Gun Hub

Go Back   Gun Hub > Gun Forum > Handguns

View Poll Results: Is benefit of .45 cal worth trading my Beretta for a 1911?
Yes 13 56.52%
No 10 43.48%
Voters: 23. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-30-2005, 09:39 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 654
Opinions: Beretta 92 vs 1911

I currently have a Beretta 92FS. My Dad and I went to the range yesterday because he wanted to get a new pistol. I have a 92 FS and he ended up buying a SIG P220 (stainless).

I shot my Beretta at the range and I shot the P220. The .45 cal (which I shot for the first time) really wasn't any problem for me at all in terms of kick and the accuracy was nice.

After seeing for the first time the .45 cal bullet next to one of my 9mm it really put into perspective the size and stopping power difference. My 92 is very accurate and so was the P220.

Anyways, it made me start to want a .45 cal more and more and I think I would go with the SA 1911 mil-spec (earlier I was wanting a .45 either the 1911 or P220) since my Dad got the P220.

Is the trade off in caliber worth trading my Beretta and getting a 1911? What about the limited 7 rd capacity? Opinions please. I will be using the pistol for target practice and concealed carry.

I really can't afford to get both right now, so it would have to be one or the other.
M1A_Owner is offline  
Old 01-30-2005, 09:53 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 256
You can get an 8rd clip for the 45. I once saw a power comparison done between the 2 weapons in foot-pounds. Take the no. of rounds for ea. and multiply the ft-lb available per round. The 45 becomes even more impressive when done this way. You can also get 10 & 15rd mags in 45 for the range, but are rather bulky for concealed carry.
oneshy is offline  
Old 01-30-2005, 09:56 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: California
Posts: 316
I tried a wide variety of guns before I bought any of my own, thanks to my friends. One guy among other items in his collection, had both the Beretta 92FS and a Colt 1991A1. I shot the Beretta a few times had fun shooting it, but didn't really knock my socks off. But the first time I shot his Colt, I knew it was the gun for me. The 1911 felt the most natural in my hand, compared with everything else I had tried. I didn't feel much of a difference in recoil between the two, and I was more accurate with the Colt. Given the above, the capacity difference didn't really matter to me. So shortly after I bought my first gun, a 1911, and got started on the path of addiction.
chickenfried is offline  
Old 01-30-2005, 10:06 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 654
The size of the .45 ACP bullet just looks awesome. I don't see how it COULDN'T stop somebody in their tracks with one shot. It's like shooting somebody with baseball!

Over on the Beretta forum (and others) there is a lot of talk about the drawbacks of the 92FS(M9) in Iraq. Reliablity not so good (maybe bad magazines), little stopping power, and troops have no confidence in it. They are considering replacing it, that is telling me something right there (possibly with a .45 or .40).

I am hoping I could get an even trade, my Beretta for a SA Mil-Spec (parkerized).

Any more opinions on this debate?
M1A_Owner is offline  
Old 01-30-2005, 10:36 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 256
I read in Soldier of fortune mag a few years after the change to the M9 that they had a very low opinion of it based on frame and slide breakage due to the loop design of slide over barrel. I believe that it was in "Handguns" mag that I read their critique of the stress test that the replacements for the 45 were put through. Seems the M9 failed while the 45 and Glock17 were the only prospects to pass the test. The reason the M9 was chosen was to save money. Seems that between the time of Berettas original cost estimate and the time of selection the Lire had taken a drastic fall and they were able to buy them for an equivalent of $165.
oneshy is offline  
Old 01-30-2005, 11:35 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LaPoint, Utah
Posts: 1,365
You have an advantage over the Military guys when it comes to the M9.
A: You can pick the best ammo for it. While 9MM does take a back seat to .45 in terms of bullet diameter and weight... Civilians can choose to use hollow points of different sorts. The Army gets Ball only. There is another thread about "is 9MM good enough". Yes, it is. Sure, .45 does twice the damage when you compare ball to ball or HP to HP. But the truth is that 9MM HP is good enough. Especially when you consider them like M&Ms. You don't just take one. You take a few. Ammo capacity is a factor, and it tends to favor those with the most ammo. Yet we know only hits count. So a dozen misses with 9 doesn't equal a single hit with a .45. And vice versa of course. You can furiously miss with 8 .45's and it is all meaningless.
So let me ask you this.
Are you good with your Beretta? Can you make multiple rapid hits into the 10 Ring of a B-27 target at 15 paces? Seriously, can you? Yes or No?
Because if you can't then switching to a .45 isnt going to improve anything unless this 92 is too big for your hands and you are not able to shoot it well. I'd suggest contacting an NRA shooting coach to observe your shooting and show you how to improve.
Now, if you can... the why change? You'ld be going to a differnt platform, different trigger, different grip angle, all on top of the different caliber. You would have to start all over again learning the habits of your new set up.
Back to the AB thing... B: Civilians get to use whatever magazines they want. You can find bad mags, and replace them with good ones. Bad magazines has indeed been an issue with the M9's over there in the sand box. So mags are not an issue for civiilians. You dont just have someone hand you your gun and two mags that you have never seen before and be expected to go about your duty with confidence. My Brothers over there are given only 2 mags... thats it. One in the gun and one reload. Sounds nuts to me, but that's the way the Army is doing it where they are at. They don't have a choice and they are not allowed the use of other mags. You however can. Is that a huge advantage? Indeed it is.

All this is pretty much beside the point now. You have a Jones for a .45 and it is going to gnaw on you until you get one. Try if you can to avoid trading your 92 in on a 1911... you just might discover the grass wasn't as green as it looked. But by all means, go get your 1911 because until you do, you will not sleep well. It will itch you at the back of your mind until you scratch it.
So go... go get that 1911. And then avoid the kneejerk reaction of regarding the new gun as if it was the most fabulous object in the world.
I know sometimes that is very difficult.
Mad Ogre is offline  
Old 01-30-2005, 02:25 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Tenn
Posts: 973
Quote:
Originally Posted by M1A_Owner
The size of the .45 ACP bullet just looks awesome. I don't see how it COULDN'T stop somebody in their tracks with one shot. It's like shooting somebody with baseball!
Be careful with all the hype about "stopping power". I refer you to a recent article in the FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, on the myth of the one shot drop, "The officer shot the individual four times in the chest; then, his weapon malfunctioned. The offender continued to walk toward the officer. After the officer cleared his weapon, he fired again and struck the subject in the chest. Only then did the offender drop the knife. This individual was hit five times with 230-grain, .45-caliber hollow-point ammunition and never fell to the ground. The offender later stated, 'The wounds felt like bee stings.'"

http://www.fbi.gov/publications/leb/200 ... tm#page_15
JRWnTN is offline  
Old 01-30-2005, 06:31 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 654
Thanks for the advice Mad Ogre.

I have owned my 92 for over 3 years now and it is my only handgun. Once I fired that .45 I REALLY liked it. I am not really one to buy and trade and change a lot. What I'd really like to do is keep the Beretta and buy the 1911

I can see the plan forming now in my mind HELP ! I want the .45 so bad.
M1A_Owner is offline  
Old 01-30-2005, 07:03 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Columbia, SC, CSA/USA
Posts: 2,245
I am not going to waste my time here telling how awful the M9 Beretta performed when I was issued one while in Iraq 2 years ago.

Go with the M1911. You won't be disappointed.

BTW, I own an Italian M92FS made in 1989, and a 1944-vintage Colt M1911A1 (and a Series 70 Colt .45 ACP Govt Model, heavily modified and for concealed carry). I carry the Colt .45 auto for carry. Beretta might be nice as a police weapon, but definately not for military use. They sux, period.
bren10man is offline  
Old 01-30-2005, 07:07 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 256
Patience Glasshopper. I felt that way about a Luger. I was given some good advice as I am an internet auction nut. Patience, patience. If you are observant and patient the opportunity will present itself, and you'll have both.
oneshy is offline  
Old 01-30-2005, 07:19 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,362
Basically, what Mad Ogre and Bren10man said.

Is the 1911 good enough to carry? Possibly. I wouldn't bet my life on a Sproingfeld until it had / has PROVEN itself. It's a dice roll out of the box. Not that I don't make all carry pistols prove themselves, but I'd make a Sproingfeld DOUBLE prove itself. Mine needed repeated trips back.......

The Sproingfeld is also a bit harsh on the skin in a Summer Special. Nothing too evil, just needs some polishing down of the sharp edges.

The Beretta can be a good piece, depending more on you than anything else. I carried one for a while, and competed with another. I just never did like the double-action versions, so I got mine selective SAs

There IS another choice you know....... Get your hands on a Glock 37. You may just enjoy it enough to say bye-bye to the 1911 LOL!

For police / CCW, the 1911 is a good pistol. I carried a Colt Officers ACP for a LONG time, and have carried Government models as well. They're reliable enough for CCW or police, in my experience, unless they're Sproingfelds.

A Glock is reliable enough for ANYONE, in ANY kind of conditions.

At least that's what my experience is LOL!

-Bravo
Bravo762 is offline  
Old 01-30-2005, 07:45 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 654
After checking out the 1911 forum I have my sights on a Kimber Custom II 1911. They seem to go for about $500-$600 (about the same as the SA) with far less reported problems. SA's do seem to have plenty of reported problems, of course I have an SA M1A so I am familiar with them.

Any opinions on the Kimber 1911's?
M1A_Owner is offline  
Old 01-31-2005, 06:51 PM   #13
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Glen Ellen, Northern Ca.
Posts: 68
.45 vs 9mm

Mr. M1A Owner. You've heard lots of good advice from all who have replied. It comes down to this: You seem to not mind the recoil increase of a .45 over a 9mm. A Kimber is an excellent choice for a 1911/clone combat pistol. And bigger is ALWAYS better in self defense, provided that you can hit what you're shooting at. One .45 hollow point will acomplish more even if its a hit on the edge of your target than a nine will. (how many documented stories of multiple 9mm hits on an assailant, who still managed to shoot back and hit the good guy do you need to hear?)Get the Kimber .45, practice like hell, and have confidence that if you hit your target square, fight's over! (the one who lives to talk about it wins)
stryker is offline  
Old 01-31-2005, 07:25 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Chubby Pigeon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 1,720
Here's a general synopsis of what I have learned from this board over the past couple of months, regarding self-defense with a handgun.



First, let me get this out of the way: Nothing hand-held is a reliable stopper.

Here's why: bullets don't get enough speed up to reliably produce the amount of shock necessary to quickly disable someone by virtue of impact alone until you get into rifle, or at the very least heavy magnum handgun, velocities. Even then, you can miss a vital area, and the guy will just keep coming.

Do you know how long a human being can live and actively fight after their heart has been stopped, by one method or another?

15 seconds. The average 9mm handgun holds that many bullets, and can be fired once per second, even by a relatively unskilled operator.

There is no such thing as a hollywood, man-flying-backwards, one-shot kill from a center-mass hit, unless the target takes a psychological cue from the GSW and thinks "I'm dead." If they do that, then they might slowly sink to their knees or something... or get royally pissed off and charge you like a madman.

The only one shot stops from a pistol come from severing the spinal cord, or putting a bullet through the brain, and neither of those things are somethign to rely on. Why? It doesn't matter how bad you think you are, you will NOT retain fine muscle control once you put a sweaty hand around your gun's grip, and realize that there is a very good chance that someone is about to die, and that moreover, that the someone in question may be you.

Whatever gun you get, learn to hit-slowly. Then learn to hit quickly. Then learn to hit even more quickly. Then learn to reload quickly and hit some more.

Don't be eager to actually fire your weapon in self-defense. Learn what kinds of situations your state has upheld in the past as being acceptable for use of deadly force. Much of the time, just presenting the weapon will diffuse the situation without anyone having to fire, anyway. If it doesn't though, and you one day find yourself required to actually pull the trigger...

pull it again, and again, and again, and again, and don't stop pulling it until John Q. Thuglic positively cannot shoot back.



That's what I've learned here, so far. Now then, I'd like for a LEO, or maybe Dean or somebody to assess my post, because it's sort of what I'm planning on using as my rules of engagement, and I want to know if it sounds effective.

Thanks.
Chubby Pigeon is offline  
Old 01-31-2005, 08:04 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LaPoint, Utah
Posts: 1,365
Sproingfelds. That's funny, because Springfield is my 1st choice for a 1911 out of the box. You know that do make more than just the cheap entry level "Loaded" model don't you?
Mad Ogre is offline  
Old 01-31-2005, 08:17 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 280
If you shoot the Beretta good then keep it.

Ive never had any problems with them, so I like em. 9mm generally has a higher capacity, lower recoil, increased barrier penetraion, flatter trajectory and less price compared too .45ACP. Those are all things I like, on top of that its decent at putting down 2 legged animals too.

9mm and .45ACP ball perform very similar in humans. In all varieties the .45 will make a larger hole, if that gives you a warm fuzzy feeling than go for it.

I usually follow the idea that one round may miss or not stop the attacker and most handguns are poor stoppers. If i'll be putting 2+ rounds in every target then having more rounds is better than less.
JimBoB is offline  
Reply

  Gun Hub > Gun Forum > Handguns


Search tags for this page
1911 vs 92fs
,

1911 vs beretta 92

,
1911 vs beretta 92fs
,

92fs vs 1911

,
beretta 92 or 1911
,

beretta 92 vs 1911

,

beretta 92fs vs 1911

,
beretta m9 vs 1911
,

beretta vs 1911


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Opinions on Springfield 1911 FS Lightweight Bi-Tone? M1A_Owner Handguns 3 09-14-2006 07:28 PM
Opinions on this 1911 Audie Handguns 21 12-08-2005 09:10 PM
WTT: Wilson Combat 1911 mags for Les Baer 1911 mags triggerman Accessories 1 08-05-2005 01:49 PM
Opinions: So how did I do? DK M14 6 05-29-2005 11:41 PM
1911 Bobtail Opinions? GunMonkey Handguns 7 05-19-2005 07:12 PM




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2002 - 2014 Gun Hub. All rights reserved.