Beretta M9A1 or Springfield .45

rugermarksman · 10-17-2006, 07:08 PM

I am still indecisive about my next purchase. I am either going to buy a Beretta M9A1 or a Springfield Armory M1911-A1 (Mil-Spec).
I am planning to do some target shooting and pin/tactical shooting.
I know the .45 has the knockdown power but there's just something about the Beretta.
All opinions welcome!
PS. Which ever one I get first I will have the other one by next year(hehehe)

Agent006 · 10-18-2006, 01:54 AM

Hmm... it really is sort of a question of the modern U.S. sidearm versus the classic. The Springfield faithfully recreates the WWII-era .45 aside from the little saftey lock device on the mainspring housing. I have noticed a thread on here before where a guy had some problems with his magazine, but Springfield builds a quality gun and stands by it as far as I know. And, I might add that the .45 1911 is probably the most satisfying automatic pistols I've ever fired. The G.I. .45 is bone-stock military issue with no extra frills which is just the way I like it. Only thing odd is the one I handled, I noticed the magazine catch has to be depressed for you to insert the magazine but maybe there are alot bulit that way and I'm just not used to it. The safety was really stiff, too. Probably too stiff for a carry gun.

The Beretta offers you high capasity and low recoil in a package that's said to be improved even over the already popular M9. This is probably your better choice for tactical shooting and a 9mm's stopping power is honestly pretty good regardless of how one might compare it to the .45. I'm sure the M9A1 can handle the hotter +P and perhaps even +P+ loads which are nothing to sneeze at. However, I have heard complaints about Beretta's customer service and it might be more troublesome to have your Italian lady repaired under warranty than your trusty .45. But overall, it's a nice handling weapon with a very professional feel to it and handles really well.

If I were in your shoes right now, it would probably be the .45 for me but mainly because earlier this year I too was faced with a difficult decision and had to get a L-frame S&W .357 Magnum instead of the Springfield G.I. .45. I do enjoy my fire breathing six-gun, but I sure felt like a dog for having to leave the .45 behind!

Trey45 · 10-22-2006, 01:23 PM

I just got a Beretta 92F that came with the 96G slide as well (40sw) I'm VERY happy with the performance of this pistol, regardless of which slide I have on it. The 9mm magazines have 15 rounds, the 40sw magazines take 11. The 9mm shoots closer to point of aim than the 40sw does @ 50 yards. At 25 yards point of aim is dead on with both slides. I've shot the M9 Beretta, it's identical to my 92F. I've also shot the Springfield .45 and liked it very much, but for a primary defensive weapon I'd choose the Beretta over the Springfield any day. With the Springfield you're "stuck" with .45acp, the Beretta's ability to accept different slides and magazines, giving the shooter 2 different calibers to choose from(3 if you buy the .22 conversion) makes it a better deal, in my humble opinion.

Rockh0und · 10-29-2006, 11:31 PM

If it were me...which it will be soon. I'd get the Beretta. I love to shoot 'em. We recently built a Combat Pistol Range and every time I run it I get the using unit to let me shoot against their top shooter if they have any extra ammo. I can drop 8, man sized targets. Ranging from 25m out to 41m in less time than it takes to tell it. That is one sweet little side arm. (I haven't lost a match yet) Plus I like to close my eyes and see how fast I can take 'em apart and put 'em back together. With practice 10 seconds seems like an eternity.

10-17-2006, 07:08 PM	#1
rugermarksman Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Southeastern CT Posts: 57	Beretta M9A1 or Springfield .45 I am still indecisive about my next purchase. I am either going to buy a Beretta M9A1 or a Springfield Armory M1911-A1 (Mil-Spec). I am planning to do some target shooting and pin/tactical shooting. I know the .45 has the knockdown power but there's just something about the Beretta. All opinions welcome! PS. Which ever one I get first I will have the other one by next year(hehehe)

10-22-2006, 01:23 PM	#3
Trey45 Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 244 Images: 3	I just got a Beretta 92F that came with the 96G slide as well (40sw) I'm VERY happy with the performance of this pistol, regardless of which slide I have on it. The 9mm magazines have 15 rounds, the 40sw magazines take 11. The 9mm shoots closer to point of aim than the 40sw does @ 50 yards. At 25 yards point of aim is dead on with both slides. I've shot the M9 Beretta, it's identical to my 92F. I've also shot the Springfield .45 and liked it very much, but for a primary defensive weapon I'd choose the Beretta over the Springfield any day. With the Springfield you're "stuck" with .45acp, the Beretta's ability to accept different slides and magazines, giving the shooter 2 different calibers to choose from(3 if you buy the .22 conversion) makes it a better deal, in my humble opinion. __________________

10-29-2006, 11:31 PM	#4
Rockh0und Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Ozark Mountains, Arkansas Posts: 91 Images: 1	If it were me...which it will be soon. I'd get the Beretta. I love to shoot 'em. We recently built a Combat Pistol Range and every time I run it I get the using unit to let me shoot against their top shooter if they have any extra ammo. I can drop 8, man sized targets. Ranging from 25m out to 41m in less time than it takes to tell it. That is one sweet little side arm. (I haven't lost a match yet) Plus I like to close my eyes and see how fast I can take 'em apart and put 'em back together. With practice 10 seconds seems like an eternity. __________________ :gangster: The essence of war is violence. Moderation in war is imbecility - John Fisher

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

10-18-2006, 01:54 AM	#2
Agent006 Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: South Carolina Upstate Posts: 179 Images: 10 Blog Entries: 1	Hmm... it really is sort of a question of the modern U.S. sidearm versus the classic. The Springfield faithfully recreates the WWII-era .45 aside from the little saftey lock device on the mainspring housing. I have noticed a thread on here before where a guy had some problems with his magazine, but Springfield builds a quality gun and stands by it as far as I know. And, I might add that the .45 1911 is probably the most satisfying automatic pistols I've ever fired. The G.I. .45 is bone-stock military issue with no extra frills which is just the way I like it. Only thing odd is the one I handled, I noticed the magazine catch has to be depressed for you to insert the magazine but maybe there are alot bulit that way and I'm just not used to it. The safety was really stiff, too. Probably too stiff for a carry gun. The Beretta offers you high capasity and low recoil in a package that's said to be improved even over the already popular M9. This is probably your better choice for tactical shooting and a 9mm's stopping power is honestly pretty good regardless of how one might compare it to the .45. I'm sure the M9A1 can handle the hotter +P and perhaps even +P+ loads which are nothing to sneeze at. However, I have heard complaints about Beretta's customer service and it might be more troublesome to have your Italian lady repaired under warranty than your trusty .45. But overall, it's a nice handling weapon with a very professional feel to it and handles really well. If I were in your shoes right now, it would probably be the .45 for me but mainly because earlier this year I too was faced with a difficult decision and had to get a L-frame S&W .357 Magnum instead of the Springfield G.I. .45. I do enjoy my fire breathing six-gun, but I sure felt like a dog for having to leave the .45 behind!