should i get rhe glock 17 or beretta 92fs please help!

[Harrisracing]

One more thing. All the Glock fanboys are going to LOVE the next demo gun I build. Seriously...love it and hopefully some will come back to this thread and re-read it from my point of view instead of getting so defensive after I show it off

 

[madwabbit]

never mind. im just gunna watch.

 

[olivs260]

Sounds like he wants it to throw in his truck and forget about. Do your fabulous metal guns have problems with rusting? I'm asking that as an honest question. I've never owned any Beretta.

 

[JR1572]

I think your signature is deceiving...in fact I do think you care very much!

I don't have to justify myself to you at all, but I will. My brother is a veteran of warfare and did carry an issued Beretta. Killed all the people he had to to do his job with it...even if that number was zero.

I am a professionally licensed mechanical engineer and being educated in that I'm sure there are applications for metal and applications for plastic in all regards. In my so educated opinion, I believe that a metal frame on a pistol adds to the rigidity of the pistol in a way that plastic cannot. In my previously cited example, the frame is being utilized as a scope mount...would you use a plastic scope mount on a rifle? I'd hope not! maybe for a light, but definitely not a laser or optic. IN this example (the example that I cited), the metal wins. Quit trying to distract from my comments by taking ONE line out of context.

IN the "going to combat" example I will say that a pistol should probably be lightweight due to the fact that it will likely almost never be used. Rifle is the tool of choice for sure, so bring whatever pistol you want because there's a slim chance it would be needed.
Back to my other LEO example - Lightweight, reliability, and short range are the considerations...range is no longer a consideration...plastic is the favored flavor I'm sure. That and it's CHEAP to make plastic stuff in comparison. I would never buy a plastic HK...waste of money, buy a Glock.

I wouldn't say "common", but neither were plastic guns at one point. BUT, It is an option. I think Lasers are pretty common though. And if you put a laser on a glock frame you will notice that you can change it's location from shooting from a rest or grabbing it in different positions / left thumb push etc.

6/10 of this list are metal frames...no clue on production numbers of each in active duty to date. This is ONLY ACTIVE pistols currently in production. And as always COST is a driver and plastic is cheaper. If you look at the list overall including active frames surely metal will dominate because of advancements in polymer are pretty recent. Would love to see a Russian Bakelite glock copy though LOL.

In active service (some branches or limited roles)

Mk 25 Mod 0 (SIG P226 Mk25, 9x19mm) (Naval Special Warfare)
M9A1 (Beretta 9x19mm) (USMC)
MEU(SOC) pistol (.45 ACP) (MEU(SOC))
Kimber ICQB (.45 ACP) (USMC MARSOC)
Mk 23 Mod 0 (.45 ACP) (USSOCOM)
SIG P229R DAK (.40 S&W) (USCG)
M1911A1 (.45 ACP) (Army, Marines, USSOCOM)
Heckler & Koch HK45C (.45 ACP) (Naval Special Warfare)
Glock 19 (9x19mm) (USSOCOM, DEVGRU)
Glock 22 (.40 S&W) (Delta Force)

Lots of sources as quoted on WIKIPEDIA. Knock yourself out digging around to check it.

I agree, that's why I own a bunch of them, But to answer the OP's question, I would get a Beretta (or Taurus), model 92xx of his choosing. There's always a place for a Glock (or 5), but I like shooting metal guns better to be honest. Maybe I wouldn't want to pack one in all my gear while carrying an M4 or an AK, but surely they are fun to range shoot and are good enough defense.

Another thing I noticed about the list. It is dominated by .45's! Hmmmm interesting.

One more thing. All the Glock fanboys are going to LOVE the next demo gun I build. Seriously...love it and hopefully some will come back to this thread and re-read it from my point of view instead of getting so defensive after I show it off

You win Bayoushooter today. I'm just an end user, not a "professionally licensed mechanical engineer" like you.

I'm bowing out. I should know better by now...

JR1572

 

[Harrisracing]

You win Bayoushooter today. I'm just an end user, not a "professionally licensed mechanical engineer" like you.

I'm bowing out. I should know better by now...

JR1572

Bowing out of offering your opinion to the original poster on which gun he should buy? All I did was offer my opinion of which one he should buy as well

 

[JR1572]

Bowing out of offering your opinion to the original poster on which gun he should buy? All I did was offer my opinion of which one he should buy as well

I gave it already.

JR1572

 

[Harrisracing]

Sounds like he wants it to throw in his truck and forget about. Do your fabulous metal guns have problems with rusting? I'm asking that as an honest question. I've never owned any Beretta.

The one I linked to is stainless.

 

[Harrisracing]

And one more thing about the metal rail and the frame mounted optic.

My next demo gun is going to be a glock 17 converted to full auto. I am not using slide mounted optics because the slide will pretty much be in full motion all the time. I am using a mako tactical stock for Gen 3 glock as well. Thus the reason why frame mounted optics will be better for my application. I have the gun, stock, and optic mount, just waiting on the full auto switch.

 

[US Infidel]

^ so to the OP; get a plastic Glock 17. See even he^^ likes them.

 

[Poorboy504]

Sounds like he wants it to throw in his truck and forget about. Do your fabulous metal guns have problems with rusting? I'm asking that as an honest question. I've never owned any Beretta.

The fabulous metal Beretta has an aluminum alloy frame, so it will rust as fast as a Glock's polymer frame.

 

[cmb88]

i have shot the 92fs before (love it, i have big paws and it fits niiiccceee) i have never fired a glock though this would be my main home defense and doing a lot of shooting at the range gun. i just recently decided to start beefing my pistol collection up(i only own 4 22,25,380 and the highest caliber is my keltec p-11 i bought to cc) been handling guns(hunting) my wholelife i just really got into pistols and now im obsessed but i dont want to break the bank on my first full sized caliber. the fact that only 10 dollars is the difference in price between the two doesnt help either lol.

 

[cmb88]

i didint want to just grab the 92fs because i have shot a mag or 2 out of it and later think the glock might have been better. thanks everyone so far some of these facts yall are discussing i didnt know so im learning, and weighting the pros and cons of each no body is making the decision besides me i just want the knowledge ya'll have, i mean if yall even think another pistol would be better for me throw it up here with some facts. Thanks again

 

[US Infidel]

You said a Glock would be your main house gun? So just go get one. Even Harris who is pushing metal frames, is building a Glock; what's that tell ya?

 

[Harrisracing]

You said a Glock would be your main house gun? So just go get one. Even Harris who is pushing metal frames, is building a Glock; what's that tell ya?

If you go back and read my FIRST post you will notice that I have lots of Glocks. I'll add to that by saying I have lots of Taurus', Sigs, various 1911's, FN's, Rugers and probably some I forgot about. I offered an UNBIASED opinion based on what I own and that is all I did to get attacked and now be labeled as some kind of Glock hater...which is very funny to me. No one asked "how much quieter is the factory threaded G17 than the Sig SP2022 with the Tirant 9 on it?" after my post. Instead they disregarded that and asked where I have been in combat?! I think it's funny!

But to the absolute plastic fantastic die-hards: Do you think plastic IS the best material for a pistol frame? What if Glock made a titanium or carbon fiber glock that was just as lightweight as their plastic but a stronger, more rigid firearm? Do you think it would be BETTER than a plastic injection molded frame? Let's be fair and let's imagine that it still would say "GLOCK" on the side. Sure it may cost $2k when they are done, but would you think it better than plastic?

 

[madwabbit]

If you go back and read my FIRST post you will notice that I have lots of Glocks. I'll add to that by saying I have lots of Taurus', Sigs, various 1911's, FN's, Rugers and probably some I forgot about. I offered an UNBIASED opinion based on what I own and that is all I did to get attacked and now be labeled as some kind of Glock hater...which is very funny to me. No one asked "how much quieter is the factory threaded G17 than the Sig SP2022 with the Tirant 9 on it?" after my post. Instead they disregarded that and asked where I have been in combat?! I think it's funny!

But to the absolute plastic fantastic die-hards: Do you think plastic IS the best material for a pistol frame? What if Glock made a titanium or carbon fiber glock that was just as lightweight as their plastic but a stronger, more rigid firearm? Do you think it would be BETTER than a plastic injection molded frame? Let's be fair and let's imagine that it still would say "GLOCK" on the side. Sure it may cost $2k when they are done, but would you think it better than plastic?

It was more about you saying that glocks are ill-suited for combat when many of those that have been in combat carried glocks. While overseas, we saw polymer guns. Ask anyone issued one and they'll tell you the primary reason provided is that metal guns are poorly suited to prolonged use without cleaning or maintenance. Additionally, polymer guns generally hold more rounds and weigh less, both in the pro category.

Glock is what it is because of its capability and reliability, and I for one would pay more than they ask. Colt, from my own experience, had a price tag at roughly triple and couldn't get a single box of ammo through it without hiccups. I own many different brands and styles, just providing my own unbiased opinion.

I listed the issues with metal guns, tell me your faults in polymer? And no, your field test of adjusting my grip does not affect my surefire... did you install it harder than hand tight?

 

[Hattrick 22]

These threads might do better as a poll..

 

[Harrisracing]

It was more about you saying that glocks are ill-suited for combat when many of those that have been in combat carried glocks. While overseas, we saw polymer guns. Ask anyone issued one and they'll tell you the primary reason provided is that metal guns are poorly suited to prolonged use without cleaning or maintenance. Additionally, polymer guns generally hold more rounds and weigh less, both in the pro category.

Glock is what it is because of its capability and reliability, and I for one would pay more than they ask. Colt, from my own experience, had a price tag at roughly triple and couldn't get a single box of ammo through it without hiccups. I own many different brands and styles, just providing my own unbiased opinion.

I listed the issues with metal guns, tell me your faults in polymer? And no, your field test of adjusting my grip does not affect my surefire... did you install it harder than hand tight?

Read it again. I said very clearly "I WOULD RATHER...." First post of mine in the thread. This one line was taken from context and even you misconstrued it as me saying a glock is not fit for combat...I never said it. I would rather metal. Navy Seals clearly would rather metal. US Sky marshalls prefer metal. Call me crazy if you want to but I own them all (other than HK's which I can't justify paying that much for plastic) and prefer metal.

Let me finalize this one more time as saying IN MY OPINION, the Glock 9mm series of handguns are great firearms and well worth the money. ALSO IN MY OPINION, the Taurus and Beretta 92xx 9mm series of handguns are great firearms and well worth the money. I do NOT own any .40 cal guns at all so I cannot comment on them from experience, but I am sure both are well suited for the OP's needs.

 

[madwabbit]

Read it again. I said very clearly "I WOULD RATHER...." First post of mine in the thread. This one line was taken from context and even you misconstrued it as me saying a glock is not fit for combat...I never said it. I would rather metal. Navy Seals clearly would rather metal. US Sky marshalls prefer metal. Call me crazy if you want to but I own them all (other than HK's which I can't justify paying that much for plastic) and prefer metal.

and to teach their own.

The delta guys at bragg always, always, always had a g19 and would promptly ask you about carrying anything else. The flight crews at pope always had glocks and refused to carry anything else. The only seal I know retired in 2000, and he does own .45's and said he prefers metal guns. He does miraculous things at the range with his 1911. That being said, his edc is a g19 and his nightstand gun is a g17.

This is my only experience with any of that reputable list, but for me personally- it trumps what I read on the internet. Not sayin I'm right or you're wrong, just parroting my experience vs an open source wiki site.

 

[JCcypress]

There is some minor flex in Glock lower receivers, and we can all nit-pick at unfavorable features about any pistol. The plastic receiver isn't a selling point for me- The overall package is what is important in the long run. The Glock design has fewer buttons and switches and levers than most of the "non-plastic" pistols that I have encountered. This means that the end user has fewer fine motor movements to deal with when operating the pistol. Just draw, present, bang. The manual of arms is based on gross motor function. The gun fight veterans that I have discussed this with agree that this is a favorable model for the simplification of training and execution in combat. I am a big fan of having as few variables as possible.

I have personally witnessed the reliability of the Glock platform by participating in numerous classes in which Gen 3 and Gen 4 Glocks were the most popular pistol on the range. If I do the math, I can (very) conservatively estimate that I have witnessed over 100,000 rounds being fired from Glocks. Of those 100,000 rounds, I'd say that I have witnessed maybe 35 actual malfunctions (FTF, FTE). Another conservative estimate would blame ammo on half of those malfunctions, which would indicate that in my experience, the Gen 3 and 4 Glock platform has about a 00.0175% failure rate in classes that I have been a part of. Even if we assume that I am crazy and triple those numbers, that is a level of reliability that I am comfortable staking my life and that of my family on. Conversely, I have watched many other platforms fail, sometimes catastrophically during these same classes.

I don't find "accuracy" to be an issue on modern pistols produced by the major manufactures, even though I constantly hear guys at the range say things like, "That X isn't as accurate as my Y" when all they did was pick up X and fire 10 shots at 10 yards all over the target. If X wasn't as accurate, then your shots would still be neatly grouped, just off of the target. What they mean is, "I'm not used to shooting X and that's why my grouping looks like ****." Unfortunately, the gun community is also an Alpha Male macho community, so most guys don't want to admit when they come up short with a gun- instead of blaming their lack of training and proficiency, they blame the gun for being "less accurate."

Combine the simplicity of operation and reliability of the Glock with the extremely broad range of parts, accessories and upgrades available for the platform, and it's difficult for me to come up with a reason not to choose it as a combat weapon. I don't use lasers or wraparound frame mounted optics on my defense weapon because I think its unrealistic to think that I will have time to put a laser pointer on someone before shooting, and a frame mounted optic sounds like a nightmare to holster and/or carry.

To answer your question though, yes, I'm sure that a $2,000 space age upgraded Glock would be "better" than a $400 used Glock off of Bayoushooter, but I also think you'd be getting into a realm of diminished returns.

 

[nolaradio]

Back to the original question...

Of the two brands mentioned, I would purchase the Glock for the following reasons.
Lower cost.
More available accessories.
More support from dealers/gunsmiths.
More capacity. Those extra two rounds might save a life.
Smaller frame and lighter weight. Easier to conceal if needed.

If I had money to burn, I would get them both. But then again, wouldn't we all buy all the guns we wanted if money were no object?