Posted: 6/7/2014 1:24:59 PM EDT
| Just wondering when they stopped production of the 92F, both in Italy and at Beretta USA. Also, when did they start production of the 92FS and Civilian M9? |
|
Quoted:
Just wondering when they stopped production of the 92F, both in Italy and at Beretta USA. Also, when did they start production of the 92FS and Civilian M9? Don't know the dates, but basically, .mil had had several severe slide failures, causing loss of sight and other serious injuries. The FS added a slot in the slide, and a "Disc" on the hammer pin, so that if the slide cracked/broke, it would not be propelled back into the shooter's face. And it really was not a defect in the design so much. It was found that Nato-spec submachine gun ammo, at much higher pressures than ever meant for a handgun, was the cause of the slide failures. |
|
Quoted:
Don't know the dates, but basically, .mil had had several severe slide failures, causing loss of sight and other serious injuries. The FS added a slot in the slide, and a "Disc" on the hammer pin, so that if the slide cracked/broke, it would not be propelled back into the shooter's face. And it really was not a defect in the design so much. It was found that Nato-spec submachine gun ammo, at much higher pressures than ever meant for a handgun, was the cause of the slide failures. Quoted:
Quoted:
Just wondering when they stopped production of the 92F, both in Italy and at Beretta USA. Also, when did they start production of the 92FS and Civilian M9? Don't know the dates, but basically, .mil had had several severe slide failures, causing loss of sight and other serious injuries. The FS added a slot in the slide, and a "Disc" on the hammer pin, so that if the slide cracked/broke, it would not be propelled back into the shooter's face. And it really was not a defect in the design so much. It was found that Nato-spec submachine gun ammo, at much higher pressures than ever meant for a handgun, was the cause of the slide failures. Never knew that last part about the ammo. |
|
Quoted: I have an 89 Italian 92F and a 91 US made 92 FS fwiw. You should post your question in the Beretta section of the Handgun Forum. Many Beretta experts there. Quoted: Quoted: So any 92F should be pre-1990 for the most part? Is there any data on production numbers by year? I have an 89 Italian 92F and a 91 US made 92 FS fwiw. You should post your question in the Beretta section of the Handgun Forum. Many Beretta experts there. |
|
Quoted:
Don't know the dates, but basically, .mil had had several severe slide failures, causing loss of sight and other serious injuries. The FS added a slot in the slide, and a "Disc" on the hammer pin, so that if the slide cracked/broke, it would not be propelled back into the shooter's face. And it really was not a defect in the design so much. It was found that Nato-spec submachine gun ammo, at much higher pressures than ever meant for a handgun, was the cause of the slide failures. Quoted:
Quoted:
Just wondering when they stopped production of the 92F, both in Italy and at Beretta USA. Also, when did they start production of the 92FS and Civilian M9? Don't know the dates, but basically, .mil had had several severe slide failures, causing loss of sight and other serious injuries. The FS added a slot in the slide, and a "Disc" on the hammer pin, so that if the slide cracked/broke, it would not be propelled back into the shooter's face. And it really was not a defect in the design so much. It was found that Nato-spec submachine gun ammo, at much higher pressures than ever meant for a handgun, was the cause of the slide failures. In Massage A-boob's book about the Beretta, he says the SEALs were using suppressors threaded onto the end of the barrel and that the extra weight leveraged itself up into the slide (locking block area???) and in turn caused or accelerated the slide breakage issue. Supposedly...according to Ayoob |
|
Beretta serial number look up. Should give you rough manufacture date. |
|
Quoted: Beretta serial number look up. Should give you rough manufacture date. |