What's the difference?

To the bigger point you need 1000s of rounds through a system to test its reliability. The military (not necessarily the gold standard for all things testing) usually trial their new weapon systems for 50k rounds.

MAC has a BCM he’s testing for failures and he’s up to 7k rounds from his last video I watched.
 
Have you looked at the operating system for both? There is a lot that is different. The m4 system is proven superior. Is the extra cost warranted in your case? That's for you to decide.
You say the M4 is proven superior. Is that proof the operating system itself or actual statistics about performance?
 
The only problem I see with the Beretta is the placement of the safety. Have seen people go from shotgun to AR and drop the mag from the rifle thinking they were turning off the safety. If they would move the safety location it would be a much better design.
 
You say the M4 is proven superior. Is that proof the operating system itself or actual statistics about performance?
It would be actual, and countless, tests, trials and untold countless shooters. Much of that is due to the operating systems.

I have a 930. Put it together for 3 gun stuff years ago. It's fine after a lengthy break-in and with regular and persnicky maintenance. The m4 just runs though. And can be neglected. I'll grab my m4 before the 930 now, but the 930 is still fun.
 
There is a pretty good argument to be made that the Benelli M2 tac, with their inertia system, is the superior choice to both the m4/1014, the 930 and damn well anything else on the market. And depending on model and particulars, aren't much more than a 930, and quite a bit less than the m4
 
If you have the money to run a thousand rounds to test a 930 then just use the ammo money and buy the Benelli and there is no need to test and then have to replace all that ammo spent during testing. Now that's thinking like a proper prepper. Stay tuned for more vast knowledge from me the proper prepper. LOL
 
Back
Top Bottom