quote:

Originally posted by ridewv:
Did he mention if they improved the durability over the previous version? If so, I actually like what they've done with the new mag release and improved trigger. I'd like to see the base version 30X in black.

True, maybe the frames on the new version won't crack in half! That would be an actual improvement.

quote:

Originally posted by ridewv:
Did he mention if they improved the durability over the previous version? If so, I actually like what they've done with the new mag release and improved trigger. I'd like to see the base version 30X in black.

Beretta says the durability issue has been addressed. Hopefully it's true.

The Bob/Tom's have always been my shooting kryptonite. I shoot most anything passably, but those damn little things.....safest place to be if I am shooting at you with one is right in front o me. Chances are I will just wing the damn thing at your forehead and have a better chance at hitting you.

I just never could shoot those damn things worth a crap.

But hey, maybe with a dot, suppressor and extended mag......I have a chance.

I bought one of the M9A4s with the intent of putting an RDO on it but honestly I can’t stand the look. So I have a real nice RMR sitting on a shelf without a home because I just can’t bring myself to put it on the gun.

I appreciate red dot sights on my rifles but can’t warm up to the idea on a pistol. I’m sure if I shot enough I’d come to appreciate it on a pistol too but I can’t.

These guns look ugly.

I like dots and I like Berettas. That being said the Beretta 92 is an awful optics platform. Nothing about the slide lends itself to being a good red dot pistol. I got one of the free plates you need to mount a dot on a 92X. It was ridiculous. It sits very high. Because of the shape of the slide it has a weird overhang. It just isn’t a good platform.

These things aren’t either. Now actually upgrading the Tomcats so you can shoot normal ammo without cracking the frame would be nice. I hope they did that.

As for loading these things the barrels pivot basically past vertical. You won’t have an issue loading them at all. And yea, if you get preoccupied with staring at the dot then you don’t know how to use a dot.

Well he straight up said they improved the durability so I take that to probably mean the frame cracking. A 35% reduction in trigger weight is good also. These are great pocket guns if they don’t crack or have horrendous triggers which they kind of do. The optics stuff is goofy I agree. Fixing the actual Tomcat issues is not.

I miss my 950BS. It was .22 short. I used it to shoot at pigeons on the highway bridge girders. The ricochets were exciting!
Cant see it as an optics platform, though.

IDK, about the red dot, but right now I'm thinking about putting compensators on all my .32s.

Oh and cans.

Comps and cans. OK I guess red dots too. and lasers.

quote:

Fixing the actual Tomcat issues is not.

Agreed. The Tomcat was never a good gun. The Bobcat in its various versions was interesting just due to its size, and IMO it also just looked better due to being more svelte and streamlined. That still wasn't enough for me to keep mine around, though...too small, horrible sights, and I didn't like dealing with .25 ACP (I might have kept it if it had been a .22 LR). The Tomcat was like its awkward, fatter big brother with osteoporosis. I don't think anybody cared about it until Beretta announced they were discontinuing it a few months ago. If they can make it better and cheaper, good for them, and I imagine they'll sell a few just from riding the self-created artificial panic of the announced "discontinuation". And they probably just boosted the market for all their old stock, too, because some folks are going to demand the "original".

It's still not a good gun, but if they can keep the frame from cracking when you shoot it it'll at least be incrementally better than the old one. Sticking an optic on it is still dumb.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by patw:
Supposedly at the Shot Show, they were described as mini-race guns.

And here I was, thinking these are supposed to be pocket pistols.

This kind of stupid shit, I've come to expect it as routine from some other manufacturers, but Beretta should stay away from this nonsense. That's a compliment.

I know the product manager; I think this is meant as tongue-in-cheek

All metal, no rail and not striker fired. What's not to like?

Those make me sad.

Here is the thing. The 3032 Tomcats sucked. They literally couldn't shoot standard pressure ammo above a defined limit. Even if you followed those draconian backstops the gun could and did on a routine basis crack. The trigger was awful and the sideplate mag release while useable was/is completely European in nature and not well liked on this continent.

By increasing the durability and the trigger and the mag release you actually improved this gun. (assuming these frames don't crack, I won't be the beta tester so I will wait upon judgement)

Don't get caught up in the lunacy the engineers threw at this project. Those three changes alone were badly needed. A plate option doesn't need to be used if you don't want it. Don't get caught up in the compensator and the bling. Improving the basics of this gun was long overdue.

I hope they upgrade the Bobcats next. They are in dire need of getting fixed. Plus I could see putting a small dot on that one. The sights are so bad that they are tough to shoot. I personally would prefer they just upgrade to the sights on the Tomcat, but any improvement in hitting is an improvement.

Beretta is the definition of just because you can doesn't mean you should.

quote:

Originally posted by PASig:
I really don't get this obsession to put RDS on pistols

This.

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
A plate option doesn't need to be used if you don't want it.

Agree, but I wish people would stop acting like cutting a rectangular chunk out of the top rear of a perfectly good slide is necessary for every pistol that goes on the market these days. Never mind pic rails.

People like options. Especially options like an optics cut that don't impede your normal use in the slightest. I understand why people want a no rail option, a cut slide with a good plate cover is unobtrusive with zero impact. It's a smart manufacturing move and I for one applaud it. I too like options.

The Tomcat was never a range gun. Heck, it's fixed sights couldn't hit POA past about 3yrds. It's a belly gun, at best.

Folks out there running them with over recommended pressures and taking them out to shoot on the regular fail to understand what they're meant for.

I've owned a couple Titanium Tomcats....which don't have the same problems. Trouble is, they weigh more than the normal alloy ones so what's the point of a heavy, chunky monkey single stack smol caliber pistol? Keltec P32 is a better alternative

I have no personal experience with optical sights on handguns, but am open to the idea of them … on medium- and full-sized guns. The point of little guns is to be little. Adding even optical sights to them, let alone grossly extended magazines and suppressors, defeats this purpose.

I'd say the engineers did a marvelous job of making something that would cause a lot of buzz in the firearms community. After all, there are 2 pages of comments about these things on a forum for a competitor.

Now, I'm not interested in one, but you can bet someone will buy it.

The guns in the OP remind me of something … can't quite put my finger on it … got it!

quote:

Originally posted by josp:
I'd say the engineers did a marvelous job of making something that would cause a lot of buzz in the firearms community. After all, there are 2 pages of comments about these things on a forum for a competitor.

Now, I'm not interested in one, but you can bet someone will buy it.

And enjoy it for the joke that it is.

quote:

Originally posted by josp:
I'd say the engineers did a marvelous job of making something that would cause a lot of buzz in the firearms community. After all, there are 2 pages of comments about these things on a forum for a competitor.

Competitor? Competitor of what?