Beretta PX4 Compact Review: The Reality-Check Pistol
I stood in silent awe. Mouth open. Eyes pensively glazed.
An uncanny manifestation of handgun marksmanship loomed before me: 30+ bullet holes in the tightest pattern I’d ever seen on paper.
Slowly, my attention shifted to my strong hand—in which there was… a pistol.
I half expected to see a Neuhausen Sig P210, a Walther P88, or some high-dollar 1911. Something that could explain what I was seeing on the target. Something that had a legendary reputation for accuracy and unquestioned precision—and a price tag to reflect that.
Nope.
In my hand, was a Beretta PX4 Compact. And with it, I had just shot the best group I’d ever shot @ 10 yards.
And that, my fellow gun hipsters, is what I call a “reality check.”
Unfortunately, I don’t have a pic of that “historic” group I just mentioned. So, you’ll have to settle for a PX4 glamour shot.
What makes the Beretta PX4 hipster worthy?
With its unique rotary mechanics, the Beretta PX4 transforms recoil into a seamless conduit of sensory feedback, making every shot feel astonishingly precise, predictable and intuitive.
Shooting a PX4 seems to transcend consciousness.
You don’t think. You know—where, how and when your shots are hitting. There’s no uncertainty. No ambiguity. Just seamless, unabated accuracy.
The recoil impulse is incomparably smooth. Almost timeless. It keeps you in the moment. It keeps you connected to your point of aim, your trigger break, your point of impact. It seems to know where you want to put your next shot.
Maybe before you do.
Is the PX4 really that good?
Yeah, the thing is damn accurate. But is it more accurate than other inherently accurate pistols?
Honestly, I don’t think so. But the way the PX4 shoots and handles makes its accuracy so… available. No doubt, my Beretta 92, Walther P88, Walther P5 and Sig P239 routinely put up groups that make me smile. I have no complaints with any of those pistols. And I’m not saying there’s a vast gulf in terms of accuracy/shootability between those fine pistols and the PX4.
But, after not shooting my PX4 for a while, a recent range trip really put things in perspective: This gun is special.
It’s not just the accuracy.
The PX4’s eminent glory, captured in a ray of sunlight.
It’s the way in which you experience, perceive and implement the accuracy. And while there are some aspects of the PX4 Compact that, for me, ultimately make it less than ideal for its intended purpose (but don’t worry—it’s 100% reliable), its incredible shootability is more than enough to justify owning one.
And we’re not talking about some $1,000+, bougie/boutique-y pistol, here. This is a modern, polymer-framed pistol that costs what other modern polymer-framed pistols cost.
So, yeah. The PX4 is that good.
And if you don’t want to read the rest of the review, I think you’d be thrilled to own one. It’s a pistol that must be experienced to be understood… even believed.
But let’s get into what makes this thing tick… er, spin…
A Different Spin on Breech Locking
In case you’ve been living under a tactical rock for the past 15 years, the Beretta PX4 series uses a distinctive rotating breech-lock system.
So, instead of tilting down and back to unlock from the slide, the barrel turns on its axis as it retracts (about a third of a turn) which disengages a series of asymmetrical locking lugs and allows the slide to complete its rearward cycle. The barrel has a slanted cam track machined into its rear lug assembly which mates with an angular “nub” on a special “camming block” that slots-in under the barrel. This is what turns the barrel as it retracts, under recoil. Upon returning to battery, the barrel gets cammed back around and the lugs re-lock into their respective nooks and crannies in the slide.
It's pretty cool.
The camming block, next to the barrel. You can see the angled cam-track on the barrel and the corresponding “nub” on the cam block.
To be clear, the PX4 is not the first gun to use a rotary breech-lock system—nor is it the only gun to currently offer such a system (the Slovakian Grand Power guns use rotating barrels). Other guns that utilized a rotary system include the Mexican Obregon, the Sig/Mauser M2 and the Boberg/Bond bullpup guns. Glock even makes a model for European police—the Glock 46—which uses a rotating barrel.
You can see the main locking lug on the left of the barrel and the camming slot on the right.
But the PX4 is the most well-known, most prevalent gun to employ the system. Well, the PX4 and its rotary rockin’ predecessor, the Cougar—which, in my experience, shares the sublime shooting characteristics of the PX4.
Speaking of sublime shooting characteristics…
“Uniquely Communicative”
In past reviews, I’ve used this phrase to describe how pistols with falling-block actions—namely the Beretta 92 and the Walther P5—feel a little different than pistols with tilting barrels.
To me, falling-block guns seem to recoil a bit slower and more predictably; I find I’m able to stay more engaged with my point of aim and more connected to how and where my shots are hitting. In a sense, it’s like I’m in a “conversation” with the gun.
The PX4 and its big brother
The PX4 certainly has this quality. And then some. Honestly, I tend to think the PX4 is even more engaging and more communicative than the falling-block guns.
While I can’t say for certain what was going through the heads of Beretta’s engineers back in the ‘90s, I have to believe they recognized and appreciated the 92’s intuitive shooting characteristics. So, it stands to reason that they’d want to preserve this quality—if not accentuate it—in their next major pistol platform.
Which, as it so happens, was NOT the PX4.
So, I picked up this hot Cougar back in 2016…
The story of the Beretta PX4 begins with the Beretta Cougar (which I mentioned before). The Cougar—aka, the 8000 series—debuted in 1994 and it represents Beretta’s initial foray into the world of rotating barrels.
Beretta 8000 Cougar—the PX4’s progenitor. Photo courtesy of Wikipedia.
In a sense, the Cougar is a PX4 with a metal frame. Now, that’s a gross oversimplification. Any Beretta engineer reading this is surely face-palming now. But… having trigger time with both platforms, there is some truth to it: the defining characteristics of the shooting experience are common to both guns.
Internet lore seems to suggest that the Cougar was not particularly successful or well-loved when it was in production. I could see that being true. Compared to a 92, it was short, fat and… ahem… “proportionally distinctive.” Personally, I think the Cougar looks freakin’ cool. But up against the 92’s classically graceful lines, it probably was a bit of an “acquired” taste—which, I guess, not too many were willing to acquire 25 years ago.
But, regardless of aesthetics, the Beretta Cougar can _uckin’ shoot. I know because I had one.
In .45.
It was probably the smoothest shooting .45 I’ve ever experienced. It shot just as softly as my Smith & Wesson 4506-1, with breathtakingly effortless accuracy. Compared to the HK45c I also owned at the time, the Cougar was just… dreamy. More accurate. Less recoil. Better trigger.
Now, the .45 Cougar’s grip was gigantically fat and the trigger reach was long for my teensy-weensy hands. But the gun shot so incredibly well, those nitpicky details just didn’t matter.
Unfortunately, I had some failures to feed with that Cougar. [insert obligatory cougar innuendo]
But I later realized I was putting waaay too much moly grease in the rotating action. Because, like most budding gun hipsters, I thought grease was the avowed lubricant of the tactical intelligentsia and oil was for losers. But I’m fairly certain all that viscous white sludge was making the action sluggish and causing it limp into battery. After that experience, I’ve only used oil in the rotating action of my PX4 Compact; 2,000+ rounds later, I’ve never had an issue.
In any case…
In the early 2000s, the pistol market was changing. Polymer frames were becoming ubiquitous. Glock was growing in popularity. Younger buyers were looking for more modern offerings. And while Beretta had offered the polymer-framed 9000 series beginning in the late 90s, for reasons I’m still not entirely clear on… everyone _ucking hated that gun. Which makes me kinda want one, honestly.
Again, I can’t be certain what Beretta’s thought process was… but… I think they knew they had something special in the rotating-barrel design. Something that was inherently shootable. Something that was intuitively accurate. And maybe they figured that with a more modern take on the Cougar, they could find success where the 9000 had failed.
The PX4—looking ethereal AF.
Thus, in 2004, the Beretta Cougar died quietly and the PX4 was born. Though it’s worth noting that the venerable Cougar did live on as the Stoeger Cougar for another 10 years or so, when Beretta moved the Cougar tooling to Turkey.
The PX4 subcompact was subsequently released in 2008. The PX4 compact—which this review covers—was last of the PX4 trio, released in 2011.
More on the various “flavors” of PX4 later.
What goes around comes around
Rotating barrels must have some kinda magic.
As I’ve said, both the PX4 and the Cougar are outstanding in terms of their inherent shootability. I’ve also heard that the Grand Power guns—all of which use rotating actions—are impressively accurate. Same with the Mauser M2 series, despite their stiff DAOish triggers.
So, what is it about a rotating action that enables this plush, predictable, precise character in terms of shooting dynamics?
Truth be told, I’m not entirely sure.
The stock explanation is that the rotational mechanics bleed off more recoil energy because… well… I guess there’s more movement occurring with rotation vs. the abrupt, jerky motion of tilting. I’m sure there’s truth to that. However, there is one other thing I noticed about the PX4’s action.
The rearward travel of the PX4’s barrel is slightly longer than tilting-barrel designs.
Locked back, the PX4’s barrel seems to retract slightly farther than tilt barrel and falling block designs.
Not a ton. And my measurements are far from precise. But… plotting half-inch tick marks on a sheet of paper, here’s some rough measurements of how far the muzzle moves forward from lock-back to battery:
P239 & P99 (tilting action) – ~1/4 inch
Beretta 92 & Walther P5 (falling block action) - ~1/3 inch
PX4 (rotating action) – Just under 1/2 inch
Interestingly, the slide travel on all these guns was similar—just under 2 inches of travel.
So, then…
Does more barrel travel = more “feel” in the recoil impulse?
These crude measurements would seem to suggest that—especially when you see the falling-block guns falling (ha!) somewhere in the middle. But certainly there are many more factors in play here than one gun nerd with a tape measure can account for.
Regardless, I tend to think that more motion during the recoil cycle—be it length of travel, rotation and/or both—translates to a slower cycle, which translates to a less abrupt, less-distracting recoil impulse.
That is, of course, just a theory.
So, whenever I get into these quasi-technical musings, it comes with the caveat that I’m not an engineer. So, please chime in if you know better or different.
In any case…
Here’s what you need to take away from all this: The Beretta PX4 is…
One hell of a great shooter
If I had to describe the experience of shooting a PX4 in one word, it would be:
Seamless.
From sight picture, to trigger break, to recoil impulse, to hole on target… everything falls into a smooth, harmonious cadence. Nothing breaks your sense of connection to the shot. And that plush, relaxed recoil impulse is your conduit for that sense of connection. Plus, the bore axis doesn’t feel especially low, but the there’s almost zero muzzle rise.
It’s almost… weird. But awesome.
Especially when churning out groups like this starts to feel easy.
50 rounds @ 10 yards, in the center. Somehow one went high…
And that’s the thing—I shoot tight groups with other guns. I put one mag almost into a single hole with a Sig P239, recently.
But it just feels a little easier with the PX4. And to me, that matters in a combat gun. That means you’re less likely to lose accuracy under stress. That means you’re not fighting the gun to make hits when you need to be fighting a real threat.
In that, I think the PX4 is simply a superb fighting pistol.
Tactilely Tactical
Moreover, the gun’s human inputs—namely the grip and the single-action trigger (more on the DA trigger)—are exceptionally good, in my opinion.
Now, there’s no ergonomic wizardry when it comes to the grip. But there doesn’t need to be—the width, the depth, the contour, and the angle of the backstrap are all on point. Overall, it has fairly upright grip angle. I dig it, personally. The Makarov pistol has a pretty “straight-up” angle too and it, similarly, feels great to me. Same deal with the Cougar, too. And while the Talon grips are a nice add, the proportions/angle of the PX4’s grip are so well done, the gun still feels secure in the hand without them.
In any case…
I get a fantastically secure, comfortable hold on the pistol. And even my short index finger finds a comfortable reach to the trigger—which is excellent, I might add.
The grip’s contours and the resultant trigger reach are damn near perfect—even for my small hands.
At least in single action.
Mind you, I do have the “Compact Carry” variant of the PX4, which includes the “competition trigger package.” I also put a 12lb recoil spring in mine (lighter than stock) and the Langdon “Optimized Performance” trigger bar. Those are all “nice to haves,” yes. But I have shot a stock PX4 Compact—in single action, the trigger is still freakin’ great and completely shootable.
NOTE: I’m not gonna mention any of those upgrades in the YouTube review—it’s against YouTube’s policy to talk about “modifying” firearms. So… who knows how they’ll see that stuff.
Beretta knows how to make great single-action triggers in a DA/SA guns. The PX4—and the Cougar—easily equal the 92 in that respect.
So, yeah… I think the PX4 Compact is awesome. But honestly, I don’t carry it much. Which you might find surprising, since I just raved about it for roughly 6 MS word/Calibri/single-spaced pages.
Let me tell you why.
Big Beautiful Weapon
I’m not one to body shame. And I think the PX4 Compact is beautiful, just the way it is. But when it’s in my pants…
I start to feel a little different. Because the thing is wiiide.
Just to contextualize that, my review of the Legacy Sig P229 is called “Worth the Girth.” Because, you know, the P229 is fat. Well, the PX4 Compact is fatter. It’s fatter than a Beretta 92. It’s fatter than a Walther P99 or a PPQ. I’m willing to bet it’s fatter than an HK Mark 23.
You can see how the PX4C’s slide (bottom) is a few millimeter’s thicker than the Legacy P229’s slide (top)—which is already girthy.
But maybe not a Desert Eagle. Or that 30mm cannon they put in A10 Warthogs.
Now I’m talking about the slide width, here. When the internet gives you widths of pistols, it’s always across some random lever you don’t really care about.
But… as wide as the PX4’s slide is, the gun’s soft contours and low-profile levers (which come standard on the Compact Carry model) do make it carry more comfortably than you’d think it might. There are no sharp edges on the gun and its overall shape just seems kinda biomorphic. So, it’s not pokey and irritating when it’s in your pants.
PX4C and Old School P229. Both chonky—but the PX4 is chonkier.
But you feel the bulk of the slide. Moreover, the gun’s girth tends to create more of bulge at the beltline (talking appendix carry, specifically) which doesn’t look entirely inconspicuous in lighter clothing. The grip length? It’s not overly long. But it’s not short enough or thin enough, in my opinion, to do you any big favors in terms of concealability.
Is it un-carryable? Certainly not. Recently, I have carried it some. Just because it’s such a fantastic shooter… I feel like I should. Like I said, it’s not uncomfortable in the sense that it “rubs you the wrong way.” But when I go back to my Walther P88C or even a Sig P239, the difference in bulk is immediately noticeable. And preferable.
Now, if you’re very thin waisted, fat guns may not present much of an issue for you. But, as I tell my wife, “I have curves.”
Here’s the thing, though…
I don’t think a rotary action gun will ever have a thin slide. I think that’s just… how they roll.
Ha. Haha. Sigh…
And even if you could fit all the complex rotational mechanics into a thinner slide, I would NOT want to compromise reliability. I’ve fired 2000+ rounds (I stopped counting after a while) through my PX4C and never had an issue. Even with plenty of shitty reman ammo.
P88C left, PX4C right. Which one do you think is more comfortable in your pants?
So, yeah…
#keepthepx4fat
But there is one other thing I’ll complain about with the PX4…
Double Trouble
While I love SA triggers on Berettas, I’m not as crazy about DA triggers on Berettas.
As I mentioned in my Beretta 92 review, the gun tends to “jostle” in my hands when the hammer falls (I’m talking double action—not single action). It sends what I’d describe as a “shockwave” through the gun, which makes it basically impossible to hold steady as it’s discharging. Needless to say, this screws up my sight picture and affects accuracy.
I find that the PX4 also has this unwelcome quality—albeit less than the 92.
I believe this phenomenon is mainly a product of overtravel. In DA, the hammer seems to release farther forward than other DA systems. So, your finger goes from squeeeeezing to… nothing. And you jerk the gun as you pull through the remaining slack.
Now, I will say I have small hands. Likely, I’m unable to get enough “hand” around the gun to completely immobilize it against the “jostle” when the hammer falls.
Nevertheless, here’s an anecdote to illustrate what I’m talking about…
A few years ago, I was doing some casual USPSA steel competitions. I used my PX4C. Because… it shoots phenomenally. But 8 times out of 10, I missed my first DA shot. I figured, “Okay, I need more practice.” And that’s probably true—you can always use more practice.
But then, one fateful day…
I had my PX4 in the shop for some sight work. So, I took my Smith & Wesson 6904 to a competition—mainly because my buddy has a 6906 and I borrowed his mags. Honestly, I didn’t expect too much out of a bone-stock cop carry pistol from 1994.
But I don’t think I missed one DA shot.
The difference was night and day. The Smith & Wesson’s DA trigger was so much easier to hit with. And here’s thing: the Smith’s DA pull is actually heavier than the PX4’s; there’s just something inherent to Beretta’s DA lockwork that makes it tougher (for me, anyway) to handle.
Once I got into SA, the 6904 was nowhere near as quick and capable as the PX4. But when every second counts, you want to be able to depend on that first hit off the buzzer.
I did recently install the Langdon Tactical Optimized Performance Trigger Bar in my PX4.
In addition to reducing the reset, Langdon claims the OP trigger bar reduces overtravel. And it delivers on that. It’s a big improvement.
I was aiming around the neck, decocting between shots. It’s good enough to hit a steel plate at 10 yards, I guess. I can’t remember if the string on the bottom was DA only or not. If it was… not bad.
The pattern on the head/neck area is DA only. I suppose it’s decent enough for self-defense—and probably even steel plates. Still… shooting DA only, I think I can pull tighter groups with a Sig, a Smith 3rd gen or a DA/SA Walther. I found the DA on my FN HP-DA to be damn solid, too.
All that said…
I tend to see the DA/SA system as a willful compromise: you know you’re giving up some precision/speed on your first shot to have that seamlessly safe / ready-to-shoot mode of carry. So, given that caveat I don’t expect bullseye accuracy out of the DA in any DA/SA gun.
Nevertheless, I believe one’s DA performance must fall within a certain envelope of “acceptable” accuracy. Of course, that’s subjective. But… I can definitely get there with the PX4—especially when you throw in an OP trigger bar and a lighter hammer spring.
But is it reliable?
Yup.
Like I said, I’ve put somewhere north of 2,000 rounds through mine. Maybe closer to 2,500. Never an issue. And that seems to be the norm, based on what I’ve read.
Now, rotating actions do seem to have a reputation for being more sensitive to dirt, crud and less-than-ideal lubrication practices. Case and Point: my .45 Cougar actually choked (FTFeed) when I slathered the camming action in grease.
So don’t do that.
A few drops of boring, plebian gun oil in the cam track / nub has always kept my PX4 running perfectly. I haven’t always cleaned it between range trips. I haven’t always re-lubed it between range trips. But I never shoot the thing dry.
And it has never jammed.
It’s also worth noting that the rotating action is considered to be extremely tough and durable.
Ernest Langdon endurance tested the PX4 Compact up into the 50,000 round-count territory. He replaced springs and minor parts. But the barrel, slide and frame showed no durability issues and the gun showed no discernable loss in accuracy.
Moreover, in a recent interview with James Reeves of TFBTV, Beretta’s chief of marketing—Carlo Ferlito—recently stated that they have not been able to actually “wear out” a PX4. He also says that it’s probably their most “underrated” design, as he extolls its virtues in terms of not only longevity, but accuracy.
Can’t say I disagree.
In that interview, Mr. Ferlito also notes that the PX4 does indeed serve with armed professionals around the world. You don’t hear a lot about the PX4’s LE/MIL service. But… it’s definitely a thing. A visit to Wikipedia show’s the PX4 is in service with various US police agencies and various international militaries—including special-operations units in India, South Korea and Chile.
If it’s good enough for spec-ops soldiers… it’s good enough for you.
PX4s Galore
So, if you’re considering a PX4 you probably know they come in different flavors. Basically, there’s:
The Full Size – 4-inch barrel | 9mm, .40, .45
The Compact – 3.27-inch barrel | 9mm, .40
The Subcompact – 3-inch barrel | 9mm, .40
My experience is solely with the compact. I’ve never shot a full-sized model or a subcompact. But I have heard the full-size is fantastic. No doubt, it has all benefits in terms of shootability described above, combined with the benefits of a larger gun (e.g., lower recoil, longer sight radius, etc.). Nutnfancy has a review on it. He raves about it.
While the PX4 has never been known for its looks, I find the Compact to have best proportions and lines of all 3 size options
One other thing—and most of you reading this probably already know this…
The subcompact PX4 does NOT use the rotating-barrel mechanism.
It has a good ole’ tilt barrel. Now, I’ve heard it’s a fine, reliable handgun. But, for me, the whole point of the PX4 is the sublime shooting characteristics you get with the rotating barrel. So… just wanted to put that out there.
Then, there are the Langdon PX4 models: the “Carry” and the “Compact Carry.”
As I said, I have the “Compact Carry”—which is a normal PX4 Compact, with:
Low-profile levers
A gray cerakote finish
A proprietary Ameriglo night-sight setup
The competition trigger pack
The “Carry” is a normal full-size PX4, with all those same improvements.
Are the Langdon improvements worth several hundred over the normal compact or full size?
Maybe?
Honestly, I could take or leave the sights, the finish and even the trigger pack (like I said, normal PX4 triggers are dope). But the low-profile levers are really a nice option if you do plan to carry the gun. And the annoyance of ordering those separately and installing them yourself would be… well… annoying.
Also…
Only the full-size PX4 is available in .45. I’ve heard it’s wonderful. And if it shoots anything like that .45 Cougar I had… it is.
Interestingly, the manual for my compact (which is specific to the compact) actually references a .45 in the compact flavor. So, there must have been plans for one at some point. Man, that would be a sweet mid-sized .45. Beretta—I’m game if you ever decide to release it.
FINALLY…
There’s the PX4 “Special Duty”—which is tricked-out “tactified” full-size .45. Honestly, I think it’s kinda ugly. YMMV. But I’m sure it shoots so incredibly well, I wouldn’t give half a _hit about how it looks.
Plus, I’m not sure anyone buys a PX4 for looks. You buy it because it shoots like nothing else.
In Conclusion
And that leads me to my final thoughts.
Buy a PX4 if you value no-BS accuracy in a handgun. Buy a PX4 if you want one of the best-shooting handguns available right now, for any price. Buy a PX4 if you want a solid, reliable, well-engineered product from one of the greatest companies in history. Buy a PX4 if you don’t mind some extra girth and a less-than stupendous DA trigger pull.
But above all…
Buy a PX4 if you don’t have one. Because you’ll freakin’ love it.
Thank you so much for reading.
BUT WAIT!! What about the Walther P99?!
Oh, yeah…
In my recent overview of my current gun collection, I mentioned how much I love the Walther P99 series. More specifically, I mentioned how favorably the P99 compares to the PX4, in the “mid-sized, polymer-framed DA/SA pistol” category.
Euro, polymer, DA/SA, mid-sized, 9mms… FIGHT!!
So, which do I like better?
“Yes.” :)
Both guns are fantastic. Both guns have their respective strong points. Neither gun has any glaring weaknesses, in my opinion.
That said, I still don’t think anything can touch the PX4 when it comes to just pounding through rounds in single action. The thing is just… magic.
But the P99 is definitely a shooter. And when you zoom out from that pure expression of single-action shootability, the P99’s merits become more and more apparent.
To that end, I’d like to do a more “formal” (I mean, is anything I do “formal”?) head-to-head comparo between the PX4 & P99. Because, to me, they’re not only the best in their class… they’re both sorta under-appreciated.
So…
Stay tuned, my friends. And stay hipster.
Hip-Tac out.
What are your thoughts on the Beretta PX4? Experiences? Opinions? Scathing condemnations on my review? Feel free to share below…
#hiptac
© 2022, Hipster Tactical