driftrider

For everyones information, the Beretta 92F and the U.S. military's M9 service pistol, while being the same design and appearing similar, are really not the same gun. The Beretta 92F that you and I can buy at our local dealer is a much better built pistol than the M9. The reason is that when the DoD contracted the M9 to be built, it went with Beretta because the M9 best fit the mil spec requirements and was marginally cheaper than the competitors guns, but as a stipulation for the contract, congress required that all the M9 pistols be made in the United States (should Italy once again become our enemy). And since the gun had to be made at the bid price, but using higher paid (and probably unionized, given the governments tendendency to favor unionized contractors over non-unionized ones) American workers, something had to give, and that seemed to be the fine quality that makes the 92F a top shelf pistol. I think of the M9 as a 92F that has been AK-ized. Tolerances are greater and fit tends to be looser(some I encountered were downright sloppy), accuracy tends to be hit-and-miss with some guns being very good, and others being very bad (the one I carried was somewhere in between), the trigger isn't quite as nice, etc... They are very reliable except for the occational (and characteristic) stovepipe stoppage (if you've ever shot an M9 you'll probably know what I mean).

As far as cost/unit to the government, I believe it's somewhere between $250-$300 per pistol based on what couple different armorers told me while I was still in the service, but like all second hand information, it could be wrong, but I'd bet it's a pretty accurate range.

I will say that the M9's were always good for a bit of amusement at another absentminded Marine's expense due to the design of the take-down lever. I can't tell you how many times I saw someone who had put their slide back on after cleaning by racking the slide back and locking it open in one movement, then hitting the slide release without flipping the take-down lever back to the assembled position. You'd be surprised at how far that slide can go, barrel and all! Had one brand new to the unit PFC on his very first shift launch the slide, loaded barrel and all, into the clearing barrel at the start of a shift.

Mike

driftrider

Because Glock's are designed to save their shooters butt should he or she be unfortunate enough to wind up trading bullets with an armed thug, not punch out the bullseye of a paper target or knock over pepper poppers. 1911's lend themselves well to customization and can be made very accurate, where with Glocks, and most other purpose built defensive handguns, aren't built with accuracy as the primary concern (in defensive handguns, as I'm sure you know, reliability is paramount because almost any pistol is accurate enough to hit a human torso at all realistic and justifiable engagement ranges).

So to answer your question with a similar one; if mil spec, GI issue 1911A1's are so great, why isn't anyone winning high profile shooting events with them?

I don't mean to disparage the top shelf, semi- and full-custom 1911's out there, as they are certainly great handguns, but comparing a match grade 1911 to a Glock is like comparing a GI issue milspec 1911A1 to the same match grade 1911, it's apples and oranges.

Mike

patricik

home defence=.357 mag

plinking, cover fire=9mm

Rebel Hog

JD......I'm retierd from the Sheriff Dept. in Tampa FL.....have you seen any wear on the Glock slides?
a few of the guys that shoot alot, have had complaints.What's your opinion on this mattrer?

Jake696

I do have slide wear on my 15 year old Glock 22. It's from the holster! I agree with Rebel Hog...the Glock may not be pretty, but what a functional gun and it's great for concealed carry. I'm still waiting on my new model 35 in OD green.