quote:

Do you think they would be about equal when it comes to carrying and/or concealing one?

I'd say they'd be pretty darn close. I haven't tried carrying the PX4 yet as I don't have a holster for it (making one is on my list of things to do in the next week or so). Being a little girthier and longer in the grip, I imagine it might be a tad more bulky in the areas that matter for concealment.

That said, the aggressively textured grips of the 92X, which are awesome for shooting, do tend to grab onto a cover garment. The PX4, which initially feels almost too slick (but in practice I haven't noticed any issues under recoil yet), might actually be easier to conceal just because of that. The dimensions really are that close.

I'll try to get some comparison pics tonight if I get time. Keep in mind, the PX4 also comes in a compact model, which based on the comparison of with the full-size would undoubtedly be significantly smaller than a 92 Compact if that's what you're after.

So far, I like the PX4, but I LOVE my 92X Compact. We'll have to see what the LTT trigger bar does on the range, but I have a hard time believing that even with the upgrades I'm going to ever get to a point where I'd rather have one of these than a 92X.

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:

So far, I like the PX4, but I LOVE my 92X Compact. We'll have to see what the LTT trigger bar does on the range, but I have a hard time believing that even with the upgrades I'm going to ever get to a point where I'd rather have one of these than a 92X.

For me, a PX4 will never be as fun to shoot at the range as my Beretta 92a1.
My biggest gripe with the PX4 is the slippery (bar of soap) grip and the mediocre trigger. I know both of those things can be improved however. I see the PX4 being a great option for those who are looking for a appendix carry option and don't like striker fired guns.

The 92 compact feels chunkier than the PX4. While the PX4 is technically bigger its shape/design lends itself easier to carry IMO.

Here are some comparison pics, with both my 92X Compact RDO and a P320 Carry:

Thank you for taking the time to post those!

Got a chance to shoot it briefly on the indoor range today with the LTT trigger bar. I was limited on time and what I could do, but I did put a few rounds through it to verify function. 5 rounds at 7 yards...I'd say mechanical accuracy is acceptable.



As far as the reset, in practice I'm not sure how much difference the short reset makes in the feel of the trigger. There is a definite benefit in that I shouldn't have any more short-stroking problems, but I'm not really riding the reset in rapid fire, so I still have to contend with the mushy pre-travel. I want to get it back on the plate rack again to see how it does at speed.

Excellent thread dude!

I've always been intrigued by the PX4, and its predecessor, the cougar.

That compact 92 is awesome too.

How does the PX4 recoil compare to a full size normal shmormal 92FS?

quote:

How does the PX4 recoil compare to a full size normal shmormal 92FS?

Guess I'll have to try that and report back...good excuse to get the old girl out of the back of the safe .

quote:

How does the PX4 recoil compare to a full size normal shmormal 92FS?

So I had to answer this question, so I dug my old 92FS out of the back of the safe where it's been collecting dust for far too long. I also brought the 92X compact, just for added comparison.

The first thing I did was shoot B8s at 25 yards, since I was already doing that for the Postal Match. I used my P320 Subcompact for that, and you can check out the photos over in the postal match thread if you're interested....it was pretty horrible and I'm not posting them again, lol.

Since I already had the targets and the range st up, I figured why not run the Berettas through the same test.

First the 92FS. The first shot DA went outside the rings, but everything else was in...night and day better than my P320. Why don't I shoot this gun more?



Then the 92X Compact. This was dissappointing, and kind of made me want to re-evaluate my grip setup on this gun. Still better than the P320, though.



Finally, the PX4. Just a hair behind the 92FS, but close enough to be statistically insignificant. This surprised me. It was easy to get a good sight picture, and the gun hit to point of aim.



After the bullseye test, I shot the 5x5 drill from lucky gunner. This is six 5" targets at 5 yards. Each target must be shot 5 times in less than 5 seconds. The first target is a practice run, and the next five are for "Score". I did cheat a little bit, as it's supposed to be shot from the holster, but I didn't bring one for every gun, so I started with the gun in my right pointed at the ground by my right side, and brought it up and presented as if I was coming from the holster. Yes, it's quicker than an actual draw, but the purpose here is comparison.

I shot the PX4 first. I dropped two rounds, but everything was under time. I struggle keeping this gun on target at speed...it tends to drop low as I turn up the gas. Times averaged around 4.30 per target.



The 92X Compact shot it clean...only miss was on the practice run. Times were similar to the PX4.



Finally, the 92FS. Also clean, my times were faster with this one...around 4.0 seconds, and groups were tighter. That last one at the bottom I really turned up the gas and shave another half second, which is why the group opened up.



Finally, I ran them on the plate rack for time. I needed a clean run, so I'd make a run and then speed it up until I started missing, then go back again to where I could shoot it clean. Not exactly scientific, but it's the best I could come up with. It's a 6-plate rack, 6" plates shot at about 12 yards:

92X Compact: 11.19
92FS: 9.69
PX4: 11.65

I was having trouble hitting with the PX4...I did a bunch more practice runs and finally got it down to 9.70.


All in all I like the PX4. It's smooth, accurate, and reliable. The combination of the grip and the trigger reset tend to make me push low when trying to recover quickly from recoil. The SA pull is mushier and longer than the 92FS, but the initial DA pull is lighter, smoother, and shorter. Weight-wise they're a wash. The 92FS gives you a bit more sight radius, which I think makes it easier to make precision hits at distance. Even though the frame is plastic, the gun retains that smooth "greased ball-bearing" operation and satisfyingly crisp controls that we've come to expect from Beretta. I still don't think I'd trade a 92 for one, but with some consistent practice and training I can see how someone could shoot one just as well.

Thanks for taking the time to post that. Nice shooting too!

quote:

All in all I like the PX4. It's smooth, accurate, and reliable.

My thoughts exactly.

quote:

Thanks for taking the time to post that. Nice shooting too!

HELLA NICE shooting. I had thought of posting a couple of my 92 vs PX4 groups but……..well I suck but my low speed, high drag guy findings are similar to 92Fstech’s…………..only way shittier in comparison. .

Thanks guys...I enjoy this kind of stuff. It gives me an excuse to shoot different stuff, and in this case particularly a chance to shake the dust off an excellent gun that's been neglected for far too long.

One thing I need to add...functionally, the LTT trigger bar doesn't do much for the feel of the SA pull, as when I reset under recovery from recoil, my finger travels forward far enough that I still have to deal with that two-stage takeup. On the upside, shortening the reset completely eliminated any short-stroking issues, which I'm confident I would have experienced during these drills had it not been installed. I'd say it's definitely a worthwhile investment for that reason alone.

After I got home yesterday, I removed the small backstrap and swapped in the medium. I'm hoping having a little bit of swell back there will help push the muzzle up a bit, and hopefully mitigate the tendency to drop rounds low when shooting rapidly.