Beretta 92FS decocker removal

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have a new beretta 380 I won around 2005 or so (choice of it or a sorry 410 neither caliber I particularly wanted). I can't remember what the charity event was but raffle tickets were bought and they called and said to come pick up whatever I wanted. I'm thinking it was frame mounted and condition 1 capable. But I never shot it so I could be mistaken. It looked like a scaled down 92/96. Maybe an 84 variant?

I'll have to look out for a 51
 
MTMilitiaman said:
Even if you remove the decocker, you still have to deal with the world's least intuitive safety design placed in the least convenient spot. Up-swept, slide-mounted safeties are retarded and offer not one single advantage over a properly placed and functioning down-swept, frame-mounted safety. Better to just not mess with the POS Beretta to begin with, IMO.
Click to expand...
Ouch!

If I had to grab only one handgun and jump out a window to face TEOTWAKI, it would be my M92- but the P226 is a close second.
 
First generation Beretta 92 had a proper frame mounted thumb safety. Unfortunately, it also had the oddly placed Marengoni magazine catch.
First generation Beretta 84 and similar also had proper frame mounted thumb safeties.
They were still DA/SA, so if you wanted to manually decock and get to a DA/SA start, you could, same as a CZ75.
 
I originally came into this post because I was curious as to whether the OP had a way to remove the safety/decocker completely. I know for Glocks there is Lone Wolf and a couple dozen others. For CZ there is Cajun Gun Works. The 1911 has a plethora. I wondered if someone maybe offered an aftermarket kit to convert the Beretta 92FS to a straight DAO. If you could get a kit to remove the switch completely, bob the hammer completely flush and contoured with the back of the frame, and run it DAO with a nice 8 to 8.5 lbs pull, that I would maybe consider. Other than that, I generally despise DA/SA autos. It can be a little squishy or gritty, I can learn to deal with a lot of things in a trigger, but I just can not understand any sense in having two different trigger pulls on the same gun. So I don't mind a broke in Glock trigger, but prefer a good SAO trigger on a hammer fired gun. I've shot several well tuned 1911s. While I am not a fan of the 1911, I consider its trigger to be among its strongest suits.

If I was forced to go with a DA/SA with a decocker, it would be the P226. If forced to go with a DA/SA more broadly, I would go with some version of the CZ-75 that allowed cocked and locked carry, even at the expense of a decocker. But given an even broader choice among hammer fired autos generally, I would go with either the SAO Legion version of the P226, or a Cajun-ized CZ-75 converted to SAO.
 
20190105_201622.jpg

I'm with you night. Of these four I took out last weekend, I'd take the Glock or beretta one.

Btw.. usp has a decocker and allows for cocked and locked too. One of very few.
 
Last edited:
MTMilitiaman said:
... I just can not understand any sense in having two different trigger pulls on the same gun.
Click to expand...
I'm not trying to convince you to like DA/SA guns, everybody gets to make a choice as to what they like, but to explain why somebody would prefer two different trigger pulls on the same gun. More Ernest Langdon ...

 
MTMilitiaman said:
I originally came into this post because I was curious as to whether the OP had a way to remove the safety/decocker completely. I know for Glocks there is Lone Wolf and a couple dozen others. For CZ there is Cajun Gun Works. The 1911 has a plethora. I wondered if someone maybe offered an aftermarket kit to convert the Beretta 92FS to a straight DAO. If you could get a kit to remove the switch completely, bob the hammer completely flush and contoured with the back of the frame, and run it DAO with a nice 8 to 8.5 lbs pull, that I would maybe consider. Other than that, I generally despise DA/SA autos. It can be a little squishy or gritty, I can learn to deal with a lot of things in a trigger, but I just can not understand any sense in having two different trigger pulls on the same gun. So I don't mind a broke in Glock trigger, but prefer a good SAO trigger on a hammer fired gun. I've shot several well tuned 1911s. While I am not a fan of the 1911, I consider its trigger to be among its strongest suits.

If I was forced to go with a DA/SA with a decocker, it would be the P226. If forced to go with a DA/SA more broadly, I would go with some version of the CZ-75 that allowed cocked and locked carry, even at the expense of a decocker. But given an even broader choice among hammer fired autos generally, I would go with either the SAO Legion version of the P226, or a Cajun-ized CZ-75 converted to SAO.
Click to expand...
O, that's an easy one, then. You're looking for a M92D- smooth slide, DAO, bobbed hammer.
 
MTMilitiaman said:
I originally came into this post because I was curious as to whether the OP had a way to remove the safety/decocker completely. I know for Glocks there is Lone Wolf and a couple dozen others. For CZ there is Cajun Gun Works. The 1911 has a plethora. I wondered if someone maybe offered an aftermarket kit to convert the Beretta 92FS to a straight DAO. If you could get a kit to remove the switch completely, bob the hammer completely flush and contoured with the back of the frame, and run it DAO with a nice 8 to 8.5 lbs pull, that I would maybe consider.
Click to expand...
For Beretta customization there is...

Wilson Combat https://www.wilsoncombat.com/custom-beretta-9296-work-and-accessories-2/

Langdon Tactical https://www.langdontactical.com/products/guns-gunsmithing/

Allegheny Gun Works http://alleghenyarms.com/custom-berettas/

Note the Wilson Brigadier 92G Vertec I linked in an earlier post, begins life as a normal 92G Brigadier and Wilson files on the frame to create the Vertec frame. They aren't starting with a Vertec frame, Wilson is making it one. That should demonstrate the level of capability they have.
 
shoobe01 said:
Unless I missed something, the OP was originally asking to not have decock? That is a 92G (Gendarme: the French police asked for it, and got it).
Click to expand...
The "G" gives decock only with no safety.

The OP basically was asking for the complete opposite, no decock, with a safety.

The Beretta "G" models are a good idea, and I'm really surprised it has taken them so long to begin mainstreaming them into the US (though I think the preponderance of FS models and potential liability may have kept them scared for a while), and probably are a better choice for most users these days, though I can still see a use for the safety/decocker versions.
 
OP, the option you are considering is one that I haven't heard of before. You might try the Beretta forum and see if anyone knows something. Most who want a cocked and locked 92 series find one of the older models with the frame mounted safety or get a Taurus PT92. I keep an M9 next to my bed and I am pretty happy with the original system. In fact, the Walther P38 is my all time favorite pistol, after the Colt's 1911.
 
FYI it is possible to create a SAO 92 with a frame mounted thumb safety like the old ones. It will probably cost you as much as buying a bilennium or Steel I but it's possible with help from shops like Allegheny
 
I'm also going to say look at the Taurus PT-92AF-D. It does have a decocker, but you have to WANT to decock it.

Also, it can be safetied cocked and locked (or decocked for that matter)

Also, The safe/fire direction matches the 1911.
Also, the safety selector is in about the same place as a 1911.

I do not like to have a different manual of arms for my guns. I like a manual safety, but I won't use one that dos not operate "naturally"...so the Beretta is out.
 
JTQ said:
The "G" gives decock only with no safety.

The OP basically was asking for the complete opposite, no decock, with a safety.

The Beretta "G" models are a good idea, and I'm really surprised it has taken them so long to begin mainstreaming them into the US (though I think the preponderance of FS models and potential liability may have kept them scared for a while), and probably are a better choice for most users these days, though I can still see a use for the safety/decocker versions.
Click to expand...
Arg, correct! Got my brain backwards because it's been too long since I messed with 92s so much.
 
I guess I don't understand what about the decocker/safety would make the OP "nervous". The cocked and locked setup makes some people nervous, but I don't understand how firing a gun from the hammer down condition would concern anyone. Oh well, if it really did, I would look at a CZ pattern gun. I really like the 92, and had no problems with the 3 I've owned over the years. I don't find it "too big", and I really like the smooth DA trigger that they all have, but especially my last 92FS police trade in that had some work done to it.
 
hemiram said:
I don't understand how firing a gun from the hammer down condition would concern anyone.
Click to expand...
That long and heavy DA trigger pull, combined with the bulky grip, makes it impossible for me, personally, to fire the gun with any degree of accuracy. That means that the first shot, when fired in that mode, is basically wasted. I would like to start in the SA mode, but be able to carry the gun reasonably safely in that mode. (I suppose carrying with the hammer down, and manually cocking the hammer prior to shooting, would involve about the same effort as carrying it cocked and manually releasing the safety with my proposed modification.)

This is the same reason why I don't like DA revolvers. They're tolerable for me if they can be cocked and fired SA mode. A DAO revolver is something I don't want to struggle with.

I have a Sig Sauer M17 (P320 variant with a manual safety) on order. When I get it, I'm going to post a comparison of its ergonomics as opposed to those of the Beretta 92FS, and the Colt M1911. Let's see if the Army made a wise decision in going from one to the other.

I also have a couple of Walther P1's. Although their decocker/safety arrangement is the same as the Beretta 92FS, their grip size (due to the single-stack magazine) makes them far more manageable.
 
AlexanderA said:
That long and heavy DA trigger pull, combined with the bulky grip, makes it impossible for me, personally, to fire the gun with any degree of accuracy. That means that the first shot, when fired in that mode, is basically wasted. I would like to start in the SA mode, but be able to carry the gun reasonably safely in that mode.
Click to expand...

There are guns that are well-suited to that approach. The Berettas are not really among them, unless you happen to track down one of the rare models with a frame-mounted safety.

Otherwise, this is like asking how to best carry a 1911 with the hammer down but ready for immediate action, or how to install a safety on a Glock... or how to configure a dump truck for LeMans racing. You sell the dump truck and buy a race car.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JTQ
AlexanderA said:
In the Beretta 92FS (U.S. M9), applying the safety rotates the firing pin out of the way of the hammer, blocks the firing pin, and then drops the hammer. As someone who's used to the way the M1911 operates (being able to carry it "cocked and locked"), this feature has always made me nervous.

I have a Sig Sauer M17 (P320 variant with a manual safety) on order.
Click to expand...
I'll be interested to know what makes you more nervous, the hammer drop decocker/safety or a gun with no visible hammer.
 
JTQ said:
I'll be interested to know what makes you more nervous, the hammer drop decocker/safety or a gun with no visible hammer.
Click to expand...
Obviously the hammer dropping when the safety is applied makes me more nervous. But we'll see. The M17 I'm getting will be my first striker-fired handgun.

Hey, I'm old and I'm used to things working the old-fashioned way. (I have 8 M1911's but only 2 Berettas. Anything from the 1980's is still new-fangled to me.)
 
AlexanderA said:
Obviously the hammer dropping when the safety is applied makes me more nervous. But we'll see. The M17 I'm getting will be my first striker-fired handgun.

Hey, I'm old and I'm used to things working the old-fashioned way. (I have 8 M1911's but only 2 Berettas. Anything from the 1980's is still new-fangled to me.)
Click to expand...
Everybody's got their concerns. Folks have commented in this thread about their concern for Condition 1 with a 1911, you've got concerns about a hammer drop decocker/safety.

I've got no problems with either of those, either a Condition 1 1911, or a Tradition Double Action (TDA) with a decocker/safety. The thing that bugs me is not seeing a hammer so I can tell the condition of the gun. As mentioned in a couple of the videos I linked above, the hammer gives me an extra margin of safety strikers don't give me.
 
The SIG M17 may be what you're looking for.
AlexanderA said:
That long and heavy DA trigger pull, combined with the bulky grip, makes it impossible for me, personally, to fire the gun with any degree of accuracy. That means that the first shot, when fired in that mode, is basically wasted.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying you're doing it wrong, but perhaps you're approaching the DA trigger pull incorrectly. Here's some more Ernest Langdon with a Beretta 92/M9 on "Fear Not the Double Action Shot"

 
Last edited:
Still a noob but here's my 2 cents, get thinner grips and a trigger job.

Then practice.

I carry my 92fs with a round chambered, hammer down. No red showing on my lever. This doesn't seem a lot different to carrying c&l to me but I practice my da often.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

MSgtUSAF
  • Locked
  • Poll
Walther PPK/S safety binds
Replies
6
Views
573
HisSoldier
HisSoldier
K
  • Locked
Convert 92FS from Safety/Decock to Safety-only
Replies
22
Views
7K
JTQ
J
H
  • Locked
Safety confusion on the new Beretta 90-Two
Replies
4
Views
843
wally
wally
D
  • Locked
Half-cock on a Beretta 92FS
Replies
3
Views
2K
berettaman
B
J
  • Locked
How would you carry a Daewoo Tri-Action?
Replies
5
Views
738
Mad Magyar
M
Back
Top