Beretta 9mm 92 cracked#

Which, in turn, makes the sights skip off target. So, if you’re engaging the trigger at ANY kind of an angle… the gun jerks in (or against) that direction as the trigger jumps to backstop. In other words, the hammer falls while you’re still plowing through the DA stroke. But also think part of that “sight jerk” problem is because there’s more over travel in the Beretta’s DA action. Now, this is partly because I have small hands: it’s tough to get enough “finger” in front of trigger for a 100% straight-back pull. But when the 92’s hammer falls (in DA), the entire gun jerks, jostles and fishtails-and so do the sights. While the gun is simply sublime in SA, compared to competitive offerings from Sig Sauer and Smith & Wesson, Beretta’s DA game leaves something to be desired. But I can’t give Beretta a pass on the double-action trigger. And it was never meant for concealed carry-it’s a duty gun, straight up. The weight and size (along with the locking block) are part of what make it such a great shooting gun. People bitch about the 92 being humongous. I also own a Walther P5 (which is more or less the final iteration of the P38) and I can tell you there is a definitely a similarity in how the guns handle and shoot… especially as it relates to recoil. Now, I’m no physicist… but… since the locking-block system keeps the barrel straight the as gun cycles, it would (or could) explain the more “linear feeling” recoil impulse you find in a Beretta 92. Another way to look at it: a separate part does the tilting to unlock the barrel from the slide, instead of the entire barrel pivoting down and back. In a nutshell, the locking-block (also known as “falling block”) system allows the barrel to stay straight as the gun cycles-it only moves back and forth, instead of tilting. I’ve had 4 Beretta 92s from different generations, and they’ve all been 100% reliable (minus a broken extractor spring on a surplus 92S from the early ‘80s). And it’ll probably outshoot most of its more “modern” competitors. But, beyond these over-hyped anomalies from the past, I feel there’s a consensus that the Beretta 92 is one of the most proven, most reliable, most rugged handgun platforms out there.Īs long as you keep some semblance of lubrication on the innards… a 92 will run. And there were some sand issues (in Iraq) with aftermarket mags (i.e., cheapo finish, no hole near the bottom for sand egress). Supposedly, they were torture-testing the guns with oodles of high-pressure 9mm.

Beretta 9mm 92 cracked#

Sure, some Navy SEALS cracked some slides way back when. It also serves the Italian military and many other foreign military units / police forces. It served the US military with distinction for over 35 years and it will probably continue to do so for the foreseeable future. I don’t have to tell you the Beretta 92 is reliable. NOTE: While I offer some perspectives on how the 92F compares to more recent 92FS / M9 models, I will mainly focus on the shooting/handling characteristics of the Beretta 92 in general. It just wants you to peer down those iron sights and hose-down the 10-ring with as many bullets you can afford to feed it. It gives you punch-out-the-bullseye accuracy every time, and it doesn’t give a shit what you think about red dots, accessory rails or one-handed slide manipulations. Like the distance between you and your target almost disappears. But I’m not sure any other gun offers up its signature recipe for accuracy so willingly. There are more accurate guns than a Beretta 92. The 92 isn’t just an icon-it’s a gun that shoots like no other, offering a refined sense of poise and purpose that translates into effortless accuracy. What makes the Beretta 92F hipster worthy? So… after putting about 200 rounds and roughly $300 of collector value through my latest, umm, divestment, I can confidently tell you this: An old-school Beretta 92 is gun-hipster gold. And, until about 3 weeks ago, it was completely unfired.