Beretta 92X Performance A new pistol

I just saw an advertisement for the relatively new Beretta 92X Performance pistol.
Apparently, Beretta announced this pistol a few months ago and they are slowly becoming available.
I haven't been able to find one to check out around here yet. Every place I called within 100 miles had sold the one or two the had gotten in.

It is a variant of the Beretta 92 that has several new features that solve the issues I had with the original 92fs.
It has an all steel frame.
The safety is on the frame and works like the safety on a 1911.
The trigger is vastly improved.
It has adjustable sights with a fiber optic front.
The grip has been flattened on the backstrap.
It still uses the 92fs magazines.
Ambidextrous safety.
Flared magazine well.

Reviews, of which there are several, say it is a fine shooter.
It seems to be intended for competition shooting but would still be an excellent pistol for general use.
It is a little cashy with a selling price near $1300.

Anybody here own or handled one?

looks good https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxDi3VQYda0

That looks awesome.

Everything listed sounds like a great improvements, just not at this price point for me.

I'm sure glad they fixed that hump on the backstrap but at the price for this pistol on the new M9, they can keep them.

It looks like Beretta is trying to capture a little more of the market by using as much of an existing platform as possible.

The alloy frame on the 92 is fine but a steel frame might add a little speed to follow up shots due to the higher weight.

I actually like the safety on the 92 but 1911 devotes have always shunned slide mounted safeties. I don't think either side of that debate has the high ground - it just comes down to preference.

I'm not sure how Beretta could improve the trigger on the 92 series. It's a decent DA trigger and the SA pull is about on par with most DA/SA designs.

An adjustable rear sight may be a good feature on a target gun. A fiber optic front sight doesn't do much for me.

The flat back strap - again , attempting to appease the 1911 crowd.

Uses model 92 mags - that was smart of Beretta

Ambidextrous safety - nothing new there

Flared magazine well - Most double column magazines taper to a single feed point at the top. I've never seen a need to flare the mag well when dealing with a double column magazine. The opening in the bottom of the frame is already twice the size of the top of the magazine.

$1300 for all of that? They lost me there. There are a lot of high capacity 9mm pistols that will fill that role for less money. That upper is nearly identical to any other 92 with the Brigadier slide.

They claim the double action trigger pull is right at 6lb with the single action pull at 3lb. That is a lot better than the 92FS I had. Reviews I have seen confirm those numbers.
For me, the fiber optic front is easier to pick up quickly with my old eyes.
I like to have all the basic controls on my pistols to work the same way. The 92FS safety works backwards of everything else I own. I want it to work for me so I don't need to think about which gun I picked up in a pinch. I carry my 1911 coked and locked. If I push the safety down on a 92FS, it will decock the pistol. The 92X will work just like a 1911.
I like the idea of a steel frame for a number of reasons I won't go into here.
I agree with your opinion of the flared magazine well. Not necessary but nice touch.
Having the back strap flat may help with my grip on the gun. I have fairly short fingers. The flat backstrap may help with that. I won't know until I get to handle one.

I don't know if the improvements are worth the money either. A Good custom pistol is going to be expensive no matter which one you start out with. That is what you essentially have here.
Many wouldn't blink at paying $2000 or more for and STI or Les Baer.
It is also a little less money than a Springfield armory 1911 TRP which would be a good gun to compare it to.
It would be hard to say the Beretta 92 is an unproven design.

It's priced close to some of the CZ 75 target models .

Why not single action only?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Texas by God

Why not single action only?

---

you get a do over:guntootsmiley:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Texas by God

Why not single action only?

---

Ever have a cartridge that didn't quite chamber and when you dropped the hammer on it, it finished chambering but did not fire? Or a primer that did not quite get seated?
Double action allows for a second hit that may be enough to make it fire.

There may be some games out there where people have to start with the hammer down. A good double action pull make that scenario a lot better.

I don't see that 92X as a carry gun. It appears to me to be a competition gun. That being said, it's an expensive toy.

A Browning Hi-Power would fill the role except for the lack of DA

A CZ75 would fill the role with DA !

A S&W 5906 would fill the role.

A Walther P-88 would fill the role but it would be 3 times the cost :shock:


I like the Beretta 92 series and I don't want to come across as being overly negative but I would need to have a very specific role for that pistol before I would lay out $1300 for what is essentially a Brigadier with a steel frame.

Petrol & Powder

I agree 100% it's no carry gun but looks like fun range toy and like you said at $1300 not going to run out and buy one
I do like the 1911 style safety better then the *** backwards one that's on the 92fs and I do like the steel frame and the fact that it will
use the 92fs magazines but the price point is a deal breaker for me for what I would use it for

Beretta really was aiming this new 92X series at the competitive shooting sports market, more specifically USPSA/IPSC. Make no mistake, that is why this series exists. The reason for the DA/SA is so it is legal for USPSA Production Division rules. The CZ Shadow2 has really swept Production & Carry Optics off its feet with a lot of people buying those. Beretta is trying to get a slice of the pie. They are making the 92X in three flavors, a Production gun, Limited, and Open Division guns. They are gunning for this hard, enough so they got Grand Master shooter, JJ Racaza to join the Beretta team as captain and to shoot the 92X open gun. That's what it is all about! The X series is tuned to meet Division requirements.

I like to shoot my handguns. A lot.
I am 6 foot tall and overweight. My hands, fingers, and wrists are getting worse with arthritis. My trigger finger was broken at the middle joint when I was 16 and has never worked quite right since. Lighter triggers are essential for me to shoot accurately. The strength and control to pull a heavier trigger(think DA revolver) in anything like a proper method will never be there.
Couple that with my deteriorating eyesight, and I have a situation where I need to look at triggers, sights, and gun weight a bit differently than most.
I have to live and deal with my drawbacks. Yes, I am getting old.
The idea of a heavier pistol with a great trigger pull and fiber optic sights that puts less recoil strain on my hands is attractive to me. My arms and shoulders are still strong enough to support a heavier handgun with no issues.
The five pound plus triggers that most "defensive" pistols come with are impossible for me to shoot well or even "good enough". It seems my magic number is right at 3.5-4 pounds. Above that , and I begin having issues.
If I can't shoot a handgun well(by my standards), I will not attempt to use it in a defensive situation.
I have tried many smaller, easier concealed handguns and found them universally difficult for me to shoot comfortably or well. The only smaller handgun that comes close to filling that niche for me is a S&W model 60 in 38 special. I shoot it single action nearly all the time.
I own revolvers, 1911 pistols, and several other brands of semi-auto handguns and have tried many others as the opportunity arose. The standard "service" size pistols and larger seem to be the ones I shoot best and am most comfortable shooting provided they have good triggers. Comfort equates to more practice time which make me a better shot.
I am willing to spend some money on a pistol that fits my requirements. If it is a "competition" pistol, fine. I have no problem with that. Competition pistols are designed to be accurate, reliable, and easy to shoot as well as comfortable.
Sounds like my kind of handgun to me.

Tazman have you had the opportunity to shoot a CZ rami , out of the box the trigger is mediocre but with a carry kit from Cajun gunworks the DA is right at 6lbs the SA is 3lbs they can be had with frame mounted safety or a decocker a really easy to shoot small gun . The compact CZ 75 is all steel and responds equally well with Cajun parts.. sorry I can't help it I am a big CZ fan .
That Beretta looks and sounds like a gun I would like much better than the 92 I had.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by onelight

Tazman have you had the opportunity to shoot a CZ rami , out of the box the trigger is mediocre but with a carry kit from Cajun gunworks the DA is right at 6lbs the SA is 3lbs they can be had with frame mounted safety or a decocker a really easy to shoot small gun . The compact CZ 75 is all steel and responds equally well with Cajun parts.. sorry I can't help it I am a big CZ fan .
That Beretta looks and sounds like a gun I would like much better than the 92 I had.

---

Nobody in this area, no gun stores that have ranges and rentals anyway, have any CZ handguns either new or used. I haven't seen anyone using a CZ at the range I infest either.
So I guess the answer is no, I haven't had the opportunity to fire or handle one.

We have a similar appetite for handguns I to like heavy guns with good triggers..
If you ever pass through Oklahoma City give me a holler and we will go shoot.
The duty grade CZs have duty grade triggers but are easy to upgrade to excellent , the shadows I have shot come with really good triggers and a grip that feels excellent to most people.

The 92X performance is what the Beretta 92 should have been all along. Perfection

Another vote for a CZ-75 derivative if a 1911 safety, steel frame, DA, with no decocker is what you're after.

My biggest peeve / source of "meh" on the 92 is the Walther P38 rear-only lockup without the P38's benefit of the front sight being directly attached to the barrel. The CZ, Glock, or any other Browning derivative at least try to lock the slide to the muzzle. Unless they gave it some other form of match treatment up front, I'd have doubts about match accuracy retained after wear.

At any rate, they ditched the "arched mainspring housing" of the original, meaning that it will probably point low for me just like a WWI .45 does. None for me thanks. YMMV.