92s......setup to keep broken slide from flying off?
- Thread starter jhb
- Start date
- Status
Would you have some nice photos of broken lock?
Thanks. "A picture is worth a thousand words":
Looks to me that there is a problem with manufacturing method. Machining is poorly done, with not so sharp tool, and tooling marks are in the worst possible direction, contributing directly to the stress and crack development. If machining was done other way, tooling marks created by cutting tool will not be in same direction as the stress.
Also, it would be interesting to see what kind of steel was used, and was heat treatment properly done. I have high respect for S7 tool steel, used to manufacture cold forging dies. IMHO, locking block from this steel, plus better machining methods to reduce tooling marks and redirect them for 90º should make far superior locking block.
Last edited:
Interesting thread about evolution of Beretta pistol http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_5_15/150057_Beretta_92_Variants_and_FAQ__M9_vs_92FS_.html&page=1
Your statements are absolutely correct.
FYI, my knowledge about Beretta is nil. But from mechanical and manufacturing point of view, it is very difficult to get machining of the slide and locking block done in a such way that both sides will take the same amount of load without some sort of self-adjustment of the locking block.
I am aware of the possibility that slight wear might help, but I will newer rely in my design on such assumption.
These threads are humorous.
Most citizens won't fire 5000 rounds through a single pistol in a lifetime.
For all the hoo ha talk about the Beretta pistols most won't tell you the 1911A1s the M9 replaced broke down just as often if not more so than the Beretta's.
Only difference was the slides never broke and hit a SEAL in the face.
Most citizens won't fire 5000 rounds through a single pistol in a lifetime.
For all the hoo ha talk about the Beretta pistols most won't tell you the 1911A1s the M9 replaced broke down just as often if not more so than the Beretta's.
Only difference was the slides never broke and hit a SEAL in the face.
FL-NC
Member
RX- There wasn't a "predictable threshold" for this to happen. I know I replaced on on a team mate's pistol twice in one 60 day deployment, and he wasn't one of the "heavy shooters" on the team. So my guess is block # 2 failed in less than 2000 rounds. I kept 6 blocks at all times in the range box- the repair guys would replace them 1/1 when I brought in the broke ones (or at least some of the pieces). They were also replaced prior to any OCONUS deployment without question, and when a barrel was replaced. New slides got a new barrel and block. As for "civilians and a lot of rounds"- what is "alot"? Remember, some of us like to shoot "alot". When I'm in the US, I go through about 1,000 rounds of 9mm a month.
Last edited:
FL-NC
Member
onmilo- any firearm can and will eventually break, or just wear out. The amount it is shot, the maintenance (both routing and preventive) -or lack thereof- also play a role. Its just a matter of time. To me (and many other people) its also a matter of when this time is acceptable, balanced against the cost of the firearm, ease and expense of repair (if viable), overall reliability and performance of the firearm, and what other alternatives are available (often at a lower price). For myself, and many other users (including some US Special Operations units) the M9 wasn't cutting it, so we cut the M9.
FL-NC,
Check out Pistol-Forum. Plenty of guys shooting several thousand a month.
What I find interesting is that you mentioned replacing barrels. Chrome lined barrels. How many rounds does that take? 80,000? 100,000?
It really appears that M9s receive enormous numbers of rounds and I really wonder what sort of internal wear the frame, barrel and slide have after 10 locking blocks and 90,000 rounds of +P ammo, and what that does to stress a new locking block.
That's why I'm curious what a brand new M9 does, or at least one with a new top end.
I just think it is possible that the problem is that you are maintaining firearms that are hundreds of thousands of rounds past their life expectancy.
Check out Pistol-Forum. Plenty of guys shooting several thousand a month.
What I find interesting is that you mentioned replacing barrels. Chrome lined barrels. How many rounds does that take? 80,000? 100,000?
It really appears that M9s receive enormous numbers of rounds and I really wonder what sort of internal wear the frame, barrel and slide have after 10 locking blocks and 90,000 rounds of +P ammo, and what that does to stress a new locking block.
That's why I'm curious what a brand new M9 does, or at least one with a new top end.
I just think it is possible that the problem is that you are maintaining firearms that are hundreds of thousands of rounds past their life expectancy.
Confederate
Member
Thanks. I saw the reference to the 5,000 round service life in a dated government PDF that I can't locate. You can find a reference to it at:
http://www.guns.com/2013/01/17/sigs-in-the-us-military/
"So much that by 2004, some 75% of the USCGs inventory of M9 Berettas was far past their 5,000-round service life. As part of the Department of Homeland Security, the Coast Guard was part of a testing process that examined 46 different handgun models. Nearly 3-million rounds later (it’s a dirty job but someone has to do it!), the winner was the P229."
FL-NC
Member
RX- our weapons got gauged on schedule twice a year, plus pre-deployment and post-deployment. Sometimes you would find new parts like barrels, slides, etc. that you didn't expect on your pistol. Often the supply sgt would come tom my team room with new pistol(s) and the revised property book where serial numbers changed and we got new pistols on our team hand receipt- he brought us the pistols to confirm the new numbers. I got several rebuilt M9s through Anniston (they were stamped ANAD), but I only got a brand new replacement one once, in the 90's. It seemed like M9 pistols would last me about 2 years before I got a replacement. A replacement M9 usually meant your last one had a problem with the frame.
amd6547
Member
When I bought a used 1997 Taurus PT92, I did some research on the Taurus forum regarding locking blocks.
With a lot of thread searching, I found a few reports of locking block failure, and also stories of PT's with 10's of thousands of round through them with no issue.
In my own PT92's case, with no idea of round count, or if the previous owner fired bunches of +P+, I replaced the block with a current gen Beretta block.
This current block has a much longer expected service life, and over at Beretta forum, you don't read about them breaking often.
The Beretta kit comes with a new recoil spring, the block, and the block pin, which is thicker in the new design.
It cost about $40, and dropped right in.
Personally, I think staying current on the recoil spring, as well as proper lube and maintainence, is the key.
With a lot of thread searching, I found a few reports of locking block failure, and also stories of PT's with 10's of thousands of round through them with no issue.
In my own PT92's case, with no idea of round count, or if the previous owner fired bunches of +P+, I replaced the block with a current gen Beretta block.
This current block has a much longer expected service life, and over at Beretta forum, you don't read about them breaking often.
The Beretta kit comes with a new recoil spring, the block, and the block pin, which is thicker in the new design.
It cost about $40, and dropped right in.
Personally, I think staying current on the recoil spring, as well as proper lube and maintainence, is the key.
OP
OP
jhb
Member
What about using a heavier recoil spring that wolff sells? 14 or 15 lb....good idea of bad idea? I realize function can be affected if ammo isnt matched to the spring deal, but im more interested in damage that could happen from over powered slide closure on the frame etc? I doubt a lb or 2 would do much but alas i am no engineer.
Last edited:
Deaf Smith
Member
Pitiful...
Imagine a 1911 or Glock or Sig having to do THAT to keep it from failing. Or having to replace the locking guns every 5k rounds.
Pitiful...
Deaf
FL-NC
Member
RX- I can't answer that with any degree of accuracy. First off, in the 90's (clinton years) we shot less in general and with pistols in particular than post 9-11. No $. That block on my new gun didn't fail on me- I left that unit and someone else got that pistol. The 2 blocks that I had fail, 1 happened during a stateside train-up, the other during a SOUTHCOM deployment, with the same pistol. I fixed countless others range-side- both "team guns" and "school guns" when I was an instructor. Guys would say, "hey- my POS broke again", I would throw in another block, and they would head back to the line. It was normal. Some deployments we shot a lot, some a lot less. Some guys would go out once a week, some guys 3-4 times a week. Round counts weren't something we really kept up with, except for sniper systems. The gauging and maintenance schedules are what really kept our weapons in order. I'm sure locking blocks were replaced pre-deployment that probably didn't need to be. Just too many variables to give you anything approaching an intelligent answer.
JTQ
Member
Here's a thread from another forum on the Beretta 92 locking block's. Apparently there is a need for replacement blocks to be fitted to the gun for long term success.
https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?8166-The-Achilles-heel-of-the-Beretta-(Broken-locking-block)
FL-NC,
Your answer is typical of all military users I've spoken to. "Hey, these M9s keep breaking!", but no one can say how much mileage the guns or replacement parts had on them.
I would be one thing if new pistols destroyed locking blocks in 5000 rounds and the rest of the parts fell apart at 20,000 rounds. But it sounds like you were using guns that may have had hundreds of thousands of rounds and weren't really being maintained as much as having new block after block thrown into pistols that may have had some serious dimensional problems.
If the military tracked anything, it might avoid deploying problem pistols by retiring slides, frames or barrels before they accumulate enough dimensional problems to destroy their blocks. It sounds like some gauges are in use, but who knows if those gauges address what stresses the blocks.
I think it quite possible if any handful of M9s was tracked accurately from new to when it becomes a problem gun, we might find the round count fairly extraordinary.
Your answer is typical of all military users I've spoken to. "Hey, these M9s keep breaking!", but no one can say how much mileage the guns or replacement parts had on them.
I would be one thing if new pistols destroyed locking blocks in 5000 rounds and the rest of the parts fell apart at 20,000 rounds. But it sounds like you were using guns that may have had hundreds of thousands of rounds and weren't really being maintained as much as having new block after block thrown into pistols that may have had some serious dimensional problems.
If the military tracked anything, it might avoid deploying problem pistols by retiring slides, frames or barrels before they accumulate enough dimensional problems to destroy their blocks. It sounds like some gauges are in use, but who knows if those gauges address what stresses the blocks.
I think it quite possible if any handful of M9s was tracked accurately from new to when it becomes a problem gun, we might find the round count fairly extraordinary.
FL-NC
Member
RX- Yes, I know in many cases, slides were "coded out" and replaced. When a frame "codes out", the entire weapon is replaced (usually with a ANAD rebuilt replacement pistol) and the tape re-winds. And entire pistols were replaced frequently. Speaking for myself and the unit I was in, we were provided and used much more ammunition for all of our weapons systems than most units, which resulted in a high level of proficiency (which was our standard). M4 barrels and bolts were replaced every year or 2. Machine gun barrels were constantly being replaced, and sniper systems were regularly exchanged for new ones at round count thresholds or when there was any loss of performance. That being said, the M9 was the most problematic weapon in our inventory, which led to them being replaced with Glock pistols. Since that changeover occurred, improvements in pistol reliability, service life, overall performance of users, and less frequent "down time" due to repairs were much better than expected. Yes, the occasional "problem child" Glock did raise its ugly head, but in most cases simple armorer work fixed these problems long-term.
I wouldn't say that a M9 is as tough as a Glock, but you are still comparing the average problems of a heavily recycled weapon system to the results obtained by 100% new weapons.
If the M9s were just junked at 80,000 or so rounds - which is fair for the $250 or so they cost - instead of endlessly recycled, you might not have had the experience of them being so unpredictable.
It isn't like when you sent off an M9 to be rebuilt they actually remachined the frame. They inspected it for obvious cracks, put paint on the silver spots and replaced the small parts. That doesn't reset the odometer.
From your experience and everyone I talked to when I was in the service - the M9 is misunderstood and mistreated. The military has miserly squeezed an incredible service life out of an alloy framed weapon by allowing degraded reliability.
If the M9s were just junked at 80,000 or so rounds - which is fair for the $250 or so they cost - instead of endlessly recycled, you might not have had the experience of them being so unpredictable.
It isn't like when you sent off an M9 to be rebuilt they actually remachined the frame. They inspected it for obvious cracks, put paint on the silver spots and replaced the small parts. That doesn't reset the odometer.
From your experience and everyone I talked to when I was in the service - the M9 is misunderstood and mistreated. The military has miserly squeezed an incredible service life out of an alloy framed weapon by allowing degraded reliability.
Glock recommends changing recoil spring assemblies about every 3K rounds in their Gen3 and previous guns and every 5K rounds in their Gen4 guns.
SIG, I believe, recommends replacement of the recoil spring every 3K to 5K rounds depending on who you talk to.
As far as +P goes, if you're shooting enough +P in a Beretta to wear it out, you should either have someone maintaining your gun for free (and supplying you with free ammo) or, based on your ammo expenditures, you should have enough money to easily buy a new pistol when you do finally wear one out.
Beretta locking blocks should last around 20K rounds or so (based on feedback from high-volume competition shooters who use the 92FS platform) and you can get a complete locking block replacement kit, including a spare recoil spring for $35 from Beretta.
http://www.berettausa.com/en-us/beretta-92-96-locking-block-kit/le9201/
- Status
