Opinions on Beretta 92

[Handy]

Actually Mr. Hand, if you cant verify it with names of real people, yeah, its a rumour or sea story. Thats the difference between news and a rumor. If nobody will go on record and say it, its not news, its a rumor.

I think you're confusing heresay, like a report from your brother, with rumor. I know who I spoke with, even if I can only remember calling him "Scout" at the time. If you want to call me a liar, that's your perogative. That my Sr. Chief had a block failure on her base security sidearm 2 months ago could also be considered heresay.


I am incorrectly using the word toggle. I got it from another long forgotten reference and was using it to describe the alternating motion of the block, rather than comparing it to a Luger. I have a P5 and understand exactly how it works.

The following is complete gobbledygook:

The .45 acp has a low chamber pressure, roughly half of the chamber pressure of a 9mm. That is why the 1911 is so flat compared to other makes and models of guns...It doesnt have to handle that much pressure.

1911s come in 10mm and many other ridiculously high pressure/high recoil chamberings. Locking block guns come in no greater recoil or pressure than 9mm and .40. You response actually seems to suggest that you think the locking block system is tougher than the Browning system that has been used to contain .357 Magnum forces. But you do seem confused about the action:

The advantage of the locking block over the browning tilting barrel is accuracy.

You are aware that the most accurate production (no hand fitting) autos are either the Browning tilt barrel Sig 210s, the Luger or a host of fixed barrel autos. The Army spends probably 10 times the expense of accuracizing a 1911 to get the M9 to shoot tight enough for their shooting teams. The modifications are extensive. That isn't saying that a Beretta won't shoot a reasonable combat group, but it is almost the last system to choose for match type accuracy. This is probably because the barrel and block aren't fully locked until the round is fired and the bullet pulls the barrel forward. If you know better, I'm sure the Army shooting team gunsmiths would like to speak to you.

While speaking of reference material, where are you getting your "facts" about the Sig product? Rugers are investment cast, but that process wasn't being used for firearms in the early seventies. Sig frames are 7075 aluminum, which I also don't believe can be cast. So you might want to check that.

If you think the Brigadier slide is purely marketing, whatever.


My internet research was soully to see if anyone on the countless gun forums were reporting the CZ failures you believe in. I'm sure there have been some, but none that anyone is talking about. The important question is really whether the 30,000 round (or so) life of a 92FS is good or not. I say it is low, since there are several other guns that will shoot alot more than that, and quibbling about which ones is beside the point. Definitely by the Glocks, USPs and P210s, which are each capable of hundreds of thousands, rather than tens of thousands. Which other guns will also do that is a matter of tests and reports.

 

[warhammer357]

Check out George C. Nonte's Pistol Guide. There is a chapter there that describes the then new SIG's interesting, unique manufacture process which was set up to produce production runs in an inexpensive way for military orders.
Nonte, who was a respected pistolsmith and gunwriter in his day should know what he was talking about there.
Many people back then offered that submachineguns were also made from stampings and weldings and castings and that they worked fine. What they forgot is the simple physics matter. Subguns generally are larger and heavier than pistols, except for the full auto type pistols like the Glock 18, or Beretta 93-R.
Oh, and Handy, unless they have redesigned it, the Sig P-210 is a single action auto target. I think the original topic was the B-92, which then drifted into a topic about it and other service autos. I doubt any military or police unit today is using the 210, nice though it may be. Military and police units that go for SA autos go for 1911s or P-35s in general.

In case you are wondering where I got info about Sig grips backing out, that came from Massad Ayoob, who pointed out that many Sig fans use those Handall backstraps to avoid problems in that area.

Real people, real names, no rumours.


>>>While speaking of reference material, where are you getting your "facts" about the Sig product? Rugers are investment cast, but that process wasn't being used for firearms in the early seventies. Sig frames are 7075 aluminum, which I also don't believe can be cast. So you might want to check that.<<<

 

[juliet charley]

In terms of quality, durability, reliability, etc., etc., etc., the Beretta 92 and its SIG equivalent (P226) are virtually identical. Neither one will consistently outlast or outshoot the other. It's just a matter of whatever "floats your boat." You cannot go wrong with either one of them.

 

[Handy]

The question I raised was of durability of the 92, a military service pistol. I compared it to three other military service pistols, the 210, the Glock and the USP. The 210 is being phased out of service, but some of the Danish guns are still in use. While you like to dance around the issue, the point is that there are guns, like those three, that you and I can buy that will not break in nearly as few rounds.

Where are your counterarguments about heavy chambering and implicit accuracy?

 

[juliet charley]

The trouble with the P210 and the Glock (and to a large extent the USP) is none of them have really seen much military service--at least with a major military power. Give a bunch American GIs twenty years to play with them then ask that question (of the Glock won't near as good for driving tent pegs as the M9 so the polymer frame gives it an advantage).

 

[Hard Ball]

The Swiss Army used to test samples of their Military 9mm Sig P210s for 100.000 rounds replacing only the barrels (nothing else failed,) When the replaced it with the P75 military version of the SIG P220 the reduced the sample test firings to 50,000 rounds, Perhaps this prooves that DA automatics ARE more delicate then SAs,

 

[Handy]

Perhaps this prooves that DA automatics ARE more delicate then SAs,

That would be true if and only if that was the only difference between the two guns, but it is not:
Steel frame vs. alloy frame (probably the main difference in the change).
Forged slide vs. stamped/welded slide.
Forged internals and levers vs. stampings.

I really fail to see how the DA trigger of any gun is likely to break before the locking surfaces, frame rails, slide, firing pin and extractor. Those are the parts seeing the impacts, friction and torsion that leads to failures.

Juliet,
I'm not sure why it matters who is using the pistols. They were designed for military service, accepted for the same and have all been shot extensively by shooters worldwide. If this discussion was about something like reliability in combat conditions, your point might have some applicability, but it doesn't to the question durability.

 

[juliet charley]

Because how hard they are used can effect durability. There's more involved than just round count. The comment about driving tent pegs was serious. I'm not really sure I consider either the Glock or HK really proven yet.

But you may be right--polymer may trump aluminum. Steel does, but there are costs involved in steel as well. It might be simplicity (P210, Glock, 1911) beats complex (Beretta P226). Or it might be loose tolerances (Glock, 1911) beats tight tolerances (SIG, Glock). Or maybe traditional (expensive) manufacturing techniques (P210, 1911) beat modern, less expensive manufacturing techniques. And it probably doesn't make a whole lot of difference in end.

You get what you pay for (DOD certainly does) with the Beretta, and you get what you pay for with P210. If the Beretta goes 50k and P210 goes 100k, but I can buy three Berettas for the price of one P210, guess which one is the best deal?

I don't really know what you're after, Handy (and I'm not sure you do). In another thread you were championing the virtues of the P226 over all comers. In this thread, you seem to have confined the M9 and the P226 to rubbish heap in favor of the Glock and HK (neither of which have the service record of either the M9 or P226). Sometimes, I think you just like to argue.

 

[AngusPodgorney]

Just curious, did the original poster get his answer? I wonder what he thinks of this thread now?

Isn't it time someone locked this thread and flushed it?

Ed

 

[Handy]

Sometimes, I think you just like to argue.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.


Juliet,
I think it is some of my readership that is confused. My very first post said, "The 92 is a very reliable design, but not very durable. It won't fall apart, but has a much more limited life compared to other guns, despite its size and weight." What rubbish heap?

The ONLY thing I've been arguing (when not trying to correct what was mis-credited to me by posts like yours) is that the 30,000 round service life isn't very long. The problem with this is that, according to some, nothing lasts that long.(?!)

I've tailored my points only to that end. I don't particulary care for Sig 220s, USPs or Glocks, but the other poster set a series of amusing ground rules, so those are among the pistols I used as examples.

If I was involved in a gunfight in a gunshop, the 92FS would be one of the first guns I would pluck out of the case and load, for the reasons I stated. I wouldn't agree to buy it afterwards, also for the reasons stated.

Is that clear?

 

[Hitman32]

I am brand new to this forum. This is my first reply. The pruchase of the Berreta depends on the intention of what it will be used for. For self
defense in a extended close quarters fight the Berreta is not a bad choice
with the 15 shot mag. For general plinking if you do not own a 45 Colt
buy the Colt.

 

[Striker1]

dfaugh,

Other's opinions aside, I have trained folks on the M92 exclusively for the last 10 years and can recommend it. Unless you are going to shoot thousands of rounds competetively, I doubt you'll have a problem.

Can the locking block break? Yes it can, but it takes a lot of shooting. Usually it will be plainly visible arounf the locking block lugs as a crack first, so this is one of the key inspection items to look at when cleaning it (as should be done with ANY weapon).

I have also seen the trigger spring break on training weapons with many rounds through them (9mm NATO)

The Beretta has redundant safety features; safety decock lever, firing pin block and hammer half cock. When operating properly it is highly unlikely that the weapon will fire accidentally (unless the trigger is pulled).

The weapon is more accurate than most shooters, and has light recoil due to it's ergonomics and size.

Speaking of size I have taught everyone from big guys to petite ladies to shoot this pistol and usually slight adjustments in grip are all that's required.

Get the Beretta mags and you won't have a problem if you clean them every now and then

My only issue is that the DA trigger can be up to 16Lbs (however Ernest Langdon) can fix that issue. It is made that way intentionally to avoid Negligent discharge (from a convulsive grip when startled).

Most of all, I recommend you get one and try it before you buy. More and more ranges are offering rental guns so hopefully you can. That is the ultimate test, just don't be turned off by these folks who parrot what they have heard somewhere, unless you are going into combat in the desert I would be happy with it.

Good Luck

 

[Arizona Fusilier]

I've had my Beretta for 20 years, the oldest serving firearm in my battery.

Actually, my first was the 92SB, which was the actual weapon that went through the trials, if memory serves me. After selection, changes such as the swell at the bottom of the grip, oversized and squared trigger guard, matte finish made it the 92F. (That's how I remember it; please correct if somebody recalls differently). At any rate, I bought the 92SB after it was declared the winner, but traded it in several months later when 92Fs became available.

It's been rock-solid reliable, about the only handgun I can say that about, and I own Colts, SIGs, Glocks, etc. It did choke on that cheap Egyptian stuff that was on the market about 15 years ago, but it was my recollection the same stuff BLEW UP other guns! I don't shoot nearly as much as I should, but the Beretta has been through the most.

I agree with comments about the trigger; curiously, most heralded it as an improvement over most DA autos made to date when it first came out.

I agree with the size comments, too. Your not packing a 92 concealed unless you're a very large person, or put it in your backpack or something. My Beretta 92F is my "outdoor" gun. I wear it in a full-flap Bianchi holster whenever I'm out in the desert. With the prospect of engagement ranges well beyond the norm for pistols, the possibility of shooting, and missing, more often under these circumstances make the 15 round capacity comforting. By the way, I've found the Fiochi 123 gr truncated cone to be superbly accurate in my specimen

We're all mostly on the same page here (believe it or not! ), we seem to have an outstanding issue on long-term durability. I will say I monitored and studied those original trial results rather closely. While there might be some evidence to the contrary, those tests still remain, in my opinion, the most scientific and documented. I have other guns, and carry them with confidence. But the Beretta 92 series still gets my nod in this parameter.

Now, at the risk of really throwing gas on this fire, let me say my 92F is one of the orignal Italian makes. Come to think of it, all my mags are pre-ban, Italian-made too. Is it possible that the perceptions of a lack of reliability/durability (and I'm satisfied to call them perceptions until something besides anecdotal evidence comes around) arise not out of some fundamental design flaw, but perhaps some spotty quality control out of Maryland?

Not saying it's so, just wondering what others might think, based on their more extensive research.

 

[sks]

Right now I own a Glock 27, Sig 220 & 228, BHP & 92FS among others. I like them all even though they are in 9mm, .40 and .45. They have different grips, different magazine capacity, different trigger pulls and different safety mechanisms. But I love them. I've got the most rounds through the 92FS, BHP and P228. None of them have ever had any problems. Only my occasional bad reload.

If you like the Beretta by all means get it. Man, some of the posts here are wearing me out. All that technical data, (albeit good stuff), is confusing me. I'm almost afraid to shoot any of them now.

My Beretta has worked great even though I haven't frozen it, left it in seawater, dropped it from a building, exposed it to fire, buried it in sand or hammered nails with it. Wait a minute, did I hammer nails with it? No that was the BHP. For the average shooter, which is probably the majority of us, any of the pistols made by any of the well known manufacturers will serve well.

Take the advice listed at the beginning of this thread, rent a gun and try it or find someone who shoots close by and shoot theirs. If they let you. Sometimes what looks good in a magazine or on display just doesn't cut it.

I'll never forget once when my wife wanted a Sig P230. I was going to buy one for her because she liked the way it felt in her hand and would fit in her purse. We had the chance to fire one at the range and both of us said, YUCK.

Last but not least. Didn't Bruce Willis use a Beretta in some movie? That is reason enough to buy one.

 

[OBIWAN]

Bruce Willis, Mel Gibson....etc.

Finally...some real testimonials

 

[warhammer357]

No, Mr. Hand,
What you did was you claimed the beretta was not a durable design. You had no proof for your claim.
When your bluff got called, you responded with the silliest list of outdated World War I and II surplus that not only hasnt been produced in half a century, but stuff that does not have an outstanding reputation for durability either. Stuff that is far from being in the same niche of the modern designs.

I challenge you to produce documentation of a Luger pistol that has 100,000 rounds through it without at least seven major rebiulds.
I challenge you to find one that made if for half that round count, considering its feeble toggle action. A toggle action that no other pistol uses by the way because it is a weak link on a fairly legendary gun.
I challenge you to show us a Radom with 35,000 rounds through it. Or a Finnish Lhatti.
Just because a weapon sits in a museum somewhere doesnt necessarily mean it is durable. It just means that particular specimine survived.
For your education, the famed 1911 earned its rep way back when for going 7,000 rounds before it jammed or a part broke. 7000 rounds.
Thats the tally Beretta had to beat.
If that number doesnt strike you as impressive take a loot at those military test results.
Thats the tally that many guns couldnt make. Some, flat out failed like the Smith 59s with their cracking frames. Some were withdrawn by the manufacturers in the first series of military tests. Thats proven fact on record, which beats any of Mr. Hands unwarranted claims and sea stories and rumours from military officers who must be in the OO7 program because they don't appear to have names.

And for the record Mr Hand, just about any double action design is not going to be as inherently long term durable for the reason I explained many postings ago. They have MORE SMALL PARTS and they have to be SQUEEZED INTO SMALLER SPACES.
Every time you pull that trigger it affects the gun, especially when you are pulling against 12-16 pounds of force. Thats why Jeff Cooper, Chuck Taylor and others who are well known in the firearms community point out that DA has some liabilities, not just in terms of trigger pull it self.

For the record Hand, I dont shoot my USP nearly as much when I read about the failures and breakages over on the HK and other boards. Mine hasnt broke, but then again, maybe I am gun lucky or something.
I do know that polymer guns really have not been around long enough to see how they will stand up over the decades. Some plastics and rubber products seem to lose elasticity and ductility and break or crumble in time.
Will that happen to my Glock or USP? I dunno. I do know I dont have to worry nearly so much with my Beretta on that regard or my Colt, despite its plastic trigger and mainspring housing.
The fact is there are not that many double action service pistols that will last over 25,000 rounds, period. Most makers feel that 10,000 rounds is an adequate service life.
Old single action designs made from steel often surpass that mark, but that is comparing apples to pears in my book. With the lesser number of parts to fail, SAs do have an advantage often in durability. You can keep shooting the typical Super Blackhawk long after a Model 29 has been retimed twice, generally. Do you want SA or DA? The Redhawk is pretty durable because it is beefy compared to smaller DA wheelies in the same caliber. Just like the B 92 is more durable than some other DA autos in the same caliber -its bigger and thicker-simple physics there.



>>>The question I raised was of durability of the 92, a military service pistol. I compared it to three other military service pistols, the 210, the Glock and the USP. The 210 is being phased out of service, but some of the Danish guns are still in use. While you like to dance around the issue, the point is that there are guns, like those three, that you and I can buy that will not break in nearly as few rounds.<<<

 

[OBIWAN]

Warhammer/Hand

Am I the only one that thinks you are tying up way too much server space arguing with each other?

I can't believe you two have enough time to read all this!

 

[Guntec]

For the record, I enjoy reading all the great information provided here.

 

[Handy]

Warhammer,

The handle I use here is "Handy", H-A-N-D-Y. There is no need for the insulting and abusive tone you've used since we've been having this little "conversation". As it is stressing you out, I will let it go.

You are one of those people that is always demanding proof, documentation and statistics of occurances that are not immediately available, even if common knowledge among many shooters. If you want to find out about the durability of the Luger, known for it's accuracy and longevity, there are shooting clubs in Switzerland that might provide you with some sort of court certified records. It doesn't matter that I might not remember a name after all these years, because you would simply say that I made it up or my friend did. I'm not going to be able to personally spend the $10,000 necessary to prove that pistol A or B will be able to shoot 100,000 rounds. Only organizations and rich people can do that. It is not worth my time talking to someone who so easily calls others liars.

So we are both just left with our impressions and beliefs (yours being of a slightly more fanatical nature, judging from your emotional tone). Aside from personal reports and testimony, which are by their nature, flawed; I will simply remind you again that Beretta and Taurus both abandoned the design when they set out to build .45s. I know from your last post on the subject that you don't yet have a very keen understanding of how the various pistol actions actually work, but do some reading and think about why Beretta gave up on their signiture open top design when they went to chamber this very popular caliber.


On that note, I'll leave this thread alone, per the requests of those who joined this chat forum, but don't like chat.

 

[Hard Ball]

I think that this thread has established that the M9 Beretta ia an jnferior pistol which will probably have a major failure when the locking block breaks at #10.000 t0 15,00 r0unds/ The sooner it is perlaced with a first class pistol the better off we will be.