Iraq Veterans, what is your true opinion on the M9 Beretta 9mm?

hoytinak

you got it summed up pretty good.

I think thats the most precise yet accurate opinion OP will get on Beretta m9/92fs.
 
Unholster an M9 and everyone stops. It's kinda crazy but in that theater, the M9 can be the most powerful weapon in a platoon. And you don't ever fire it.
Not an uncommon response in many parts of the world. It's because in many areas pistols are used mainly for executions.
 
I am struck by the observations above that Iraqis are more intimidated by handguns than rifles or machine guns. Those long guns are combat weapons; pistols are personal.

Remember the scenes on the news where Sadam and others would use their pistols as an intimidation factor.
 
OK for a more specific appraisal, what condition were the guns in, that you did not like or had problems? Were these like new out of the box or well worn beaters with high round counts that had been banged around for years? And was some of the problem from non Beretta mags? Was there a dust and sand problem, like, if you kept that crud out of the gun somehow, did it play OK? Field conditions are quite different in that theatre than like Europe or something, I don't hear alot about civilian 92's having all kinds of troubles so much as over there. Is it the conditions?
 
Well I own a 1911 made in 1913 and it shoots very good I have had it since I was 16 which is about 45 years, when I was young it ate a lot of old corrosive G.I.Ball as it was cheap I have put many thousands of rounds through it and no telling how many the army put through it before I got it.:D
 
Of course the civilian 92s are not going to have the same problems. Civilians, since they actually own the weapon, treat their tools with kid gloves carefully doing whatever they can to make the pistol last.

Its like the difference between a civilian Crown Victoria and the ones the police drive. There is a big difference between how the two are treated.

I think the real point is you dont hear the same things about Glocks or Sigs that you hear about the 92s. Never heard anyone say the Glock was too bulky. Never heard anyone say the Sig was not accurate or unreliable.

The Seals purposely switched to the P226 because they felt the 92s were not up for the job. Many police departments have switched from the 92s to Glocks or other weaponry. The military is the one who is still holding on.
 
Re; M9

First, thanks to you guys for your service. Because of you, I can sit here on Thanksgiving Day and fumble on this keyboard. I'm a Viet Nam vet and my weapon was a M60, and I had a "souveneired" Hi-Power Browning. Keep on Uncle's ass and make him get it right.
 
I understand that civvy Berettas or maybe even police ones, are not gonna see the conditions that the M9's do. But you mention police getting rid of them, could that be because of something like, following the latest trends(with grant or confiscated money), caliber up-sizing, etc? And I can't see how any handgun in that dusty sandy environment can always be 100% without extreme cleaning, like, notice how tight those barrel hoods fit the slides on the Glocks and Sigs? What would one grain of sand in that gap do to the lockup? Etc? I don't think that probably Sigs and Glocks have the widespread exposure that the general issue M9 has, worldwide in US combat.
I bet their "perfect numbers" would slide a bit if they spend 5 years in that environment. Still, IMO I would have let the troops that like the 1911, keep them over there, or reissue them! With ball ammo, the bigger is better!
 
M9 opinion

I was issued a brand new one and had to qualify on it. Every magazine would have at least 2 stoppages and I was not the only one experenceing this. I was issued one along with my rifle and it felt good to have one, but no way would I trust it. It could have been the ammunition who knows, but my enlistment expired before I could use it again.
 
This is all very interesting. I have limited experience with the M9. I was running AK Marksmanship Unit when they first came out and was tasked with training people on the "new" pistol, but before I got started they were recalled because of the cracking slides. So I didnt get very far.

I was trained on the old 1911a1s. Though I'm more of a rifle shooter then a pistol shooter, I qualified higher with the 1911 then I did with the M14. That I couldnt figure out.

We just didnt have the malfunctions with the 1911s that you people mention with the M9.

My personal experience with the 1911 is extensive and I'd proboly cry like a baby if I was to go back into combat and someone tried to take my 1911 and make me take the M9. But my experience with the M9 is pretty limited

Interesting thread.
 
Went bang everytime I pulled the trigger.



OTOH, whatever knucklehead decuded to parkerize the inside of the magazines needs to be drug down the street.
 
No brainer

Not a vet so my opinion is not weighty but it is obvious we should go back to the 1911 and .45 when a change is made.

If not the 1911 then at least the 230 gr .45 with something like the FNP .45 or M&P .45 but I think the military was well served with the 1911 and the .45 and would be so again with both.

Pico
 
Wasn't issued the M9 in the service, but used one in my police department. While holstered and used in police departments, the weapons get much better care than in the military.

Compare police issued M4 carbines to the military ones.

In either case, I've never had problems with my duty pistol, and I own two Beretta's now.

A lot of police departments are moving to the .40, which the 96 has inferior magazine capacity (although I still like mine).

The Beretta 92 design has been around a long time and used in various law enforcement capacity around the world. It's a trusted weapon for a reason.
 
I carried an M9 on 2 tours in Korea as an MP. Never really even noticed it was on my hip when I carried it. I also never really had a problem qualifying expert with the M9 or even the clunky old WWII and Vietnam era 1911A1's. The 45's I was issued in the late 80's were absolutely beat to hell. By the time my career had ended, the M9's had been in service for about 20 years and were still always reliable, always accurate and always effective. I don't recall even a jam with my M9's. I think it's more about the man with the weapon and not so much about the weapon; especially when discussing high quality fine firearms such as the 1911a1 or the Beretta M9.
 
I carried an M9 on 2 tours in Korea as an MP. Never really even noticed it was on my hip when I carried it. I also never really had a problem qualifying expert with the M9 or even the clunky old WWII and Vietnam era 1911A1's. The 45's I was issued in the late 80's were absolutely beat to hell. By the time my career had ended, the M9's had been in service for about 20 years and were still always reliable, always accurate and always effective. I don't recall even a jam with my M9's. I think it's more about the man with the weapon and not so much about the weapon; especially when discussing high quality fine firearms such as the 1911a1 or the Beretta M9.
The M9 is an almost universally loathed pistol in the DOD arena.

Fortunately, the M17 is shaping up to be a tremendous improvement.
 
The M9 is an almost universally loathed pistol in the DOD arena.

Zombie thread aside, a simple reading of the ten-year-old posts above show that the M9 wasn't "universally loathed" by those who used it.

Some liked it. Some didn't. Regardless, it served its role as a pistol in modern combat well enough.

Which is to say it spent the majority of its time unused in a holster.


Fortunately, the M17 is shaping up to be a tremendous improvement.

The M17 is a double-stack full-size pistol of acceptable reliability throwing a similar number of 9x19mm slugs to the M9, which is a double-stack full-size pistol of acceptable reliability throwing a similar number of 9x19mm slugs to the M17.

"Tremendous improvement" is serious hyperbole.


.
 
Last edited:
Zombie thread aside, a simple reading of the ten-year-old posts above show that the M9 wasn't "universally loathed" by those who used it.

Some liked it. Some didn't. Regardless, it served its role as a pistol in modern combat well enough.

Which is to say it spent the majority of its time unused in a holster.




The M17 is a double-stack full-size pistol of acceptable reliability throwing a similar number of 9x19mm slugs to the M9, which is a double-stack full-size pistol of acceptable reliability throwing a similar number of 9x19mm slugs to the M17.

"Tremendous improvement" is serious hyperbole.


.
He's being sarcastic. He has a thread on his own 92 that he set up for home defense. He does this all the time but his delivery is such that the sarcasm doesn't really translate, or he might mean to do that simply to troll.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 
The M9 is an almost universally loathed pistol in the DOD arena.

Fortunately, the M17 is shaping up to be a tremendous improvement.
I don't recall the M9 being universally loathed when I was in the Marine Corps in the early to mid 90s. Handguns were generally considered useless in combat, especially in 9mm. I'm not sure what's changed due to recent wars, but at least when I was in handguns were completely irrelevant. You might as well argue about which bayonet is better to carry in combat.

Handguns were kind of considered a symbol of authority though, or a sign that you were somebody important, since staff NCOs and officers were issued one. I also remember being thrilled the first time I handled an M9, more thrilled than any other weapon I used except for maybe the m249(which just seemed totally bad*** to me at first). It seems ridiculous to me now. I guess because at that time semi auto handguns were rare in the civilian world, and this was a pre internet age. Most people's only exposure to them when enlisting was seeing cops and movie heroes carrying one, so they were as foreign to most of us as any machine gun. That's totally changed these days.

EDIT: OK maybe the post I quoted was sarcasm, since the m17 seems to be a total cluster so far.
 
No opinion, because I always managed to find a Chief or Gunny who managed to have a .45 squirreled away in a locker during Gulf War part I, part II and when I was in Afghanistan in 2003.
 
How 'bout an opinion from an afghanistan vet?

LOL...We don't count I guess!

The M9 is a great service pistol. I carried a 1911 in 1/75th...the M9 was more reliable. The Batt 1911's were worn out so not a condemnation of the pistol.

We did test Glock 21's on one tour which were passed on and 1911's were available if you wanted one. Only saw a couple 1911's being carried. The majority of us carried M9's.
 
Back
Top