The (In)Famous Beretta M9/M9(A1)

[SemperFiGuy]

Summa You Fellow Forum Members..........

With previous military experience musta been sent in Harm's Way once upon a time armed in whole or in part with a Beretta M9/M9A1 Pistol, Semiautomatic, 9mm, M9, loaded with 9×19mm Parabellum military issue ball ammunition. 

(Instead of good, ol' Hornady Critical Defense, Federal HydraShok JHP, whatever.)

My own limited experience w/military ball ammunition vs. JHPs (in any caliber) is that the difference is clearly detectable.

Anybody wish to share any private thoughts about putting their life on the line w/a sub-optimized self-defense system as they were strapping on their sidearm?

sfg

[shooter]

 I carried a smith 39 sometimes, came with a supessor . I didn't know much about bullet weight back then, nice touch was it had a slide lock,

[wallace11bravo]

Once upon a time:

Disclaimer: This is an entertaining way of sharing my opinions on the M9. I am sure it is not historically accurate.

Army: "We need to get a new pistol"

Common Sense: "Okay, well there are some pretty cool things going on with striker fired polymer framed guns--"

Army: "NO"

Common Sense: "Okaaaaay.... well what are you thinking?"

Army: "The 1911 was too high maintenance. It also isn't in line with our NATO partner's chamberings."

Common Sense: "Oh, well 9mm is a fine choice. Here is something new from an Austrian company. Just hear us out on this, it is getting pretty popular with law enforcement. Low maintenance, reliable, accurate."

Army: "Okay... I don't like plastic. It's not heavy enough."

Common Sense: "What? The M16 and new M4s both have plastic components. Canteens, pro-masks... Why is heavier better?"

Army: "Where is the safety???"

Common Sense: "Well there is mechanical safety features built in, like this trigger safety. Which is sufficient given a quality holster a reasonable level of training."

Army: *Shoots self in foot* "It's just a flesh wound... I'll be fine... I don't like things that don't have toggle safeties... What is this one?"

Common Sense: "Well, this is a double/single-action Beretta."

Army: *Looks confused*

Common Sense: "It means that there are two completely different triggers, basically. A really long smashing one for the first shot, and a lighter one for every shot thereafter. Not really good for actually training folks to hit things under duress."

Army: "I like smashing. I don't like actually training. That costs money and is hard since you have to hold people to standards."

Common Sense: "Well, it is very large and heavy, the magazines last about 6 months of service, it doesn't do well in dirty conditions, the barrel is exposed through the slide making it easy to interfere with, the sights are crap, the grip is too large for most people, the exposed hammer is another easy target for--"

Army: "It has a safety!! Dumb soldiers need safeties!"

Common Sense: "Yes but--"

Politicians: *whispers* "Get the Beretta, they gave us money and promised jobs in our state."

Common Sense: "Who is that??"\

Army: "Who is what?"

Common Sense: "The person that was just whispering in your ear."

Army: "Don't know what you are talking about. It's not like we will ever issue these to anyone but officers. After all, we don't care about Infantry platoons with their silly AGs and Squad Leaders, or Armor Crews.... just how cool we can look when we are walking around the rear. Let's buy a whole bunch and then a whole bunch more. And lets spend way more in upkeep too."

Common Sense: *Backs away slowly* "Are you sure you aren't suffering from blood loss?"

Years later:

Army: "These Berettas suck. The few people we do train are told to keep the safety off and hammer down, the magazines are crap, they aren't reliable, the magazines wear out so fast it is ridiculous, we can't attach things, the upkeep is expensive. We are actually in a war now, and not the one with the soviets, we are fighting some kinda insurges (sic) and those crazy guys that go out and do missions are buying Glocks from IA and ANP because they hate the Beretta. What should we do?"

Common Sense: "Well, those polymer guns are pretty tried and true nowadays."

Army: "Well, let's take another look at them I suppose. I do hear good things."

Army: *Shoots common sense in the face*

Army: "..... ****! We can't have weapon's without toggle safeties. Soldiers can't be trusted with that! Buy more Berettas!"

Army: "Lets spend billions upgrading non-combat vehicles to try to make them into combat vehicles. And lets not train troops in C-IED, lets pile more armor on top of them... its not like we can have them avoid roads, paths, canalized areas, and chokepoints, their feet might get hurt and those (non) combat vehicles will get stuck and broken. Lets spend billions more on a land-warrior system no one uses and everyone hates. Lets make sure that NG units guarding detainees have plenty of night vision equipment and batteries, but lets make those Infantry guy have to get their families to send them batteries for their 12 year outdated nods. Lets get uniforms that everyone hates and blend into nothing...." (it goes on like this)

Common Sense: *Bleeding out on the floor*

Army: "Keep bleeding out on my floor, and I'll Article 15 your ass... I don't care how good you are at getting your men through ambushes or accomplishing real objectives. Do you even have your ACE card on you?..." (it goes on like this)

The end.

[tstuart34]

Once upon a time:

Disclaimer: This is an entertaining way of sharing my opinions on the M9. I am sure it is not historically accurate.

Army: "We need to get a new pistol"

Common Sense: "Okay, well there are some pretty cool things going on with striker fired polymer framed guns--"

Army: "NO"

Common Sense: "Okaaaaay.... well what are you thinking?"

Army: "The 1911 was too high maintenance. It also isn't in line with our NATO partner's chamberings."

Common Sense: "Oh, well 9mm is a fine choice. Here is something new from an Austrian company. Just hear us out on this, it is getting pretty popular with law enforcement. Low maintenance, reliable, accurate."

Army: "Okay... I don't like plastic. It's not heavy enough."

Common Sense: "What? The M16 and new M4s both have plastic components. Canteens, pro-masks... Why is heavier better?"

Army: "Where is the safety???"

Common Sense: "Well there is mechanical safety features built in, like this trigger safety. Which is sufficient given a quality holster a reasonable level of training."

Army: *Shoots self in foot* "It's just a flesh wound... I'll be fine... I don't like things that don't have toggle safeties... What is this one?"

Common Sense: "Well, this is a double/single-action Beretta."

Army: *Looks confused*

Common Sense: "It means that there are two completely different triggers, basically. A really long smashing one for the first shot, and a lighter one for every shot thereafter. Not really good for actually training folks to hit things under duress."

Army: "I like smashing. I don't like actually training. That costs money and is hard since you have to hold people to standards."

Common Sense: "Well, it is very large and heavy, the magazines last about 6 months of service, it doesn't do well in dirty conditions, the barrel is exposed through the slide making it easy to interfere with, the sights are crap, the grip is too large for most people, the exposed hammer is another easy target for--"

Army: "It has a safety!! Dumb soldiers need safeties!"

Common Sense: "Yes but--"

Politicians: *whispers* "Get the Beretta, they gave us money and promised jobs in our state."

Common Sense: "Who is that??"\

Army: "Who is what?"

Common Sense: "The person that was just whispering in your ear."

Army: "Don't know what you are talking about. It's not like we will ever issue these to anyone but officers. After all, we don't care about Infantry platoons with their silly AGs and Squad Leaders, or Armor Crews.... just how cool we can look when we are walking around the rear. Let's buy a whole bunch and then a whole bunch more. And lets spend way more in upkeep too."

Common Sense: *Backs away slowly* "Are you sure you aren't suffering from blood loss?"

Years later:

Army: "These Berettas suck. The few people we do train are told to keep the safety off and hammer down, the magazines are crap, they aren't reliable, the magazines wear out so fast it is ridiculous, we can't attach things, the upkeep is expensive. We are actually in a war now, and not the one with the soviets, we are fighting some kinda insurges (sic) and those crazy guys that go out and do missions are buying Glocks from IA and ANP because they hate the Beretta. What should we do?"

Common Sense: "Well, those polymer guns are pretty tried and true nowadays."

Army: "Well, let's take another look at them I suppose. I do hear good things."

Army: *Shoots common sense in the face*

Army: "..... ****! We can't have weapon's without toggle safeties. Soldiers can't be trusted with that! Buy more Berettas!"

Army: "Lets spend billions upgrading non-combat vehicles to try to make them into combat vehicles. And lets not train troops in C-IED, lets pile more armor on top of them... its not like we can have them avoid roads, paths, canalized areas, and chokepoints, their feet might get hurt and those (non) combat vehicles will get stuck and broken. Lets spend billions more on a land-warrior system no one uses and everyone hates. Lets make sure that NG units guarding detainees have plenty of night vision equipment and batteries, but lets make those Infantry guy have to get their families to send them batteries for their 12 year outdated nods. Lets get uniforms that everyone hates and blend into nothing...." (it goes on like this)

Common Sense: *Bleeding out on the floor*

Army: "Keep bleeding out on my floor, and I'll Article 15 your ass... I don't care how good you are at getting your men through ambushes or accomplishing real objectives. Do you even have your ACE card on you?..." (it goes on like this)

The end.

Wow that was fun!

Bravo sir bravo!

[Mudinyeri]

My version of John's story is a little different.

Setting: Basic Training, Fort Jackson, SC, 1984

Army: Private, you need to qualify with a pistol!

Mudinyeri: Cool, I get to shoot some more.

Army: Here, qualify with this. (Hands 1911, manufacture date circa 1944, to Mudinyeri)

Mudinyeri (handling pistol): Why does this thing rattle like that?

Army: Don't ask questions.  Qualify.

Mudinyeri (after firing first magazine): Why is my shot group nearly 6" across at 15 yards?

Army: Don't ask questions. Qualify.

Mudinyeri (during pistol qualification): This piece of junk is going to ruin my string of Expert qualifications. I'm going to end up with a Bolo Badge.

Mudinyeri qualifies Expert ... barely.

Setting: Frankfurt, Germany, 1985

Army: Here is a new, improved pistol. Qualify.

Mudinyeri: Why doesn't this one rattle? The 1911 that I qualified with in Basic rattled and couldn't shoot a MOA group even if it was locked down in a vise.

Army: Don't ask questions. Qualify.

Mudinyeri (at the qualification range): Wow, I hate that double-action trigger pull but this thing shoots nice. (Easily qualifies Expert.)

Mudinyeri: Man, that M9 is a really nice piece of Italian manufacturing.

Setting: Frankfurt, Germany, 1986

Army: Here carry this M9 for your daily duties.

Mudinyeri: I still hate that double action trigger and it's a pain in the butt to have to manually switch the safety to fire mode.

Army: Carry the pistol with the manual safety engaged or we'll give you an Article 15.

Mudinyeri: I'd rather have an Article 15 than be dead.  (Carries M9 with safety in Fire mode.)

Army: If we catch you carrying your pistol with the safety disengaged again, we're going to give you an Article 15.

Mudinyeri: I'd rather have an Article 15 than be dead.  (Carries M9 with safety in Fire mode.)

Army: If we catch you carrying your pistol with the safety disengaged again, we're going to give you an Article 15.

Mudinyeri: I'd rather have an Article 15 than be dead.  (Carries M9 with safety in Fire mode.)

Army: If we catch you carrying your pistol with the safety disengaged again, we're going to give you an Article 15.

Mudinyeri: I'd rather have an Article 15 than be dead.  (Carries M9 with safety in Fire mode.)

Setting: Civilian Life, Several Years Later

Mudinyeri: That M9 that I was issued in the Army was a pretty nice pistol.  I have 1000's of rounds of experience with it.  I think I'll get a 92FS.

Setting: Several more years later.

Beretta 92FS: Why do all the other pistols get to go out shooting and I just sit here in the safe?

[NE Bull]

LMAO! Ya'll is funny.

[gsd]

Having owned one, I'll never own one again. It is neither a useful nor regularly functioning firearm.

[Mudinyeri]

Having owned one, I'll never own one again. It is neither a useful nor regularly functioning firearm.

Interestingly, I never had a single malfunction with either my M9 or my 92FS.  I know a lot of people hate on them because of reliability issues but after thousands of rounds through both I've never had a problem.  (Knock on wood.)

[bullit]

I was issued one being part of the medical side of the house (Go Navy!!!).  We were also given a pretty little ID card with a BIG RED CROSS identifying us per the Geneva Conventions (yes, there was more than one for those you in Rio Linda) that was supposed to keep the Hadji's from cutting our heads off..... being a "non-combatant" and all......Riiiiggggttttt.....  That being said, "qualifying" was quite entertaining.  I never could convince the armorer that my front sight was bent about 20 degrees to the left.  Thank goodness for "Kentucky Windage".  That being said, my personal action plan was to grab the first battlefield pick up M4 or AK if the wire were overrun ....

[sidearm1]

It seems to never end.

In a land far, far away, in a time far, far away, one gang entered another gangs turf.  As usual, a small confrontation occurred.  Looked over and the fellow gang member had this rod shoved down his weapon, action out.  Dammed piece of junk.  No good plastic.  etc.

lesson learned. 

Learn your weapon.  maintain your weapon. shoot the bad guy as much and as fast as you can accurately.

[DCPrecisionLLC]

I carried an M9 through a combat deployment. For it's intended purpose as a defensive weapon, not an offensive weapon, it performed it's job just fine. The larger issue existing is the lack of quality training on the M9, not the weapon itself. The army is horrible at teaching people to shoot pistols unless your in a specialized units that depend heavily on them. Are there better options? Sure, but I would be willing to bet that the M9 is mechanically more accurate and capable than 75% of the shooters that use them, as is the case with most pistols in the civilian market.

[NENick]

I ran my Beretta 92 for probably 5 years. It never had any problems (other than my really crappy, underpowered handloads). It fit my hand really well, was plenty accurate, and had light recoil. Mags are pretty inexpensive at $7-15per. My only complaint is that I had a habit of flipping the safety/decocker on during mag changes. Easily remedied by using the slide release lever, slingshot method, or paying attention to what you're doing.

I might have started complaining about reliability as I approached a round count of 8,152,752,523

[Ronvandyn]

Compared to the Smith and Wesson Model 15 Combat Masterpiece we were carrying before the change, the Beretta was as close to a Ferrari.  Instead of 18 rounds of +p ball ammo (basic load out) to a gun that had a 15 round magazine plus another just in case?  MAJOR improvement.  Don’t get me wrong, I loved shooting the Model 15, but the M9 was a serious improvement.