FNP 45 vs Beretta PX4 Storm .45

[Cylinder Head 22]

I agree with Ronhonda, the Cougar is a dog, and while I've heard some good and some bad about the Px4, it's basically a slightly re-designed Cougar. Beretta makes some great firearms, but I'm nowhere near sold on the Px4. Plus, rotating barrel assemblies just mean more parts that can fail.

 

I would like to hear from Px4 owners who are over 5,000 rounds in their guns. The most common problem I've heard of is failure-to-feed.

[Krdshrk 3,877]

I think I've got over 5000 rounds through my Px4. If not then I'm close. I know Ray Ray has more than 5000 through his. No FTF/FTE problems at all. I initially had some FTF issues but that was when the gun was brand spanking new and I fired it without cleaning it.

[lunker 274]

The Cougar/PX4 Storm has a barrel and a locking lug. That is no more parts to fail than on a 92FS.

 

Obviously Ron's idea of beauty in a gun runs along the lines where he is most likely to succeed in his sport. I just shoot recreationally. I think that gives me a little more freedom in choosing what guns I like since I am not concerned about it holding me back in competition.

Many people say that the 92FS is way too big a gun for the small and light recoiling round it shoots. The Cougar was Beretta's answer to that. The gun is basically the same width, a little shorter in height, and a good amount shorter in length than the 92FS. The trigger is the Beretta SA/DA from the 92FS, the safety/decocker is the same, and the recoil is noticeably less due to the rotating locking system. In my eyes, that is a winning combination. If I can enjoy it at the range and be accurate with it (and the Cougar was as accurate to me as any other handgun I have owned), that's all I am looking for. Glocks and Springfield XDs have their place (I own a few), but they don't win any beauty awards and are only purchased by me when they are better at what they do than other guns I like the look and feel of better. I own a Glock 20SF in 10mm because no other autoloading platform I have tried (S&W 2nd gen auto, 1911) stands up to the abuse of this caliber as well as Glocks do. I sold my Glock 34 because I feel that I can shoot a CZ P01 better and faster than the Glock 34.

[Vlad G 345]

It should be noted that Ronny and I are biased because of our competition experience, but keep in mind that the kind of shooting we do stresses everything about a firearm. Our handguns have to be reliable, accurate, handle well, allow for quick shot to shot recovery, have safeties in useful places, work dirty or sandy or muddy, have magazines that work when stepped on or full of sand, have replacement parts that you can actually find and not wait for, have triggers that allow accurate shooting, etc.

 

I've seen EVERY kind of gun fail. Shoot enough and you will break every gun out there, so keep in mind that while most people shoot their guns, USPSA shooters wear out their guns with 10k-15k rounds per year being fairly common. We also get to see a lot of people show up with lots of different guns and get to see what problems they have, how easy is to solve it, and what gun they buy after they had enough of the one they started with.

 

Things that work while firing from a normal firing line, slowly, at a hung paper target don't work so hot at speed and on the move. Here are some examples.

 

DA/SA guns need to die. There is a reason the 1911 design with its single action trigger and the newer safe action triggers on M&Ps. Glocks, XD's etc are so popular. Shooting a DA/SA trigger means you have to master two different trigger pulls and sometime need to shift your grip between first shot and follow up shots. If all you do is shoot at a bullseye target from a firing line, you may never realize this because most people shove a mag in the gun, rack one in, and start shooting with the gun in SA. A consistent trigger is important.

 

Safeties need to make sense and be easy to operate. The Beretta slide safeties are in my opinion an atrocity. Removing it a speed can be done but is awkward. Give me a 1911 type safety that I can slam my thumb on, or no safety at all (ie: "safe action" triggers, although I like the XD/XDM approach best with a trigger and grip safety). Combining a 1911 type safety with a decocker is also a pretty poor idea. For example someone could point out that the FN-45 has a option of a 1911 like safety and could be carried cocked and locked so no need to worry about the SA/DA issue. However it suffers from the same problem that the H&K USP suffered. If you have your gun cocked and locked, and you don't care about the DA pull and you don't train because you are never going to use it, you will regret it the first time you slam you thumb on the safety a bit to hard and push into the decock mode and you are now in DA mode.

 

I could go on, but my point is there are certain ergonomic considerations that only become apparent under hard use. When I say the FN and the Beretta are second tier guns, it is because of such considerations and based on my experience of seeing such things in use in competition.

 

Edited to add: I also have an aesthetic beef with the 92 platform. I particularly disapprove of the external trigger bar and such things make it look like a steam choo-choo train to my eyes. I'm willing to forgive the aesthetics if the functionality is there, but the safety arrangement kills it for me. Plus they don't fit my hands comfortably, but thats a personal issue.

[ronhonda 86]

The Cougar/PX4 Storm has a barrel and a locking lug. That is no more parts to fail than on a 92FS.

 

Obviously Ron's idea of beauty in a gun runs along the lines where he is most likely to succeed in his sport. I just shoot recreationally. I think that gives me a little more freedom in choosing what guns I like since I am not concerned about it holding me back in competition.

Many people say that the 92FS is way too big a gun for the small and light recoiling round it shoots. The Cougar was Beretta's answer to that. The gun is basically the same width, a little shorter in height, and a good amount shorter in length than the 92FS. The trigger is the Beretta SA/DA from the 92FS, the safety/decocker is the same, and the recoil is noticeably less due to the rotating locking system. In my eyes, that is a winning combination. If I can enjoy it at the range and be accurate with it (and the Cougar was as accurate to me as any other handgun I have owned), that's all I am looking for. Glocks and Springfield XDs have their place (I own a few), but they don't win any beauty awards and are only purchased by me when they are better at what they do than other guns I like the look and feel of better. I own a Glock 20SF in 10mm because no other autoloading platform I have tried (S&W 2nd gen auto, 1911) stands up to the abuse of this caliber as well as Glocks do. I sold my Glock 34 because I feel that I can shoot a CZ P01 better and faster than the Glock 34.

 

Not true. They don't have to be pretty to help me succeed, they need to work. That's it.

I was a plinker for about 2 years before I shot my 1st USPSA match. After that everything changed.

I happen to think highly of the 1911/2011 platform. 1ST and foremost they work. 2nd, the ergonomics fit me well. Lastly I am proficient with them.

That being said, I don't want to own a bunch of safe queens. All the firearms I have, have a purpose and they do it well.

The only regret I have is that I should have picked up a G-22 instead of a G17. The 22 would have been more versatile in what I do.

[lunker 274]

Vlad, that was an excellent explanation. The one thing I didn't consider was the sheer round count competitive shooters go through and how it would become apparent which guns held up over the long haul and which ones fell on their face. That amounts to an extreme endurance test, and is something I would take into consideration when buying a gun. I was only thinking about the race aspect of your shooting style, so I don't know if that has to be a factor for someone who is the weekend shooter. I don't take that many double action first shots. I agree that the 92FS safety/decocker is an abomination. The motions are the exact opposite of the 1911 and thus are, to me anyway, completely counterintuitive. I actually own a Beretta Steel I because I liked the Beretta but hated the safety arrangement. It has a steel frame for strength and a frame mounted safety like a 1911 (i.e. cocked and locked).

[Aleshka 0]

I am a typical weekend shooter and it is more of a recreational activity to me than a real sport, however I always wanted to stop by and take a look at USPSA events at my club (Old Bridge) So, your perspective on these guns is way different than mine, but very interesting indeed.

If my permit wouldn't be expiring in about 2 weeks I'd definitely explore the competitive aspect of it more. But since the time-frame is also a factor I will have to base my decisions on the information I am getting from you guys and I have to say - I really appreciate the advices I am getting and the different perspectives that I didn't even think about! Thanks!

[ronhonda 86]

To shoot a USPSA/IDPA match, you can basically use almost any gun. So there is no need to go out and spend some money on a dedicated gun. But once you start to shooting and get more involved, what tends to happen is that you will want to get something new to either upgrade what you have or be able to shoot another division.

[Vlad G 345]

Look at it this way, we all end up owning guns we don't shoot, and we all end up changing our taste over time. Don't sweat it that much. Buy whatever catches your fancy, shoot the crap out of it, and if you change your mind later you buy another one. Its not like you aren't going to buy more guns anyway. It isn't like you asked about a Lorcin or a Raven, the guns you are looking at are perfectly serviceable guns.

[Aleshka 0]

Very true! And I definitely have enough to be able to start. It is just the whole PITA of getting the permits etc. On the other hand - my budget is safer with these obstacles.

[Ray Ray 3,566]

Sorry, Beretta makes some of the best pistols/shotguns out there. Hands down. STI? It seems that every time I read about them in gun magazines they have issues with certain ammo. And they're expensive. A Beretta will do ANYTHING you ask of it. Second tier my @$$. The 92 is one of the greatest (top 3) pistols of all time.

 

45acp double stack, here are some good choices

 

Px4

FNP

XD, XDM

Glock

M&P

Stoeger Cougar

H&K

some 1911s

Sig

CZ

EAA

 

Pick one and have fun

[Vlad G 345]

I stand corrected Ray, you are absolutely correct, the Beretta are Gods gift to all us and STI's are crap, because magazines said so. As for the tier of your a**, well that's not for me to decide, so I'll take your word for it.

[Ray Ray 3,566]

I stand corrected Ray, you are absolutely correct, the Beretta are Gods gift to all us and STI's are crap, because magazines said so. As for the tier of your a**, well that's not for me to decide, so I'll take your word for it.

 

Thanks, I think?

 

But really, we're comparing apples and oranges here. If you want a gun to punch holes threw paper and knock down steal, then the STI is for you. If you want a gun for bumps in the night, go with a Beretta.

[gunnyr 17]

There's a little known Israeli company called Bul that makes double stacked .45s. They are the M5 series which are very similar to the Paras. I have a Bul import by the now defunct Charles Daley (KBI Harrisburg) called the DDA 1045 which is another double stacked 45. Not a bad handgun but my concern is that I'd have to order parts from Canada as that's the nearest country that still has a Bul importer.

 

I think my next 45 purchase is going to be the CZ 97B but I'd definitely handle it first before making up my mind.

[Vlad G 345]

But really, we're comparing apples and oranges here. If you want a gun to punch holes threw paper and knock down steal, then the STI is for you. If you want a gun for bumps in the night, go with a Beretta.

 

Ray that's not a very solid argument. I've actually provided some examples why I think the Beretta is not the ideal firearm. I tried to explain why thing like DA/SA triggers and the Beretta safety arrangement are in my eyes strikes against it. I've already stated that it is a perfectly reliable firearm and it has no large faults, but I've pointed out reasons for which I find it less then ideal. In response you provided arguments based on what you read in magazines and a flat out statement that it will do ANYTHING I ask of it. I'm actually pretty sure it won't, and you might want to consider that different people may ask different things from their handguns.

 

Maybe you would like to explain why you believe the Beretta should be the gun one picks for self defense and why an STI would be unsuitable.

 

For full disclosure I'll add that I don't own an STI (I just hang around a lot of them) and despite recommending against the FN-45 I actually own FNP-40 which while a slightly different sized platform then .45 does have many of the same design principles.

[Ray Ray 3,566]

Sure it is, Beretta's are used in lots of houses for home defense. STI's are not. Beretta's are on the front line right now, STI's are not. Beretta's are used by law enforcement all over the US, STI's are not.

 

Check and Mate

[Babaganoosh 192]

For what it's worth when I first got my Beretta the DA/SA was killing me. My first shot in DA was way off target by as much as a foot from 10 yards. However after 1000 rounds or so my first round in double action is hitting very close to my SA shots, usually within the same group. However I can see the benefit of a striker fired or SA only type of weapon. All of your shots will benefit from having the same exact trigger pull time after time.

[Vlad G 345]

So let me get this straight, in the 31 years since the adoption of the M9 there has been no advancement in the firearms world, the US military picking a side arm (by definition a secondary weapon) because it it was cheaper (then its sig 226 competitor) makes it the ultimate fire arm, and the fact that pretty much every law enforcement institution is using something NOT a Beretta (like Glocks and M&Ps) somehow qualifies it as the ultimate self defense weapon?

 

Of course the fact that an STI costs 3-4 times as much has nothing to do with its lack of adoption by people who have a budget to worry about. I think your argument basic boils down to the Beretta has been around longer and it is cheaper. In some ways I'm not even arguing that an STI is a perfect weapon mind you, all I'm arguing is that there are things better then the Beretta.

 

So .. before you declare this chess game over, would like to actually tell me what makes the Beretta the perfect weapon? Oh, and please tell me how whatever wonder properties the M9/92 platform brings to the table translate to the PX4 the original poster inquired about, a completely different design, and maybe you can tell me how many people were issued those.

[Ray Ray 3,566]

Px4 is issued by Maryland state police? Not sure which state.

 

I own the Px4 and although I don't have 5000 rounds down the pipe (more like 3000) it has never failed me once. Yes there are more updated pistols to the M9 but it's a proven design, like a 1911?

 

Thanks for the arguement Vlad, it's all in good fun.

[PeteF 1,044]

If my permit wouldn't be expiring in about 2 weeks I'd definitely explore the competitive aspect of it more.

 

Extension?

[hd2000fxdl 422]

 

Check and Mate

 

Your getting close to bringing CZ into this...

 

Harry

[Aleshka 0]

This is after the extension... and I cannot afford to let it expire!!!