It was a nice enough gun. Very comfortable to shoot, but I just couldn't figure out how to work the safety without removing my off hand from the grip. Am I just clueless, or is there a way to do it?
No, welcome to the world of Beretta. I have yet to shoot one of their products that didn't require me to change my grip to operate the safety.
That's why I got rid of mine. The safety was just too much of a PITA to use. Other than that I enjoyed shooting it.
I had a PX and sold it to buy a Taurus Millenium. I hated that gun for the exact same reason -- will never own another Beretta.
It was interesting shooting this gleaming, dewy fresh, modern, whizbang, polymer gun juxtaposed to my scuffed up 54 year old workhorse Colt that draws blood every time I shoot it. It was like a modern, Italian super car with gigabytes of computerized traction control, GPS, and carbon fiber break pads vs. a '69 Camero ZL1. The Italian super car was pretty and fun to drive, but I like my ZL1 much better.
I think that but for a few things the PX4 could have been a run away success. They took the rotating barrel concept and just about made it work, better than anyone else has so far IMO. Some of the problems I saw with it was the safety issue we are discussing. Sorry but I shouldn't need that much effort to manipulate a safety. They should get away from the slide mounted safeties and go with the frame mounted safety. I.e. crib from John Moses Browning. Next up were the sight mounts. Apparently Beretta decided to make the mounting process the exact opposite of what everyone else is doing. This has resulted in quite a few mangled slides by smiths who are unaware of the differences. Finally their customer service dropped the ball big time. There were a fairly large number of early model pistols that were experiencing something that was called "trigger sting". As far as anyone could guess it was some sort of harmonic back feed from the rotating barrel that was expressed in the trigger. This harmonic was painful for many. Short of the long there were lots of unhappy owners and Beretta's customer service basically told them all that they were crazy and that they would not get any repair work out of Beretta. Those were the reasons I dumped mine despite the fact that I enjoyed how it shot.
Well, the fact that you have to alter your grip to work the safety makes it less than useless as a defensive handgun IMHO. Actually, I take that back. It's not IMHO. it's a goddamn fact.
I was forced to carry an M9. Safety wasn't a problem. Actually, neither was the mag release. But that is because I'm left handed. So I'd come back and punch the mag release with my trigger finger. If I were right handed (or the smith flipped the release button like he offered to), I'd have to shift my grip to get at it with my thumb. That and the piece of shit jammed every time I unloaded it, over in the desert. I don't care what anyone says about faulty magazines or whatever, my opinion of the M9 is that it is a piece of shit. I would take my S&W Highway Patrolman .357 over it in a heartbeat.
An M9 doesn't have a safety, it has a decocking lever. As you will only be manipulating it right before and after you holster it, why should grip matter?
Because it's an extra step that requires fine motor skills. Can you draw, unsafety, and fire two aimed shots with an M9 in under two seconds? I know I couldn't do it if I had to unsafety it with my off hand before I ever grip it. On the other hand, when you draw a 1911, the safety is off by the time you present.
Kind of glad I bought a Taurus PT92 over the Beretta. Safety is on the frame, not the slide. I mean, besides the fact I was still in college and couldn't afford the Beretta. However, I find it a fine handgun. Wouldn't carry it though. Too big and heavy. The IWB kydex holster I used for awhile made it look like I had a tail.
You aren't understanding me. An M9 doesn't have a safety. What you are thinking of as safety is actually a decocking lever. As it will only be manipulated right before you holster your weapon, and then immediately afterword it is holstered, there is no need to worry about your grip.
Oh. I understand. However the gun that I fired had an actual safety. You couldn't fire it until you took your left hand off the grip and disengaged the safety.
Never saw the need for a safety in a DA pistol, anyway. Don't think I'd ever use one if I did. Ask any revolver owner.
You're splitting hairs. It is a switch you flip that exposes a red marker. Until the red marker is exposed, bullets won't come out of the clip and make holes in what you want to make holes in. It is a safety. Of course because it is an M9, if you are in dusty desert conditions if you need to take an unarmored HUMVEE anywhere only one or two bullets will come out of the clip even with the safety off.
Let me ask a stupid question. I've never shot a genuine M9. That is, one with .gov markings. I did carry a 92FS for the first three months of my LE career (I went running to a Sig P226 ASAP). One of my favorite people in the world is Detective by day and a E-8 in the ALNG on weekends. She carries a 92FS as a LEO and a M9 in the Guard. I know both my and her 92FS' has genuine manual safeties. She told me both weapons were identical.
I have a Beretta 92FS (identical to the M9 in all but a few superficial ways) and I've relied on it as my primary self-defense arms for many years, even though I own several more "modern" polymer-framed pistols. It's accurate, reliable, and has plenty of firepower. Needless to say, I like it. My only complaint about it is that it is VERY HEAVY for what it is. A Glock or S&W M&P in the same caliber is considerably lighter. This would make a BIG difference if I could carry, but, since I can't, the extra weight is no bother.
