Posted: 2/7/2026 10:50:21 PM EDT
| Been trying to dig up research regarding the USMC issued M9A1. Are there any differences between the two? Roll marks, etc? If I buy a commercial A1, is that about as close as I can get to an issued one? |
|
The M9A1 was a COTS acquisition. I'm told some Army and others used them, not just the USMC. These are the best hard proof (close up pics) I've seen of the M9A1. https://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/military-service-pistol/ No pics of the right side of the pistol. But it looks identical, down to the serial on the left side of the pistol of commercial guns I've seen. |
|
Originally Posted By Jack_Flag: The M9A1 was a COTS acquisition. I'm told some Army and others used them, not just the USMC. These are the best hard proof (close up pics) I've seen of the M9A1. https://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/military-service-pistol/ No pics of the right side of the pistol. But it looks identical, down to the serial on the left side of the pistol of commercial guns I've seen. Thanks. I am aware it wasn't USMC specific. But my interests are purely USMC related hence I specified USMC usage. It's a bummer some of the photo links are broken on that site. However, thanks to your link I have a good shot of the left side. Thanks again. |
|
Marines M9A1 was COTS purchase. So no formal trial and competition from various vendors. Exact to the commercial M9A1. No sure about magazine though. U.S. Marines Add to M9A1 Inventory Beretta to complete pistol system deliveries in 2006 ACCOKEEK, MD July 29, 2006 Beretta USA today announced that it has received another order from the United States Marine Corps for the M9A1 pistol system. The pistol system consists of the Beretta M9A1 pistol, a tactical holster from Blackhawk products Group, and Beretta's specially designed sand-resistant PVD magazines. |
|
I can't speak for the new production ones, but the civilian M9A1s available at the time the military ones were purchased were not any different aside from not falling in the procured serial number range. That is not the case for the regular civilian M9s and civilian M9s, which have different markings. Beretta did release a series of civilian M9s with similar markings to the military guns FWIW. Much easier to get an accurate M9A1 clone than an M9 clone though. 
|
|
Originally Posted By AK-12: I can't speak for the new production ones, but the civilian M9A1s available at the time the military ones were purchased were not any different aside from not falling in the procured serial number range. That is not the case for the regular civilian M9s and civilian M9s, which have different markings. Beretta did release a series of civilian M9s with similar markings to the military guns FWIW. Much easier to get an accurate M9A1 clone than an M9 clone though. I have had both, M9A1 is exactly the same(except s/n), the M9s are marked different, not including the dust cover and part markings/grips/etc. I added a M9 numbered hammer, a Beretta enlarged mag release, and slotted screws to my M9A1(which would be legit armorer replacements for in service weapons, original hammer was not marked). The latest USMC weapons spec is can find that mentioned M9A1 was 2021(I think, might have been 20). Attached File |
Taxation without representation
|
Originally Posted By mech4matsnova: I have had both, M9A1 is exactly the same(except s/n), the M9s are marked different, not including the dust cover and part markings/grips/etc. I added a M9 numbered hammer, a Beretta enlarged mag release, and slotted screws to my M9A1(which would be legit armorer replacements for in service weapons, original hammer was not marked). The latest USMC weapons spec is can find that mentioned M9A1 was 2021(I think, might have been 20). https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/349748/1000015468_jpg-3717096.JPG Originally Posted By mech4matsnova: Originally Posted By AK-12: I can't speak for the new production ones, but the civilian M9A1s available at the time the military ones were purchased were not any different aside from not falling in the procured serial number range. That is not the case for the regular civilian M9s and civilian M9s, which have different markings. Beretta did release a series of civilian M9s with similar markings to the military guns FWIW. Much easier to get an accurate M9A1 clone than an M9 clone though. I have had both, M9A1 is exactly the same(except s/n), the M9s are marked different, not including the dust cover and part markings/grips/etc. I added a M9 numbered hammer, a Beretta enlarged mag release, and slotted screws to my M9A1(which would be legit armorer replacements for in service weapons, original hammer was not marked). The latest USMC weapons spec is can find that mentioned M9A1 was 2021(I think, might have been 20). https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/349748/1000015468_jpg-3717096.JPG That looks great! Nothing looks better than a Beretta M9A1. |
We are just a minor threat.
|
Originally Posted By mech4matsnova: I have had both, M9A1 is exactly the same(except s/n), the M9s are marked different, not including the dust cover and part markings/grips/etc. I added a M9 numbered hammer, a Beretta enlarged mag release, and slotted screws to my M9A1(which would be legit armorer replacements for in service weapons, original hammer was not marked). The latest USMC weapons spec is can find that mentioned M9A1 was 2021(I think, might have been 20). https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/349748/1000015468_jpg-3717096.JPG I really wish I hadn’t gotten sucked into the Vertec grip profile idea. Turns out I don’t like it and the M9A1 is not only the best looking Betetta in my eyes, it also doesn’t have the light mounting problems of the X guns. |
|
Originally Posted By -OdieGreen-: I really wish I hadn’t gotten sucked into the Vertec grip profile idea. Turns out I don’t like it and the M9A1 is not only the best looking Betetta in my eyes, it also doesn’t have the light mounting problems of the X guns. What problems are those? |
|
Originally Posted By -OdieGreen-: They have too short of a trigger guard and the dust cover swoop limits rearward mounting. Most people don’t realize it and mount it too far rearward where the light isn’t actually secured. Ah ok, my railed Berettas are a 92 and a Langdon full size with the M9A1 frame so I never noticed it on mine. |
|
Originally Posted By -OdieGreen-: I really wish I hadn’t gotten sucked into the Vertec grip profile idea. Turns out I don’t like it and the M9A1 is not only the best looking Betetta in my eyes, it also doesn’t have the light mounting problems of the X guns. @-OdieGreen- I got these grips from Beretta and love them.https://www.beretta.com/en-us/product/92x-full-size-m9a3-vertec-wraparound-g10-grips-EU00083 They’ll give you that M9A1 grip that your looking for. |
I sell people a means to defend themselves.
Joined:
Mar 2009
Posts:
10394
EE: 100% (253)
UT, USA
|
Originally Posted By AK-12: I can't speak for the new production ones, but the civilian M9A1s available at the time the military ones were purchased were not any different aside from not falling in the procured serial number range. That is not the case for the regular civilian M9s and civilian M9s, which have different markings. Beretta did release a series of civilian M9s with similar markings to the military guns FWIW. Much easier to get an accurate M9A1 clone than an M9 clone though. @AK-12 what is the model number for the commerical M9 with similar markings? |
Originally Posted By bradpierson26:
So I know you're a SF whore . . . . .
So I know you're a SF whore . . . . .
|
Originally Posted By mech4matsnova: I have had both, M9A1 is exactly the same(except s/n), the M9s are marked different, not including the dust cover and part markings/grips/etc. I added a M9 numbered hammer, a Beretta enlarged mag release, and slotted screws to my M9A1(which would be legit armorer replacements for in service weapons, original hammer was not marked). The latest USMC weapons spec is can find that mentioned M9A1 was 2021(I think, might have been 20). https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/349748/1000015468_jpg-3717096.JPG That looks great. Damn I wish I hadn't sold mine. Sucks trying to recoup a loss. 
|