Gun Hub Forums banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
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. Caveat emptor, and all that, but I've always wanted one and it looked to have never been fired, so it followed me home. :D
Could any of the experts give me further info? Its a Made in Italy model, s/n D73xxxZ ;
Thanks,
Jack
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,055 Posts
Dean is our resident authority on this, but I do not recall hearing of any troubles with commercial pistols at all... only the military.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Reply to Post

Charlie,
Thanks for the reply. Dean instructed me to join the forum and consult the experts on it, so here I am! Talk about a quick response.
I visited both ends of the "new gun emotional spectrum" buying it and then seeing that report about slides disfiguring our brave soldier's.
Is there anyone out there with 5-7 thousand or more rounds through their 92F who can weigh in?
regards,
Jack
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,055 Posts
Just to clarify a bit...

Beretta went to the Glock school of stonewalling and blamed the ammo but did emerge with the "FS" model which has the fix prescribed for the M9.

Basically this consists of a big washer on the hammer pin that rides in a small cut in the left side slide rail. This would catch the back half of the slide and prevent it from impacting inconvenient places. Of course Beretta charged for new slides for the M9 so our beloved USMC fixed it themselves by milling a tiny slot in the slide.

Subsequently Beretta made some other changes, but I still do not know of any cases in civilian pistols. Nor do I know anyone who has shot one very much.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,935 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Gentlemen, Let me start by saying thank you one and all and that I am not a professional writer nor a metallurgist. I read the article at http://www.thegunzone.com/m9-a.html , and said so in my original post via the runon sentence: "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". That article said that up to 160,000 ("possibly defective") pistols were made which might have had the problem. Since my s/n was in the 73000 range and since I'm ignorant of the prefix and postfix interpretations bracketing that serial number, I was rather justly concerned my aged yet still pretty enough visage might be in danger. This concern possibly hindered good reading. But I'll cite the other information from the article, I was further concerned that as late as Feb '88 the famous 6,000 round good - 6,0007 round slide separated event occurred. The article also stated that two Picatinny Arsenal (NJ) documents from 1989 stated there were metalurgical problems with slides. So who in his right mind would be confident in a 1989 manufactured Beretta ? I sure wasn't. Te was mentioned but the very word French was not found by my critical eyes or my web browser "Find on this page" application.
I am virtually sure now, thanks to all, that my 92F is safe and hopefully will provide years of enjoyable shooting.
Jack
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Eureka! I found the following in a 1995 rec.guns post by Dean:
The French, which originally specified the Telurium inclusion in the slide

metalurgy, were savvy enough to realize that it did NOT in fact promote
fracture toughness. They change specifications before adopting the
pistols.
The "surplus" slides made it to this country, and every (EVERY!) one of my

original documentations occurred with one of the "Zero Waste Management"
slides containing >Te<, and which there is now a clear correlation between

As inspector Clouseau would say" "The mystery is solve Ed"!
:)
Thanks Again Dean, CP, TrWnTN!
Jack
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
973 Posts
DeanSpeir said:
Jack said:

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.

I'd forgotten about that episode. It still brings a smile.

I had an opportunity to talk with a retired LA Sheriff's Department instructor about their experiences with the Beretta 92. The thing that stood out was to take seriously Beretta's warning not to dryfire without a snapcap in place, or you risk firing pin breakage.
To me, that seems to be a defective in design, particularly when just about every other manufacturer has found a way to build a pistol that can be dryfired.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
723 Posts
The military did test some commercial guns along w the mil spec guns in 1988. All three of them fractured the slides too, at round counts of 17,408/21,264/24,656. There were slide fractures in commercial guns after 1989 (do not know if they were made after 1989 though).

Got that from Todd Green when he worked for BUSA (he now works for Sigarms).
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top