Accuracy of a 92FS?

Discussion in 'Beretta Forum' started by unioncreek, Aug 14, 2013.

  1. unioncreek

    unioncreek New Member

    60
    0
    0
    I'm looking for a 9mm to use at our local semi auto target league. I've always liked the look of the 92, but am curious how accurate they are for target shooting?

    Bob
     
  2. trip286

    trip286 New Member

    18,658
    1
    0
    They're accurate enough, but they're not a target gun. If this is a fairly informal group of friends shooting to see who buys the beer later in the evening after the guns go away, you'll be fine. If this is no kidding real competitive target shooting, you'll need to sink more money into a gun and a ton of ammo for practice.

    On that note, a shooter that's more accurate than their gun is a rare thing indeed. Your best bet is practice, practice, practice...regardless of the gun you shoot.

    I shot expert in the Marine Corps with the M9. Had only ever picked one up that morning. It has a fat grip that's terribly hard for me to hold with my small hands, and a bore axis higher than what I like, leading to what I felt was recoil that was ridiculously out of proportion to the caliber. Between that and the fat grip,I was ready to throw the God damned thing by the end of the day.

    The tiny Puerto Rican girl next to me on the line loved the gun.

    Individual mileage varies.
     

  3. CrazedJava

    CrazedJava New Member

    848
    0
    0
    I agree it is not a target gun, but as a combat handgun it's pretty darn accurate.

    The first time I shot a Beretta 92FS (The only Beretta 92 style I've shot) was the same time I fired an old Colt Government model. It was also my first time shooting 9mm. We were shooting at empty soda cans. The old Colt was knocking them down and I was doing ok. Don't remember the distance, probably 20 feet or slightly less.

    When I shot the Beretta I was getting really frustrated because nothing seemed to be happening. When I emptied the first magazine I went to go pick up the one can that was knocked down and realized the other two were full of holes. Apparently I was actually shooting better with it than the Colt, but those 9mm's just whizzed through while the .45's were knocking them over.

    The 92FS was the first gun to show me what it meant when a gun was more accurate than the shooter. However, it's been pretty damn rare that I've fired anything else. Overall, it's not my cup of tea for reasons I'm not going to get into, but they seem like good accurate guns and I've personally known two police officers who chose to use a 92 model as their service weapon.
     
  4. Overkill0084

    Overkill0084 Active Member

    4,910
    2
    38
    It'll probably do ok. If/when you get serious about accuracy, there are better, though costlier options.
    In any competition discipline, the best way to decide what to use is to go watch a match and see what the really good shooters are using. It's a good way to determine if you can really afford it. ;)
     
  5. shipwreck

    shipwreck New Member

    336
    0
    0
    I have seen past magazine reviews of 2" groups at 25 yards. That's not bad.

    There is a guy by the screenname of "WAL" at the Beretta Forum. For a fee, he can install a bushing on your barrel. Lots of members there are doing it. It increases accuracy.
     
  6. hawkguy

    hawkguy Well-Known Member

    4,973
    49
    48
    hmmm...maybe i'm just not as serious as some of y'all....but i always thought my 92 was as accurate as most any pistol i have shot.....certainly never felt the glocks or sigs or s&w's, etc in a comparible caliber were any noticeable amount more accurate....

    but again, my n my friends normally shot at cans and such vs accuracy competitions....:p

    i was just shooting at the range with a friend and my new 92 compact....he was all over the place with his new pistol and then he proceeded to take my 92 and place bullet on bullet....just at 7 yards, but he still shot FAR better with my beretta vs his s&w...and so did i....:)

    i dunno....i have never gotten the accusations on the beretta apaprently having poor accuracy......in fact i had never heard it until just recently...:confused:

    only guy i ever personally heard bash the beretta 92 was an ex military guy...he said they shot awful....but then turned around to admit he had not idea how old or how many rounds or how badly his service berettas had been abused...so i kinda dismissed it a bit...
     
  7. therewolf

    therewolf New Member

    8,409
    1
    0
    My accuracy is:

    target 22s,

    DE44,

    92FS,

    Everything else.
     
  8. Jagermeister

    Jagermeister New Member

    6,811
    0
    0
    Never belonged to a target league, but competed in plenty of competitions. 92s make a fine comp. gun. I use to have an Italian manufactured 92 that did me proud on the German circuit. I also competed with a Colt mark IV series 80. Liked it even better. The best gun I ever competed with is my presently owned Sig Sauer P226r. Sigs make excellent competition guns.
     
  9. jrfusatf

    jrfusatf New Member

    160
    0
    0
    New gun owner purchased the 92FS now has 2400 rounds able to group 10 shots at 10 yards around 4 inches, it's the first shot that gets me long trigger pull after that no problem. 51 years old from NJ, can't wait to shoot it , great gun thinking about getting the PX4 sub-compact any input would be welcomed, thanks.
     
  10. trip286

    trip286 New Member

    18,658
    1
    0
    The accusations of really poor accuracy coming from former military are because of maintenance issues and **** ammo.

    My gun was worn, but in good condition. My ammo... we had to "police" our bullets. I kid you not, we had to walk down range and pick up our bullets where many of them punched through the paper, bounced off the backstop, and settled in the dirt.

    As I said, I shot expert too. But I could see my bullets flying downrange.
     
  11. jjones45

    jjones45 New Member

    839
    0
    0
    I had one once and I could shoot a smiley face on a silhouette target at 30 feet. Wasn't perfect like Mel Gibson in lethal weapon but you could def tell it was a smiley face. Dang I miss that gun. So yeah I would say its pretty accurate.
     
  12. ponger

    ponger New Member

    4
    0
    0
    Out of the box new, 92's are capable of 8 inch groups at 50 yards with quality (match grade) ammo. As they get a few rounds down the pipe (1000+) the locking block and slide wear and the barrel no longer locks up as tight and the groups begin to open.
     
  13. Mercator

    Mercator Active Member

    11,342
    15
    38
    This is an oldish thread, but I just now noticed it.

    For some reason there is no love for the 92F/M9. Urban lore: Not too accurate - false. The slide is prone to cracking - false. Italian ones are better than U.S. - false. The Army was stupid to switch - false. It is an excellent all-around traditional full size DA/SA combat pistol. It can compete with any such pistol in the same class.
     
  14. Wiseman3

    Wiseman3 New Member

    1,206
    0
    0
    I remember the first time I shot the M9 qualifying, hated that gun. As time went on I began to love that gun. One day I'll buy me my own M-9 because I miss it. Pissed off I passed on a chance to get one surplus for 350 before I got out.
     
  15. Wiseman3

    Wiseman3 New Member

    1,206
    0
    0
    Forgot to add first time qualified sharpshooter 2 points from expert. So even though I felt uncomfortable with it it was still accurate enough for me to get my ribbon.
     
  16. SSGN_Doc

    SSGN_Doc Well-Known Member

    6,925
    53
    48
    Slides were cracking at one point in their life, as we're locking blocks. As noted by the Marine armorers and Navy Gunners Mates that I knew. The slides and locking blocks from Maryland had varied away from the heat treatment process utilized in Italy. Once they returned to the old method. Problems have become less frequent. Also a slide change was made to help keep the slides in one piece longer if they cracked to keep from injuring the shooter.

    Some urban legends still continue but they were based in some fact from certain lots of Beretta USA guns and parts.

    Still a great pistol overall. I'm old enough to have shot some pretty heavily worn 1911s and to have deployed with M9s. I've shot both in fleet pistol matches and placed with both. The M9 or 92FS is pretty capable as a service match pistol, though the 1911 has some competative edges with a short single action trigger and a bullet that is fatter to have a higher probability if cutting a higher scoring ring.

    My first pistol purchased when I turned 21 was an Italian 92FS. Still have it, won't sell it.
     
  17. Mercator

    Mercator Active Member

    11,342
    15
    38
    Forgot another imaginary flaw to the 92F. The open slide scoops up dirt and jams. I think every time, what's in it to you as an armed civilian, let Army worry about it.

    It is ironic that of all small arms across the iron curtain, the M9 enjoyed the widest "missile gap" compared to its soviet counterpart.
     
  18. JonM

    JonM Moderator

    20,110
    15
    38
    Compaired to a 1911 ill take the 1911 for accuracy. I own both.

    First issue runs slides cracked and would shoot rearwards right off the frame into the shooter's face causing injury.

    The military was stupid to switch. They went from a decades reliable design that both men and women of almost any handsize could use well to a pistol that is very difficult for people with smaller hands to hold operate and shoot well. Seen it for myself in actual use. I was part of the switch over and troops that had smaller hands preferred the 1911 as it was easier to use and hit with.

    In its class of da guns the m9 is excellent but its outclassed by the 1911 as a combat issue goto war handgun.

    I carry a m9 as a ccw and i carry a 1911 as a ccw interchanging from time to time for variety. Unlike the military im not restricted to fmj rounds in the 9mm which is the weakpoint in the discussion. In terms of fmj the 45acp is a big big big winner in effectiveness. Only when you use restricted to militiary hollowpoints of modern design does the 9mm become an effective defense round.

    Thats the real issue in the 1911 being stupidly replaced by the m9
     
  19. dalefan88

    dalefan88 New Member

    388
    0
    0
    I'm a better shot with my 92fs than any of my other hand guns. One day a buddy of mine was laughing at me shooting my bersa ultra compact cause I was all around the bullseye. So I said ok and pulled my 92fs and shot out the bullseye. That shut him up.
     
  20. bluez

    bluez Well-Known Member

    1,639
    60
    48
    I just shot expert in the Army last Wednesday with this gun.
    I hadn't touched it in in many years but do a lot of shooting on my own albeit with revolvers.

    In order ot be confident i would shoot expert I spent the previous evening with a rental M9 and did about 170 rds thru it.

    This helped me the next morning beause I discovered an idiosyncrasy i have with the M9 that my POI always seemed low.

    I corrected it that evening but adjust my POA and it was fine.

    next day on the Army range the gun shot quite well for me.

    As a revolver guy who believes in the superior accuracy of revolvers I was somewhat surprised that it shot maybe 80% as well as my GP100 .

    For it's class, as being a service semi-auto loading Pistol, its accuracy quite decent IMO
     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2013