Gun talk, hard choice now between an M1911 and a Beretta 92FS

Just kind of bored and sharing some dilemmas right now lol.

I've got my sights (no pun intended) on a really affordable but reliable M1911 manufactured by Springfield Armory, I've had the pleasure of actually shooting it before and I absolutely loved it.

It's in the same price range as the Beretta 92FS and is a larger caliber, I found that I can shoot it just as well as the Beretta without developing the dreaded flinches. The thing is, both have their advantages and disadvantage


Springfield Armory Mil Spec M1911 .45ACP

Spoiler:

Advantages:

• Very well balanced and easy to grip due to it being a single stack magazine
  
• Powerful cartridge makes it a very viable choice for self defense
  
• Very accurate out to 25ft
  
• Dozens of aftermarket modifications from grips to triggers and slides.
  
• Large selection of different models with various features. Some purpose built for certain roles.
  

Disadvantages:

• Ammunition is getting very expensive
  
• Moderately high recoil making follow up shots difficult for the inexperienced
  
• Heavy and can be uncomfortable to carry around for extended periods of time
  
• Single Action only (Hammer must be cocked before you can fire)
  
• Limited magazine capacity (7+1)
  
• Non ambidextrous magazine release or safety
  
• Can be difficult to dis-assemble without tools
  

Beretta 92FS 9mm

Spoiler:

Advantages

• High capacity magazines (15+1)
  
• Low to moderately low recoil
  
• Ambidextrous safety lever
  
• Low ammunition cost
  
• Single and Double Action design (Even if the hammer is not cocked you can still fire the pistol)
  
• Easy dis-assembly and relatively simple to clean.
  
• Safety functions as a de-cocking lever
  

Disadvantages

• Thick grips due to double stack magazine
  
• Single and Double Action Design (trigger pull will vary depending on if the hammer is cocked or not)
  
• Less modification options as opposed to the M1911
  
• Bulky and difficult to concealed carry
  
• 9mm round less lethal than .45 (Purely subjective since shot placement is more important, but based on over all kinetic energy transfer and pure stopping power, the 9mm is indeed inferior)
  
• Only one manufacturer, limited options and models (There are only two models and the second being difficult to obtain. 92FS and 92FS Compact)
  

I'll probably end up getting both eventually, so ultimately, it's a question of which do I want first and which I think will fulfill the roles I will be using them the most efficiently. The 92FS is much more friendly on the wallet and a lot less intimidating for the ladies if I ever find a girl that would be willing to go shooting with me. The M1911 has a long illustrious history of exceptional stopping power and accuracy, and modern ones have proven to be quite reliable. Not to mention the plethora of aftermarket goodies I can customize it with, if I so chose to get into the customized M1911 arena.

Decisions decisions, they're such a pain I swear.

1911 for the America factor

I can kind of speak to both since I (technically my dad ) own both a Springfield Armory .45 and an older Beretta 92F.


The .45 is a 4" barrel Champion model and holds 8+1 which isn't bad for a 1911. I can vouch for how accurate and reliable it is. It also is incredibly fun to shoot. You are also right about the weight of the gun because of it's all steel design which also helps its reliability, but makes it a pain to conceal carry.


The Beretta is an older model and is also bigger than the 92FS which makes it a pretty poor conceal carry choice. It still is one of my favorite handguns to shoot.


If I may throw another gun into your dilemma, I would suggest the Ruger SR9c. It's my current conceal carry firearm and it also is a lot of fun to shoot as well.


No matter what you choose, make sure you have fun shooting it first and foremost. After all, isn't that what shooting is all about.

While I have never owned a 92f, I hear they are reliable. I do own two 1911s, and one of them is a Springfield Armory Mil-Spec. The Springfield is a great quality handgun for the price. I also CC this monster from time to time. It isn't as bad as you think. I use a Desantis Inner Piece IWB holster, it is very comfortable and you cant tell that I'm carrying anything. The Springfield is put together well with high quality parts, and I haven't had any mechanical problems. I did have to swap out my grips for something more aggressive, the stock grips were too smooth for a .45 ACP. I love gun discussions, so hit me up anytime.

Could go either way.
If the 1911 was a double stack I'd say get that.

I will also say that my Beretta is pretty uncomfortable for concealed carry.

I've always loved the design of the Beretta. If I had to choose it would be that.

Rogue Jedi wrote:While I have never owned a 92f, I hear they are reliable. I do own two 1911s, and one of them is a Springfield Armory Mil-Spec. The Springfield is a great quality handgun for the price. I also CC this monster from time to time. It isn't as bad as you think. I use a Desantis Inner Piece IWB holster, it is very comfortable and you cant tell that I'm carrying anything. The Springfield is put together well with high quality parts, and I haven't had any mechanical problems. I did have to swap out my grips for something more aggressive, the stock grips were too smooth for a .45 ACP. I love gun discussions, so hit me up anytime.

Have you ever used steel cased ammunition in it? .45ACp is getting to be expensive, and I got a rule that I go by when it comes to guns. If it can't run cheap ammo as well as the more expensive stuff, it's not worth my time.

I don't have any reloading tools just yet, so saving on the cost of ammo would really help me, if not that, perhaps some cheap brass ammo and I'll just save the brass.

Don't they make double stack 1911's now or will that gun even accept a double stack?I heard double stack 1911 mags hold like 13 or 14.

Either one's good really......I really dig the 1911.Never cared much for the 92FS.I'd rather have a Glock 17 or 19 or a Sig or even a Ruger P95 or something.

I'm sure a 1911 will take steel cased ammo,they're supposed to be reliable and I'm sure back in the day when they were made brass wasn't used mostly,or maybe that's commie guns I'm thinking of....

I do run steel cased ammo in it. Wolf and Tula. Sometimes the cases get messed up, but you can't reload those anyway so I don't care.

Para-Ordnance makes a double-stack 1911 called the P14. The mag capacity on those is 14+1. If you like Glocks, I just bought a Glock 21sf over the weekend. It is chambered for .45ACP, light as hell, and has a capacity of 13+1 with the stock mags.

I was thinking of getting a Glock 21 over the 17 or 19 9mm models because that's good capacity for a .45 and it packs a punch.

idk though really.I heard 9mm hollow points are formidable.

Really even a .22 to the head or heart is a kill so it's all shot placement

Dude awesome. I have basically that exact same Beretta. I also own a .357, so I much prefer to shoot that. Im a big guy, so the weight of the gun doesn't bother me personally. The Beretta is pretty small IMO, at least compared to the guns I own and have owned in the past. I used to own an old model 1911, but a gave it to a buddy as a gift. And I also just sold my Glock recently as well. The 9mm rounds are much cheaper obviously, but not as fun to shoot. I like recoil, power and love to feel that kick back. So the 9mm isnt to fun for me. I actually keep it in my glove box, and hardly ever take it out shooting. Its more of a personal protection firearm to me. My .357 is my fun gun!

With that said Id go with the Springfield 1911 every day of the week. Just my personal preference. But again, alot of it depends on comfort.

I'm wondering if it's worth it just to buy the cheaper brass stuff. I'm eventually going to be reloading when I've got the time and cash to get set up, may as well start stocking up on brass.

I like both guns, they're both comfortable to shoot, surprisingly enough, I didn't care for the Glock too much. It just felt funny in my hand, granted I only held one model, which its name escapes me.

I loved the power of the 1911, however, I'm also taking into account that if I ever meet a girl that likes or is willing to go shooting with me, I'd like to have something a little less intimidating for her to shoot. Then again, I got a friend who told me this earlier.

"I've got the solution to your dilemma! Buy both of them and call it a day, no fuss, no regrets." lol

My fiance shot my .357 and it was pretty funny. I warned her multiple times about the recoil and power of the gun. She was like "meh, how bad can it be?". Well two sprained wrists later she learned to listen to me haha.

Thats a tough choice. Beretta makes a fine firearm. But th M1911 has been, and still is one of the best guns on the market. Very reliable and very sexy.



I would take the M1911, but I don't think you can go wrong either way.

Not sure how much your SA1911 is going to run you, but I know Taurus makes some really nice looking and feeling 1911's. That's the next pistol I'm looking into getting. Never shot the Beretta, but I've shot a 1911. It's a much fun as one would expect! Besides, I love my .45 and it's just as much fun. A lot more power than a small 9MM.

Springfield Mil Spec M1911 average: $574-$630

Beretta 92FS Average: $567-$600

Not too much of a difference really.

The Taurus one I'm looking at is $837. They also have a couple pistols that look like the Beretta, but are .40's. They are roughly $530.

As for the two you posted about, yeah, that's really not a bad price for either one. I could go either way with that.

I'm thinking I may go the route of the Beretta, the recoil was certainly easier to manage, and since I can't reload yet, the cost of ammunition is already ridiculous. For 500 rounds of Tula steel cased .45 rounds is roughly $150+, a case of 500 rounds of Wolf 9mm is about $74.

Yeah, I can get nearly a thousand rounds for half the cost, which equates to more practice time at the range. Hopefully I can find a good deal on a Beretta near by or something.

geeze I didn't know it was doubled in cost -__-

Kinda the reason I'm looking more at the AK74 for the cheaper ammo like you said way back.It's only like 100 or so bucks for 1,000 rounds.

Since the cost is that high,I'll be going 9mm as well dude lol.

How did you like your AR15?Did it work good for you?Any add ons you bought for it?I was thinking of maybe building one myself.They're supposed to be very accurate

I've always felt a .45 had more controllable recoil.
9's have a sharp crack to them.

I fired a 45 once... hurt my hand and didnt want to do that anymore.

I found 9mm's to be a lot easier to handle.

My AR15 is a blast to shoot. Very accurate out of the box, way more accurate than I am. After about 10-15 rounds when I first got it, I was hitting targets out at 200-300 yards. Honestly, I'd advise buying a built one, if you're going for a basic model an not tricking it out, it's the best way to go, especially as an entry into the AR world.

The 1911 is heavier, so it's not going to recoil as bad if it's using traditional steel frames and such. Many 9mm use light alloys and or polymer frames or polymer coated parts, thus they are lighter and tend to have a bit more recoil simply because you don't have the added weight of steel to tame the energy transfer.

But the 9mm recoil is so negligible compared to the .45 that it's not a big deal, at least it isn't for me. I like both calibers, but the 9mm is just more cost effective at this time, even though I'd rather have the 1911.

I've seen Olympic Arms already complete assembled AR15 rifles brand new for 600 bucks for sale around here,but questioned their quality at that price.

I've heard some good things and bad things about using cheap parts in an AR.Some say you can use a cheap plastic lower since the lower receiver has little or no stress when firing,others say they pulled the trigger once and the cheap plastic trigger broke >__> .

I've kinda changed my outlook on stuff.I love AK's still,but the century builds I've heard of selling around here and just in general have about 10 inch grouping at 50 or 75 yards....I think that's horrible for a rifle.For up close I'd pick a shotgun any day,but farther out I'm thinking maybe AR15 ain't so bad after all

My best advice is don't go cheap on the rifle if you intend to have it for SD purposes. You'll regret it later. I can't remember if you were the one that has a thing against buying online or over the phone, but I highly recommend Stag Arms as a brand to look into. Great, well built rifles and are in the upper tier of the entry level rifles, you can't get any better than a Stag Arms for the price and quality IMO.

An AK or AR15 are overkill in most cases, you have to be careful about over penetration with both guns. If you're going to go for an AK, I recommend you save your money and get an Arsenal or Saiga, those are brands that are known for their quality of fit an finish as well as being quite accurate. More expensive to be sure, but you get what you pat for in the end.

I've also learned to develop my own views about firearms and try then out for myself if the opportunity arises. If you have the chance to rent an AR or AK do it, and try out as many different types you can, be sure to do extensive research on the model as well. Ultimately the gun needs to feel right for you, I for one don't really care for Glocks, the ones I've fired just feel funny in my hands. Doesn't mean they're bad guns, I just don't care for the few that I've actually fired.

Yeah that's true about what feels good.

Many have said Glocks have mushy triggers and I really wouldn't care for that....I heard like a Ruger P95 for example is great quality for the money tho ~$300

I'm not sure the rates on Sigs,but heard the Sig226 9mm I believe,is a great gun as well.

One thing for sure,I'd own every gun if I could lol I love all of em really,but can only really buy a few...

I was eyeing this 12 gauge pardner new england firearms pump at walmart,I read some good things about it and the company is owned by Remington anyway but apparently Remington is owned by some stock trading firm in china now anyway and the pardner pumps are made in china and some people have said they jam up...

I'll just go with a mossberg 500 most likely.I've seen them brand new for $220.The Maverick 88 is supposed to be good quality for the price but heard the fore-end seems rather flimsy and you can't change it out easily if you wanted to...although I'll probably just leave my shotgun stock.I wouldn't mind getting a Winchester 1300 again though...It has a rotating bolt like the AR15 and the action was very smooth.I didn't like the small slide release on it though

that's a shame that remington fell under in quality control and is apparently owned by china now....I heard they were very good back in the day but have fell off recently.

I'm probably going to catch flak for this, but Beretta. The 92fs is pretty fuckin reliable and has an outstanding service record overseas. Its grip may be bulkier with the double stacked mag, and that will take some adjustment, but the eight extra bullets and fire rate increase (d-action as opposed to s-action) will most definitely be a huge boon.

Yeah I wouldn't mind a Beretta.

Probably have a better trigger than a Glock and not much more money.

Taurus makes a Beretta 92FS clone for cheap,somewhere between 3-400 but dunno about the quality or reliability or record of them

Pariah wrote:I'm probably going to catch flak for this, but Beretta. The 92fs is pretty fuckin reliable and has an outstanding service record overseas. Its grip may be bulkier with the double stacked mag, and that will take some adjustment, but the eight extra bullets and fire rate increase (d-action as opposed to s-action) will most definitely be a huge boon.

Don't see why you'd get flak for stating a fact. Both handguns are great pieces of hardware, it's about preference really, both guns didn't exactly have a stellar history of being reliable at the start of their service, but those "teething" issues have been hammered out over the many decades they've been in service with various armed forces and law enforcement agencies around the globe.

Some people may not like the double action design since the length of pull will always be different when the hammer is not cocked. I personally had no problems with the DA/SA design, and I can shoot both types rather well. As I mentioned before, I'll eventually get both, but since finances will only allow me to get one at this time, I'll most likely be looking at the one that gives me the most "bang" for my buck, and that seems to be the Beretta 92FS

good choice man.Let us know how it turns out.I may indeed get one,one day as well.Or I may settle on a Sig or Ruger.Who knows lol.

I don't really have a dream pistol per se.So many look so good.My dream shotgun is probably Mossberg 590a with thicker barrel,heatshield,metal trigger guard,8 shot,better finish,and bayonet

It's also the standard issue side arm for the US Military, and usually issued to officers, particularly ones in the Air Force. So if I ever become an officer, I'll have some experience in shooting one lol.

There's a review on the Taurus model.Seems to be made just like a real Beretta but if you can get a real true military one that would be the top of the line then lol.

Nice This guy does a review on the 92FS and adds some history facts
as well. A really enjoyable watch, at least for me being the gun nut I
am lol.

Spoiler:

http://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Mossberg-500-Chainsaw-1.jpg speaking of gun talk,that has to be the dumbiest shotgun I've ever seen.Good luck trying to hit anything with that gimmick chainsaw shotgun plus flashlight lol and only pistol grip.Somebody is gonna get killed when they need that for defense one day.....I guess they're catering to the wanna-be call of duty crowd lol

Pariah wrote:I'm probably going to catch flak for this, but Beretta. The 92fs is pretty fuckin reliable and has an outstanding service record overseas. Its grip may be bulkier with the double stacked mag, and that will take some adjustment, but the eight extra bullets and fire rate increase (d-action as opposed to s-action) will most definitely be a huge boon.

I have pretty huge hands so a double stack grip is my preference.
I also prefer single action. I usually carry with one in the chamber and knowing it's safe if the hammer is down gives me piece of mind. This is the same reason I don't like carrying striker pistols (no matter how many safety blocks they have).

Plus I love cocking pistols to fire them. It only takes a little bit of practice and you can cock a hammer nearly as fast as flip a safety, but that first trigger pull is crisp like breaking glass rather than long and heavy (or worse, uneven or gritty).

That said my Beretta is DA. If (when) I get the custom work done to it that I've been planning on I will probably convert it to SA

Not sure what you mean about rate of fire though (unless you meant SA revolvers?). They fire the same (after the initial cock or DA trigger pull)

My hands are small for the most part, so it does take a little bit of getting used to gripping a high capacity gun. I don't intend to CC so I don't think the DA design will really bother me all that much, we'll have to see.

I'm pretty sure I'm set on what I'll be getting, but I am glad that I've got a name, brand and model of an M1911 that I'll eventually want to pick up. There is a great sense of history when you hold an M1911, 100 years later and that old grizzled war veteran is still being holstered by soldiers and law enforcement officers to this day, and may continue to serve for many years perhaps even decades to come.

Gah I hate being poor, I wish I was more financially secure so I could afford all the toys I'd like lol. Some day right?

My hands are kinda small too which is why I was leaning towards a smaller 9mm like a Glock 19 or from what I've seen the Ruger P95 and Sig 226 are rather small too

Both good choices, I've not had the chance nor the desire to shoot too many Glocks, I didn't care for the feel of the few I did fire. Not sure what it was really. May give them another chance in the future, I'd really like to try out a few of HK' guns, though those tend to be priced way outside my range.

SIG is good as long as it's not made in the US, SIG USA apparently has a bad reputation of making poor quality guns, though I wouldn't pass judgement until I handled and fired one.

JrTapia1991 wrote:My hands are kinda small too which is why I was leaning towards a smaller 9mm like a Glock 19 or from what I've seen the Ruger P95 and Sig 226 are rather small too

I recommend you go shoot a few Glocks before you buy one. They have a slightly different grip angle than other pistols. I can't hit the target paper let alone the target with a Glock.

...plus it's a striker. I always feel like I'm gonna shoot my balls off with a striker.

I don't remember, Glock' don't have any fire safeties right? I'm not super familiar with them so I can't remember.

1911 all the way

The Honey Badger wrote:1911 all the way

For some reason Badger, I read your name as "The Horny Bastard"

Anyway, yeah, I'd get the 1911 if it didn't cost so damn much to shoot it lol.

I guess I'm not seeing these high prices for .45 ACP due to my living in the South. .45 ammo is still pretty cheap where I'm at, even ordering it online and having it shipped to the house is reasonable. www.cheaperthandirt.com and www.ammunitiontogo.com are very reasonable with their prices and usually have specials on shipping.

Well, I'm also coming from an income that only earns me roughly 19k a year lol, so to me, I tend to cringe at anything about $10 (I'm also stingy like that in a way lol)

I rarely buy stuff for myself really, most of my cash goes into savings or to bills. This may change a little once I'm in the military of course.

If you're not planning on shooting it at the range all the time I'd get the M1911. Realistically you'll never have to use it for self defense, so ammunition cost isn't much of a problem.

If you plan to use it a lot, the beretta seems just as reliable but cheaper.

nah Glocks don't have external safeties.The safety is supposed to be on the trigger itself.

A lot of guns have started adding that trigger safety. My Ruger SR9c has that as well as a thumb safety. With that trigger safety the gun absolutely won't go off unless your finger has depressed that safety.

Interesting, I still like the positive click of a manual lever safety but that's just me.

Artimise Flare wrote:Interesting, I still like the positive click of a manual lever safety but that's just me.

Me too. I never liked carrying my Springfield XD9 simply because it had no manual safety and it's a striker. Even though it's supposedly one of the "safest" guns there is, trigger safety, backstrap safety and internal firing block safety I still always felt like it was going to shoot me in the balls at any moment.

I felt much safer with my Para 1911 even though the only safety it had was hammer down.

I don't remember if the M1911 was known to have issues with accidental discharges if the hammer was cocked and the gun dropped.

@Rogue Jedi

Yeah the price of .45 is still kind of expensive, at least for me. I order all of my ammunition from online so I don't know. I've shopped around and have found AIM Surplus to be one of the better sites to go to for surplus ammunition, though they don't carry steel cased .45ACP