Camouflage should serve a purpose. I fail to see any purpose to these finishes. A poncho or military fatigues or hunting clothes, vehicles, tents- camouflage serves a real purpose. Even rifles may benefit from camouflage, but pistols, knives and other small objects, no.
Despite changes to the Beretta 92 over the years- a rail, added serrations, changing the shape of the backstrap and so forth, it's still for the most part a handsome pistol. Finishes that break up the lines of pistols uglify them.
If that kind of things happens to appeal to you, that is, of course, your business but I just don't get it.
Someone in charge there needs to have a long talk with Beretta's marketing department.
I think it looks kinda cool though I really just like the plain black and stainless models from years past. Except for the LTT ones—I will have one of those someday.
Gotta say I really like that the 92 series is still so popular though. It’s crazy to me that these DA/SA guns have such a following even in 2025. Some of it I think is people just don’t feel as connected to their striker guns. Many of us want to have more substance to our range toys and even carry guns and view them as more than tools.
Originally posted by LincolnSixEcho: Gotta say I really like that the 92 series is still so popular though. It’s crazy to me that these DA/SA guns have such a following even in 2025.
These particular 92s aren't DA/SA. They're SAO, with a frame-mounted manual thumb safety.
It's the relatively new 92xi model, first introduced in 2023. These are just in fancier colors than usual.
^^^^^ I guess I meant to say hammer fired guns. Whether it is DA/SA or SAO they are much more interesting than striker guns these days to me at least. And I love striker guns.
My favorite 92 variant actually was the 92 Combat that I found only once in the wild though did not have the scratch to buy it at the time. I was told they imported 50 total units.
I'm gonna have to add a vote for ugly on this one. I don't care for weird colors on guns in general but I think Para is right about the camo breaking up the lines of the 92, which is a particularly good looking gun. I also feel like if you actually use that gun it's going to put wear on that finish, and when that happens it's going to look like absolute garbage. A little holster wear on the high points of a black pistol just adds character, but when you start to get wear on an intricate design it just looks bad.
As for the 92X as a platform, I really like the grip but don't care for the front serrations. Mine (92X Compact) also had some minor QC issues that caused me to never completely warm up to it, the optics mounting system is really more of a workaround than a solution, and I ultimately traded it off in favor of the P229. I still have my old-school 92FS through...absolutely awesome pistol.
Posts: 10376 | Location: In the Cornfields | Registered: May 25, 2006
Originally posted by BigSwede: A gun hasn't caught my eye in a while until this
I'm glad that even the (IMO) ugliest duck is someone's swan.
Honestly, I wanted to say something like "it caught my eye like a splinter of wood" but I realized that my color palate preferences (see the Grey/gray thread in the rifle section) leave a lot of people cold. Its good that there are options and, like I said, someone will love it and I'm glad it's you.
___________________________________________ Life Member NRA & Washington Arms Collectors
Mistake not my current state of joshing gentle peevishness for the awesome and terrible majesty of the towering seas of ire that are themselves the milquetoast shallows fringing my vast oceans of wrath.
Velocitas Incursio Vis - Gandhi
Posts: 2217 | Location: T-town in the 253 | Registered: January 16, 2013
Originally posted by parabellum: Camouflage should serve a purpose. I fail to see any purpose to these finishes. A poncho or military fatigues or hunting clothes, vehicles, tents- camouflage serves a real purpose. Even rifles may benefit from camouflage, but pistols, knives and other small objects, no.
Despite changes to the Beretta 92 over the years- a rail, added serrations, changing the shape of the backstrap and so forth, it's still for the most part a handsome pistol. Finishes that break up the lines of pistols uglify them.
If that kind of things happens to appeal to you, that is, of course, your business but I just don't get it.
Someone in charge there needs to have a long talk with Beretta's marketing department.
Agreed. It’s cool that they’re using veterans for the artwork but the 92 is so damn good looking in basic black or the various bare/polished finishes.
Posts: 2274 | Location: New Hampshire | Registered: February 25, 2007
I am not normally a camo finish fan, but the more I follow this thread and look at the pic I have to admit the more it grows on me and I have always been a huge Beretta fan. That being said, I think if I got one of those I would eventually look at it in my safe at some point and wonder why I bought it.
