Will the new locking lugs work with the older 92fs barrel will it be a plug and play
The new locking blocks should work in any 92FS pistols although the newest generation will require the new style plunger pin. If you buy a $35 kit from Beretta, it comes with the block, matching plunger pin, retaining pin and a new recoil spring.
What is "a significant number"? I see a significant disparity between the number cited by Mr De Plano (20k rounds) and the "non-Beretta source" source (5k rounds).
I have also noted this disparity. In my opinion, the disparity is most likely due to two factors.
1. The block takes a lot of stress early in the firing cycle when the slide velocity is maximum. Ammunition that increases slide velocity is going to put a lot more stress on the locking block. So, for example, hot 124gr loadings would stress it a lot more than mild 115gr loadings. The design is definitely sensitive to slide velocity--it was officially cited by Beretta as the reason why, unlike most other manufacturers of .40S&W pistols who offered .357SIG versions, Beretta never did.
2. It seems that the first locking block often lasts a lot longer than subsequent replacements. I believe that this is due to the fact that the first block, going into a new gun with no wear shares the stress equally between the two "ears" on the blocks. A replacement new block going into a gun with wear on it is likely to place uneven stress on the two ears, with one taking more stress and therefore being much more prone to break. I suspect that carefully fitting a replacement block to the slide to insure even stresses on the two "ears" will significantly improve locking block life.
I would say that "a significant number" is not a fixed number which is why I didn't initially quote one. The numbers that follow are simply my WAGs, I don't have citations or official numbers for any of this so what follows is just my opinion. As such, I'm not going to defend it nor respond to demands for source information to confirm it.
If the gun is using a first gen block that has never been replaced and the gun is being shot with primarily practice ammo (light bullet, mild velocities), I think that replacement around 10K is probably smart. Change that to much hotter ammunition and the interval probably comes down to 5K.
If it's a first gen block that's a replacement and it's being shot with mild ammo, then replacement around 5K is probably smart unless the block was properly fitted on installation, then the 10K number is probably still ok. A first gen block that's a replacement block and is being used with hot ammo should probably just be replaced with a newer generation block.
A 2nd or 3rd gen block that's original to the gun should go 20K with mild ammo. In my own gun, I would probably drop that to 10K if I were shooting a lot of hot ammo. I think a properly fitted replacement block is probably as good as a new one, but I would probably drop both of those numbers by half for a replacement block that isn't fitted.
I have difficulty relying on such a report that the pistol would still be deemed serviceable; let alone that the original locking block would still be intact after 100k rounds.
It's obviously not typical, but the person saved ammunition boxes from shooting sessions which made it quite easy to verify the number of rounds fired. To make it even more interesting, the gun was not a 92, it was a 96. Although I regard the report as an anomaly--I would never tell someone they should expect to get 100K on a locking block, this is part of why I think that fitting & ammunition have such significant effects. Clearly the blocks CAN last a long time under certain circumstances and fitting/ammo seem to be the best explanations for why that is be true.
I know at one time Ernest Langdon recommended changing the block at 20,000 rounds.
That was also the advice from Todd Green who was associated with Beretta for awhile and shot enough ammo through Berettas to have an educated opinion. He also provided, as I recall, a procedure for fitting an new block which he believed was important.
