The Firing Line Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old November 22, 2013, 01:02 PM   #26
Dragline45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,713
Contacted Beretta and they said they wont be able to get me a replacement until late December, or they can issue me a check for what I payed for the gun. I am just going to wait it out another month rather than take the cash and buy something else. I live in Massachusetts where we can only have pre-ban high capacity magazines which I happen to have a few of for the Beretta. So I would rather have the M9A1 with a few 15rd mags than something else and be stuck with 10rd mags.
Dragline45 is offline  
Old November 22, 2013, 03:01 PM   #27
WESHOOT2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 20, 1999
Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country)
Posts: 14,270
Smart plan.
__________________
.
"all my ammo is mostly retired factory ammo"
WESHOOT2 is offline  
Old November 22, 2013, 04:39 PM   #28
TailGator
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 8, 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,047
Good to hear that they are making it right for you. I agree with your choice, being rather fond of the 92FS myself. It was decent of them to offer you your choice of resolutions.
TailGator is offline  
Old December 21, 2013, 12:48 AM   #29
Dragline45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,713
Just an update, got the Beretta back in the mail today. The original gun I got was out of spec and was battering the frame and displacing metal backwards so they decided to replace it with a new one. For once, I am kind of happy the gun had to go back to the factory, because the replacement they sent me is a better overall gun.

The replacement gun they sent me has a much better fit and finish than the first one. The gun I originally had came with 3 scratches on the right side of the slide from the factory, and swirl like tooling marks on the frame. I figured all Beretta's have the tooling marks on the frame, but was pleasently surpised that the new one they sent me had none at all. Not only that, but the slide finish on the new gun is a flat/matte black compared to the cheap looking shiny paint finish on the one I originally had. I noticed the trigger on the new gun feel's smoother and breaks cleaner too, so all in all I am happy with how it all turned out. +1 for Beretta customer service.

Dragline45 is offline  
Old December 21, 2013, 12:58 AM   #30
MoGas1341
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 16, 2013
Location: Missouri
Posts: 158
I have to jump in on this thread late, and Im glad Beretta did you right, but we (my unit in the Marine Corps) is currently experiencing a similar but worse problem... The Beretta's locking blocks are cracking and we just had to DRMO (basically, throw away and get new ones) 23 pistols...
The Beretta is not a bad pistol, but I am at Ft. Leonard Wood where the Military Police entry level students train, and our pistols get approximately 300 rds put through them a week. They were brand new in 2010, so we can do the math and figure each one has 50,000+ rounds through it. My point being that that wear mark you pictured turns into a crack eventually, and the Marine Armorers at Quantico suggested changing the recoil springs every 10,000 rounds or so. (I dont know if this would have prevented it) but Im just throwing this info out there.
__________________
Former USMC Engineer, Iraq War Vet, Afghanistan War Vet, NRA Life Member
MoGas1341 is offline  
Old December 21, 2013, 01:01 AM   #31
LockedBreech
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 6, 2009
Location: Rocky Mountain West
Posts: 3,150
Beretta 92 Wear - Normal or Not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MoGas1341 View Post
I have to jump in on this thread late, and Im glad Beretta did you right, but we (my unit in the Marine Corps) is currently experiencing a similar but worse problem... The Beretta's locking blocks are cracking and we just had to DRMO (basically, throw away and get new ones) 23 pistols...

The Beretta is not a bad pistol, but I am at Ft. Leonard Wood where the Military Police entry level students train, and our pistols get approximately 300 rds put through them a week. They were brand new in 2010, so we can do the math and figure each one has 50,000+ rounds through it. My point being that that wear mark you pictured turns into a crack eventually, and the Marine Armorers at Quantico suggested changing the recoil springs every 10,000 rounds or so. (I dont know if this would have prevented it) but Im just throwing this info out there.

Thanks for sharing your experience. Did the armorers swap out the blocks? I think Beretta recommends new locking blocks every 5k or 10k rounds. Their current 3rd Gen locking block is supposed to be much better.

OP, glad they took care of you. A proper Beretta is tooling mark free or minimal and fitted nice and right, glad you have one now.
LockedBreech is online now  
Old December 21, 2013, 01:09 AM   #32
MoGas1341
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 16, 2013
Location: Missouri
Posts: 158
No Sir, they did not. The Marine Corps issued us brand new pistols, a 1 for 1 swap. We send them away, and the 'higher ups' determine if they can rework or repair. However, it is my understanding, that just as in your case, Beretta sent Uncle Sam brand new weapons to replace the broken ones. (That attests to the company's quality assurance)
I wish I would have been on this forum and seen this earlier, and I could have shown pictures. Sgt. Litsch might still have some on his CPU and I can get them after the holidays. But we put ALOT of ammo through these guns. I like the 92s, but as with all mechanical devices, they can break.
__________________
Former USMC Engineer, Iraq War Vet, Afghanistan War Vet, NRA Life Member
MoGas1341 is offline  
Old December 21, 2013, 01:10 AM   #33
Dragline45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,713
Quote:
I have to jump in on this thread late, and Im glad Beretta did you right, but we (my unit in the Marine Corps) is currently experiencing a similar but worse problem... The Beretta's locking blocks are cracking and we just had to DRMO (basically, throw away and get new ones) 23 pistols...
I wouldn't necessarily call that worse, the locking blocks have a life of about 20,000-25,000 rounds, and with the price I would pay for all that ammo, I could buy multiple Beretta's. The part is easily replaced and relatively cheap, and I actually have a spare, as well as spare recoil and trigger springs. I am not sure I would have dumped the pistols just for a cracked locking block, although you mentioned 50,000 rounds or more have gone through those gun's so that probably has more to do with it. But changing the recoil springs is always a good idea, and I think Beretta even recommends doing it every 2,000-3,000 rounds.

As far as what happened to my pistol, it seems to be a freak occurence and I have not been able to find a similar case. The part of the pistol shown in those photos is actually part of the frame/rail system. The gun was out of spec, or that's what they said, and was battering the frame excessively and displacing metal backwards. The gun only had about 250rds through it which is why I was so so concerned with what I was seeing. Before I sent it back I asked close to a couple dozen people to check their Beretta's, including people on this forum, and not one person had any sign of wear to that particular area. Thanks for the reply though, and if you do show those photos to your armorer I am interested to see what he has to say.

Last edited by Dragline45; December 21, 2013 at 01:27 AM.
Dragline45 is offline  
Old December 21, 2013, 01:29 AM   #34
MoGas1341
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 16, 2013
Location: Missouri
Posts: 158
I will get the pics for you if he still has them. The reason according to him as to why they had to send them off was to check the frame by a higher echelon etc. Our armorer is only allowed to do 2nd echelon repairs (It goes 1-5) And I find that funny that Beretta recommends changing the spring every 3000 rounds... That makes sense to me, but not to the Corps apparently. The damage as they put it, was caused "by the pistol beating itself to death" But I agree that they were probably out of tolerance due to lack of maintenance on the Marine Corps' behalf. We abuse the hell out of our weapons, and then they slap a crappy reputation on them because of it. I will get back with you for the pics though, and once again, Im glad Beretta did you right. They make great firearms, and obviously stand by it.
__________________
Former USMC Engineer, Iraq War Vet, Afghanistan War Vet, NRA Life Member
MoGas1341 is offline  
Old December 21, 2013, 01:43 AM   #35
Dragline45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,713
Quote:
The reason according to him as to why they had to send them off was to check the frame by a higher echelon etc.
Now that I think of it I think the Beretta's service life for the frames is around 50,000 rounds which makes sense that they needed to be replaced, and I am actually kind of surprised the locking block's held up that long. I guess your armorers were doing a pretty good job at maintaining them since the locking blacks lasted so many rounds. Thanks for sharing your expereince with the Beretta's, and more importantly thanks for your service to this great country of ours.
Dragline45 is offline  
Old December 21, 2013, 01:47 AM   #36
MoGas1341
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 16, 2013
Location: Missouri
Posts: 158
I appreciate it, and it was good talking with you. If you would like, I will still try to get those pics for everyone to see (just for reference of course)
__________________
Former USMC Engineer, Iraq War Vet, Afghanistan War Vet, NRA Life Member
MoGas1341 is offline  
Old December 21, 2013, 06:39 AM   #37
Guv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 24, 2012
Location: South Texas
Posts: 1,083
Makes me wonder what the machined bottom breech end of the barrel looked like. My 96 INOX shows no such indentations and the bottom of the barrel seats flush all the way across the frame at that point. Glad to hear they took care of you though, I had a similar experience with Beretta with a Tomcat and could not have been happier with the outcome.
Guv is offline  
Old December 21, 2013, 10:08 AM   #38
Guv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 24, 2012
Location: South Texas
Posts: 1,083
Well.......after looking at two, 92's I have one shows this same wear/defect pattern while the other doesn't. Will have to contact Beretta on this I guess as neither gun has allot of rounds put through them.
Guv is offline  
Old December 21, 2013, 11:35 AM   #39
Dragline45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,713
Quote:
Well.......after looking at two, 92's I have one shows this same wear/defect pattern while the other doesn't. Will have to contact Beretta on this I guess as neither gun has allot of rounds put through them.
If it is just wear I wouldn't worry about it, there are going to be smoothed out spots where the finish wears off and shows the metal underneath which is normal for any gun. But if you can physically feel a raised hump in that area like mine was, which was caused by the metal being displaced backwards, I would have them take a look at it.
Dragline45 is offline  
Old December 21, 2013, 12:00 PM   #40
Guv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 24, 2012
Location: South Texas
Posts: 1,083
It looks just like yours, a close inspection looks like the mill left a little material on both outside edges so the bottom of the barrel bears against both outside edges instead of the full width of the recoil abutment. My 96 is flat all the way across were the bottom of the barrel contacts the frame. One 92 shows these two bulges while the other doesn't (yet?) but both have this very small void in contact area that appears shouldn't be there.
Guv is offline  
Old December 21, 2013, 12:08 PM   #41
Guv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 24, 2012
Location: South Texas
Posts: 1,083
Dragline,

Your first picture shows this void I'm talking about between the dimples. The void seems to be on the vertical recoil surface.
Guv is offline  
Old December 21, 2013, 01:34 PM   #42
Dragline45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,713
Quote:
a close inspection looks like the mill left a little material on both outside edges so the bottom of the barrel bears against both outside edges instead of the full width of the recoil abutment.
Quote:
Your first picture shows this void I'm talking about between the dimples. The void seems to be on the vertical recoil surface.
This is exactly what was happening with my first one. You could visibly see where the bottom of barrel was contacting the outside edges where the metal was being displaced backwards. The new one they sent me is flat all the way across like your 96. I think you are spot on about a little material being left over on the outside edges which is why it was being displaced. In hindsight, those bulges probably would have only gotten to a certain point and then stopped. But at the same time, it could also lead you to believe that those two areas because of the excess material are taking the brute of the force from that barrel when firing and could potentially cause a crack?
Dragline45 is offline  
Old December 21, 2013, 01:43 PM   #43
Pilot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 21, 2000
Posts: 3,706
I have a couple of 92FS's, one a full size Italian made gun, and the other an American mad Compact. Both have excellent fit, and finish, and function great. Glad they replaced your defective pistol.

Now throw in a "D" spring (hammer spring) and get an Elite II hammer, and you're good to go. Both are easily installed by the user. It makes the DA trigger pull much lighter, and helps SA a bit also.
__________________
Pilot
Pilot is offline  
Old December 21, 2013, 02:02 PM   #44
Dragline45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,713
Quote:
Now throw in a "D" spring (hammer spring) and get an Elite II hammer, and you're good to go. Both are easily installed by the user. It makes the DA trigger pull much lighter, and helps SA a bit also.
Already got the D spring, IMO it is a must have mod for any 92 series pistol. I was thinking about the Elite II hammer, and I know they say it is fine to use with the D spring as far as reliability of primer ignition is concerned, but I would rather have the extra weight of the stock hammer. I know the original Elite hammer is not recommended with the D spring as you can experience light strikes, and that the Elite II hammer is heavier, but when that D spring start's to weaken down the road I would rather have that extra weight of the hammer behind it.
Dragline45 is offline  
Old December 21, 2013, 02:24 PM   #45
Guv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 24, 2012
Location: South Texas
Posts: 1,083
Thanks Dragline,
I do agree with you on all counts, maybe it would be okay over time, or maybe lead to other issues like a crack? Makes me wonder how many others are out there like this. I still think I may contact Beretta on this matter. Maybe ShipWreak will get back to us again after inspecting some of his Berettas.
Guv is offline  
Old December 21, 2013, 07:59 PM   #46
Pilot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 21, 2000
Posts: 3,706
Quote:
I was thinking about the Elite II hammer, and I know they say it is fine to use with the D spring as far as reliability of primer ignition is concerned, but I would rather have the extra weight of the stock hammer. I know the original Elite hammer is not recommended with the D spring as you can experience light strikes, and that the Elite II hammer is heavier, but when that D spring start's to weaken down the road I would rather have that extra weight of the hammer behind it.
From what I have read on the Beretta Forum, and from some gunsmiths that frequent there that are Beretta specialists they claim the Elite II hammer improves primer ignition, and they've recommended to do both mods at the same time.
__________________
Pilot
Pilot is offline  
Old December 21, 2013, 08:17 PM   #47
Dragline45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,713
Quote:
From what I have read on the Beretta Forum, and from some gunsmiths that frequent there that are Beretta specialists they claim the Elite II hammer improves primer ignition, and they've recommended to do both mods at the same time.
Hmm, interesting. Maybe because it is slightly lighter the hammer drops faster, thus negating the lighter weight of the hammer. I will have to look at the Elite II hammer again. Thanks for the tip.
Dragline45 is offline  
Old December 21, 2013, 08:22 PM   #48
Pilot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 21, 2000
Posts: 3,706
^^^^^ Anytime. The Elite II hammer allows faster lock up as you surmise, thus higher momentum which overcomes the lower weight. Anyway, I did both mods to my 92FS, and 92FS Compact L, and have not experienced any problems with any ammo.
__________________
Pilot
Pilot is offline  
Old December 22, 2013, 04:56 AM   #49
mete
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 14, 2004
Location: NY State
Posts: 5,482
Dragline , your photo shows 'hammering' not wear !

Locking wedge failure .An old story for Beretta. I had a M1951 that broke the locking wedge . I actually made and heat treated a new one but it too broke .I was very amused to find that Beretta now has a repair kit which includes a new wedge !!
My experience seems to me to also involve the recoil spring. I wonder if the original spring was for the 9mm glisenti ?? Same dimension cartridge but lower pressure than the 9parabellum.In any case they made it for too long without resolving a problem .Amazing that the military ever accepted it.
__________________
And Watson , bring your revolver !
mete is offline  
Old December 22, 2013, 10:48 AM   #50
Dragline45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,713
Quote:
Locking wedge failure .An old story for Beretta. I had a M1951 that broke the locking wedge . I actually made and heat treated a new one but it too broke .I was very amused to find that Beretta now has a repair kit which includes a new wedge !!
Pretty nifty that you made your own locking block, just wondering how long did it last? From what I understand the new locking blocks are redesigned and last alot longer, I think they have a service live of 20,000-25,000 rounds, although MoGas posted earlier than he is in the Marine Corps and their pistols started seeing locking block failures around the 50,000 round mark. I keep the locking block greased at all times and with the new design I am not too worried about it, but I still have a spare as well as spare recoil and trigger springs.
Dragline45 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

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 01:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13329 seconds with 8 queries