Jack said:
I need some help concerning a Beretta 92F I just acquired. Its an AU stamp indicating 1989 manufacture, but I need to find out if this pistol could possibly be subject to the Model 9 slide failure problem I've just read about on the main page, here. … Its a Made in Italy model, s/n D73xxxZ
If it was manufactured in Italy in 1989, then that is well after the date of that limited run of slides for the French contract which specified Tellurium as an inclusion.
The French quickly discarded that requirement since they discovered that it failed to produce the desired slide fracture toughness. It was the first, Italian-made and Italian-manufactured iteration of M9s into which those rejected "TE" slides were "dumped."
All this is explained on that M9 page. They who hath eyes, let them read… critically, of course.
CeePee's right… I know of no such Models 92SB/F which made it into the commercial distribution stream.
The USMC/M9 relationship is a contentious and amusing one… while slides were practicing field dentistry on SEALs and causing disorder and uncertainty throughout the rest of the Armed Forces and causing first 3,000 round count and then 1k RC replacement edicts to be issued, the Corps simply refused to accept delivery of the pistols, preferring instead to repair and refurbish their antediluvian inventory of M1911A1s.
In 1991, some members of Congress got enough heat from 1701
Indian Head Beretta Drive that it formally directed USMC to stop refusing to accept delivery of the M9s. The following year, realizing the gaping "loophole" their Act had permitted, they passed another one, this time specifically ordering the Corps to stop simply accepting those deliveries and warehousing them, and to start issuing the M9s to its personnel.