M9a1 & 92a1 vs 92fs & m9

[9mm]

Looking at a 92fs again had one years ago. But heard frame crack, slide stop cracking issues with high rounds count & high pressure NATO rounds.
Someone said that the new a1 fixed this?? Is there a link to beretta stating what they changed in the new a1 models? I remember the auto locking barrel back on though when putting slide back on frame. And heard there's metal guide rod and all steel trigger.

 

[9mm]

Bump

 

[9mm]

nvm I found it on my own after a few hours

http://www.berettausa.com/media/92series.aspx

for anyway else interested

The 92a1 is the way to go, it has a beefed up frame for recoil/longer service life, the link its on page 4-5 on page 5.

Both m9a1/92a1 have 3 dot sight, m9a1 has sand resittance magizanes, rails, but 92a1 has better frame, though a 92fs slide will not fit on, I believe only the 90-two

 

[Dragline45]

But heard frame crack, slide stop cracking issues with high rounds count & high pressure NATO rounds.

Those problems were addressed long ago and were with the original military M9's. Newer production pistols are good to go.

The 92a1 is the way to go, it has a beefed up frame for recoil/longer service life, the link its on page 4-5 on page 5.

It does not have a beefed up frame, it has a plastic insert to act as a recoil buffer. The link to the manual you posted even states it was specifically added to deal with the increased pressure of the .40 round for the 96A1, this is because the original M9/92 series pistols were designed around the 9mm not the .40.

Personally I went with the M9A1. It has alot more availability for what holsters will work with it. The M9A1 will work with any holster made for the Beretta Vertecs, the 92A1's may or may not. Also the M9A1 has a beveled mag well and more aggressive checkering on the front and back strap. The only benefit of the 92A1 is replaceable front sight, but since I have no desire to switch out the front sight that's not a deal breaker for me.

 

[9mm]

I didn't not know that about the s"holsters.

And the beefed up part is only plastic? Wow ...m9a1 then lol

 

[Dragline45]

Yeah as tough as it is to find compatible holsters for the M9A1 it's even tougher for the 92A1.

If you end up with the M9A1 I bookmarked all the companies I found that make holsters that will work with the M9A1.

I highly recommend this Don Hume

http://www.donhume.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=67_351_393&products_id=42

Aker also has a good selection of holsters that will work with the M9A1, type Vertec in the search bar and select Beretta Vertec from their drop down menu's for a specific holster and it will fit the M9A1. If you are looking for a shoulder rig it will probably be your best choice.

www.akerleather.com

Also Raven Concealment makes kydex light compatible holsters for use with a weaponlight.

http://raven-concealment-systems.mybigcommerce.com/beretta-custom-phantom-light-compatible-holster/

If the recoil buffer was really a feature you wanted they sell this, IMO it's not needed though.

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/17...l-spring-guide-rod-beretta-92-96-polyurethane

Either way whatever you end up with order a Beretta D hammer spring and replace the factory weight spring right away, it's what they use on their DAO models and it lightens up the trigger dramatically, it's like night and day.

 

[Sweet Shooter]

The frame cracking and (near zero) stoppages of the original M9 were due to the fact that they were subjected to outlandish tests, the likes you will probably never afford, time-wise nor money-wise to replicate. We are not talking 30k +P we are talking 30K "proof" loads. Good luck finding those. The 92/M9 stops for nothing. Grow old shooting your M9, they will use it to pound the last nails in you casket when you expire. After which your offspring will win shooting matches with it.



-SS-

 

[Guv]

^^^ Any more need be said?

 

[10mm4ever]

Ben Stoeger has several 92FS that are well into the six figure round counts with no major breakage.

 

[9mm]

I had a time deciding on the 1911 and m9/92fs as I have owned a 92fs in the past but wanted something new and they made the a1"'s. What I heard in the past was m9 military had problems but many suggest this was because of the high round counts , high pressure +p loads that were causing this, along withn abuse. And the fact military is about to replace all the m9 with somethig new in the next year. Some were saying back to the 1911.

Thanks guys, will try to find one. As for the holsters thy don't make something like crossbreed or galco king tuk? I'm not really interested in carrying this one but it be nice to know if they do make it.

 

[TailGator]

And the fact military is about to replace all the m9 with somethig new in the next year.

I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for that announcement. That "fact" is an unsubstantiated and highly dubious rumor.

 

[10mm4ever]

I doubt they'll replace the M9 any time soon. These rumors run rampant constantly,lol

 

[TunnelRat]

I had a time deciding on the 1911 and m9/92fs as I have owned a 92fs in the past but wanted something new and they made the a1"'s. What I heard in the past was m9 military had problems but many suggest this was because of the high round counts , high pressure +p loads that were causing this, along withn abuse. And the fact military is about to replace all the m9 with somethig new in the next year. Some were saying back to the 1911.

Thanks guys, will try to find one. As for the holsters thy don't make something like crossbreed or galco king tuk? I'm not really interested in carrying this one but it be nice to know if they do make it.

They are not replacing anything. The last pistol trial was canceled. There is currently no open competition that I am aware of. Wars are not won with pistols. The DoD is still under threat of $1 trillion in budget cuts. Even if sequestration ends completely it is still $500 billion in budget cuts. All of this over 10 years. Believe me when I tell you pistols are near the end of an extremely long list. I get that we as civilians give them a lot of attention, but it is a rumor without basis in our current reality.

 

[Dragline45]

Yeah the M9 isn't going anywhere as far as the military goes. Not many people realize that the average soldier is not issued nor do they carry a pistol. They are mostly reserved for officers, MP's, machine gunners, medics, tank crews, and other various roles. But as stated the average infantryman will usually not carry a pistol, therefore it's not really a priority to replace since it plays such a small role.

 

[iraiam]

I have at least one of every model listed in the OP title. The M9A1 has a rail and beveled mag well. The 92A1 is a 92 with a rail, other than that they are pretty much the same pistol.


My oldest one is a 1992 or 93 model, I have 2 of these with well over 20K rounds of +p fired through them. The things will digest whatever you feed it, I regularly feed them max COL 147 grain +p ammo

 

[LC9]

The 92A1 has a rail AND a "beveled" mag well........

 

[AustinTX]

Interesting necro. I'll add something for future random readers:

It does not have a beefed up frame, it has a plastic insert to act as a recoil buffer.

The 92A1/96A1 does actually have more metal in the dustcover now, not that the 92FS needed it.

 

[Homerboy]

I've had a BUNCH of 92's, standard 92FS, M9, Centurion, INOX, but am down to just one, the Vertec.

The straight backstrap (feels like a 1911), the replaceable sights, the rail (if you want it). It's what the 92 should have been. The M9A1 is the only thing that comes close to it.

As for the 92A1, I can't get over the round trigger guard, so that was not an option.

I do wish I had kept my Centurion, though.

 

[kraigwy]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but as I understand it when the slide problems showed up with the M-9, it also showed up on the 92F (civilian version).

When the M-9's slide problems were corrected so was the 92F, giving us the 92FS.

I was running the Marksmanship unit for the Alaska NG, and being a 1911 fan refused to give up our M1911s for the Berretta (without knowing anything about them, simple prejudges).

Something came up later in my retirement that required me to qualify with the Berretta and my wife bought me a 92 FS. Found out I liked it, found it accurate and extremely reliable.

I was concerned about the slide problem and that's when I found out the FS was a fix. I have fired thousands of rounds with zero problems.

I suppose I could dig out my X-ray (from my EOD days) and see if I can find any cracks.

 

[AustinTX]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but as I understand it when the slide problems showed up with the M-9, it also showed up on the 92F (civilian version).

When the M-9's slide problems were corrected so was the 92F, giving us the 92FS.

Not quite. The slide problems were due to metallurgical flaws in a batch of slides (too much tellurium) in tandem with the use of thousands of rounds of submachine gun-pressure ammo.

The FS modification is merely an oversized flange on the hammer pin that mates with a machined slot in the bottom of slide in the event of a fracture. It's not necessary for anything because the slide fractures were a limited problem that was addressed long ago.