FN Five-Seven vs Beretta 92FS

[Apothix]

Hello all, I currently have a Glock32 and for whatever reason I just do not really care for the "feel" of it. I was thinking of replacing it with something else. I had my thoughts going toward either picking up a FN Five-Seven or a Beretta 92FS. It will be my primary carry weapon. Is it worth it to spend almost double for a Five-Seven verses the 92FS ? Thoughts comments are welcomed and appreciated.

Apothix.

[apostate]

The calibers are very different. What do you need the handgun to do?

[Apothix]

I would use it as my primary carry and personal defense weapon.

[Dave2]

I haven't shot a Beretta 92, so I can't comment on it. (I did like the Beretta .380 that I shot once. It seemed to be smaller version of the 92... I think the guy said it was an 80 something.)

Comparing the FN FsN to my Sig P226, I prefer the FsN's magazine capacity and recoil, but I prefer the general feel of my P226. Since the P226 doesn't have a safety there's no way to compare them, but I do like where FN put it on the FsN. It's right where I want to put my index finger when I first draw my gun, not out of the way like thumb safeties tend to be.

[MadMonkey]

I carried a Beretta 96D Centurion for a while... similar to the 92 but DAO and .40S&W, and a tad shorter. I didn't like it for carry as it was heavy and bulky (for me).

The Five Seven and 92 are very different guns and not what someone usually narrows their choices down to, but whatever floats your boat! Honestly, I've fiddled with the 5-7 (haven't shot it) and I pretty much adore it (sad, I know!). I've tossed around the idea of getting one myself, but haven't gotten around to it.

I know there are people who do carry it. It's large, but significantly lighter than the Beretta, and has very high capacity (for a pistol). There are 5.7X28 loads that are very, very hot available for it as well (over 2,500fps). Nothing to sneeze at IMHO, and from what I've seen they're very effective especially in the temporary wound cavity department. More effective than the 9mm? Hard to say at this point, but I would feel just fine carrying one.

Personally I'd go with the 5-7.

[philip964]

I shoot the 5.7 more accurately than any of my other guns. However, I can't imagine carrying it. It is my night stand gun.

[Middle Age Russ]

Interesting choices you have narrowed down to. I know many folks carry full-size service handguns every day, but in today's market there are plenty of options besides the two you have chosen. Since you don't care for the feel of the Glock, you might try looking at a few gun stores and getting a feel for some of the other popular carry handguns, including the M&P series, the XD series, the FNX/FNP, Beretta PX4, SIG, HK and Ruger. There is a great variety of different trigger actions, manual safeties, sizes (full size down to sub-compact) and costs in this group. Happy hunting!!

[TxRVer]

If you carry all day, I think you would tire of carrying either of those. They are both large weapons with similar dimensions. The FiveseveN is about 10 ounces lighter, but still weighs over a pound when empty.

[Apothix]

I just love shooting those two guns and I tend to be more accurate with them than I have with many of the others I have shot. I have tired the XD40 and XD9 and although I liked them both more than I do my Glock32, I didn't like them near as much as I did the 92 or the 5-7.
My aim and hit box is just so good on the 5-7 compared to anything else I've used, its hard not be in love with it.. After shooting 100 rounds through it, picking back up my glock32 felt like I was shooting a cannon.
But I appreciate all recommendations and suggestions as I am still in the learning stages.. I was looking at the PX4 Storm as a compact instead of the 92, but have not had the pleasure of being able to test one out.

[koolaid]

I think the FiveseveN makes for a pretty horrible carry gun. It is both large, and fires an underwhelming round that was designed for a task that you are extremely unlikely to encounter in a self defense situation and ammunition that you can't actually get.

Unless you have penetrator ammo and expect to have to fire large volumes at people wearing body armor and have some expectation that you'll need to be able to share ammo with your P90, almost anything else is a better choice.

[MadMonkey]

I think the FiveseveN makes for a pretty horrible carry gun. It is both large, and fires an underwhelming round that was designed for a task that you are extremely unlikely to encounter in a self defense situation and ammunition that you can't actually get.

Unless you have penetrator ammo and expect to have to fire large volumes at people wearing body armor and have some expectation that you'll need to be able to share ammo with your P90, almost anything else is a better choice.

I disagree. There are a lot of loads available for the 5.7X28, not just the stuff FN puts out.

Here's some testing:
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'd hardly consider it ineffective.

[karder]

As others have said, the FivenseveN and and the Beretta 92FS are very different. I like the FN very much and strongly recommend it for it's firepower, accuracy and dependability. It is not the easiest gun to conceal, but the Beretta is a large gun too, so that may not be a problem if your choice is between the two. The Beretta does come in a more widely found caliber and you have a lot of choices for loads, so that is where I would give the Beretta the advantage. The purchase price on the 92fs is also more agreeable.
Both these guns are good and will serve you well, but my opinion is that if you can manage the size and don't mind the higher cost, the FN is the next best thing to a rifle.

[A-R]

Same general thoughts from me ... neither would be my carry choice and they are VERY different animals .... that said, here would be pros/cons in my mind:

FN FiveseveN

Pros -
lighter/polymer frame
more devastating ammo (at least on paper and in theory)
more rounds in gun
easier-shooting round (but not by a lot compared to 9mm)

cons -
twice as expensive gun
more than twice as expensive ammo (per round costs)
only one gun and ammo supplier
likely not a lot of holster options

Beretta 92 (in direct answer to comparisons made above)
heavier/older design
good, but not great stopping power (comparatively speaking)
still a decent number of rounds
still an easy-shooting gun
half the price new vs new and even less than that for a good used one or a Taurus clone - seen used 92F for $400 or so used
MUCH cheaper ammo - $10.97/50 rounds (22 cents per round) for practice ammo at any Wal Mart - about about 60 to 80 cents per round for quality +P JHP
two manufacturers (Beretta and Taurus) and most popular ammo caliber in the world.
plenty of holster options

[surprise_i'm_armed]

I think the FiveseveN makes for a pretty horrible carry gun. It is both large, and fires an underwhelming round that was designed for a task that you are extremely unlikely to encounter in a self defense situation and ammunition that you can't actually get.

Unless you have penetrator ammo and expect to have to fire large volumes at people wearing body armor and have some expectation that you'll need to be able to share ammo with your P90, almost anything else is a better choice.

Ruger's P90 is a .45 caliber single stack pistol. I'm not sure to which gun maker you are referring.

SIA

[Middle Age Russ]

SIA,

The P90 referred to earlier is likely the FN P or PS90, which is a bullpup PDW originally designed for the 5.7mm cartridge. The P90 is the select fire version -- thus not obtainable for civilians -- and the PS90 is a very short, semi-auto carbine.