Beretta’s 92 Compact INOX Model.
For more information, visit https://www.beretta.com/en-us/92-compact-with-rail-inox/.
To purchase on GunsAmerica.com, click this link: https://www.gunsamerica.com/Search.aspx?T=Beretta%2092%20Compact.
You never forget your first… gun.
My first “real” handgun was a Beretta 92 FS. If you’re not familiar, it’s become kind of a classic 9mm pistol, especially since a variant, the M9, was adopted as the standard US military sidearm back in 1985. You remember that year, right? The worst song ever (We Built This City) tortured the airwaves like a mutant virus, movies only cost $2.75, and rib eye steaks were just $3.89 a pound. Except for that song, it was a great year.
To this day, my trusty Beretta 92 FS is among my favorites. Well used, with holster wear on all the rights spots, I can pretty much guarantee that it’s never going to leave my “go-to” collection. In fact, I’ve bought a second threaded barrel so I can shoot it suppressed and added Crimson Trace Lasergrips to modernize it a bit. Given my good experience with the full size 92 FS, I was keen to try the new and smaller 92 Compact model.
The Beretta 92 Compact INOX (top) shown above a 92 FS full size.
The 92 Compact comes in two flavors: a Bruniton black finish like my 92 FS and stainless steel-style INOX. A brushed, matte finish, it looks somewhat like unpolished aluminum. In fact, the stainless-color finish on the slide and barrel almost exactly matches the brushed aluminum finish of the frame. It’s not gaudy and shiny, but rather functional. You won’t see glare from the surface, and it does a great job of hiding the wear and tear of everyday use. With black grip panels, a black rear sight, black hammer, and black operating controls, it also looks great. Let’s take a closer look.
[one_half]
The contrast between the brushed stainless and aluminum and black looks great on this pistol.
[/one_half]
[one_half_last]
A Picatinny rail allows attachment of lights or lasers. This is a difference from the pre-A1 series models.
[/one_half_last]
SPECS
- Chambering: 9mm
- Barrel: 4.25 inches
- OA Length: 7.75 inches
- Weight: 31.6 inches
- Grips: Synthetic
- Sights: Post and notch
- Action: DA/SA
- Finish: Inox
- Capacity: 13+1
- MSRP: $800 (Inox)
The Beretta 92 Compact Tour
The Beretta 92 Compact is a classic double-action / single-action pistol. From an uncocked status, the first trigger press cocks the hammer and releases it, hence the “double-action” description. Recoil from the first shot cocks the external hammer for the next, so the second trigger press is much lighter and requires much less travel distance.
Like most other Beretta pistols, this one features a combination safety and decocker lever. The frame-mounted lever, accessible on both sides, safely decocks the hammer with a downward stroke. However, it also disconnects the trigger when activated, so the trigger moves back and forth freely. So, technically, it doesn’t “lock things up” like a traditional frame-mounted safety, but it effectively accomplishes a similar purpose.
[one_half]
Even without the magazine pinky rest I could (mostly) get all fingers on the grip.
[/one_half]
[one_half_last]
The stainless front sight housing contrasts well with the black rear sight – it was fast to acquire.
[/one_half_last]
The hallmark Beretta 92 family features are all there. The slide is an open-top design, so most of the barrel is clearly visible. Beretta does this for both weight savings and reliability. When most of the slide is open, there’s no need to worry about fitting an ejected cartridge case through a relatively small ejection port, so malfunctions like stovepipes are exceedingly rare. Partly owing to the open slide cut and limited metal up front, the front sight is machined as part of the slide – there’s no dovetail cut that allows you to replace the standard front sights with night sights or something different. This is one of the very few things about the standard 92 design that drives me a bit nuts, although the new M9 A3 models remedy that gripe.
Controls are identical to the big brother 92 models. The takedown lever works exactly the same. Just press the button on the right side to rotate the lever on the left and the slide, barrel, and recoil spring slide right off the frame. As long as the magazine is removed, it doesn’t matter what the decocker and hammer status it, everything just slides right off. There’s no need to pull the trigger just to field strip the pistol. From the factory, the magazine release button comes on the left side, but it’s easily reversible.
[one_half]
I made it a point to test a couple varieties of Sig Sauer ammunition – it’s proven to be very, very accurate.
[/one_half]
[one_half_last]
You can actually move the safety/decocker up into fire position by pushing it down. Read on for details.
[/one_half_last]
The frame on the 92 Compact borrow from the A1 family and offers some cosmetic and functional differences from the original shape. Most obvious is the addition of the single-slot rail for attaching nifty accessories like lights, lasers, or even a bayonet if you want to deck it out like a video game piece. You’ll notice that the backstrap of the grip has a checkered pattern for improved grip as opposed to the vertical-only cuts on the classic 92 models. The front of the grip has the same checkering pattern as compared to the vertical cuts. The trigger guard is the same shape, with a slightly squared-off front edge, but there is no texture there. That’s fine with me; I don’t really care for the “support finger on the trigger guard” style anyway. The magazine well has a nice bevel to it for easy magazine insertion. The double-stack magazines narrow to single-cartridge width at the top go in effortlessly – it’s hard to miss even when you’re going for speed in a magazine change. While we’re in that area, I should mention that the Compact model has a lanyard ring at the rear of the magazine well just like the full size 92 and M9 pistols.
[one_half]
A lanyard ring is there if you want it.
[/one_half]
[one_half_last]
Both front and rear grip surfaces use this checkering pattern.
[/one_half_last]
The sights are interesting. While “mechanically” they’re the same as the older 92 FS models, they’re a lot more visible. The front sight body (machined into the slide) is finished in the gray INOX texture. It has a painted red dot in the center. The rear sight body mounted via a dovetail, but it’s all black, also with inset dots painted red. While I would always prefer the option of dovetail-mounted sights front and back, I liked these and found them fast to acquire.
The magazines are steel and those for this compact model hold 13 rounds of 9mm, so total capacity is 14 including one in the chamber.
The standard magazine holds 13 rounds so total capacity is 14 if you keep one in the chamber.
Compact vs. Full-size
As you might guess, the major difference between the full-size 92 models and the 92 Compact models is size. The original big boys are about .75 inches longer overall and .15 inches taller than the compact model. Here’s a full dimension comparison:
| 92 FS | 92 A1 | 92 Compact | |
| Length | 8.5” | 8.5” | 7.75” |
| Height | 5.4” | 5.4” | 5.25” |
| Width | 1.5” | 1.5” | 1.5” |
| Barrel Length | 4.9” | 4.9” | 4.25” |
| Weight | 33.3 oz | 33.3 oz | 31.6 oz |
As you never really know where the dimensions are taken (grip, slide, safety, etc.) for published factory specifications, I whipped out my trusty set of Lyman calipers and started measuring. Even through the slide on the 92 Compact INOX model appears a bit wider, it’s not. I suppose that’s just an optical illusion created by the shorter length or color. Both the 92 FS full size and 92 Compact slides measure exactly 1.11 inches wide.
You can’t assume that holsters are interchangeable. The biggest issue with trying to use the same holster between standard 92 series pistols and the 92 Compact is the rail itself. The dust cover area on the standard 92 FS models is rounded, much like a classic 1911, so it’s much narrower under the barrel. The 92 Compact presents a more blocky and squared-off profile underneath to accommodate the rail area.
The important controls are either on both sides like the safety/decocker or easily reversible like the magazine release.
Shooting the Beretta 92 Compact
Being a classic Beretta, there are two different trigger sensations. The double-action (DA) pull is much like that of a double-action revolver and in the 12-pound pull weight vicinity. Total travel, by design, on the double-action movement is over a full inch. You won’t fire this pistol inadvertently in double-action model unless you’re a complete spaz. Once the first shot is fired, the pistol transitions to single-action (SA)mode with the slide cocking the hammer as it cycles. I measured the single-action weight on this Compact model at a consistent 4.75 pounds of pressure. In single-action mode, total travel is under ½ inch, with the first 1/4 of an inch being weightless take-up. The break happens over the next 1/8 of an inch, and it’s smooth, grit-free, and crisp. I’ve always liked the triggers on Beretta 92 series guns, but that’s a personal preference for sure, especially the double-action/single-action part.
[one_half]
Field stripping is easy – just rotate the lever and no trigger release required.
[/one_half]
[one_half_last]
The magazine well features a moderate bevel.
[/one_half_last]
This gun is designed to be carried with a round chambered, the hammer decocked, and the safety/decocker lever in the “safe” position. In this mode, the trigger is disconnected, so the gun can’t fire until you flip the frame mounted safety up. Here’s a nifty trick that Beretta guru Ernie Langdon taught me a while back. That Beretta safety lever moves “up” into the fire position, so naturally, we assume that we have to use our thumb to “lift” it upwards into position. Makes sense, right? However, that’s counter to other safety designs like that on the 1911, so if you shoot other pistols, you might think you have to learn different motions. Not so. You see, the Beretta folks spring loaded this little lever so by swiping your firing hand DOWN across the lever, it’ll pop up into the fire position on its own. It’s basically the same motion you would use on a safety that moves down to fire. You just don’t have to press it through its entire range of motion. Try it; it’s a nifty technique and all your range buddies will be suitably impressed by your high speed, low drag technique moves.
One of the only things I don’t like about the Beretta safety design is its position. If you rack the slide vigorously, as in a malfunction clearance, you’ll feel that safety lever and you might even knock it back into the safe position if you’re not paying attention. Just something to be aware of. On the plus side, the slide on this gun is very easy to rack so you can choose the overhand technique or a simple two finger slingshot with thumb and forefinger.
[one_half]
The rear sight does use a dovetail mount unlike the front.
[/one_half]
[one_half_last]
Unless your holster is a one-size-fits-many, it probably won’t work for the standard and rail models.
[/one_half_last]
As for handling and felt recoil, the 92 Compact is a dream to shoot. It’s an exceptionally soft shooting gun for a mid-size 9mm pistol. The large grip and extra weight from genuine “not-plastic” construction really mellow out recoil and muzzle flip, so you’ll find it easy to shoot both accurately and fast.
As for reliability? Don’t worry about it. The combination of ramped barrel and open side design mean that this gun will eat anything you want to feed it. It’s not at all sensitive to the point of requiring a crusher grip and rock solid stance like other pistols. Pick it up with enough pressure to prevent it from falling to the ground and it’ll run. I’ve got somewhere near 10,000 rounds through my 92 FS, and it just keeps going, and going, and going. Bullet profile, lead bullets, hollow-points, varying bullet weights – it just doesn’t matter.
OK, so it looks a little dorky, but the scope allows real accuracy testing.
Since this pistol has a rail, I was able to do some precise accuracy testing. For rail-equipped guns, I always like to mount a handgun scope. Most of the “group size” error in handguns comes from the imprecision of the eyeball, iron sights, and down range target. When I mount a scope, groups almost always shrink in half using the same gun and ammo. Using a UM Tactical rail mount, I stuck a Bushnell Elite 3500 Handgun Scope on the 92 Compact and set up targets 15 yards down range. Yes, the gun looked ridiculous. But also yes, I had a perfect sight picture with no optical alignment error. Here are the results. The group sizes shown are averages of three different five-shot groups. Oh, and just for the heck of it, I set up a Shooting Chrony Beta Master Chronograph so you can get an idea of real world velocity from the Compact model’s 4.25-inch barrel.
| Velocity | Accuracy | |
| Federal FMJ RN 9mm 115 grain | 1,080 | 1.68” |
| Sig Sauer FMJ 9mm 115 grain | 1,140 | 1.50” |
| Sig Sauer V-Crown JHP 9mm 147 grain | 980 | 1.33” |
| American Eagle Syntech 9mm grain | 1,134 | 1.41” |
As a random note, I did pop my 92 FS magazines into the 92 Compact model and found them to be interchangeable. Of course, the longer magazines give you two additional rounds, but it does extend past the base of the shorter grip on the 92 Compact model.
Summing It Up
I think it all boils down to this. The 92 Compact is intended to be a more carry friendly version of the 92 FS / M9 full-size pistols. It is not supposed to compete with the tiny pocket rocket compacts that weigh 43% of nothing. To me, that’s a good thing. While I still own some, I gave up carrying puny guns a couple of years ago. Yes, they sure are convenient, and you can stick them anywhere. No, they are not fun to shoot. As a result, it’s hard to become really proficient with them. For a carry gun, I want confidence. I want to know that I can hit what I’m aiming at, and that takes practice.
The open top slide design is one of the most distinctive features of Beretta 92-pattern pistols.
I like this gun. The capacity is respectable, but more importantly, it’s easy to shoot well, at least for me. Reliability and longevity are a no brainer for this gun. If you’re willing to carry some extra ounces, it’ll serve as a great multi-purpose gun: carry, home defense, competition, and plinking fun at the range.
As of now, the only chambering for the 92 Compact is 9mm.
For more information, visit https://www.beretta.com/en-us/92-compact-with-rail-inox/.
To purchase on GunsAmerica.com, click this link: https://www.gunsamerica.com/Search.aspx?T=Beretta%2092%20Compact.
My 92 fs COMPACT stainless Baretta is the gun I will never sell or trade. I bought it in 2014 when price was $575 and have never been sorry for it.
Ther is nothing I can add to the write-up except that I doubt baretta will never make another 9mm comparable to this beauty.
I like the 92fs compact but the one I found is Italy made Peitro… What is the difference as per your opinion?
Can it take regular Beretta m9 magazines
To ppl griping about the slide mounted safety. I used to think they were stupid too, til I tried it. For those who are worried about accidentally engaging the safety when racking the slide, you have to be terribly clumsy to do that. So much so that you really shouldn’t have a gun in your hand under any circumstances. I just bought an inox compact and found my perfect pistol. Great review!
Similar to the author, my very first handgun was a Beretta 92FS, and it will always remain one of my favorites. In fact, I like it so much, I bought a second one, as well as a Model 96. In all those years, I’ve never, EVER had a malfunction, despite feeding it all kinds of cheapo ammo. It also has an iconic look – even in recent movies, the Beretta 92FS makes frequent appearances.
I also remember back when the M9 was adopted, and the wailing about our military not “buying American” from people who were disappointed about the Beretta being chosen over the S&W 459. I read an article on that many years ago. What I remember most was the process of selecting guns for testing. According to the article, S&W presented x-number of pistols THEY had hand-picked to the evaluators. When the evaluators went to get the testing pistols from Beretta, they were pointed to a wall on which hundreds of M9s were hanging and told to take however many they needed. The evaluators were surprised, and asked if any pistols had been set aside for evaluation. The answer was “no” – just pick whichever ones you want – we don’t care which ones you take. And still, the M9 outperformed the 459, fair and square. I think that speaks to the confidence the manufacturer had in its product. I know the haters are out there, but I’ll always love my 92FS.
great looking guns………quite pricey though……the part about malfunctions, clearing them I sometimes activate the safetydecocker . thats why i prefer no safety guns…..wish beretta would do that……
No mention of the Beretta 85 FS Cheetah in Cal 9 Short (380) almost identical to the compact except for Caliber, Picatinny, and Lanyard ring. I own both the 92FS and the 85FS, the 92 for home, the 85 for carry. I love it. Out of production, but still available on the market, thou typically used. And there is not much difference between the 9 mm and the .380. Cheetah available at GunsAmerica.com. I love mine, try it yourself !
I have a full size 92, an Inox compact, and the Cheetah 85. I love all of them. In the winter I carry the Inox, and when it’s warm (most of the year, it’s AZ), I carry the 85. I also have Glocks and Sigs which I carry on occasion, but the Berettas rule. Practice makes perfection.
The M9 WASN”T adopted as the standard US military sidearm back in 1985, it was Congressmen were BOUGHT in 1985 that put into circulation…
For ANYONE to think the M9 was or is better than the 1911 in 45ACP using Ball Ammo, is a Complete Fool plain and simple!
I MADE A FEW MISTAKES IN MY COMMENTS AND I’LL RESUBMIT MY COMMENT REPLY.
BOB, YOUR ENTITLED TO YOUR OPINION BUT WHY REFER TO THOSE THAT DON’T AGREE WITH YOU AS FOOLS. THE 1911 HAD ITS STAY FOR 75 YEARS AND IT WASN’T BECAUSE IT WAS THE BEST GUN AVAILABLE. THE BERETTA HAD ITS 33 YEAR REIGN AND IT SERVED AS A MODERN REPLACEMENT FOR THE 1911. NOW SIG IS ABOARD AND IT WILL NOT BE EVERYONE’S FIRST CHOICE BUT ITS MINOR IMPROVED FEATURES ARE HOPEFULLY ACCEPTED AND APPRECIATED BY OUR MILITARY THAT NEED THE BEST HAND GUN AND THE BEST DEFENSIVE CARTRIDGE FOR THE GUN. OUR MILITARY AND OUR POLITICIANS BEND TO NATO INSISTING ON THE FMJ ROUND WHILE THE ENEMY DOESN’T HAVE TO BE CONCERNED WITH NATO.
I’d like to see it compared side-by-side to the full sized one…
But putting a sight like that on a pistol is just crazy !
Buy an AR fer cryin’-out-loud !
I had one once and it remains to me as one of the more bitter recollections of my gun owning experiences. It was absolutely one of the most inaccurate pistols I have ever owned, and that’s not counting the feeding issues, of which there were many. Couldn’t get rid of it quick enough.
I can’t begin to count the hours or rounds building muscle memory with an M9, so this sounds like a great transition to civilian CCW.
A few years ago I picked up what appeared to be an unfired 92 FS L Compact (M9A1) for a paultry $600. I sent the slide to Tooltech, wherein they drilled out the front sight and installed a Trigicon tritium vial that sits in the center of a small white ring. They did a fantastic job and it’s so clean you’d never know that it was not a stock tritium sight. I installed a set of “thin” design Wilson Combat G-10 grips In the most aggressive pattern they carry. I immediately decided to send the entire gun to Wilson Combat for their trigger job and while they were at it I asked them to switch out the hammer with a factory skeleton hammer and enhanced steel trigger. I also had them send me a couple of fluted guide rods with flat springs and dampener.
The only thing separating my Compact from being “the PERFECT” pistol is the door to my safe. Every time I look at it I see a work of art and I just can’t bring myself to slap it in its holster and start the wearing process. I have accumulated around 12 of the 13 rd magazines (I pick up any great condition new/ used magazines whenever the opportunity arises and X-Grips makes a perfect spacer that works equally well with the 15 and 17 round magazines. I’ve had 5-6 various Berettas and this one is by far the simplest, most reliable pistol I own. It shoots like you’d spread butter with a machete on a 110 degree day. To date, this is the only Beretta I’ve owned that I won’t part with unless the price was well north of 1k. I also have 4 of the 17 rd and probably 10 of the sand inhibiting treated 15 rd magazines.
Thank you for an awesome read, great pix and secrets to even better handling than I thought possible. I appreciate the time and effort you put towards your work.
I have been looking for a beretta 92fs compact L inox. Can not find one for sale anywhere no body has them need some help. One bitchin gun!!!
I own a 92FS Compact in stainless…I absolutely love mine!, Mine shot great right out of the box..did a 3 shot head shot from
fifteen yards the first time I shot and it layed em right on target..my gal liked it more then her Glock 19..I hate them things, piece of crap striker rattle trap..dangerous guns to carry.I don’t know who decided trigger safeties were a good thing but they need to have their ass kicked out behind the barn….Glock..well known for misfiring more then any other gun,,Oh,back to the Beretta..I didn’t like the sights so I changed them..trigger is fine..i’m not really a big gun modifier like most dudes on here so my gun is good enough for me and I really enjoy shooting it.One more thing,I paid $600 for mine..it was the cheapest price I saw when researching it.
Great read!
Really enjoyed the reading the informative review and have total belief in Beretta products! As a former product marketing manager – though not in this industry – I would take offense if I worked for Beretta with your pictures promoting my competitors brand (Sig Sauer) three times which is a big faux pas. In my prior industry that would have caused a big uproar and ceased marketing funds whether the slight was inadvertent or purposeful. It’s something your photographer and/or editor should have caught before press time.
I know nothing about guns, but this one looks nice. I needed one for my story, a cop give his daughter a gun for her 14th Birthday without her mother knowledge of course. Can anyone tell me what I should look up to get the information right about this specific gun? If so thank you very much.
Pretty nice review & purty pics. Perhaps the rail & the Inox makes it “New”. Does it have the new buffer like the A1s & A3? Actually, with flush ‘Gov’t. style 15 rd. mags., the hand-grip height of the M9, 92s, 96s, 98s is about the SAME as the compact with the ‘bumpy-pad-pinky-grip-mags’. The slide & barrel are only a bit shorter, yet the wt. is less than 2 oz. diff. Has anyone tried a full-length barrel & locking block in the compact? Wasn’t there a 40 cal compact avail. a while back? It is nice to have a Big 9mm for Big Guys with Long fingers, but I feel for those small Mil. & L.E.O. people. Why don’t we have more options for slim grip panels?
Great review. I want one. Problem is I can’t find a 92FS Compact Inox. Do you have any insight on why they are not available or where I can get one?
Thanks!
Beretta was founded in 1526 it is the oldest gun maker in the world for a reason.
I only trust my life to Beretta Sig Ruger & Mossberg.
Some guy once said “Beretta is betta gets the girlies wetta” 😉
not only “oldest gun maker in the world” they are the oldest private business in the world
I have a Stoeger /Beretta Cougar 9mm compact that is a awesome gun with the feel of the full size 92 in a smaller size 13+1 with the main difference is a rotating barrel -came with a rail and is available in 9 mm .40 and .45 originally informed the 9 mm didn’t come with a rail but mine has it.
I love my 92FS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sweetest trigger pull,best looks…just fantastic overall…
Hey this is not a completely new gun folks.
My first handgun purchase when I turned 21 here in California was a Baretta 92 SB “compact”
This “new” gun has almost the same specs but the original SBC with the old curved trigger guard…
Length 7.75 in
Height 5.07 in
Barrel 4.29 in
I always like the way the proportions of the SBC looked over the full size model.
Why no mention of the single stack Beretta 92 M ?
the M is a gem! i haven’t seen one for less than $1300ish the mags are $80 or so sometimes on ebay
Will this Beretta be offered with Night Sights?
I’ve never been a fan of the 92 series although I have both a 92 full service size and a 96 that I’ve never shot. Still I like your reviews as I find them to be the best out there in our firearms field. On occasion You’ve tempedme to look into new and older firearms you review. I’ve yet to be disappointing even when I disagree with you. My question would be why not review the newer entries that Beretta is putting out there ? Beyond their small subcompacts they have some newer full size offerings to consider. The 92 which the military has had for some 30+ years has been reviewed to death without drastic changes there is not much more to say about the pistol. For the average person it would be a safe very reliable, soft recoil home or personal defense weapon that could last several lifetimes for the normal family. Perhaps my problem is that I’m a CZ and S&W guy.
I own this gun in stainless..it shoots great right out of the box.This gun came out in 2013 so it is “new” if you want to be technical about it..anyways..I want to get a grip laser for mine but I cant find any for this model..they only seem to make them for the full
size 92fs.
I also am a fan of the Beretta 92. I have an ‘S’ and a ‘FS’. While I generally enjoyed your review I must take exception with your comment that ‘We Built This City’ is the worst song ever. It is one of my personal favorites from that era. That year was when I bought my 92S which I still have.
I agree! I like both the Beretta 92 and We Built this City!
BERETTA…..There is no substitute!!!
UGH!!! I cannot learn to like the 92 no matter what I do or said by others.
It’s slide mounted safety is stupid, a product of Govt. engineering by silly people who would most likely never use such a weapon in combat. It is mounted in such a way as to be un-natural in it’s use, and forces those with small hands to shift their grip.
stupid.
You don’t know what you’re talking about troll..
Get a 92G decocker only no safety to get in the way and night sites. I love mine.
Get a 92G decocker only no safety to get in the way and night sites. I love mine.
The Wehrmachthad a little military experience. Their P38 has the same slide mounted safety/deco key (and many other similarities).
do you feel the same about the “G” models with a de-cocker only and no safety? I love them but have issues
1. The 80 series: they are big enough to be 9mm, no need to keep them in 32acp and 380
2. he grip is two wide on the 80 series and the 92 series. If they would have staggered the rounds in the magazine, rather than having them in two columns, you can make it thinner so more concealable by default
Why do you keep saying that the safety/decocker lever is frame mounted? It’s clearly mounted on the slide. Other than that, the review is quite informative.
Any idea if (or when) Beretta plans on making a compact version in other calibers?
I am a bit confused here. This is nothing new. My first handgun was a Beretta 92 compact almost thirty years ago. That gun was stolen in a home burglary and was replaced with a 92FS compact that is 20+ years old now.
Why is this review referring to this as the “new” – “I was keen to try the new and smaller 92 Compact model.” ????
This is my home protection choice since I know that it will never fail me. You do have to give Beretta a lot of kudos for reliability of this design.
Great review, very detailed and You had me from first mention of the 80,s spandex and neon guitars era! LoL, I have a heap of striker fired, polymer frames like most others and I tend to agree with you its always such a pleasure to shoot a metal framed CZ or 1911 something that absorbs some of that recoil and don’t have such a stiff recoil spring. Just the feel of metal in the hand feels better to Me but then its hard to deny the reliability of the strikers too. But the compact 92 sounds like a good option to bridge the gap! And I am trying to figure out why I have never payee more attn to the fact they made compacts? I’ve shot m9,s and always liked them but thought too much here to ccw carrY. Now I have a itching to try the compacts. Hopefully more of them will find there way here into KY now that they are making a new railed version?
Not sure you can improve on perfect.
Absolutely correct.
Nifty Langdon trick on the downward safety spring-loaded manipulation–tnx for the info !!! DMD
Is this new compact the same size as the previous 92 SB? If not, how do they compare?
i want to say the newest production compacts are the shortest models to date in 92 config. The SB has a rounded trigger guard but that’s not the only reason for the designation. The 92 SB Type M is a single stack 9mm
Is the cost of the Bruniton Black Finish the same as the Inox finish . Don’t like stainless or Aluminum finish in my opinion there to flashy and bright for a CCW . Interested in the black .I also have a 92fs . Also will they make a laser guide rod for the 92 compact . Thank you for your time .
Thomas Davis .
INOX will look like brushed stainless with black accents
I have shot over 5000 rounds through my 92 fs . This has to be the perfect gun for anyone.