notmetoo 41 Posted December 17, 2014 Beretta is offering this as an engineering change to their existing contract, not as an entrant in the Modular Handgun System (MHS) competition the Army just announced. Some nice changes, nothing earth-shaking though. Still want an Inox, but may need to get one of these once they offer them to the public. Beretta USA Presents Next Generation Handgun to the Department of Defense Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
checko 180 Posted December 17, 2014 A thinner grip sounds nice Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSD1026 48 Posted December 17, 2014 to me, the fatter grip is what makes it so much more comfortable.. sounds like a mix of a 92A1 and a Vertec (with a different color) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diamondd817 826 Posted December 17, 2014 Yeah, they re-introduced the Vertec with a new color...meh....nothing to see here... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Candyman87 10 Posted December 18, 2014 I like... gotta get my hands on that grip to see though. My girly hands can't get around a full size 92FS or M9A1 comfortably for one-handed operation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vlad G 345 Posted December 18, 2014 "offered" .. LOL. Hey I hear you are shopping for a different car, for our loyal customers ONLY we have this deal on a brand new version of your current car. No need for you to shop for another car! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gski1 3 Posted December 18, 2014 Spot on Vlad. That about sums it up Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
notmetoo 41 Posted December 21, 2014 Spot on Vlad. That about sums it up Actually, no. This isn't being offered as part of the Army's "shopping" for a new handgun. It's more like "We have a new version of the car you're currently leasing and can offer it to you for no change to your existing lease." To quote the article, "They are being submitted via an Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) in accordance with the terms of the current M9 contract." The M9A3 isn't a competitor for the MHS (at least, not yet. And I don't see it fitting the requirements the Army has put forward anyway). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vlad G 345 Posted December 22, 2014 Yeah right and the timing is complete accidental. Sorry I'm not buying that. Beretta would have no driving motivator to change a single screw thread pattern on the gun as long as the Army didn't express interest into something new. Oh yeah, and make it cheaper at the same time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scrap 4 Posted December 24, 2014 I also have a slight crush on the Beretta 92, always looked very sleek and Italian-sexy-smooth to me... I personally love the Inox. If the straight up 92F/FS etc came in Inox and also in .40 cal, I would own one. (i don't care for the rail on the sleek 92 myself but understand the military need) However, this new one is awesome, I think it looks great, I would totally rock this! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diamondd817 826 Posted December 24, 2014 ... I personally love the Inox. If the straight up 92F/FS etc came in Inox and also in .40 cal, I would own one. Like this one? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSD1026 48 Posted December 24, 2014 LOL.. Minor Details.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scrap 4 Posted December 24, 2014 Hey I obviously wasn't aware they were out, when I moved to FL in April I looked at Beretta's website and the only .40 I saw was black, could you link me to that? Also it had a rail , which while I am not anti-rail I am not interested per se in a railed Beretta, I would be purchasing it for the looks not the functionality and I like the looks of the conventional design. I only saw the 96 A1 in black. It's very nice, how much did that run you? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diamondd817 826 Posted December 24, 2014 Hey I obviously wasn't aware they were out, when I moved to FL in April I looked at Beretta's website and the only .40 I saw was black, could you link me to that? Also it had a rail , which while I am not anti-rail I am not interested per se in a railed Beretta, I would be purchasing it for the looks not the functionality and I like the looks of the conventional design. I only saw the 96 A1 in black. It's very nice, how much did that run you? They don't make the 96FS anymore, the only .40 available in the 92 platform now is just what you saw, the 96A1. Beretta seems to be moving away from the .40 round, they never released the .40 Nano either. 1 good thing that they are doing now is selling the straight dust cover frames again for the 92FS, which most people find more appealing. The slanted dust covers were made to handle the extra recoil of the .40 round, now they are gone, so is the slanted dust cover. The new Inox 92FS is a M9 (straight dust cover) frame that has been Inoxed(?). You could pick up a real nice used 96FS Inox pistols if you shop around. Usually around $500-$600 used. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
High Exposure 5,662 Posted December 27, 2014 Lipstick on a pig: Still has that stupid slide mounted safety, exposed hammer, and DA/SA trigger, and I bet that damned locking block is still in there. Sorry, Beretta, but there are better solutions out there. The M9/92 type may be a hell of a shooter, but it leaves a lot to be desired as a general issue combat pistol when compared to other available offerings. Hey, I have a good idea - Let's take the hardest weapon type to shoot (handgun) in its most complicated configuration (DA/SA with a decocker/safety) and issue it to the troops with the least amount of training time/opportunity in the army IMO - The Army should not be dumping money into a tertiary weapon system that typically aren't even issued to those that need it most and is responsible for <0.01% of Enemy KIA. Let those who truly require a sidearm choose what they want by unit. Don't force a polished turd on them. I would strongly prefer to see the issue of an M4 type PDW to troops that don't need a full size rifle by location or MOS. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vlad G 345 Posted December 27, 2014 I would strongly prefer to see the issue of an M4 type PDW to troops that don't need a full size rifle by location or MOS. My guess is it wouldn't be carried due to size. Think of all the doctors, officer staff, etc, they are not going to lug a PDW around, specially away from direct combat zones, but a light plastic hi-cap gun they might. The real problem is not the gun, it is the ammo, but it unlikely that problem will get fixed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
High Exposure 5,662 Posted December 27, 2014 My guess is it wouldn't be carried due to size. Think of all the doctors, officer staff, etc, they are not going to lug a PDW around, specially away from direct combat zones, but a light plastic hi-cap gun they might. The real problem is not the gun, it is the ammo, but it unlikely that problem will get fixed. Too bad. They are in the Army. Tell them to carry/ have within arms reach the PDW whenever possible or stand tall before the man. (I understand some jobs will prevent this at some times - ie: a DR in an OR) It's easier/faster/cheaper to teach someone to be proficient with a PDW than a pistol and the PDW will be more effective at pistol ranges. Ammo and mags are now the same across the board, easing supply issues. Win win The pistol has largely become nothing more than a badge of office for many. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vlad G 345 Posted December 27, 2014 Oh, I'm not disagreeing with the physics of it, I'm just guessing there will be a lot of people with lots of stars on they shoulders saying they don't want to be issue that "crap". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rauchman 3 Posted December 28, 2014 I REALLY like it. It tackles a bunch of "issues" that advance the platform. Dovetailed rear and FRONT sights Bevelled mag well Extended mag catch Comes with night sights The safety can easily be converted to a G configuration (decocker only) Will come with optional grips that wrap around the backstrap sort of mimicking the standard 92 grip frame I know a lot of people find the platform dated, but I've recently been moving back to my wife's 92FS with D spring, Elite II hammer and Beretta aluminum grips. My biggest gripe with the platform was the trigger being heavy. The D spring and Elite II hammer (less so), really have enhanced the trigger. I still love my Glocks, but I like the challenge of trying to master the Beretta platform. Also, the 92 series pistols are very accurate. I'm looking forward to the M9A3. I just got some permits a couple of weeks ago and will be holding one for this pistol. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DevsAdvocate 112 Posted December 28, 2014 The problem is: it doesn't meet the MHS requirements... the biggest ones being: * Loaded Chamber Indicator * Ambidextrous Thumb Safety * Ambidextrous Slide Release (not sure if the M9 has that) * Captured Firing Pin Assembly (not sure how the M9 is) * Captured Recoil Spring * Grip/size/caliber interchange-ability The last one is most important as the MHS is not only intent on replacing the M9, but the M11 pistol as well. The new gun needs to go from being a full-size down to a compact or subcompact depending on who uses it. US Army CIS, for example, might want a compact version they can carry concealed. Tank crews, pilots, etc. may want one for similar reasons. Officers and MPs might continue to use full-sized variants. Having the ability to change calibers is also a net benefit... the Army might not go away from 9mm now, but if it goes to a platform that can change calibers, then the logistics burden of doing so later is much less. The M9 doesn't allow that. Staying with that means staying with the 9mm, because any deviation from the 9mm means a whole new gun, and more procurement headaches. But a gun which can size up to 45ACP from 9mm doesn't need to go through that headache. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
High Exposure 5,662 Posted December 28, 2014 This is Baretta's attempt to go around the new solicitation. Provide an updated pistol on the same current contract. If they "improve" it enough the Brass may just cancel the request for a new weapon and continue on with the M9 family. Personally, I hope they don't, but I am sure that Beretta and I don't agree. Oh, and Army CID already carries a compact pistol, the Sig M11. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
notmetoo 41 Posted January 9, 2015 Well, so much for that: Army Rejects M9A3 Proposal, Opts for New Pistol Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
High Exposure 5,662 Posted January 9, 2015 Well, so much for that: Army Rejects M9A3 Proposal, Opts for New Pistol I am shocked I tell you, shocked! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vlad G 345 Posted January 9, 2015 You know what I REALLY dread? The day the Army picks their new uber pea shooter of doom in .456 MaximumDeath made by the highest quality European whatnot (by which I mean lowest bidder, or highest bribery) I'm going to have to watch every internet forum, everywhere, being swamped for a decade by a certain type of people who will do nothing but tell me that there is no better gun then their civilian version of the .456 HajjiStumper because the US military uses it. I'll have to see remakes of every 80's cop movie, and I just hope we don't see a return of Mel Gibson's hair in Lethal Weapon. Quite seriously, I don't think I'll be able to browse the gunweb for a few years. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
carl_g 568 Posted January 9, 2015 We need a lazer pistol! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
67gtonut 847 Posted January 9, 2015 Disappointing..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
High Exposure 5,662 Posted January 9, 2015 We need a lazer pistol! Phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
remixer 1,645 Posted January 9, 2015 67GTOnut whats with the Signatures LOL Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rob0115 1,105 Posted January 9, 2015 Phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range. Terminator? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DevsAdvocate 112 Posted January 9, 2015 Disappointing..... Why? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
