The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Semi-automatic Forum

View Poll Results: If it broke tell us when--otherwise tell us how long it's been going strong.
Locking block broke in under 1,000 rounds 3 3.95%
Locking block broke in 1,000-2,000 rounds 2 2.63%
Locking block broke in 2,000-3,000 rounds 0 0%
Locking block broke in 3,000-4,000 rounds 0 0%
Locking block broke in 4,000-5,000 rounds 3 3.95%
Locking block broke in 5,000-7,500 rounds 1 1.32%
Locking block broke in 7,500-10,000 rounds 1 1.32%
Locking block broke in 10,000-15,000 rounds 2 2.63%
Locking block broke in 15,000-20,000 rounds 0 0%
Locking block broke in 20,000-30,000 rounds 2 2.63%
Locking block broke in 30,000-40,000 rounds 0 0%
Locking block broke in 40,000-50,000 rounds 0 0%
Locking block broke in 50,000-75,000 rounds 0 0%
Locking block broke after 75,000 rounds 0 0%
Locking block still good after 1,000 rounds 8 10.53%
Locking block still good after 2,000 rounds 15 19.74%
Locking block still good after 3,000 rounds 5 6.58%
Locking block still good after 4,000 rounds 4 5.26%
Locking block still good after 5,000 rounds 11 14.47%
Locking block still good after 7,500 rounds 4 5.26%
Locking block still good after 10,000 rounds 5 6.58%
Locking block still good after 15,000 rounds 3 3.95%
Locking block still good after 20,000 rounds 4 5.26%
Locking block still good after 30,000 rounds 2 2.63%
Locking block still good after 40,000 rounds 1 1.32%
Locking block still good after 50,000 rounds 0 0%
Locking block still good after 75,000 rounds 3 3.95%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 76. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old December 5, 2009, 10:05 AM   #26
LUPUS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 26, 2007
Posts: 463
Those are some of the parts that failed in the 92 Inox which the barrel above belongs. Sorry since I could not get a very clean picture of the fracture on locking block that still stays intact because of the daylight.
















LUPUS is offline  
Old December 5, 2009, 11:37 AM   #27
Chindo18Z
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 23, 1999
Posts: 498
I thought this excerpt from an earlier Beretta discussion would be appropriate for this particular thread...

From a 2006 post by Chindo18Z:

Quote:
I thought some folks might like to see (for reference) what we are talking about when we discuss broken locking blocks.






Quote:
Chindo18Z: The attached photos show multiple views of two broken locking blocks from M-9s. The ones on the left are from my issue pistol (that makes 6 broken locking blocks to date on my personally assigned GI weapons). It sheared and the weapon seized up while I was firing.

The ones on the right are from a different 12-man element that was using the range immediately before my group. The owner just left the broken block on the range table and returned to the unit. No need to explain anything to the armorer or show him the broken part. Normal and expected failure.

Both on the same day in April 2006. Not an uncommon occurence at my unit.
The poll currently shows 11 failures noted from 59 civilian weapons...a fraction over an 18.6 % failure rate.

All mechanical devices break. Some just break more often.
__________________
Figure The Odds...

Last edited by Chindo18Z; December 5, 2009 at 01:12 PM. Reason: typo & miscount
Chindo18Z is offline  
Old December 5, 2009, 01:45 PM   #28
chibiker
Member
 
Join Date: November 14, 2008
Location: Northern Illinois
Posts: 63
John, I'd vote in your poll if I knew how....No, it's not a technology thing. I have no idea how to answer if I have to include a round count. I have a 92FS that going by serial number is a mid-eighties vintage. I also know that I am at minimum the fourth owner of it.
How many rounds put through it before me? Not a clue... I on the other hand would guess I have put somewhere around three thousand rounds downrange with it? I don't even know if the the locking block in it is the original. If wear pattern is used as an indicator compared to the rest of the gun I would say it was, again though just a guess.
So, mostly just answering to confirm there is another 92 out there, my locking block is fine and I personally don't consider it any more of a concern when it comes to failure as I do about any other part on any other firearm I own.
chibiker is offline  
Old December 5, 2009, 05:19 PM   #29
seeker_two
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 31, 2002
Location: Deep in the Heart of the Lone Star State (TX)
Posts: 2,169
Question: are we just talking about breakages on Beretta pistols or on the Taurus and Helwan pistols as well? That could affect the data we're looking at here.....
__________________
Proud member of Gun Culture 2.0......
seeker_two is offline  
Old December 5, 2009, 09:10 PM   #30
Homerboy
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,320
No breakages on any of my 3 92's. Two were bought new, an INOX in 2002 with maybe 2000 rounds through it, and a police special bought last year with maybe 500. Also bought a mint Centurion this year. No idea how many rounds through it, but it looked unused when I bought it.

The 92 is my favorite gun. It's the gun I measure others against. Comparing locking block breakages on used and abused military M9's shooting hot NATO ammo to privately owned 92's that are well manintained is a waste of time.

I had a SIG 226. Nice gun, but sold ot for another 92.
Homerboy is offline  
Old December 5, 2009, 09:36 PM   #31
curt.45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 28, 2008
Location: Fort Wayne Ind.
Posts: 866
ok so where can I order a spare locking block?
curt.45 is offline  
Old December 5, 2009, 11:54 PM   #32
Chindo18Z
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 23, 1999
Posts: 498
Beretta USA:

https://www.berettausa.com/e2wItemMa...084:3100000485

$59.95

MidwestGunWorks:

http://www.midwestgunworks.com/page/...ormance/LE9201

$79.00
__________________
Figure The Odds...
Chindo18Z is offline  
Old December 8, 2009, 12:25 AM   #33
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,910
Quote:
Why is that the simplest explanation?
Because it is the simplest explanation that explains both discrepancies, not just one.
Quote:
Why would you automatically assume accurate data from a fan forum while questioning the veracity of data from TFL members?
The reason I suspect the TFL poll data is because it implies that new blocks are more likely to break than blocks that have seen a lot of use. That is counter to my understanding of metal fatigue.
Quote:
Both polls reflect alleged data from owners.
That's overly optimistic. I have no way to verify that only owners voted. Even if I assume that only owners vote I have no way to verify that the votes are accurate nor can I verify that the poll results have not been altered after they voted.
Quote:
To my mind, the simplest explanations are:
There are some problems with your simple explanations:

The "borderline design flaw problem" theory is inconsistent with the apparently similar durability of the 96 pistols which subject their locking blocks to significantly more abuse and yet do not seem to experience locking block failures at a signficantly higher rate.

The "batches of flawed pistols" has merit and you will note that I listed it as a possibility. However, that wouldn't explain why Beretta forum members don't ever seem to encounter any of these flawed pistols. So that explains discrepancy 2 but not discrepancy 1.
Quote:
Why would you automatically assume accurate data from a fan forum while questioning the veracity of data from TFL members?
I'm not automatically assuming anything, I'm just looking for a simple explanation that covers all the bases and I presented the best one I have come up with so far.

To be perfectly clear, I'm not assuming that the Beretta forum results are accurate, I'm simply saying that the simplest explanation that covers both discrepancies is invalid votes on the TFL poll.

Ok, current results:

69 pistols represented in the TFL poll--11 broken blocks for a 15.9% failure rate overall.

Of the 34 pistols with 5K or less rounds, 6 of them broke blocks--17.6% failure rate.

Of the 35 pistols with 5K or more rounds, 5 of them broke blocks--14.3% failure rate.

Even more interesting is that the poll indicates that of the 10 guns that fired less than 2000 rounds, 30% of them broke a locking block.

If we're to take these results seriously then here's what we must believe.

If you fire your Beretta less than 2000 times you've got about a 1 in 3 chance of breaking your locking block.

Stick with it for around 5000 rounds and now your chances of breaking a block are just under 1 in 6.

If you can keep going past 5000 rounds you have about a 1 in 7 chance of breaking a locking block.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old December 8, 2009, 01:15 AM   #34
railroader
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 8, 2000
Location: Tucson Arizona
Posts: 1,756
Well I know it's not a beretta but I have a taurus pt99 that was made in 1989. I am the second owner. The 1st owner said he put 500 rounds through it I'd say I put about the same. Well the block broke last sunday and locked up the pistol. Taurus is sending me another block. Mark`
railroader is offline  
Old December 8, 2009, 02:02 AM   #35
HorseSoldier
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2006
Location: OCONUS 61°13′06″N 149°53′57″W
Posts: 2,282
Quote:
The "borderline design flaw problem" theory is inconsistent with the apparently similar durability of the 96 pistols which subject their locking blocks to significantly more abuse and yet do not seem to experience locking block failures at a signficantly higher rate.
Smaller sample size comparing 96s and 92s may be something to consider when comparing durability issues between the two.

I kind of suspect that the inclusion of a shock buffer as standard on the Beretta 90-Two pistols to be supportive of the borderline design flaw theory. Official advertising is recoil reduction, but I don't know of anyone who really complains about the 92/M9 being snappy, so there must be some reason Beretta increased their production cost on the 90-Twos to add the buffer.
HorseSoldier is offline  
Old December 8, 2009, 10:04 AM   #36
Chindo18Z
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 23, 1999
Posts: 498
Quote:
JohnKSa: I'm just pointing out two discrepancies and offering a possible explanation for the discrepancies.

Discrepancy 1: The poll here and the poll at the Beretta forum provided VERY different results. The Beretta forum results, even with many more responses, indicate no failures at all under 5K rounds and a much lower overall failure rate.

Discrepancy 2: The TFL poll results indicate that new locking blocks break at more than double the rate of locking blocks that have been subjected to a lot of use. It's not often that metal fatigue shows up more in new parts than it does in much-used parts.
Quote:
JohnKSa: Both of those discrepancies indicate that something is wrong somewhere and the simplest explanation for what could be wrong is that the TFL poll got some invalid votes in the "broke in under 5K" rounds categories.

Quote:
Chindo18Z: Why is that the simplest explanation?

JohnKSa: Because it is the simplest explanation that explains both discrepancies, not just one.
Actually, an equally simple explanation is that many of the Beretta Forum votes are invalid.

Quote:
JohnKSa: To be perfectly clear, I'm not assuming that the Beretta forum results are accurate, I'm simply saying that the simplest explanation that covers both discrepancies is invalid votes on the TFL poll.
Reversing your logic again..."I'm not assuming that the TFL forum results are accurate, I'm simply saying that the simplest explanation that covers both discrepancies is invalid votes on the Beretta poll."

Quote:
JohnKSa: The "borderline design flaw problem" theory is inconsistent with the apparently similar durability of the 96 pistols which subject their locking blocks to significantly more abuse and yet do not seem to experience locking block failures at a signficantly higher rate.
Conjecture and assumption. We haven't yet even nailed down the 92's problems. I wouldn't assume 96 perfection.

BTW: Do .40 cal 96s use identically dimensioned locking blocks, barrel exteriors, & slide/breech machining when compared to 9mm 92s? I would suspect not, but I honestly do not know.

Quote:
The reason I suspect the TFL poll data is because it implies that new blocks are more likely to break than blocks that have seen a lot of use. That is counter to my understanding of metal fatigue.
But dovetails neatly with my conjecture that a lot of Berettas leave the factory with poorly designed/executed parts. In that case, I'd expect early failure. All guns and all parts are not necessarily produced uniformly equal in quality. Any minor change to tolerances or metallurgy could push a blueprinted design to early failure. I have seen exactly the same problem in a certain design of standard parachutes fielded to the military.

I will also remind everyone of something I've mentioned before.

Think about this. How many fellow shooters do you ACTUALLY KNOW who have the free time...the inclination...the consistent dedication to practice...and the $wallet$...to put MULTIPLE TENS OF THOUSANDS of rounds through ONE pistol.

How many have you even met or heard of? There are probably only a few thousand on this forum (and many are probably not even owners of Berettas). Competitive shooters? Check. Sponsored shooters? Check. Military & LEO with access to free ranges and ammo? Check. Range and Shooting Industry Employees? Check. The occasional well-monied Hobbiest and Itinerant Tactical School Student? Check.

But most of us? A couple of hundred to a couple of thousand rounds a year through any one of our multiple pistols...

The person who only owns ONE pistol? He/She has a busy life and bills to pay. Only out to the range once in a while more often than not.

Hence MY distrust of anonymus poll votes. Folks get bridled at the suggestion that their toy is anything less than perfect...and probably feel compelled to vote in an imaginary number of rounds in support of their chosen firearm. It's human nature. If the shoe fits...wear it.

I wouldn't care if every poll vote on the internet said that all Berettas are faultless through 500,000 rounds. I work around the weapon everyday. I've owned several. I have had the opportunity to personally observe the results of extended use across a pool of several thousand examples. What I've observed is locking block (and trigger return spring) failure. YMMV.

To this point, the only things solidly evident to ME are...

1. GIGO (nobody seems to actually trust polls)
2. Civilian Beretta 92s DO fail (in fairly significant numbers ~15%)
3. Factory engineering fixes indicate that Beretta acknowledges M92 failures
4. Beretta Forum members seem to love their M92s more than TFL members
5. Thus far, this partisan thread has remained civil and lucid (fairly unusual)

Anyway, time to go make the doughnuts...
__________________
Figure The Odds...

Last edited by Chindo18Z; December 8, 2009 at 10:20 AM.
Chindo18Z is offline  
Old December 9, 2009, 02:15 AM   #37
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,910
Quote:
Actually, an equally simple explanation is that many of the Beretta Forum votes are invalid.
It is simple but it doesn't explain why the TFL poll results indicate that blocks in guns that have been shot little break more frequently than blocks in guns that have been shot a lot.
Quote:
..."I'm not assuming that the TFL forum results are accurate, I'm simply saying that the simplest explanation that covers both discrepancies is invalid votes on the Beretta poll."
Except it doesn't cover both discrepancies as I've noted above repeatedly. There is a discrepancy that is ONLY reflected in the TFL poll data that indicates that blocks in guns that have been shot very little break more than blocks in guns that have been shot a lot. That discrepancy has nothing to do with the Beretta forum poll results and therefore can not be explained by anything having to do with the Beretta forum poll results.
Quote:
I wouldn't assume 96 perfection.
Strawman. I haven't so much as implied perfection in either pistol. The only point I made was that if the 92 pistols are borderline in terms of locking block design fragility then 96 pistols should break blocks at a MUCH higher rate than 92 pistols since they stress the blocks significantly more. I've not seen any data that so much as implies that 96 pistols break blocks at a much higher rate than 92 pistols.
Quote:
Think about this. How many fellow shooters do you ACTUALLY KNOW who have the free time...the inclination...the consistent dedication to practice...and the $wallet$...to put MULTIPLE TENS OF THOUSANDS of rounds through ONE pistol.
I know a few. It's not that common but it's not vanishingly rare or anything. I've seen data that suggests that amongst shooting enthusiasts something like 1 in 10 will put 25K or more rounds through a single handgun. I'd say that dovetails reasonably well with my sample set of personal friends who are shooters.
Quote:
Hence MY distrust of anonymus poll votes.
Interestingly and ironically, I made a similar statement earlier in this thread and you've been taking me to task for it ever since.
Quote:
2. Civilian Beretta 92s DO fail (in fairly significant numbers ~15%)
What, you mean based on anonymous poll results? It seems that you trust them pretty well when they support your point. It would be more accurate to say that: "Based on the poll results they fail at a rate of somewhere around 5% to 18%."
Quote:
3. Factory engineering fixes indicate that Beretta acknowledges M92 failures
Yes, this is pretty much beyond debate. Of course I'm not aware of any design with decent longevity that hasn't been improved upon to some extent or another over time.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old December 9, 2009, 06:33 AM   #38
Homerboy
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,320
I know several guys who have put more than 10,000 rounds through their guns, and that includes 92's. You own a gun for 15 years and 10,000 rounds is hardly even used.

This whole argument is dumb. Ask an old soldier how great the 1911's were . My Uncle brought his back from Vietnam. Talk about rebuilt! This thing probably stormed the beach at Normandy. Wasn't an original part in the gun. And while we're on the topic of 1911's, anyone care to answer WHY they cost so much, when a S&W 4506 or a Glock .45 will fire the same bullet? And why do gunsmiths have "1911 tune-up packages" that cost several hundred dollars? Yet nobody would ever trash the 1911 like they trash the 92. If you buy an M1 or M1 carbine from CMP, you're gonna get a gun put together from bins of used parts. Guess what? Soldier's guns gets used, ALOT! They're gonna need servicing MORE OFTEN.



The Beretta 92 is a great weapon. WHEN they break, it is usually the locking block or a trigger spring. The trigger spring cost a few dollars, and a locking block maybe 50 bucks. Not a big price to pay for owning such a quality built firearm. There is NO gun I have ever handled that feels as smooth as any of my 92's. Slide feels like it's rolling on ball bearings. So I picked up a couple of locking blocks over the years. Never had to use one yet. If I do, I'll pop it in an continue to love the gun.
Homerboy is offline  
Old December 9, 2009, 06:45 AM   #39
Hommbs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 1, 2005
Location: La Puente, California
Posts: 102
I had one break and it was pretty high count and an older square cut one. I was hoping it was isolated to the square cut ones, but I see a lot of the round cut ones failing too here.
Hommbs is offline  
Old December 9, 2009, 10:01 AM   #40
Homerboy
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,320
There's a thread on here regarding a Glock kaboom. Do some research and there are others. Despite this, the Glock still sells and is very popular. whenever I see a pic of a 92 being used in Iraq, I always look closely at it. Usually look very worn.

My 92's have never let me down. I don't shoot more than 1000 rounds a year through any of them, and I have a few locking blocks on hand. The 92 just feels perfect in my hand. It is smooth as silk and the slide feels like it rolls on ball bearings. I am super accurate with it, blowing out the center of a target at 15 yards, rapid fire. For all the benefits it gives me, I'll accept that the locking block MAY break, just like a part may break on any machine.

I have sold other guns to get MORE 92's. mags are cheap and available, holsters and other accessories are everywhere. The one thing I will concede is is isn't the best candidate for concealed carry, but they do offer the Centurion and the type M single stack for Beretta fans. I have the Centurion, and it is fine for concealed carry.
Homerboy is offline  
Old December 9, 2009, 11:55 PM   #41
Chindo18Z
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 23, 1999
Posts: 498
As of today:

BERETTA FORUM: 67 votes & only 4 commenters (other than JohnKSa) ; 3 broke / 64 OK

TFL: 69 votes & 40 comments by ~ 27 other commenters, JohnKSa, and myself. 14 broke / 55 OK (although 28 of those votes are from folks firing fewer than 4000 rds)

Quote:
Chindo18Z Quote:
Think about this. How many fellow shooters do you ACTUALLY KNOW who have the free time...the inclination...the consistent dedication to practice...and the $wallet$...to put MULTIPLE TENS OF THOUSANDS of rounds through ONE pistol.

JohnKSa: I know a few. It's not that common but it's not vanishingly rare or anything. I've seen data that suggests that amongst shooting enthusiasts something like 1 in 10 will put 25K or more rounds through a single handgun. I'd say that dovetails reasonably well with my sample set of personal friends who are shooters.
Only 8 out of 67 TFL voters have fired 20,00 rds or more.

Over 55% of Beretta Forum voters have fired less than 5000 rds through their weapons.

Like many of you, I know a fair amount of shooters who go high volume (including myself), but the above numbers kind of correlate with what I mentioned about not many shooters actually shooting a LOT. We forumites tend to be enthusiasts. We hang together and tend to shoot together. The owners and operators of a million or so civilian M92s and military M9s are not necessarily frequent shooters. Hence the more common average of only a few hundred or thousand rounds expended over the course of ownership.

Quote:
JohnKSa: There is a discrepancy that is ONLY reflected in the TFL poll data that indicates that blocks in guns that have been shot very little break more than blocks in guns that have been shot a lot. That discrepancy has nothing to do with the Beretta forum poll results and therefore can not be explained by anything having to do with the Beretta forum poll results.
Sure it can be explained...

1. The Beretta Forum poll votes are probably fabricated. Some folks exaggerated their round counts and some folks who have had problems didn't admit to them, preferring not to start a flame war on a partisan forum. If you can throw an unproveable hypothesis out there...I'll join you on the same thin ice.

I think it's telling that out of 67 votes on a forum dedicated to ownership of Berettas, only four people thought their poll votes important enough to even comment on the subject.

Meanwhile, on TFL, we are approaching our third page of spirited debate, analysis, and investigation...just sayin'.

2. Neither poll to date has enough "votes" to provide any detailed conclusive analysis. Our statistically invalid samples don't yet provide enough fidelity. Maybe some folks with more broken blocks will weigh in (or maybe not). We need lots more votes/comments before we could define an accurate trend.

There are only 67 votes in the Beretta Forum poll. It's a miniscule sample (as are the 69 votes in the TFL poll). For comparison, I've got almost a thousand Beretta M9s in my military unit. These are weapons that I can physically inspect, shoot, review maintenance records for, and query both the end users and armorers. And, yes, I respect the poll parameter of only discussing civilian 92 failures. I'm just saying that 136 pistols is too small a number to draw other than broad brush stroke conclusions from.

Quote:
JohnKSa: The only point I made was that if the 92 pistols are borderline in terms of locking block design fragility then 96 pistols should break blocks at a MUCH higher rate than 92 pistols since they stress the blocks significantly more. I've not seen any data that so much as implies that 96 pistols break blocks at a much higher rate than 92 pistols.
Me neither. I've never heard of a similar major problem with 96s. Which takes me back to a question I asked earlier in the thread: What are the metallurgical measurements of the 96 locking system. I suspect that the 96 locking block and matching barrel lug are not dimensionally interchangeable with those of the 9mm 92s. Did Beretta strengthen the design when they went to .40? I don't know. Maybe someone reading this thread does. I would not simply assume that 96 locking block and springs are exactly the same as those of its 9mm sibling. Beretta may have gotten it right with the 96.

Quote:
Chindo18Z Quote:
Hence MY distrust of anonymus poll votes.

JohnKSa: Interestingly and ironically, I made a similar statement earlier in this thread and you've been taking me to task for it ever since.
Touche. You are right. I think we are starting to thread a camel through a needle with regard to the tit for tat. I'm perfectly willing to breakout a chainsaw and blender in my attempts to do so, but I think I'd just like to see where the poll goes over time. I'm actually curious and (as I've mentioned previously) this is the first time I've ever seen anyone attempt to get some decent statistics on the issue. Kudos to you. I think this is a great discussion and poll.

Quote:
Homerboy: This whole argument is dumb.
That's cool. I'm just a dumb, mouth breathing, knuckle dragging grunt anyway.

Quote:
Homerboy: The 92 just feels perfect in my hand. It is smooth as silk and the slide feels like it rolls on ball bearings. I am super accurate with it, blowing out the center of a target at 15 yards, rapid fire.
Agree with everything you just said.

Quote:
Homerboy: My 92's have never let me down. I don't shoot more than 1000 rounds a year through any of them, and I have a few locking blocks on hand.
I rest my case.
__________________
Figure The Odds...

Last edited by Chindo18Z; December 10, 2009 at 12:10 AM.
Chindo18Z is offline  
Old December 10, 2009, 01:52 AM   #42
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,910
Quote:
Only 8 out of 67 TFL voters have fired 20,00 rds or more.
That's about 12% or 12 in 100. I said one in ten (10 in 100) fired more than 25K rounds. That's reasonably close, I'd say.
Quote:
We forumites tend to be enthusiasts.
I specifically mentioned that my comment related to "shooting enthusiasts"--in fact, to be more specific, it related to gun forum members like the ones polled here. Most gun owners shoot very little.
Quote:
Sure it can be explained...

1. The Beretta Forum poll votes are probably fabricated.
Ok, I'll try again.

Forget the Beretta Forum poll entirely.

Now look at the TFL poll results. You will note that the TFL poll results (even in the total absence of any other poll results) suggest that guns shot very little break locking blocks more frequently than guns that are shot a lot.

That has nothing to do with the Beretta Forum Poll, it has ONLY to do with the TFL Poll. Trying to explain something that is seen ONLY in the TFL poll by saying that the Beretta Poll is fabricated makes no sense at all.

Even if the Beretta poll had never been done the TFL poll would still provide results indicating that a little wear is more likely to break blocks than a lot of wear. That is a discrepancy since metal fatigue is a result of wear and the more wear the more likely breakage is to occur.

Let's say we took polls in Brazil and Djibouti and found that the Djibouti poll results indicated that very elderly people (over 90 YOA) are much stronger and healthier than the average 20 year old person. You don't even have to look at the Brazil poll results to note that there is a discrepancy in the Djibouti poll. Trying to explain the discrepancy by saying the Brazil poll results are fabricated is nonsensical because the Brazil poll didn't generate the discrepancy in the Djibouti poll results. The discrepancy is SOLELY reflected in the Djibouti poll and even if we had never even done the Brazil poll the Djibouti poll results would still be indicative of a discrepancy.
Quote:
I suspect that the 96 locking block and matching barrel lug are not dimensionally interchangeable with those of the 9mm 92s.
They are identical--in fact Beretta doesn't sell 96 locking blocks. There's only one kind of locking block. Well, that's not true--there are different kinds in terms of "generations". What I'm trying to say is that a Beretta locking block isn't a 92 block or a 96 block, it's just a locking block. It will work in either pistol.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old December 10, 2009, 06:41 AM   #43
Homerboy
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,320
Well, 25 years ago, several gun makers vied for the coveted military contract and honor of supplying the fighting men and women of this country with their offical sidearm. Many makers put their best guns into the race, and in the end, SIG and Beretta were the only two left standing. Beretta won the contract, probably because they had a factory in the US, and they probably cost a few pennies less. They DID pass the rigorous testing that most others failed. For 25 years, they have been riding in holsters and going into harms way. They aren't going anywhere anytime soon. If you serve in the military, you use what they issue you, unless you're a special forces guy who has more leeway. A few of my friends have served over there, and are very happy with their M9's, so much that they have the civilian 92FS, as well.

In light of the fact that i do not shoot as much as a soldier does, I guess my odds of breaking a block are very small. However, I keep a few blocks on hand just in case it DOES happen. If it does, I'll change it out and keep shooting. All the positive aspects of the gun are MORE than enough to keep it.

I've chosen the Beretta 92 as MY personal favorite pistol. The Glocks, SIGS, and Rugers I have owned have all gone away.
Homerboy is offline  
Old December 10, 2009, 09:40 AM   #44
Chindo18Z
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 23, 1999
Posts: 498
Quote:
JohnKSa: They are identical--in fact Beretta doesn't sell 96 locking blocks. There's only one kind of locking block. Well, that's not true--there are different kinds in terms of "generations". What I'm trying to say is that a Beretta locking block isn't a 92 block or a 96 block, it's just a locking block. It will work in either pistol.
As I admitted, I didn't know the answer to that question. Fair enough. I'll accept that. I wonder if factory .40 recoil spring weight compensates for the wear and tear found in the 9mm versions? Like you, I've only heard of large scale failures in the 9mm versions.

The Djibouti / Brazil analogy only works if you are intent upon throwing out poll results due to an assumption of voter dishonesty. I would suggest that the poll (so far) simply shows that some Berettas DO break. If everyone on TFL had voted over at Beretta Forum, the numbers would be more in line. For instance, I didn't vote on that poll (I forgot my login ages ago and rarely go to that forum). You don't have enough data points to draw conclusions yet. I guess what I am saying is that, while you seem perfectly satisfied to accept ALL voting on the Beretta Forum, you are reaching for a reason to use voter fraud on TFL as an explanation for an apparent discrepancy between the two polls.

I would suggest that there are other causitive factors (e.g., infant failure, metallurgy/engineering specs, substandard subcontracted parts, etc.)

We need to look for those.

Squirting some more camel through the eye of a needle...

Although I understand your 90 year old vs. 20 year old analogy, I can easily think of reasons why an obvious "No Brainer" assumption could be false. In many parts of Africa, a huge portion of the young population is infected with HIV. The non-sexually active population of elders are indeed healthier than the youth population.

The 90 year olds could have grown up as a generation with high nutrition, adequate health care, and a tradition of fitness inculcated into their existential fabric. The 20 year olds might be victims of a formative time of general famine, pestilence, no organized sports or medical care, and rampant drug addiction among the youth. You might indeed find 90 year olds in better general health than 20 year old malnourished heroin addicts. This would be especially so in the third world, where by default, a 90 year old is probably connected to the ruling class or tribe, benefiting from increased odds of survival due to being a "have" instead of a "have not".

In that region, a 90 year old is some warlord's or sheik's mother. She is in better health than a 20 year old on a starvation diet in some border camp in Eritrea. Those who last, last well. Most don't and die young.

Children growing up in the dietary deprivation of a shattered post-WWII Europe & Japan comprised a generation that was physically stunted in statistical comparison to their grandchildren. Their progeny grew up in roaring economic times, with better access to health care and food. They grew up bigger, stronger, taller, faster, and with odds of far greater longevity.

I've actually been to Djibouti although never to Brazil (darn the luck ). I'm not actually debating the analogy choice you threw out there, just pointing out that there can be many (rather than one) factors that explain a discrepancy. The old "everyone who eats sugar eventually dies...therefore sugar is bad for you" blind alley. A true statement that doesn't actually explain anything.

My point is that all of my empirical / anectdotal experience says that there should be some more failures listed over at the Beretta poll. The fact that there aren't doesn't automatically make me assume that TFL poll is bogus.

I've already thrown out two possible reasons for a lack of "early broken" votes on the Beretta Forum:

1) the Herd Mentality inherent in a partisan site and...
2) folks who've actually had problems simply voting the opposite of their reality.

With 95% of Beretta Forum voters not even bothering to comment, what I really suspect is that a great many votes are simply drive-bys from folks who may not even own an M92 (much less have fired one extensively). Impossible to prove, but my gut tells me this is so.

I noticed that there are a hell of a lot of locking block discussions over on the Beretta Forum (some going back quite a while). Not all the comments are glowing. Perhaps those with less than stellar experiences sold their Berettas and got Glocks? Highly unlikely they'd continue to peruse a forum for a weapon they got rid of. Nor would they be likely to vote on a current poll.

Again, the poll samples are currently small. Give them (both) more time.

The fact that (out of a miniscule sample) some new blocks fail and some old ones don't is not suprising to me. Encountering failure of new machinery or parts is a pretty common occurrence, especially with weapons. It's not simply a function of metal fatigue. A poorly designed or manufactured part is simply going to fail early. One made to standard will last much longer. I believe that the M92 locking block design exists in a design world of too close tolerances. If anything is out of synch, the part will fail early. If everything is golden, that same part cycles along until normal wear and tear (metal fatigue) eventually causes it to fail. No different than any other weapon in that regard, but the Beretta seems to exhibit such an issue more than a lot of other weapons.

Quote:
JohnKSa: Even if the Beretta poll had never been done the TFL poll would still provide results indicating that a little wear is more likely to break blocks than a lot of wear. That is a discrepancy since metal fatigue is a result of wear and the more wear the more likely breakage is to occur.
You are making an assumption that all locking blocks (and springs) are identical in design, fabrication, and performance. I say they are not. That's at least as likely an answer for the discrepancy as simply discarding votes because they don't match your desired answer.

Here's another analogy for everyone:

Look at the car or truck in your driveway. It's your pride and joy. You may have put a lot of hard earned money into it. Maybe your family rides in it everyday.

Would you be inclined to keep it or buy another if 15% of that model's engines blew up during normal driving?
__________________
Figure The Odds...

Last edited by Chindo18Z; December 11, 2009 at 09:58 AM. Reason: Typos
Chindo18Z is offline  
Old December 10, 2009, 09:08 PM   #45
Homerboy
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,320
Chindo, what the hell are you talking about? You're using AIDS in Africa as an arguing point?

Look, you're a soldier in the US Army. You take what is issued to you. You don't like the 92, but when you draw a weapon for the field, it's gonna be a 92, unless you're a Spec Ops guy. So maintain the gun. Look for wear on the locking block. Change if you think it is necssary.

And MAYBE the Beretta forum poll didn't bother to post comments because choosing a response in the poll accomplished the same thing as adding flowery comments to it?

We can do MINIMAL research to villify the Glock. Go the the gunzone website and type in Glock 19. See the horror show that the NYPD experienced. So I guess we should ALL get rid of our Glocks, huh? And before you ask, I was a member of the NYPD, and I personally can vouch for the negatibe experiences with Glock 19's.
Homerboy is offline  
Old December 10, 2009, 11:22 PM   #46
Chindo18Z
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 23, 1999
Posts: 498
Quote:
Homerboy: Chindo, what the hell are you talking about? You're using AIDS in Africa as an arguing point?
Quote:
Chindo18Z: I'm not actually debating the analogy choice you threw out there, just pointing out that there can be many (rather than one) factors that explain a discrepancy.
JohnKSa and I are debating about debating. What's your point Homer?

Quote:
Homerboy: We can do MINIMAL research to villify the Glock.
Dean Speir has his opinions. I have mine. You have yours. I went through a Glock phase for about 10 years starting in 1985. I'm over the Austrian Kool Aid these days (although I still occasionally carry one downrange). If you want to talk about Glock 19s, maybe we should start another thread?

Quote:
Homerboy: And MAYBE the Beretta forum poll didn't bother to post comments because choosing a response in the poll accomplished the same thing as adding flowery comments to it?
Or MAYBE after responding disingenuously to a poll, a lot of voters didn't have anything factual to say (flowery or otherwise).
__________________
Figure The Odds...

Last edited by Chindo18Z; December 11, 2009 at 09:52 AM.
Chindo18Z is offline  
Old December 11, 2009, 06:31 AM   #47
Homerboy
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,320
Debating is fine. I love posts like this, but when you make outlandish analogies to AIDS in Africa, it takes away from your otherwise, sound argument.

And your opinion is based on service weapons that see thousands of rounds in a very short time. By your own admission, civilian shooters will rarely approach the round count that service 92's do. So MAYBE you can argue that the Beretta is not a good weapon for a soldier, but since the opinions of soldiers are the LAST thing that the government considers when changing weapon systems, you might as well talk to a wall. Beretta just got an order for ANOTHER 500,000 M9's, and that isn't counting the ones still in service that aren't going anywhere anytime soon. The M9 IS the sidearm of the US. The 1911 it replaced had it's own issues. Most of them were cobbled together from WW II surplus. Soldiers take what they are issued.

As for me, lots of my friends shoot Beretta 92's. I take credit for that. When they shot mine, it was love at first sight for them, as well. Never seen a broken block yet.

I would take a Beretta 92 over a Glock, SIG, HK, or any other semi auto. Feels like it was molded to my hand and I am deadly accurate with it. The locking block weakness is the trade off for a non-tilt recoil and super smooth handling. I think it's worth the price. So I bought a few blocks over the years. Who knows if I will ever need them? If I do, I'll change it out and continue to love the gun.

Quote:
Look at the car or truck in your driveway. It's your pride and joy. You may have put a lot of hard earned money into it. Maybe your family rides in it everyday.

Would you be inclined to keep it or buy another if 15% of that model's engines blew up during normal driving?
Another outlandish analogy. You're comparing replacing a 50 dollar part that MIGHT break, causing no damage or danger to anybody (and please don't respond "what if it is in a firefight" or some nonsense. The odds of getting into a shooting are astronomical. The odds of the locking block breaking in that crucial time is even more unlikely) to an engine blowing up, causing you thousands of dollars in repair?

Last edited by Homerboy; December 11, 2009 at 06:36 AM.
Homerboy is offline  
Old December 11, 2009, 09:51 AM   #48
Chindo18Z
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 23, 1999
Posts: 498
Homerboy: Outlandish? In my experience, gunfights are pretty outlandish.

All we are doing here is just talkin'. Nobody is shooting at you on a forum.

I like my guns to work. It gives me an edge. I like that. Everytime.

Hope and Luck are not reliable planning factors.

You buys your ticket...you takes your chances.
__________________
Figure The Odds...
Chindo18Z is offline  
Old December 11, 2009, 05:06 PM   #49
Homerboy
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,320
I like my guns to work, too. And they always have. Matter of fact, only semi auto I ever had a malfunction with was the Glock 19. it was very problematic for a few years when it was adopted by the NYPD. Seems 25,000 guns is a better indication than 50 to a small dept. Still, the Glock 19 is regaded as a fine weapon, carried by many.

Since you're in the military and have access to more data, would you care to tell us how many times a locking block failure has occurred during actual combat use, and if a person was shot because of it?
Homerboy is offline  
Old December 11, 2009, 08:00 PM   #50
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,910
Quote:
I guess what I am saying is that, while you seem perfectly satisfied to accept ALL voting on the Beretta Forum, you are reaching for a reason to use voter fraud on TFL as an explanation for an apparent discrepancy between the two polls.
I'm not satisfied with the results from either poll. I would like 200-300 votes on both poll and results from each that are reasonably consistent with each other before that could be true.
Quote:
The Djibouti / Brazil analogy only works if you are intent upon throwing out poll results due to an assumption of voter dishonesty.
I'm not intent on anything other than trying to make sense of the poll results. I've already made it clear that I'm not trying to throw out votes/results.
Quote:
Although I understand your 90 year old vs. 20 year old analogy, I can easily think of reasons why an obvious "No Brainer" assumption could be false. In many parts of Africa, a huge portion of the young population is infected with HIV. The non-sexually active population of elders are indeed healthier than the youth population.
Good analogy. The point is that if you want to explain apparent discrepancies that only appear in the Djibouti poll results you need to look in Djibouti, NOT in Brazil.
Quote:
You are making an assumption that all locking blocks (and springs) are identical in design, fabrication, and performance. I say they are not. That's at least as likely an answer for the discrepancy as simply discarding votes because they don't match your desired answer.
First of all I'm making no such assumption. It's accurate to say that I'm more aware than most of the differences in Beretta locking block designs/generations and I have a reasonably good understanding of parts failures and why they occur.

Yes, a fairly large batch of very failure-prone blocks could weight the poll results toward early failures but I can't find data to support such a premise. Even your data doesn't support it since you're saying that the failure rates have been very similar over your entire period of experience. That's not consistent with the idea of a batch of bad blocks that would have moved through the system causing a spike in failures that then would have passed.

Again, I'm not looking to discard votes only trying to find reasonable and reasonably simple explanations for the counterintuitive results.
Quote:
Would you be inclined to keep it or buy another if 15% of that model's engines blew up during normal driving?
It would depend completely on how early in the life of the vehicle it happened and how much expense/hassle the failure involved.

For example, if it only happened after driving 100K miles and I could buy a spare engine for $50, carry it in my pocket and replace it in about 5 minutes by the side of the road then it wouldn't be a factor at all.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.10434 seconds with 10 queries