View Full Version : Beretta 92FS Compact
NCPatrolAR
03-18-10, 13:39
So I've been a Beretta kick for the past year or so. I've had a little 25 Beretta for a number of years then picked up a police special 92FS about two years. Starting early last year I picked up a 92FS Vertec and a 96D Centurion that I've converted into a 92FS. I shoot the Berettas quite well and have started carrying the Centurion more and more often. In a quest to continue expanding my Betetta collection I've been toying around with the idea of picking up a 92FS Compact. Does anyone have experience with these? If so; is there anything I need to be aware of?
The older Italian guns were beautifully made.
No real issues that aren't shared with the full size, which you're aware of, so no worries.
They're about the same width as the single stack 92F-M, which really didn't make any sense, so definitely go with the double stack.
NCPatrolAR
03-18-10, 13:45
The older Italian guns were beautifully made.
No real issues that aren't shared with the full size, which you're aware of, so no worries.
They're about the same width as the single stack 92F-M, which really didn't make any sense, so definitely go with the double stack.
Thanks. I initially looked at the single stack Compacts but the rarity and expense of magazines along with gun width caused me to stick with the double stack variant. If I want with a single stack 9mm I'll just go with a 3913/3953.
Speaking of mags; full size 92 mags will work in it, correct?
I had one, liked it a lot, sold it, shouldn't have.
Live and learn lol
Standard M9 mags will fit and function just fine in the Compact, they just stick out a little.
Standard capacity on the Compact is 13 vs. 15 of the full size.
NCPatrolAR
03-18-10, 14:31
Standard M9 mags will fit and function just fine in the Compact, they just stick out a little.
Standard capacity on the Compact is 13 vs. 15 of the full size.
I had a feeling that would be the case. I'm a big fan of the 18 and 20 round MacGar mags and wanted to make sure they will run in the Compact (should I get one)
they are very nice guns. I looked high and low when I was on my beretta kick a few years ago. Never did start to find them until after I had moved on. Every state patrol investigator I talked to in my state says they wish they would have bought theirs when they moved to HKs.
Check the classifieds over at berettaforum.net, there were a couple that popped up over the last week.
Could you Post a Picture I didn't Know they Had a compact 92F .I had A 380 Beretta Cheetah I think it was Called, It held 13 rds and was a great Little 380 ,But Just like the 92F .I sold It and went with a Sig
NCPatrolAR
03-18-10, 18:11
Random image:
http://www.beretta-e.org/images/thumb/4/40/92FSCM_0012_sm.jpg/180px-92FSCM_0012_sm.jpg
The older Italian guns were beautifully made.
No real issues that aren't shared with the full size, which you're aware of, so no worries.
They're about the same width as the single stack 92F-M, which really didn't make any sense, so definitely go with the double stack.
Judging from some of the detailed discussions over in the www.berettaforum.net over the past few years (including an extremely detailed recapitulation of a group BUSA factory visit), there really isn't any signiificant difference in quality between Italian and US production Berettas; in fact, at the time of the factory visit, the BUSA plant's parts rejection rate was lower that that of the Italian plant.
I consider the 92 series to be a modern, fully usable classic; my personal 92D with Trijicons does continuous nightstand duty, and is also occassionally used for carry, IDPA, and steel plate competitions. It's a great gun/platform, and has literally been 100% reliable, although I've probably only put 1K-2K rounds through it since I got it brand new several years ago.
Best, Jon
I am not trolling when I say I'm glad somebody likes them. I see zero value in the Beretta as a military pistol. Fortunately I was never issued one even after the Marine Corps was finally forced to take them. Too many parts, too big for a 9, goofy controls, DA/SA makes no sense for the military, I don't like the entire locking block concept..I don't even understand why people think such a "busy" pistol is nice looking. Oh well...
I have one, though I haven't put many rounds through it. I bought the gun because I've been a big Beretta fan for years. My daily carry gun is an old Ernest Langdon-tuned 92G Elite that's got thousands of rounds through it in both IDPA and classes. The gun just runs like a scalded-ass ape, and has a single-action reset that rivals my 1911s. But it's a bit beefy for a daily IWB carry gun in Arizona summers, and I wanted something smaller that felt and shot similar to my full-size gun.
One thing I noticed was that the finger rest base pads cramped my gorilla hands something fierce. I solved it by putting normal 92FS base pads on the mags. I also found that the thick 'Elite' basepads act like a grip extender, making the grip as comfortable as my full-size gun. My eventual plan, once I get the action cleaned up, is to carry it with the standard 92FS basepad in the gun, and a spare mag or two with the Elite basepad.
My only real gripe is that CT doesn't make lasergrips for the compact gun. Other than that, it works just like my full-size gun, but is a little more concealable due to the shorter butt. I tried putting a full-size slide on the compact frame so I could benefit from the longer sight radius, but there's about a 1/2" gap in front of the dust cover, so that's a no-go.
I bought one of the first 3,000 or so 92Fs in the country...circa 1984 (if memory serves)...it was my first handgun...the first one that I sold...and the one I probably regret selling the most...
-Rainman
I am not trolling when I say I'm glad somebody likes them. I see zero value in the Beretta as a military pistol. Fortunately I was never issued one even after the Marine Corps was finally forced to take them. Too many parts, too big for a 9, goofy controls, DA/SA makes no sense for the military, I don't like the entire locking block concept..I don't even understand why people think such a "busy" pistol is nice looking. Oh well...
what!?! You don't know how to see! Its beautiful :D
The rest I agree on lol.
I remember the full size I had being very accurate though.
Judging from some of the detailed discussions over in the www.berettaforum.net over the past few years (including an extremely detailed recapitulation of a group BUSA factory visit), there really isn't any signiificant difference in quality between Italian and US production Berettas; in fact, at the time of the factory visit, the BUSA plant's parts rejection rate was lower that that of the Italian plant.
I consider the 92 series to be a modern, fully usable classic; my personal 92D with Trijicons does continuous nightstand duty, and is also occassionally used for carry, IDPA, and steel plate competitions. It's a great gun/platform, and has literally been 100% reliable, although I've probably only put 1K-2K rounds through it since I got it brand new several years ago.
Best, Jon
Jon, I'm not doubting that both the US and Italian guns run well, they do, but my time selling them, I could definitely tell a difference between the Italian guns (silver box) and the US guns (blue box) in terms of overall execution of finish and machining.
I've owned both Italian and Maryland built M92F's and FS's and they will both run well with upkeep.
I've had the same observations at Templar. My first LE duty weapon was an early Italian manufactured 92F I purchased in the mid-80's. Although it was large, and the sights were not ideal, the finish was beautiful, with no rust occurring during the Academy and over several years of patrol use. The action was very slick, and the mediocre trigger pull was improved by an LAPD gunsmith. The most impressive characteristic of this pistol was that it was EXTREMELY reliable--there were NO malfunctions with approximately 25,000 rounds of Winchester and Federal 147 gr JHP's over the 5 years or so I owned it. I had a second, lower round count Italian made 92FS that was quite similar in its fit and function. On the other hand, I had an entirely different experience with Berettas when I went TAD to a Marine unit which had M9's. Unlike my Italian pistol, even brand new, right out of the box U.S. made USMC Berettas had a horrible finish, trigger pulls that were agonizing and L O N G, poor accuracy and a rapid accumulation of significant amounts of broken parts and rust in just a small amount of time/low round counts--in short those particular U.S. made Berettas were garbage.
The 92G Compact was probably my favorite Beretta before the Vertec came along. It's a great size -- though oddly proportioned by today's standards -- and shoots exactly like a full size gun. It's one of the guns I'm genuinely sorry I gave up.
Doesn't combining Beretta 92 and Compact together in the same pistol description create an oxymoron?
Templar and DocGKR-We actually may not be on different sides of the planet here. When I'm discussing comparable quality, I was concerned primarily with internal component/material quality, not so much the degree of fineness of the exterior finish.
Regarding M9 and earlier generation BUSA Police Special guns; BUSA was allowed a different standard of acceptability regarding finish of these guns. What was allowable was a longer slide contouring cutter tool/tooling use period before replacement (the slide contouring tool is involved in the metal shaping/finishing of the slides), so that as the slide contouring cutters involved on M9/Police Special production became older, more tooling marks appeared on the exterior of the slide contours; the exterior Bruniton finish was actually applied to the same standards as on the commercial guns, but the marring on the metal made it look as if the finish application was suspect.
The broken parts and rust issues on NIB (or "new in crate") USMC M9s is interesting. I would be curious to ascertain if they were indeed a manufacturing QC issue/problem, or a post-manufacture shipping and/or inappropriate storage problem, or unit armorer (or operator) problem (in the Army we referred to this as the "PFC with a crowbar" syndrome). Military TMs make it clear that there are specific pre-issue weapon preparation protocols to be performed on weapons by unit armorers prior to operator issue/use, so were you present with the armorer(s) when the crates were opened and the problems discovered, or were the problems encountered later at the unit issue level?
I believe that there were also different levels of acceptable accuracy standards for commercial/LEO and military M9/M10 contract 92s, apparantly by DoD contract specifications. According to ToddG's 1998 Beretta Factory Armorer Class notes, "Each gun is then put in a Ransom rest, settled (3-5 shots fired) and accuracy tested. M9 military guns must meet a standard of 8" 10-shot groups at 50m, while law enforcement and commercial guns are tested with 10 shots at 25 yards." As a Group XO in the early 1990 timeframe, I don't recall there being an epidemic of accuracy impared M9s-but I do remember needing to adjust the rear sight of my personally issued M9 to achieve POA = POI.
Best, Jon
JonInWA--I am sorry my initial post was not clear, the rust and broken parts occurred after minimal amounts of use with brand new pistols shot in training packages.
The FS 92 is large, complicated design, and have lots of small pieces... but IME (mosly italian guns, but also some commercial BUSA) they run very smoothly, good triggers, and are very reliable. The small parts is not a problem for most users because they never will fully disassemble the gun. It is a mistery to me why I read all these good/bad/terrible conflicting reports on the M9.
I've never seen many problems around here, with many civilian users and IPSC gamers. Some broken locking blocks, trigger return springs, etc. but nothing out of the ordinary. Finish is durable, and the guns are accurate and well liked. Perhaps the extensive diet of NATO ball with the military is harder on them, but I don't think it will make too much of a difference.
A few years ago I had the opportunity to meet here a few US green berets from Ft. Bragg, they all had M9s that were very well kept, with some aftermarket light rail. They liked their guns and were very proficient with them. They were trained to decock the pistol whenever they changed position, and with the slide mounted safety/decocker this is FAR more difficult and cumbersome with an M9 than with a 1911 style pistol, but they did it with no problems other than an little callus on the thumb :)
I never understood why the US did not adopt a decocker only (G) version, now is probably too late to change. With the M9 when you rack the slide in a hurry you can decock the hammer and leave the gun on safe, it is mandatory to always wipe up the lever.
Thanks for the clarification, DocGKR. It sounds like more of a unit storage/maintenance issue as opposed to a manufacturing issue per se. What parts were broken, if you recall?
"Training package guns" sounds suspiciously like a group of pistols specifically dedicated to training en masse, as opposed to being assigned to a specific individual. If so, they may have been exposed to sporadic/indifferent maintenance, and if combined with exposure to the elements despite the Bruniton finish, such guns can age out/corrode quickly despite their chronological age.
But I'm shooting in the dark here. All that I can say is that the problems and issues that you encountered were not ones that I've observed in units/arms rooms with which I've been associated, or with any of my 3 personally owned 92s. I do recall that the M9 triggerpulls (at least initially) in our early 1990's new issue M9s were pretty average. The triggerpull (and accuracy) on a M9A1 that I tried awhile back was surprisingly excellent.
Best, Jon
They were NEW pistols, NEVER before fired, issued to individuals who were going through a multi-week training package. Lots of broken locking blocks, as well as some sheared trigger return springs and a couple of cracked slides. Again, they offered DRAMATICALLY different performance than my personally owned Berettas.
NCPatrolAR
03-19-10, 18:47
The 92G Compact was probably my favorite Beretta before the Vertec came along. It's a great size -- though oddly proportioned by today's standards -- and shoots exactly like a full size gun. It's one of the guns I'm genuinely sorry I gave up.
Todd
will full size mainsprings work in the compacts?
I am a "Beretta Fanboy" for certain. My wife has an Italian 92FC(compact) - it fits my hands quite well and work well for here and her frame. All said, prior true. It is very sweet and is great for rounding out the collection.
My favorite is an Ernest Langdon modded 92FSVertec in stainless - my uber sweet pistol.
I am a "Beretta Fanboy" for certain. My wife has an Italian 92FC(compact) - it fits my hands quite well and work well for here and her frame. All said, prior true. It is very sweet and is great for rounding out the collection.
My favorite is an Ernest Langdon modded 92FSVertec in stainless - my uber sweet pistol.
"Riggs!" -- LAV :D
The FS 92 is large, complicated design, and have lots of small pieces... but IME (mosly italian guns, but also some commercial BUSA) they run very smoothly, good triggers, and are very reliable. The small parts is not a problem for most users because they never will fully disassemble the gun. It is a mistery to me why I read all these good/bad/terrible conflicting reports on the M9.
I've never seen many problems around here, with many civilian users and IPSC gamers. Some broken locking blocks, trigger return springs, etc. but nothing out of the ordinary. Finish is durable, and the guns are accurate and well liked. Perhaps the extensive diet of NATO ball with the military is harder on them, but I don't think it will make too much of a difference.
A few years ago I had the opportunity to meet here a few US green berets from Ft. Bragg, they all had M9s that were very well kept, with some aftermarket light rail. They liked their guns and were very proficient with them. They were trained to decock the pistol whenever they changed position, and with the slide mounted safety/decocker this is FAR more difficult and cumbersome with an M9 than with a 1911 style pistol, but they did it with no problems other than an little callus on the thumb :)
.
More parts means more to fail, maintain, provide replacement for, and armorers. When you are talking about many thousands of weapons in very difficult conditions this is a big deal.
I see Beretta's by far the least among gun gamers for whatever that is worth.
Most military people have never fired a weapon prior to joining the military and that number is increasing. They go with what they know and are issued. The DA/SA triggers are there because of a risk averse military that for the most part does not want to take the time, effort, and cost to properly train soldiers in the use of sidearms. Or long arms for that matter. Accidental discharges resulting in injury or death will end a commanding officers career.
I think there is a very strong middle ground these days between the 1911 and Beretta for our military but it was apparently decided that the cost and effort of making a major change in the middle of our various conflicts was not worth it. At least the Marines have tried to make the best of this situation by ordering the M9A1.
Not trying to rain on anyones parade here in the middle of the Beretta lovefest...if you like them I'm happy for you. I find it interesting that Beretta is continuing along these lines with the 92A1 and 96A1. i though everything was going to be like the Storm form here on out which I think is a nice pistol.
http://www.berettaforum.net/vb/showthread.php?t=58304
Now if Beretta would only stop trying to sell more clothes the pistols they could be taken a little more seriously.
https://www.berettausa.com/Default.aspx
NCPatrolAR
03-20-10, 12:28
I used the M9 off and on for 8 years while in the military and never had any issues with it. The most common issue I saw was guys losing the trigger bar spring during cleaning.
Anyways, I'm enjoying my return to the Berettas. I'm carrying a Centurion right now as my offduty gun and the weight isnt an issue to me. I also enjoy the fact that my first mags holds 18 rounds in a flush-fit format and my spare holds 20. :D
I am not trolling when I say I'm glad somebody likes them. I see zero value in the Beretta as a military pistol. Fortunately I was never issued one even after the Marine Corps was finally forced to take them. Too many parts, too big for a 9, goofy controls, DA/SA makes no sense for the military, I don't like the entire locking block concept..I don't even understand why people think such a "busy" pistol is nice looking. Oh well...
why no love for DA/SA on a military pistol? 1911's were supposed to be carried un-cocked right? at least according to the manuals.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.