power behind it in that case but possible.
My point is you can find a new 92fs online right now for say $550. That extra $250 is worth it to me because of the reasons outlined above
No doubt I wouldn't pay more then 250 for a 92s.
Especially since you don't know condition till it arrives.
These have been floating around for probably 6 months now at various dealers.
At 200 I would pick one up if for no other reason then collection.
Id actually be interested in the even older original 92 which had the frame safety.. but those are hard to come by.