|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
November 22, 2013, 01:02 PM | #26 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Posts: 3,513
|
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.
|
November 22, 2013, 03:01 PM | #27 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 20, 1999
Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country)
Posts: 14,324
|
Smart plan.
__________________
. "all my ammo is mostly retired factory ammo" |
November 22, 2013, 04:39 PM | #28 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 8, 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,786
|
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.
|
December 21, 2013, 12:48 AM | #29 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Posts: 3,513
|
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. |
December 21, 2013, 12:58 AM | #30 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 16, 2013
Location: Missouri
Posts: 201
|
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 |
December 21, 2013, 01:01 AM | #31 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 6, 2009
Location: Rocky Mountain West
Posts: 3,395
|
Beretta 92 Wear - Normal or Not?
Quote:
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. |
|
December 21, 2013, 01:09 AM | #32 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 16, 2013
Location: Missouri
Posts: 201
|
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 |
December 21, 2013, 01:10 AM | #33 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Posts: 3,513
|
Quote:
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. |
|
December 21, 2013, 01:29 AM | #34 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 16, 2013
Location: Missouri
Posts: 201
|
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 |
December 21, 2013, 01:43 AM | #35 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Posts: 3,513
|
Quote:
|
|
December 21, 2013, 01:47 AM | #36 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 16, 2013
Location: Missouri
Posts: 201
|
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 |
December 21, 2013, 06:39 AM | #37 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 24, 2012
Location: South Texas
Posts: 2,126
|
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.
|
December 21, 2013, 10:08 AM | #38 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 24, 2012
Location: South Texas
Posts: 2,126
|
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.
|
December 21, 2013, 11:35 AM | #39 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Posts: 3,513
|
Quote:
|
|
December 21, 2013, 12:00 PM | #40 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 24, 2012
Location: South Texas
Posts: 2,126
|
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.
|
December 21, 2013, 12:08 PM | #41 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 24, 2012
Location: South Texas
Posts: 2,126
|
Dragline,
Your first picture shows this void I'm talking about between the dimples. The void seems to be on the vertical recoil surface. |
December 21, 2013, 01:34 PM | #42 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Posts: 3,513
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
December 21, 2013, 01:43 PM | #43 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 21, 2000
Posts: 4,193
|
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 |
December 21, 2013, 02:02 PM | #44 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Posts: 3,513
|
Quote:
|
|
December 21, 2013, 02:24 PM | #45 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 24, 2012
Location: South Texas
Posts: 2,126
|
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. |
December 21, 2013, 07:59 PM | #46 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 21, 2000
Posts: 4,193
|
Quote:
__________________
Pilot |
|
December 21, 2013, 08:17 PM | #47 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Posts: 3,513
|
Quote:
|
|
December 21, 2013, 08:22 PM | #48 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 21, 2000
Posts: 4,193
|
^^^^^ 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 |
December 22, 2013, 04:56 AM | #49 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 14, 2004
Location: NY State
Posts: 6,575
|
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 ! |
December 22, 2013, 10:48 AM | #50 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Posts: 3,513
|
Quote:
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|