Gun Review: Beretta Nano

My first impression of the Beretta BU9 Nano: awwww, it’s a baby Glock! Even the artful swage line running from the rear to the front of the Nano’s slide can’t hide the fact that the baby Beretta is an Austrian-style chunky monkey. At second glance, the Nano is a soap bar that’s been left in the shower for a couple of weeks. It’s small, slim, sleek and sexy; a snag-free concealable shooter with low-profile sights and beveled edges. There’s no slide stop to be seen; the reversible mag release is the pistol’s only protrusion. You could even say the striker-fired Nano looks like a Glock to be named later. Not that that’s a bad thing . . .

Like any little single stacker, the Beretta Nano challenges its owners to concentrate [even more carefully] on shot placement. The Nano packs a scant 6+1 rounds of your favorite flavor of nine mil. Fortunately, Beretta includes a spare magazine in the deal, encouraging Nano packers to double-up on ammo for any worst case scenario. Combat reload? Good luck with that.

Along with the Kahr CM9, the BU9 is +P rated. You can use hotter ammo, but you better hold on tight. The Nano is strictly a two-finger salute to Mr. Bad guy. The gun leaves smaller-handed women (like yours truly) struggling for pinky purchase. Depending on the size of your mitts, the Nano’s report may be best appreciated as the sound of one hand defending.

Interestingly, Beretta laser-etched the gun’s serial number on the gun’s chassis instead of the grip frame. The Nano’s grip can be completely replaced. Shooters with [larger] paws for thought may want to wait until Beretta or an aftermarket supplier releases a customized frame capable of accommodating XXL hand sizes. An extended magazine is only a matter of time; the less the better.

The Nano may be small and smooth, but it’s not the lightest gun of its type. The polymer-and-steel framed mini-nine tips the scales at just under 18 oz. That’s almost an ounce heavier than a similarly robust (if more elegant) Kimber Solo Carry and the (plenty cheaper) Ruger LC9. As always, there’s a trade-off between carry comfort and muzzle rise/shooting accuracy. If center of mass follow-up shots at five yards-plus are a high priority—and why wouldn’t they be—the Nano is the right answer.

The Nano’s sights are unremarkable three dotters. For me, target re-acquisition is slower than it would be with a dot and post arrangement (like the set-up on Beretta’s beefier M9). Beretta claims that all you need is a small (1.3mm) hex wrench to pop in new sights on your own. Any Nano packer should give serious consideration to swapping out the stock three dots for some proper night sights.

Down at the range, I fired 800 rounds of 115gr ammo through the Nano—a diet that would give the Kimber Solo a bad case of reflux disease. Here’s the skinny on the ammo I fed the gun:

Federal Champion – 115gr FMJ, 1145 fps
Remington UMC – 115gr FMJ, 1145 fps
Winchester (white box) – 115gr FMJ, 1190 fps
Hornady Critical Defense (only one box of 25rds) – 115gr FTX, 1140 fps

[HTML1]

I experienced one failure to eject (FTE) with Winchester white box and one failure to feed (FTF) shooting Remington UMC. In other words, the pocket rocket shot like a Glock—more or less. That said, I’ve read complaints by owners who’ve experienced regular FTE errors.

In the SHOT show video above, Ben Cook from Beretta USA admits the Nano might have an issue with underpowered ammo. In the video below Cook tortured tested the Nano, withholding lubrication and cleaning during thousands of rounds.

[HTML2]

While I wouldn’t recommend putting your own handguns through this kind of abuse, I couldn’t help but to try the test for myself. As soon as my test Nano arrived, I gave it a bath in Hoppe’s No. 9, reassembled it and began shooting. During the entirety of the aforementioned 800 rounds and since I’ve yet to give the Nano even a sip of oil. Two errors speaks well of this petite pistol’s reliability.

The Nano’s trigger is the biggest fly in the ballistic ointment. The baby Beretta may emulate a Glock with its inline trigger safety, but it has none of the pleasure of a Glock’s go-pedal. The Nano’s heavy nine-pound bang switch has a long drag, and the journey’s not a smooth one. When it’s crunch time, you don’t want it to be crunch time. The shooter’s solution: one long consistent pull with an equally epic return.

Field stripping the BU9 is user-friendly enough; standard for this style of handgun. If you’re concerned about pulling the trigger to deactivate the striker, you can press the Nano’s striker deactivator with a pen tip. After that, give the disassembly pin a quarter turn (I used a penny, but you can use the edge of a magazine or a casing) and the slide separates from the frame. The whole process doesn’t take more than ten seconds, assuming you have a pen handy.

Initially, I was underwhelmed by the idea of yet another polymer CCW baby nine. The Beretta Nano won me over. The trigger is long on safety and short on precision but the Nano does all the things I expect from a self-defense subcompact. It’s light (enough) without sacrificing accuracy. It conceals well. It’s enjoyable to shoot, and a lot more affordable than the Kimber.

The Nano’s design isn’t groundbreaking, but it borrows the right bits from other pocket pistols and does it with Glock-like style. In fact, the Nano’s only real competition is the Glock micro-nine that the Austrian gunmaker has yet to build. Until then, the Beretta Nano is an ideal choice in an increasingly crowded niche.

Specifications:

Model:  JMN9S15
Caliber: 9mm Parabellum (Luger)
Capacity: 6+1
Overall Length: 5.63”
Barrel Length: 3.07”
Height: 4.17”
Width: .90”
Weight (unloaded): 17.67oz.
Sights: 3 dot low profile
Slide: Pronox finish 4140 steel
Frame: Technopolymer
MSRP: $475 (about $400 street)

RATINGS (out of five stars):

Style * * * *
It’s curvier than a Glock, has clean lines, and roll-marked lettering. It’s sexy in a “tactical practical” kinda way.

Ergonomics (carry) * * * * *
Small, light, non-reflective, and snag free—ideal features for a CCW pistol.

Ergonomics (firing) * * *
“Comfortable heft” makes it a pleasant shooter. It loses a star for the two finger grip, and another for that long, crunchy trigger pull.

Reliability * * * *
My experience was primo, but there are complaints buzzing around about FTEs.

Customize This * * * * *
The non-serialized grip frame opens the door wide for customized grips. The easily interchangeable sights make the Nano a personalized package just waiting to be assembled.

Overall Rating * * * *
A pocket rocket that I can depend on without breaking the budget scores points with me, but its looks don’t hurt either. With a proper, more Glock-like trigger, the Nano would’ve landed the coveted TTAG fifth star.

97 Responses to Gun Review: Beretta Nano

  1. avatarChris Dumm says:

    Great review! I’m jealous, actually: the Nano was my favorite subcompact from the SHOT show.

    I found the Nano’s recoil to be much more comfortable than a Kahr’s or Kel Tec’s, with far less muzzle flip. My followup shots were much faster, and my palm didn’t sting afterwards. The trigger was mushier than the Kahr’s, however.

  2. avatarDaveY says:

    The Nano has been plagued by early reports of extraction problems, ours also.
    http://www.usrkba.org/nano-thoughts

    So far the party line is to only use defense ammunition, 124 grain or heavier and optionally +P. I’m at a loss to explain how the bullet weight or pressure will affect the performance of the extractor, and the c/s rep. I spoke to could not either. Hence, it’s back to Accokeek.

    • avatarChaz says:

      I’ve shot a few hundred rounds through my new Nano so far. I like it. Early on I had two extraction problems but none since then. I’m just shooting inexpensive 115 gr FMJ ammo. I’ll shoot heaver bullets and the premium defense stuff eventually. Since any tiny 9mm flips up strongly I’m skeptical about the practicality of +P loads but I will try those too.

      • avatarJeff Nugent says:

        I’ve had my nano for a year now. Lost count of how many rounds I’ve put through it but I’ve never once had a FTE or any other problem. I highly recommend this gun. My wife still prefers her glock, but only because of the trigger.

    • avatarHSR47 says:

      Have you tried different brands of ammo?

      My XD9 pistols seem to like everything I have fed them (UMC, Federal’s Champion, PMC bronze, Herters steel, Wolf steel, etc.) EXCEPT Winchester white box and Federal American Eagle, both of which have occasional failures to extract.

      Honestly, extraction issues aren’t that big of a deal for pistols with an external slide lock; on a pistol with no slide lock, or only an internal one, they are a deal breaker.

      • avatarChaz says:

        Ammo tried so far: MFS, Sellier & Bellot and Blazer Brass all 115 gr FMJ. Unfortunately I don’t remember which of these I was using for the early shooting when I encountered the FTE.

      • avatarjamie says:

        Funny, my xd9 sub compact has never had any issues except it hates tulammo. It loves winchester white box.

        • avatarAndrew says:

          The Smith had magazines falling out, a well-documented problem, failure to fire issues due to a weak firing spring, and some other problems. The current NANO has no problems at all and I’m not certain it had any even in earlier incarnations other than with substandard ammo. I like the Smiths, have a number of them including the BG380 and some of their best revolvers. The NANO is smaller than the Shield, better designed from a mechanical AND functional viewpoint – that last can hardly be debated. The NANO has many original thinking behind it, no external levers and such, it can be had with night sights one can install at home, and is, insofar as my experience with it for two years, bulletproof and entirely reliable.

          That kind of reliability is hardly common, and only experienced with my HKs – all of which are reliable, but certainly larger and heavier.

          None of this makes the Shield a bad pistol or non-competitive with the NANO. Far from it. It would have been my second choice among the small 9′s I had and still own.

  3. avatarTTACer says:

    I wonder (9!) if the hypothetical reliability problems, and the lack thereof for our smaller-handed reviewer, are tied to the lack of pinky purchase. Possibly the inability to control muzzle flip with any power ammo tends lead to short-shucking with weaker loads, if I may mix my action metaphors.

    • avatarHSR47 says:

      Some guns just have FTE issues, and sometimes guns don’t like certain ammunition.

      I have never, to my knowledge, limp-wristed a pistol, however I have had ammunition-related extraction issues.

      How can I tell? Easily. First, one is a factory-ported XD9, which has almost no kick in the first place. Second, I shot a few hundred rounds of American Eagle through it, and experienced several FTE. Then I switched to Wolf for a few hundred rounds, and had no issues at all. Then I switched back to the AE, and the FTE came back.

      So far, out of maybe a dozen brands of ammo, it has only ever had issues with AE, WWB, and ammo in a UMC box which I suspect was actually repackaged WWB (a local indoor range had a thing against WWB for awhile).

    • avatarjeff says:

      I believe the issue may be limp-wristing, also. I knew after checking out the Nano in a shop that the short grip would be an issue for my wife. Sure enough, she was getting a bunch of FTE’s when she first began to handle it. My intention was to only use the extended mag for her, but we found a great deal on a used nano at a shop and it only came with the short mags.

      After some coaching, my wife was able to stop the limp-wristing and no more FTE”s. I bought a couple of the extended mags for her, and she won’t use the shorties ever again.

  4. avatarJoe nobody says:

    Did i miss something? When did destinee start writing for ttag? Great review by the way

  5. avatarCharles says:

    Well done review.

    Some folks really like a heavy trigger pull on a SD gun. At the up-close-and-personal SD distances did you feel it affected your accuracy to a considerable degree?

    • avatarRobert Farago says:

      The closer you get the less important any gun’s accuracy. At bad breath distances, your biggest potential problem is muzzle flip degrading follow-up shots. IMHO

  6. avatarMr. Lion says:

    I do like the automatic take down screw on it– very clever, that.

    Beyond that, the lack of larger calibers removes it from my interest. Now, if they did something really off the wall like make a .38 Super version…

    • avatarChaz says:

      Somewhere I read that the Nano frame is engineered to handle 40 S&W and a 40 S&W model will be produced eventually. That should be a hand full.

      • avatarMadDawg J says:

        If they make a 40 and a mag with pinkie grip I would be likely to pick one up, until then my credit card is safe.

        • avatarPhydeaux says:

          Supposedly they designed the Nano for .40 but released the 9mm version first. I too am waiting for the .40 cal.

  7. avatarbontai Joe says:

    Nice review. I was studying the photo of you holding this pistol and you indeed have small hands. I am unfortunately blessed (cursed?) with XXL size paws and I’ll need to check this one at the gun shop to see if I can even get a full 2 finger hold on it. My little AMT Backup allows me a 1 1/2 finger grip to give you an idea how big my hands are. Do you have any notion if the trigger can be smoothed up at a reasonable price?

  8. avatarKYgunner says:

    I can see by your ammo choices that’s your budget is much more similar to mine than Ferrari owning RF (not that owning a beautiful work of Italian engineering wonder is a bad thing, quite the contrary). I love seeing guns tested with the ammo, because I know that’s the bulk of what I’ll be shooting until I get my reloading equipment.
    Great review, you are a wonderful addition to the TTAG staff!!

  9. Very good, very detailed review. I like that you put so many rounds downrange. Most gun reviews stop at 5 or 6 boxes.

    Hope to see more of your work.

  10. avatarHSR47 says:

    Honestly, I have seen the Nano, and I am unimpressed; It is a single stack subcompact 9mm, a market that is already flooded (CM9, PM9, MK9, LC9, PF9, etc.), and it doesn’t do anything to differentiate itself from the pack.

    To be brutally honest, I don’t see the point of any of them; they’re too big for pocket carry, and I have no issue adequately concealing full-size pistols (XD service, 1911 government) on my tall, thin, bony frame. In short, they are a solution in search of a problem, at least where I am concerned.

    This is why I went with first a P238, and now a DB9: they’re just barely small enough to pocket carry, which means that they aren’t extraneous guns that I will never carry.

    Additionally, the reviewer mentions the location of the serial number; Federal regulations dictate that the serial number must be applied to a metal surface. The exact location of the serial number is likely for parts interchangability: early promotional materials mentioned .40 versions, and this in addition to new grip shapes would (assuming parts interchangability that is only logical) cause the location of the serial number to make a LOT of sense.

    Honestly, it sounds a lot like the P250 in this regard….

    • avatarMadDawg J says:

      “To be brutally honest, I don’t see the point of any of them; they’re too big for pocket carry, and I have no issue adequately concealing full-size pistols”

      Understandable, but many of us spend times in situations where full size pistols will not work. If I could I would have my full sized 1911 with me at all times, but a lot of the time that would require open carry and it still wouldn’t work out. If there wasn’t a market for them, there would not be so many options.

      • avatarHSR47 says:

        “If I could I would have my full sized 1911 with me at all times, but a lot of the time that would require open carry and it still wouldn’t work out.”

        What holsters have you tried?

    • avatarbontai Joe says:

      I’m 6′-3″ and weigh 295, so I have no problem carrying a full size pistol also. I was kinda looking at this as a second gun that can tuck in a spot for those days when I feel one gun just might not be enough.

      • avatarHSR47 says:

        Well, my point is basically that, for the person who has little difficulty adequately concealing a full-size pistol, a pistol of the dimensions of the Nano is impractical, because it is too big for pocket carry.

        The issue is the height (bottom of mag to top of slide), which makes it difficult to draw and put into use. As I said above, the Sig P238 and the Diamondback DB9 are both pushing the envelope of what is practical at 4″ in this dimension; The Nano is larger than both of these.

        Add to this that the nano weighs more than either pistol too (DB9 is something like 11 oz, and the P238 is 15/20 oz depending on frame material, vs the >17 oz for the Nano), and it looks even worse as a pocket gun.

        In short, what I’m saying is that *I* don’t need a pistol like the Nano for a primary carry piece, and given its external dimensions it is unsuited to use as a BUG.

        • avatarAGB says:

          Sorry, don’t agree. I have shot all the pistols you mention and owned some of them. I also have various 380s. Sig 232, S&W 380, Ruger LCP. Those are pocket guns for real, the Smith is the best, the SIG a problem for its SA operation, the Ruger OK, the Kel-Tec a bit less so. Ditto for their 9s. The Kimber Solo is hardly smaller than the NANO. It’s just an illusion. With its levers it is almost a 1/4″ wider and longer. The butt is slightly shorter. It weighs the same more or less. The Smith Shield is longer by half and inch, wider because of the levers the Nano dispensed with altogether, and longer in the butt.

          the only reliability problems reported were from people using substandard aluminum case ammo. My personal experience duplicates that of others who own recent vintage Nanos (I had fired two of them). No FTF, ejection or extraction problems at all with good self-defense ammo.

          The Kahr PM 9 was a disaster and I sold it. So did most of the cops at the NYC PD who were unfortunate enough to buy this POS.

          The NANO is almost exactly the size and weight of the PM9. It just shoots reliably and prints better.

          The Walther PPS is another story.

          A great pistol. As good as the Nano-which I prefer.

        • avatarDaveY says:

          “the only reliability problems reported were from people using substandard aluminum case ammo. My personal experience duplicates that of others who own recent vintage Nanos (I had fired two of them).”

          That is just an outright fabrication. The Nano was shipped with a bad extractor mechanism when the gun hit the market. An entire range of these firearms were defective, right from the start. You can find evidence of the bad extractors all over the internet. Matteo Recanatini Web & Social Media Manager Beretta USA Corp – was all over the internet forums replying to early reports of these failures to extract. The link to my personal Nano above documented this as well. While not as symptomatic as some reported, the original gun choked several times, and at least one time per trip to the range. My Nano was replaced outright, something I’ve never had happen with any other firearm. The replacement Nano has worked flawlessly, but there very definitely is, or was a problem with a significant number of early Nanos. That’s not to say that Beretta has not taken care of it, they have. But the Nano issues were absolutely NOT related to ammunition, substandard or otherwise.

        • avataragb says:

          I CLEARLY spoke about “recent vintage” NANO’s, none of which had reliability problems DAVE Y, so your outrage has no effect, except I guess in your own mind.

          As for substandard aluminum case ammo, the internet is also full of FTEs reported AND THE FACT THAT USING good grade COMMERCIAL ammo had NO problems.

          So Dave, what was an outright lie and by whom?

  11. avatarDrmaudio says:

    You bring up some great points here. Many people look at weight as a negative, and it is to a point, but too light equals hard to shoot. I chose the PPS not despite it’s weight, but because of it. It is slim and light enough that I can easily and comfortably conceal it on my thin frame, but it shoots just like a much chunkier (albeit the almost same weight) and harder to conceal baby Glock.

  12. avatarlongeyes says:

    I’ve seen nothing in this new gen of mini-pistols to make me want to abandon my Glock 26. Yeah, it’s a bit heavier, a bit thicker, but it’s reliable and holds eleven rounds of hot 9mm. Sometimes old is best.

  13. avatarGOOFA says:

    I thought the review was pretty much on for the most part. I myself have put through just over 1500 rounds with no failures whatsoever. I would bet that a good portion of the individuals who experienced FTE’s were probably using Federal Champion 115gr fmj 9mm in the maroon color box. This garbage has caused many a firearm to fail due to it being marginal at best. I recommend to stay away from that ammo when breaking in a new firearm. There is other inexpensive ammo that can cause these types of malfunctions. Also I am surprised that the author did not say that the trigger gets much smoother as the round count goes up. I worked on my trigger group and I now have it at 6lbs. 6oz. and the trigger is quite smooth. Another item is that the Nano loves to be rapid fired. Double and triple taps in a defensive situation are quite respectable, much better than most of its competition. I feel the Nano is one of the best offerings in CCW today, an excellent firearm at an excellent price.

  14. avatarBigBeluga says:

    Great review! Love your writing style and the level of detail you put into this.

  15. avatarAl says:

    Nice review- I’ve had 2 Glock 26′s most recently a Gen4 still could not learn to love it, that being said I also sold my Rorhbaugh in 9mm due to the small size lack of fun factor (yes I do shoot for fun) this little gun was punishing – yes a superbly crafted firearm but alas- so the search goes on the Nano may be just the ticket!
    PS Excellent review!
    Al

  16. avatarSean says:

    Good read. Nice review.

  17. avatarGaryinVT says:

    Destinee!!! (And something about a gun)

  18. avatarJoseph says:

    LC9 – Cheap and Reliable…kinda like the girls at the Playboy Mansion.

    Destinee…class act….good review.

  19. avatarAl says:

    Excellent review! Thank’s for the info on this little Beretta- I am a huge Sig fan and I’m considering a P290 but the Nano well I think it rings my bell –
    Alain

  20. avatarFred Smid says:

    Superb evaluation. this evaluation seems to mirror my personal evaluation of my Nano, but is more in depth. Great job. I just need to put more rounds through it. Have shot about 500 through with no failures.
    Again, good evaluation.
    Freddy

  21. avatarVernon says:

    Good review. I think it also looks good. I don’t see what the reviewer of the solo sees in it’s looks. By the way aren’t you on YouTube?

  22. avatarJD says:

    Ridiculous. You write about the FTEs and then you say its dependable (meaning reliable). I realize its part of the “trade” but your biases are evident in almost everything you review. I would give this review a coveted 1-star TTAG review.

    • avatarDaveY says:

      I’m thinking of making Beretta USA half owner of my Nano, since they have had it about half the time since I purchased it. Nobody wants to admit the gun they just bought sucks, and if it fails to work with any commercially bought SAAMI spec ammunition, it sucks. It might be the best featured gun in the world, but if it won’t work reliably you had best admit to yourself and others that it sucks. Not necessarily the whole model line, but certainly your example.

      This “rationalization” is prevalent in a lot of things we do. Vehicle purchases, dealing with politicians, gun purchases… you name it. We hate to admit that the Joneses got their vehicle for several hundred dollars less, or that their gun performs more reliably than the one we just purchased.

      I found the PF9 to be a superior gun, if you can deal with the trigger, but that is a subjective opinion based on my personal experiences, biases, and round for round fired comparison. Any review you read online or in print media will be subject to the same influences. What blog reviews offer is a more prominent showing of the flaws or weaknesses that won’t survive an editorial review from a print media which takes advertising money from the manufacturer of the gun being reviewed or an accessory provider for them and a host of other unholy influences. Making excuses for firearm malfunctions with the amount of engineering precision available today is just silly.

      It is truly irresponsible and unethical to carry a firearm that you know to have a proven history of malfunctions in your hands. To quote the NRA, “50 rounds is probably not quite enough, 500 rounds might be too many. Many gunsmiths recommend 150-200 rounds with no stoppages”.
      Ultimately it’s the owners responsibility to assess reliability. But you’re right JD, providing even an implicit endorsement of a gun with a non perfect performance is just as irresponsible and just as unethical as carrying one, maybe more so.

      • avatarMatt g says:

        DaveY, sounds like you got a lemon… sorry to hear that. I agree with you on the whole owners bias thing and that carrying an unreliable personal defense pistol is insane. On a different note however, many of us have perfectly reliable Nano’s and carry them with confidence. I’ve put roughly 800 rounds through mine and the only way I can produce a malfunction is if I totally limp-wrist it – and even then, it’s still hard to get it to do it. Anyway, I hope you get yours sorted out.

        • avatarDaveY says:

          BUSA replaced my original Nano, magazines and all.

          So far, so good. I want some more trigger time but this gun has performed much better.

          Check it out: http://www.usrkba.org/nano-second-thoughts

        • avatarAGB says:

          I think the issue came up with very early production Nanos. Mine is late June production, so it’s fine as far as I can tell. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. Granted, the SIG 938 is prettier – especially the EXTREME model. But would I carry an SA every day?

          No way, or as a friend used to suggest: NFW!

          Sig is dying for liability suits, aren’t they?

          My Nano has become my favorite small pistol. With the S&W380 BG as backup.

          There is no way I want to carry larger weapons daily.

          And yes, I’ve owned, or still own, many of the others mentioned here. Among which i only kept the Walther PPS with small laser and Big Dot sights.

          For heavier duty I prefer the Heckler & Koch…and for their quality AND reliability which, in the case of the NANO, Beretta may have matched.

    • avatarTye says:

      I’d like to remind you that 800 rounds were allegedly shot through the thing WITHOUT cleaning. I would not recommend ingnoring the maintenance of a concealed carry pistol; with proper care perhaps NO failures would have occurred.

      It would have been nice to know at what round count the failures DID occur — was it the first couple of magazines; was it after 700 rounds without cleaning??

      My experience with Keltec’s PF-9 has not been so stellar, apparently “torturing” it the pocket for too long without shooting/cleaning. I may eventually learn what PM routine and ammo combo yields reliability for it, who knows. In the mean time, consideration of the Nano is in play based on the stellar performance of the other Berettas in my stable (96 & PX4sc).

      Aestetically, however the Nano is one UGLY duckling!

  23. avatarMike says:

    If you want 100% reliability, get a S&W 360 snubbie. A semiauto is inherently more complex and will fail once in a blue moon with a limp wrist and subloaded factory round.

    99% reliabity works fine since the probability of actually needing to fire your gun at an assailant is one in a million. The the chance of gun failure resulting in situational failure is therefore 1 in 100 million.

  24. avatarMike says:

    Glock please come out with a single stack 9mm the size of a LC9,That would fix all the problems

    • avatarPhil says:

      No, it wouldn’t Mike. Know why? Because the LC9 is way bigger than the Nano, the PM9/CM9 or the Solo. The LC9 is more the size of the Kahr CW9 or the new S&W Shield.

      OTOH, I would love it if Glock came out with a micro 9mm the size and weight of the Kahr PM9 or the Nano. Right now, I’m thinking I will stick with my Kahr CM9 which has been totally reliable for me. It too has a long trigger without a short reset, but at least the trigger is glassy smooth all the way back.

  25. avatarPeter says:

    I would like to know your thoughts on the Ruger LC9 vs. the Beretta Nano.

  26. avatarLuiggi says:

    Well, I never knew about the “nano” until just this morning….a friend of mine told me to check it out, so I did, I was looking at the Khar, the gunshop/range attendant offered me a test ride on the Nano, which, to be honest, I didn’t liked it at first, it looked kind of funny in the flesh, but I have always trusted Beretta, for good reason.

    I took it to the line and found the trigger better than a glock(this one has several 100′s rounds thru it, as it’s a demo gun) but after my first 10 shots I had to clean up my eyeglasses cause I can’t believe what I was seeing, at 25 ft I had barely missed the X on a standard b29 target(!!) so I pushed it back to 45 ft and I had just a couple of 9′s. pushing the envelope to 65 ft(max at that range) I deliberately slowly shoot two more 5-round sets and I still was within the 8 ring, with a pocket pistol!!!

    I had to have this little gem, so I quickly slided my ATM and filled the necessary paperwork and went back to the line with a brand new Nano. I loaded and the very first round didn’t feed,ugh..well it was the very first, so I tap-rack ejected the round and proceed with a couple of boxes, the only failure was a failure to buy more ammo because this thing ate 100 rounds like if nothing, and the out of the box gun shoot even better than the other one in the sense that the sights were perfectly centered. I’m carrying this piece no doubt, it goes in a pocket like nothing and I trust this one, there’s nothing indicating any kind of flaw in the design, and it’s not even painful to shoot even with full powered ammo.

    I give it five stars, of course it’s my gun!

  27. avatarTorbjorn says:

    +p doesn’t affect the extractor, but the extra distance the slide travels from +p makes sure the empty casing swings out of the port. Pistols with stiff recoil springs need +p ammo.

  28. avatarGreg Bankston says:

    Sent my new Nano back yesterday….I am so depressed. First box at range shooting WWB and Remington 115gr. many FTE’s. Internet research led me to try 124gr. and FTE”s continued. Used Walmart WINCHESTER NATO 124 , Speer 124gr Lawman and even Speer Gold Dot 124 gr +P…all failed. I am a very proficient shooter and am sorry I bought it. My old XD sub compact not much bigger eats everything and runs like a precision machine but I thought I could pocket carry the NANO and that didn’t work because it’s still too big. I can easily conceal my XD and my Kimber 4″ PRO and my old S&W 640 revolver that I carry with 357 and 38+P. I just hope Beretta makes it right before I get it back. Was an impulse buy and I couldn’t in good conscience even sell it to another.

  29. avatarAGB says:

    GUNS AMERICA – Just came across this review of sorts, the second video. Apparently the NANO may be the only mini 9 that matched their favorite, by consensus, theirs, the Walther PPS.

    I happen to agree with their assessment, having owned or shot the competition more than once.

    I torture tested the Nano at the range, firing sideways, upside down (no, not while flying through the air) and if worked flawlessly. This one will be a big seller after owners of Kimber Solos and Kahr PM9s ditch their unreliable weapons. Actually, they have little choice in the matter.

    http://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/beretta-arx-160-22lr-nano/

    • avatarBobo says:

      Lady Bobo’s PM9 has been anything BUT Unreliable, the only issue she’s had is after injuring her wrist she has a tough time racking the slide. We’re going to take a look at the Nano and see if it works better for her (she’s not a revolver fan).

  30. avataragb says:

    Yes it is a nice review and there are many. The FTF and FTE problems are legendary for those btw, who insist on feeding it crap ammo. I’ve now used it a lot since my last comments and had absolutely no problems. I believe very early production had a few issues, these were quickly resolved by Beretta.

    A gun magazine recently said that “it’s not the smallest out there, but design-wise and engineering-wise it is light years ahead of the rest.”

    From living with it and owning some of the others, I agree.

    Accordingly, I can’t agree with the suggestion that the Nano is not groundbreaking. I think its engineering is. Because it has solved a few problems of the small pistol other makes haven’t even attempted to address. I am sure they have patented some of these new ideas, so the Nano is just a beginning in this direction for Baretta. It’s catch up for the rest.

    • avatarHarry says:

      Hi AGB,
      I just bought the Nano to use as a CCW pocket carry gun. Before I start packing it, I will take it to the range with the idea of running a few hundred rounds through it. In the past with my other autos I have had also bad luck with “crap” ammo. However, I have also found that what maybe crap ammo for one auto maybe good ammo for one of my other autos. Since you did not have any FTE and FTF problems with your Nano, could I get you to tell me which ammo you used? It would sure be nice if I could safe some range time and money. Did you use both the FMJ (for range use) as well as the hollow point self-defense ammo? Much appreciated for helping me out with this.

      • avatarAGB says:

        Harry, I apologize not finding your reply in my email folder til now. To answer you.

        I used common target ammo FMJ and Cor-Bon DPX (not many of the last because of the expense). It appears that most ammo will feed well. I use DPX for the defense ammo to carry.

        Just try your favorite ammo with it and see what happens. That’s the only way to test any pistol.

        Eventually, you will have to use self defense ammo and I would test it with that. Some people said that the pistol was designed for 125 gr, but I’ve been shooting 115 grain (more of those available) with good results.

        Lastly, buy the Trijicon night sights from Beretta direct. Easy to install. Most issues arise at night, so be aware.

  31. avatarWill M. says:

    I have had zero problems with my Nano, other than some wear where the barrel and slide lock up that seems a little premature but does not affect function one bit. However, I have griped to Beretta about accessories, or shall I say, the enormous lack thereof. So imagine my surprise when I was asked by them to be a Beta tester for some of the items soon to come out. Seriously, to have a major company listen to me and bring me into the fold is amazing in this day and age. (And no, I am not a gun-rag writer, nor do I own a gun shop.) Old fashioned customer service is usually a thing of the past, but Beretta apparently knows customer happiness and loyalty goes farther than any advertisement. Heck, look at how I’m here typing away about my fondness for a gun company! Whether you like the Nano or not is up to you. It is one of several good sub-nines out there. But should you choose it, I can certainly assure you I have found Beretta’s service is top-tier, and you will have a wonderful carry piece and a company that firmly stands behind it and you, the consumer.

  32. avatarJanet L. says:

    It’s great to see a review by not only someone who doesn’t have hands the size of hams, but a woman as well!

    Once upon a time I bought a S&W CS45, a tiny little .45acp double action. For me it was a single shot: Bang, jam! It didn’t have this problem for the guys I had try it, and they said I must be limp wristing it, but no, I was griping it as hard and holding my wrists as rigid as I could, and it still went Bang, jam.

    It eventually occurred to me these guys not only had MUCH bigger hands, but their wrists were about as big as my ankles. Try as I might there was just no way I was going to lock down my grip as solidly as these guys were.

    Now, I’m not a small woman, fewer than 1 in a hundred are as tall as I am (Though many are heavier) and bracing with all my might against the recoil, I couldn’t convince the CS45 to work.

    I was concerned that this might be the case with the baby 9s. This review convinced me that the Nano was worth trying. I have to admit having been quite skeptical about Beretta’s handguns. When the Army adopted the Beretta 92, I tried one out, and it’s grip was so huge I couldn’t hold the thing stable – recoil would try to twist the contraption out of my hand. . .

  33. avatarGary Panuska says:

    On mine, I cleaned it with mineral spirits, blew it dry and re-lubed. I took this baby to the range and shot a variety of ammo. 2 days at the range, over 600 rounds and not a single failure. Started with Federal American Eagle 9mm 147 Grain FMJ, Federal American Eagle FMJ 124 Grain FMJ, Federal American Eagle 9mm 115 Grain, Herter’s Select Grade 115 Grain TNJ aluminum case Total Nylon Jacket, and even Wal-Mart’s Winchester White Box 115 Grain. The Nano feels good in my hand, recoil very manageable, accurate, quick follow-up shots.
    I am very impressed with the Nano, a winner for a great concealable weapon for carry.

  34. avatarIan Osborne says:

    The Nano is the only gun purchase I’ve made that I have regrets. I was CCing this firearm but after spending the past year at the range with it, I decided it was enough. Every single person I’ve given the gun to at the range to try out is completely grossed out by the disgustingly long and sloppy trigger pull on this gun. Even after putting 600 rounds through it, switching between a multitude of other firearms really accentuates this issue.

    Trigger control and practice is one thing, but when the pull feels like you ran a marathon distance every time, its quite obvious just how terrible it is. Some people had actually started pulling the trigger and literally stopped, set the gun down and asked me what’s wrong. That’s a testimony all by itself.

    Recently, I began to consult with women who want to protect themselves by helping them find a gun that suits their specific and varied needs. This gun was in my range gear as an option for them to try, when a gun feels so unnatural that first time shooters are confused by it (again, trigger pull), its pretty hard to recommend a gun that you have to say, “It takes getting used to”.

    That being said, I have a used nano for sale. Corporate sponsored gun reviews be damned.

    • avatarAGB says:

      It’s always a pleasure to get a negative experience amongst all the positives, and in light of the many good reviews the pistol received, the initial problems apparently had been worked out. I can suggest three possibilities to Ian’s misfortune:
      1. Defective pistol (not likely)
      2. Defective shooters (no comment)
      3. Shooter didn’t “like” how a semiauto meant to operate just like a revolver more or less, operated just like a revolver more or less….the only difference being is that the Nano in most applications is more accurate than a revolver with a short barrel and most other micro 9′s meant for the same market.

      But then nothing is perfect except the image I see in the mirror.

      • avatarIan Osborne says:

        Fair enough. I’m very accurate with it by the way and I personally don’t feel like I’m pulling a hammer back with the trigger as in a revolver. I feel like I’m pulling mush for a mile then towards the last 10 feet I feel it finally engaging.

        I’ve found a lot of Beretta die hardship feel the same way as I do. One trip to the forums will show that.

        My EDC is now a Kimber Pro Carry II. Granted the price is 3 times more.

  35. avatarTodd says:

    I finally got my new Nano to the range this past weekend, and although I only put 200 rounds through it, I didn’t have a single failure of any kind. I was shooting 124gr FMJ range ammo and it was a very accurate and enjoyable experience. I have no doubts about the reliability of this firearm and if my wife doesn’t steal it from me, it will be my new favorite carry.

  36. avatarWade says:

    For all of you wondering about the 40 s&w Nano, the BU9 is going to have an interchangeable barrel for a 40 s&w, has not been released yet, but soon. But you better use the extended mag, cuz thats going to hurt. lol

  37. Just purchased a new Nano Beretta. Have a Beretta Storm and I hope the Nano will perform as good as it does. Ammo is hard to come by where I live, and like the weapon (s) problems hope it resolves itself.

    Nice feel to this one and the lack of different things on the slide sides like others is a good thing. For example the Ruger is a fine shooting gun once you get by all those items on the side. But with small weapons to day used for concealed carry a manual safety switch is a little much. Carrying a small gun used for self defense is just exactually that. If you have to pull that baby who wants to worry about the safety being on or off. The trigger pull on the Nano is a little much. When I pull the trigger on my weapons I want it to go bang not wonder if its going to go bang. They claim the long pull is for safety. Lets leave the youngsters at home. Quite clear the Nano is not a range gun but a pocket gun you use for self protection. About 5 feet or so your attacker is ready to shoot you. Have a good pocket holster to carry this killer in and when you pull it shoot him. None of this talking crap. If you came to talk why have this weapon on you in the first place. Lets be honest, why this situation in the first place if you are not really ready to protect your self. When the authorty gave you a badge or a concealed carry permit to arm yourself it was for a purpose. Again, stop the games and get down to deady actions. If I.m in a parking lot and this dude comes up to me armed and intends to rob or kill me guess what–plain and simple I shoot the SOB. If not why have the weapon on your self with a CCW to go with it. Folks this is a bad world out there and you never know what you about to run into. When I went into law enforcement in the early 50′s you seldom ran into bad guys with guns. Mostly knifes, clubs, etc. Seldom did you encounter youngsters carrying ARs, etc. 50, 60, 70s etc. Today when you see them with shotguns or ARs you can bet some of them are up to no good. And your gun is in the glove department of your parked truck. Bottom line—go to a good self defense school, have a good gun on you and carry good ammo. Shoot only when you are threatened with deadly actions.

  38. avatarDon Guertin says:

    I bought one a month ago and I really like it. I am very used to the longer trigger pull and if you don’t like it then try the KelTek P11 now that is so long it is scary to me. I then bought a Sig Sauer P250 Sub compact and the trigger was a lot better but for me the gun was hard to concela and loaded was just heavier than I prefered the Nano and I really like the gun. The trigger pull is a little long but I feel it is smooth. the weight is lighter and it has none of the safteys many guns have. Mine came with a 6 and a 8 round mags and the 8 round has the extra finger groove so it is comfy. I carry it well hid under my shirt in a DeSantis holster.I have never had a FTF or FT problem unlike my Sig I had to send back to make it work. I love Berettas and was so hopefull this gun would work as good as it does. Cool light weight carry gun that does what it is supposed to do.

  39. avatarJon says:

    Sold mine. Way to many extraction problems. Eventually the trigger just stopped working. Bought a Kahr CM9. Works perfectly.

  40. avatarGary says:

    I should have read your report better because I just bought a new Nano on 5-3-13, fired 29 FMJ 115 grain, only hit the target 4 times at 21 ft and had 2 jams. I sold that, that night and bought a Glock 26. The Nano’s a nice gun but if you can’t hit your target you’ll be dead. Gary

    • avatarLarry says:

      Interesting Gary, you are alone in your preference for the Glock 26, a poorly made weapon two generations and light years behind the superb engineered NANO, that is, in my experience, absolutely reliable AND accurate. I refer you to the article in COMBAT HANDGUNS P95, Nov.. 2012 – repeat “COMBAT”….handguns. Not a magazine’s whose title is “Pocket Pistols with Hard to Pull Triggers.” The NANO’s trigger is no more and no less hard to pull than many other small pistols: You begin with putting your forefinger onto the trigger and exert enough force, about 6 lbs – meaning the weapon is made for women too – to release the firing pin. The NANO has very rare FTFs once broken in with a few boxes of cheap target ammo.

      COMBAT HANDGUNS had this to say in its conclusion about the NANO:

      “…for a semiauto it is cutting edge technology – not just for Beretta, but for semi-autopistol engineering as a whole…..compared with others it is light years ahead. As as self defensive sidearm for concealed carry the new Beretta couldn’t be any easier to use without it being a revolver.”

      A buddy who works at a large local gun retailer, after reading your words had this to say:
      “I don’t believe him. We have many trade-ins for micro semis by people who are getting rid of Glock 26s and 27s for good reason. The NANO is very popular among these small pistols and we have had absolutely no returns whatsoever.”

      Frankly Gary, I don’t believe you either and I think you’re a troll. Enjoy your two decades-old design for as long as you want to believe that is is state of the art. Anyhow, as long as it shoots and you don’t mind a brick in your pockets, why not?

      • avatarIan Osborne says:

        I don’t think he’s a troll for having an opinion. As far as your opinion goes, you do realize aside from the modifications made to the Nano (striker disengage and no slide lock) the Nano is for all purposes a Glock engineered copy right?

        Probably not, maybe if you disassembled the two side by side you’d see the Nano is a copy of this “decades old design” lol.

        Glock hate much?

        As far as the trigger pull, ya its only 6lbs. But its a mile long to get there and it finally fires after that mile. It takes getting used to if you own other guns and transitioning back and forth isn’t fun.

        I said it before and I’ll say it again. I train women in self defense and this gun (Nano) is part of my range kit. It gets the most negative feedback of all my guns whether or not I explain to the shooter that the trigger pull is long. New shooters practically jump out of their pants when it finally goes bang. I don’t enjoy any pistol that “takes getting used to” or “is supposed to replicate a revolver” it’s not a revolver, its a personal defense weapon, and I don’t want my gun to feel like I’m pulling a hammer back.

        Many people get defensive because disparaging a purchase the’ve made insults their choice. Me, I own my decisions.

        It’s a great gun for sliding in a pocket because its smooth, it takes some practice getting used to the trigger (which in my personal opinion :::Note: not a fact::::, is garbage for me to shoot). I’ve noticed most new shooters drop the shot on the target low because the pull is so long and without training they repeat this over and over again.

        Granted I’m just one guy with an opinion. But I’ll run my Glocks, Kimbers and XDs every day unless the only option I have is to pocket carry.

        • avatarLarry says:

          Actually the NANO is revolutionary design NOT using the Glock takedown, nor the Glock’s safety firing pin release, neither of which the Glock uses. The NANO’s mechanism which can be taken out of the frame intact is entirely different from the Glock’s – so much for your Glock to Nano comparison. It holds no water. In the sense that every semiauto out there can be compared with the original Browning patents, including Glock. None of these statements are meant to slight Glock’s innovations and success, but even the polymer frame most people attribute to Glock was a Heckler& Koch invention used on HK pistols the first time. That leaves the compound trigger which may or may not be – arguably – a Glock invention and which is slightly similar to Beretta’s trigger.

          The materials pistols are made from matter. Glock uses cheap steel and cheap polymer (yes, there are dramatic differences in composition and performance between materials as you’ll see below.) HK and Beretta use better materials and BOTH firms are primarily suppliers of state-of-the-art weaponry to the military, including machine guns, military rifles, etc.. Glock is not. They make no military-grade weapons, even though some military units used them.

          Beretta’s latest combat rifle is likely to be adopted as the next gen weapon of choice, and our SOCOM is already using HK’s variant of the M-series of the Stoner design. Beretta’s design is likely to overtake the FN SCAR some SOCOM is using.

          LEOs buy Glock because it is cheap – period. LEOs don’t expect to go into combat on a daily basis and therefore their needs are met with a lesser quality and less durable weapon. In the huge test run by DHS firing 3 million rounds with various pistols, including 1911s, only a few met the stringent tests they require for critical operations. Beretta was not an entry because it didn’t have a model suitable for DHS. Glock failed multiple tests early on and was eliminated practically the first round of the tests, HK came in first for two models submitted – no failures at all – and SIG came in second with one model submitted. DHS adopted HK and SIG in the largest government-sponsored tests ever attempted.

          These are incidentally full size and compact weapons. The NANO however is a micro compact, substantially smaller than the above cited. I too, prefer my HK P2000 sk (they call it subcompact which it is certainly not, but it is concealable.) It is much easier to shoot, it is relatively small enough for winter use, and it is scarily accurate out of the box. I could not cause even a single FTF even when I fired it sideways, upside down, or with a limp wrist.

          But then I could not make the NANO misfire either given I didn’t bother lubricate it, or even wipe it down, for over 500 rounds.

          In any event, a micro compact 9mm for my purposes is enough gun, so I rarely carry the HK or the small Walther, or the very tiny S&W BG 380.

          I appreciate your training creds Ian, but I do refer you to the DHS tests cited above and to the fact that gun stores are not getting returns of NANOs. The fact is that statistically the customers are very satisfied and are trading in their small Glocks for Nanos, and never the other way ’round.

          Aside this, one has to consider two observations:

          1. Glocks can be downright dangerous because it is alone that do not support the cartridge entirely and as a consequence has had more than the average KAbooms:

          http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/glock-kb-faq.html

          In other words, I’d rather not lose my hands or eyes or both. No thanks. I’ll spend more money for an HK that has never had the problem using commercial, rather than reload grade ammo. Or Beretta NANO that has never had the problem.

          2. That GLOCK has made dramatic marketing inroads allegedly from bribes, payoffs, mostly political connections who were bribed, and a long history of corruption, while making tens if not hundreds of millions selling an inferior weapon to America’s LEOs is only a problem to America’s PDs and LEOs. Here’s Bloomberg on the facts:

          GLOCK’S SECRET PATH TO PROFITS
          http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_38/b4147036107809.htm

          Your last statement however sums it up and I have little argument with it:
          “Granted I’m just one guy with an opinion. But I’ll run my Glocks, Kimbers and XDs every day unless the only option I have is to pocket carry.”

          The NANO is, a pocket carry weapon, the only option for most civilians, that also is a very convenient fit for an IWB holster: it is not a full sized weapon, not even close, as the others you cite happen to be. A full size weapon is always preferred for many reasons – especially if you expect to guard an outpost 500 miles from Kabul – and I’d agree with you.

          None of which changes my previous observations about the NANO, which, BTW, is being adopted by professionals across the world as an ideal hide out and backup weapon that has a track record of significant reliability.

        • avatarPat says:

          Glocks are reliable and simply rule the United States in popularity. Its the number one handgun of police, feds, and civilians. I do like the Nano, as it is not a brick, like a Glock subcompact.

        • avatarIan Osborne says:

          Really the Feds? Does that include the military? I served my side arm was a beretta. It still is the sidearm for the Army.

          The police generally use Glock that’s true but a poster above already covered why. Budget.

        • avatarAndrew says:

          Ian is correct. The military not only uses Berettas, they had just renewed their contract to buy more of them. The Berettas are far superior to Glocks by almost any measure. The police buy Glocks because they are cheap – end of story. The police have a sidearm, they don’t as a rule expect to use their sidearm. Combat troops who go on patrol every day expect to use it if they dropped their primary arm or ran out of ammo. The Fed’s testing of firearms way exceed that of local PD’s. In one test the feds fired three million rounds and the HK came out first. Later a SIG was also adopted. The HKs are amazing shooters out of the box and are super reliable. I had three and could never make any misfire, upside down, sideways, loose wrists – whatever. 99.99% reliable. Berettas are close and good enough for my purposes. The Nano’s only problem is the short grip. Remedied with the recent 8 round mag – so now it has no problem I am aware of. A good ergonomic grip and so far utter reliability. Lasermax now makes a great laser that appears to be part of the frame…a nice design.

  41. avatarjohn says:

    COMMENT DELETED

    TTAG’s posting policy: no flaming the website, its authors or fellow commentators. Please send any comments about TTAG’s editorial stance or style to guntruth@me.com.

  42. avatarAllan J Dore says:

    I just bought a Nano, I found all the comments very interesting.It does have a long
    trigger pull, but I think I can get used to it. other than that, I really like it.I have other Beretta pistols and I like them very much.Good Quality

  43. avatarTGugs says:

    More pictures of the writer please….maybe in a bikini?

  44. avatarWasiechu says:

    Bought a Nano today. Destinee’s review had a lot to do with the purchase.
    I had been leaning towards the Kahr CM9 but did not like the trigger and sights.

    Fired it today and had no issues. My regular pistol is a P226 so grip was a first an issue. However, after 50 rounds round I settle down.

    Thanks Destinee

  45. avatarSean Quinn says:

    I’m trading my Nano for a Glock 17 today. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with the gun and I’d love to keep it, but I need to learn to walk before I can run. Not a wise pick for a first gun. I’ll likely buy another one in a few years, and if I can track down the same one again all the better.

    • avatarAndrew says:

      You didn’t explain your problem Sean. A Glock 17 and a Nano are different animals for different purposes. I’d guess that the grip is harder w the Nano? If that’s the case, yes, you have to walk first, but the learning curve is short. Overall striker fired DA semiautos work the same way. The Nano is about as simple as they come. Like a revolver. You also didn’t mention whether yours is a 9mm or 40. A 40 is hard to handle, a 9 is not. Or shouldn’t be.

    • avatarJimmy says:

      The nano works the same as a glock. If you can’t shoot a glock you need to go back to the red rider bb gun. Very simple set up on the nano just pull the slide back and point it down range pull the trigger and have fun. But if you want a smoother trigger in a small 9 get a g26 or a ruger lc9

  46. avatarsteveintampa says:

    This gun is a bitch at first but if you commit to learning it, it is a pleasure.

  47. avatarArmand h says:

    my first Beretta in the 1960s was a little 380-auto
    this is not much bigger
    lets not talk about the difference in price.
    went through an inexpensive box of Aluminum cased 115 gr target rounds
    cheapest thing on the shelf
    not a problem in the lot

  48. avatarJimmy says:

    Nice little piece but I still love my glock g27 . As far as a 9×19 my wife love her ruger lc9 pink of course. Make the nano in a .40 and a mag extension then we’ll talk . Some people don’t like a glock but if there so bad why does the nano replicat it so well

  49. avatarArmand h says:

    one word of caution on the sub frame removal
    like a lot of part-less features the transverse pins and other parts
    are held in place by the polymer space they fit into.
    once they are out of the grip they easily slide from their places

  50. avatarArmand h says:

    PS
    the trigger spring fixed end sits between two pieces and it is not self evident if they are together first

    excellent manual when all else fails

  51. avatarDale says:

    I have consistent jamming issues and sent it back for the second time . I requested my money back I have no confinence in the nano for ccw at all. They refuse to give me my money back and want to keep try n to repair it . Not cool beretta

  52. avatarDale says:

    Jamming issues

  53. avatarTragedy says:

    I’ve torn some dirt up all around targets! It’s a babe gun’

  54. avatarnvnvnv says:

    dgeewfrwrqrqr

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.