Torn between Two Guns

imported post

I've been contemplating my new gun purchase for a while, and I think I've finally narrowed it down to the Beretta 92fs and the XD(m) in 9mm.

I've read reviews and visited multiple websites, but I was wondering what the OC population has to say about each of these two guns, good or bad.

thanks1

imported post

I spent months trying to decide what my new carry gun was going to be, I sold my Desert Eagle, and wanted something a little lighter, easier to carry, and in a more common caliber with higher capacity than either my revolver, or the D-E had to offer.

I look at Glocks, Baretta's, EAA, CZ, Etc Etc Ect.

The XDm felt best in my hand, and the controls were easier for me to operate being a lefty-shooter.

I would say figureyour price range first, and then shoot the models available in that price range to see what is most comfortable and accurate for the person making the purchase.

some people love the feel of one gun, but cannot stand others, find one that fits.

imported post

Since you're considering the XD series, you might also want to check out the M&P Smith and Wesson series, too. Similar in design with the edge going to the M&P.

imported post

I own a Glock 17 9MM, and a XD Compact 45 ACP. I like both of them, They both have there own features on them, and they both have disadvantages on both of them. One of these days I will be getting a M&P, But that is when money will let me do it. If you want to get the XDm that is a great choice, I am not sure about the Beretta tho, Never even seen one before. And have no desire to get one of them either. But if you go with the XD, XDm, Glock, M&P. You will be getting a great firearm either way.

imported post

Personally I would rather have the 92. The proven track record there means a lot to me. Nothing against the XD, but the solid feel of the 92 can't be questioned.

imported post

I have a Beretta 92fs and a XD40. I carry the XD40. Both have been flawless in operation. I just prefer the 40s&w over the 9mm. I would expect there is very little difference between the XD40 and the XDM.

imported post

If you are looking at the Berretta I would look at the cheaper version made by Taurus. I have shot both and have had not issues with either one. I personally carry a XD9 and I want to get a XDm9. I am in the process of purchasing a Taurus 92 so i can practice with it before I deploy and have to use a M9.

imported post

rocknsnow wrote:

If you are looking at the Berretta I would look at the cheaper version made by Taurus. I have shot both and have had not issues with either one. I personally carry a XD9 and I want to get a XDm9. I am in the process of purchasing a Taurus 92 so i can practice with it before I deploy and have to use a M9.

Click to expand...

Don't bother with the Taurus model. Increased chances of getting an out of spec frame and a guarantee of inferior parts will likely make it not worth it in the end. There's just no need to skip over the Beretta 92 when you can pick up perfectly good used ones for $400 all day long.

imported post

As far as Im concerned, the taurus is an off brand, like hipoint.

But the real question I have is why do you want to play around with a 9mm? diddnt you say you wanted it for defense?

imported post

Thelukaskezik wrote:

I've been contemplating  my new gun purchase for a while, and I think I've finally narrowed it down to the Beretta 92fs and the XD(m) in 9mm.

I've read reviews and visited multiple websites, but I was wondering what the OC population has to say about each of these two guns, good or bad.

thanks1

Click to expand...

I have carried a Beretta 92 FS for several years. The weapon is totally reliable and accurate. A little heavy for everyday carry but you get used to it after a while.

imported post

Thelukaskezik wrote:

I've been contemplating my new gun purchase for a while, and I think I've finally narrowed it down to the Beretta 92fs and the XD(m) in 9mm.

I've read reviews and visited multiple websites, but I was wondering what the OC population has to say about each of these two guns, good or bad.

thanks1

Click to expand...

Beretta has a long pull on the trigger, fine gun. XD is ok also.

My advice, go with a glock! :lol:

imported post

Not having fired the XD, I'd have to go with the 92FS, as I trained with it and carried it in combat since around 1991 or 1992, through 2009.

However, I do not like redundant safeties in general. Thus, I like my CZ 85 B, as it's philosophy is to be able to carry it in a configuration whereby the only thing on can do is draw and fire. I'd have preferred the decocker model (CZ 85 BD), but could not find one readily available around the time of purchase.

imported post

sevenplusone wrote:

rocknsnow wrote:

If you are looking at the Berretta I would look at the cheaper version made by Taurus. I have shot both and have had not issues with either one. I personally carry a XD9 and I want to get a XDm9. I am in the process of purchasing a Taurus 92 so i can practice with it before I deploy and have to use a M9.

Click to expand...

Don't bother with the Taurus model. Increased chances of getting an out of spec frame and a guarantee of inferior parts will likely make it not worth it in the end. There's just no need to skip over the Beretta 92 when you can pick up perfectly good used ones for $400 all day long.

Click to expand...

A friend of mine bought a Taurus revolver, it was a factory lemon. No biggie, stuff happens, right?
But what he had to go through getting it fixed byTaurus was not by any means easy.
He had to send it back 3 times before i was somewhat corrected. It was not a minor flaw either, the cylinder to frame clearance was too tight, and the cylider would jam and not turn with rounds in the cylinder. THREE TIMES IT GOT SENT BACK TO GET IT FIXED,
finally after the 3rd repair, it was a little better, the cylinder finally turned, but the frame still grinds off the brass when the cylinder turns. I would not accept a flawed weapon like that.

imported post

After carrying a glock for a long time, I'm carrying a XDm 9mm. I can't tell you how much I love this gun, it's easy to clean like a glock, but feels better and is perfectly balanced.

imported post

Definately the XDm9 .. get a set of night sights and have at it.

I have a Beretta 96D .40 and the XDm9 I prefer the .40 caliber round over the 9mm but 19+1 trumps the 10rd mag for the Beretta, The ergonomics of the XDm are great, its accurate and just fun to shoot, plus when you carry it you hardly know its there.

imported post

Reading the reports, here, I'd go with the XD over the 92FS.

Vote switched.

imported post

since9 wrote:

Reading the reports, here, I'd go with the XD over the 92FS.

Vote switched.

Click to expand...

If you're that easily swayed, perhaps you shouldn't have voted....

imported post

Having ample experience with both the 92fs (military) and XDm (.40 - personal carry choice) ........

I will strongly reccommend the XDm.

Although there are no negatives to the Beretta, (it is a good, solid gun.) The positives of the XDm outweigh it. (for me)

1) The "natural point of aim" seems better on the XDm.

I know the stock angles are similar on both, but it seems so much easier and quicker to pick up the sights on the XDm. At close ranges, I can consistently hit the 10 ring when point shooting. This is aHUGE factor in my preference. If I am ever involved in a self defense situation, I plan (and train) on using the sights. I cannot guarantee that this will happen, as I have never experienced a self defense situation. Being able to consistently "10 ring" when I just "pull and shoot" at about 10 feet is a large bonus to this gun. I can often"10 ring"with my 1911's,but rarelydo it with my snubby or my GP100.This tells me it's the gun and not my "skill"

2)The trigger pull and reset are shorter on the XDm.

I put a Springer Precision trigger kit in mine (myself), and it made it even better. I'm unaware of a kit for a 92. ....which leads to:

3)The XDm is more "user friendly".

If there is a trigger kit for the 92, could you put it in yourself?

4) I'm not a big fan of safeties placed on the slide.

Just a pesonal preference

5) The match barrel.

I'm sure aftermarket barrels are available for the 92. Do they come stock? The XDm's factory match barrelis pretty darned accurate.

6) It's Springfield Armory.

Come on! Who else makes great 1911's, and the M1A? I have never had an issue, but I'm pretty sure you won't hear too many negatives about SA's customer service. I've never dealt with Berretta either, but I haven't seen as much praise of their CS as I have of Springfield's.

7) Capacity.

Doesn't need an explanation.



Now, there are some things I don't like about the XDm, but they are not deal breakers.

1) The grip.

This is just personal preference. If you like a good grip, you'll love the XDm. But, for me, the pattern they advertise asoffering a good grip is an understatement. Good grip? JEEZ! It's like holding onto a pine cone! Way too agressive "tread" for me. I wrapped mine in tape. Ahhhhh! Much better.

2) The grip safety.

This is minor. I guess it's a good idea to keep the weapon from firing unless it is in your hand. You would think, since I'm a 1911 aficionado, I'd have no problem with it being carried over to the XD's. But what is the point of a device to keep the weapon from firing unless it is gripped........when it most likely has to be gripped to be fired in the first place?

You ever try to fire a handgun without touching the stocks?

Kinda like trying to drive a car without sitting in the driver's seat, huh?

imported post

I've only put one mag through a 92FS, so I can't claim to be any sort of authority, but I didn't like its feel as much as my XD. Best bet is to get your hands on both and feel for yourself.

Superlite27 wrote:

2) The grip safety.

This is minor. I guess it's a good idea to keep the weapon from firing unless it is in your hand. You would think, since I'm a 1911 aficionado, I'd have no problem with it being carried over to the XD's. But what is the point of a device to keep the weapon from firing unless it is gripped........when it most likely has to be gripped to be fired in the first place?

You ever try to fire a handgun without touching the stocks?

Kinda like trying to drive a car without sitting in the driver's seat, huh?

Click to expand...

It's another layer of safety against accidental discharges. Using your car analogy, it's like a device that prevents you from letting go of the brakes/parking brake unless you're sitting in the driver's seat. It wouldn't keep you from doing something stupid while you're in the seat (where you'd normally sit while driving), but it can prevent accidental motion of the car in situations where you clearly didn't want to move (not sitting in the driver's seat).

imported post

sevenplusone wrote:

since9 wrote:

Reading the reports, here, I'd go with the XD over the 92FS.

Vote switched.

Click to expand...

If you're that easily swayed, perhaps you shouldn't have voted....

Click to expand...

Hah! I know when I'm licked!

SuperLite27 has shot them both, seems well versed, so I trust his opinion.

Stock grips: I don't like pinecones either. :shock:

Grip safety: Not a fan. It may be one more measure of safety, but I'm a fan of minimalism: If a gun won't fire when you pick it up and pull the trigger, there are two many steps in the process! I prefer a simple trigger-released firing pin block with the weapon in condition 2. That way, it's not going to fire if you drop it, but will definitely fire if you simply pull the trigger, and no other action is required.

All revolvers have the same or less measures of safety.