If You Had To Choose a Beretta 92 or 96

M

Mike H

New member
Guys,

You win a gun mag competition and have to choose one gun from the entire Beretta 92 (9mm) or 96(.40 S&W) range as your prize, which would it be and why ? So is it the B.A.T.S., the INOX, the Brigadier, the Centurion etc etc step up and take a shot.

PS - You have to keep it.

Mike H
 
I'd choose the first gun I ever bought, a stainless Italian 92. Why, you ask?

Stainless is more corrosion resistant, and looks great! I think the stainless 92 is the best looking gun on the market.

I'd go with the 9mm because I'll give up a bigger bullet for an extra 4 rounds (although generally not for one or two). Of any gun, I consider low-cap mags not to be an issue because of the availability of cheap hi-caps (factory hi-cap Beretta mags are generally priced around the same as some other brand's 10 rounders).

Italian because it is the original, and from what I've heard they are built a little better (though I can't back that up from personal experience).
 
92G Brigadier INOX. i like the G configuration best (even though civilians can't buy it you said i could choose any gun from the whole series). stainless steel is stronger than the bruniton version but i don't like the red dots on the sights. the brigadier version comes with normal sights.
 
92 hands down. The Original, the High capacity, the reliable, ...

What can one say about the 96? Except is a 92 want-to-be.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rob96:
My brother picked up the 92G Border Marshall. I must say that is a very fine 9mm.[/quote]

I think the Border Marshall only comes in a 92SF configuration (thats why I didn't buy it but bought the 92G Elite).
Robb
 
I hate to sound like the only dissenter in the group, but I dont think you will go wrong either way. My dept. currently carries the 96G. We switched from the 92G in 1998. I like the .40, but the follow up shots come a little slower. The 9mm is more fun to shoot quickly and of course the ammo is cheaper.
 
92FS. Why? Already have two so I could use the same holster and mags. I've wanted another 9mm Beretta anyway. They're that good.
 
I've got an Italian Brigadier FS and really like it a lot. It's a big pistol for a 9mm but it's accurate as hell and a blast to shoot.

I've always been a fan of Berettas.
 
I've had a 96 Border Marshall for 6 months now and love it. A fine tool and cherished piece. The .40S&W round is good by me. I'm now looking for a CCW in .40, perhaps the Beretta 9000S.
 
I posted a very similar question not too long ago (see "[Link to invalid post]") and the bottom line was that if hi-cap pre-ban mags were available, then it was "six of one and half a dozen of the other" but if hi-cap mags are not an option, then go for the larger caliber and get the 96.
Share what you know, learn what you don't -- FUD
fud-nra.gif
 
At one time I'd have gone with the 92, due to a personal preference for the cartridge--in this case 9mm--that a gun was originally designed for.

Since the magazine ban, however, I've preferred the 96, because the original 96 mag holds 10 rounds and so there's no loss of cartridge capacity. (The 11-round mag that Beretta later developed for the 96 extends somewhat below the grip, affecting concealability--to the extent that a Beretta 96 is concealable!)

I really like the looks of the Inox. But any 92 or 96 is a fine pistol. My favorite is probably the 92/96 Combo. I also find the Brigadier and Border Marshall series to be impressive, and recently purchased a Border Marshall.

As far as reliability is concerned, I've never experienced a stoppage or malfunction with either the 92 or the 96. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top