Which is better...92FS or PX4?

[cyborg]

Aside from the classic Beretta 92fs being all metal and the PX4 being polymer what are the pros and cons of each when compared?

[maidenrules29]

I've never shot a 92 but I own a PX4 in 9mm and it is an excellent gun. The rotating barrel system makes it a very smooth shooter and I have had zero issues with it after about 800 rounds of many different types of ammo including +p

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T377A using Tapatalk

[maidenrules29]

The safety/de-cocker on the PX4 isn't for everyone though, as it has a rough edge at the point of contact. I've heard many ppl file it down or replace them with 92 or M1 parts.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T377A using Tapatalk

[cyborg]

The rotating barrel design is pretty cool. Which barrel length do you have? I'm eyeing the compact PX4 with a 3.2 inch barrel.
Also, how would you compare it to a G19?

[Red-Osier]

I can't stand the look of the PX4.

[Steponmytoes]

92fs - proven design used by military, law enforcement agencies around the world for the past 30 years. Passed numerous torture tests, has been known to run 10,000+ rounds reliably with just basic maintenance.

Px4 - err, not so much ...

[cyborg]

92fs - proven design used by military, law enforcement agencies around the world for the past 30 years. Passed numerous torture tests, has been known to run 10,000+ rounds reliably with just basic maintenance.

Px4 - err, not so much ...

good point

[SonOfaDI]

I have the non roster px4 compact and it is great. Soft shooting. Good ccw, sorry but it replaced a Glock. Beretta has several options for decockr/safety including a user serviceable conv to decocker only with very thin levers. Depends on what u r going to use it 4. Home defense =92, ccw= either px4 or px4 compact.

[cyborg]

I have the non roster px4 compact and it is great. Soft shooting. Good ccw, sorry but it replaced a Glock. Beretta has several options for decockr/safety including a user serviceable conv to decocker only with very thin levers. Depends on what u r going to use it 4. Home defense =92, ccw= either px4 or px4 compact.

hmm, yeah, the 92 is a bit big and heavy for a CCW gun. I don't have a CCW but I like the idea of having a gun that's good for both HD and CCW if the SHTF. Hard choice to make.

[IVC]

I have both (sort of, 92 is Compact Inox) and have shot both as factory and after upgrades. The PX-4 is a G conversion with stealth levers and Trijicon sights, while 92 went to Wilson for "the works" including G conversion (more complicated than on PX-4) custom hammer, grips, sights, trigger work, etc.

I really like them both, especially since they are both now G models and both have low profile levers. These are the two most common complaints about either gun.

If you have to chose, they serve different roles so I wouldn't compare them directly. What would you rather shoot at the range, light polymer or heavy steel?

[IVC]

I have the non roster px4 compact and it is great. Soft shooting.

There are compact and sub-compact models and at least the sub-compact doesn't have the rotating barrel design, IIRC. How does the compact work?

[cyborg]

I have both (sort of, 92 is Compact Inox) and have shot both as factory and after upgrades. The PX-4 is a G conversion with stealth levers and Trijicon sights, while 92 went to Wilson for "the works" including G conversion (more complicated than on PX-4) custom hammer, grips, sights, trigger work, etc.

I really like them both, especially since they are both now G models and both have low profile levers. These are the two most common complaints about either gun.

If you have to chose, they serve different roles so I wouldn't compare them directly. What would you rather shoot at the range, light polymer or heavy steel?

I enjoy either at the range, so I don't think I can use that as a differentiator.
Which has a better trigger?

[missiontrails]

I would never take a PX4 over most of the other polymer options out there, as they are just not designed to last. Don't take that from the casual range shooters who have 200-300 rounds through theirs, take it from the actual ranges that rent guns.... ask them how often the PX4's go down. On paper a nifty design though. So, 92 for me all the way. The PX4 would definitely not be a SHTF fan option either. Look at it this way... the 92FS is proven.... let's explore another angle.... if society imploded, and you had one last chance to grab one of two pistols that are sitting on a table, a G17 (or G19) vs a PX4... what are you reaching for?

[IVC]

After modification there is no question - Wilson tuned 92 trigger is very light and smoooooooooth.

As for factory trigger, I believe they were comparable, with 92 being a bit smoother in DA. It might be that is just felt more "solid" compared to polymer. In SA, 92 had a crisper break. PX-4 felt like a polymer.

If it's down to trigger, you absolutely have to go and try them both at a local store. They are pretty common so you shouldn't have problem finding a place where you can try them both side by side.

[cyborg]

I would never take a PX4 over most of the other polymer options out there, as they are just not designed to last. Don't take that from the casual range shooters who have 200-300 rounds through theirs, take it from the actual ranges that rent guns.... ask them how often the PX4's go down. On paper a nifty design though. So, 92 for me all the way. The PX4 would definitely not be a SHTF fan option either.

That's a big factor. Sounds like 92 wins. Thanks all for the inputs.