Beretta 92 Brigadier Part #

Status
Not open for further replies.
gregp74

gregp74

Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2015
Messages
637
Location
Rockford, IL
I'm looking for a part number for an Italian made Beretta 92 Brigadier, with the bruniton finish. The Googles they do not help. The Beretta website gives the Inox version, and also says available in Black, but the link goes nowhere.

I see a model J92F700 (only 10 rounds though) at Bud's but they can't seem to tell me if it's Italian or US made.
 
Looking for the whole gun. I'm fixin' to pick something up for a "winter project" that I can fire up the wood stove and settle down at the work bench and futz around with for a couple months.

I'm kind of leaning towards the Brigadier model just because the front sights can be changed out if I want tritium at a later date. Also I tend to gravitate more toward the Italian made Berettas. (No practical reason, just because it's an Italian company. I'm the same with with Austrian made Glocks.)
 
The Vertec slide also has a dovetailed front sight.

This slide is found on the 92A1, M9A3, 92G Elite LTT, and the Vertec if it ever makes a reappearance.
 
gregp74 said:
I'm fixin' to pick something up for a "winter project" that I can fire up the wood stove and settle down at the work bench and futz around with for a couple months.

I'm kind of leaning towards the Brigadier model...
Click to expand...
The Inox versions wouldn't require refinishing if you're "futzing around" with it.
 
JTQ said:
The Vertec slide also has a dovetailed front sight.

This slide is found on the 92A1, M9A3, 92G Elite LTT, and the Vertec if it ever makes a reappearance.
Click to expand...

That's actually been on my mind also. My problem is I think on this one I want to go with the old classic looking from without the rail setup. I may just forego the dovetail sights and pick up an old school Italian made 92FS. If I felt the need for night sights on it I could always do a switcheroo and put my M9A3 slide on it I suppose.
 
Have you handled and shot a Brig? They are significantly beefier than the standard models. I prefer the thinner/lighter slides myself.
 
I've got a beat up Inox Brigadier that got cerakoted somewhere along the way, so I'm familiar with them. That massive slide does negate a little more recoil but I don't know if it's worth the extra pudginess. Recoil's not really an issue on any 92 I've ever shot. It does give the gun a bit of a "cool" factor, but I like it more for the dovetail front sight than that.
 
They are significantly beefier than the standard models. I prefer the thinner/lighter slides myself.
Click to expand...
That massive slide does negate a little more recoil but I don't know if it's worth the extra pudginess.
Click to expand...
I have a 92FS and a 92G Elite II which uses the Brigadier slide.

Some caveats. The EII has front slide serrations which remove a tiny bit of metal compared to a standard Brigadier slide. My EII wears adjustable sights which are probably slightly heavier than the stock sights. Both of my slides are stainless steel.

Here are the stats from my measurements.

Standard 92FS stainless steel slide weight: 11.3 oz.
92G Brigadier stainless steel slide weight: 12.0 oz.

Standard 92FS stainless steel slide thickness: 1.11"
92G Brigadier stainless steel slide thickness: 1.165"

So the Brig slide is about 0.7 oz heavier and is about 0.055" thicker than the standard slide. It is unquestionably heavier and bigger than the standard slide, but we're talking less than three quarters of an ounce heavier and just a hair over half of a tenth of an inch thicker.

For perspective on the weight comparison, you can change the weight of the gun more by carrying 147gr defensive ammo vs 115gr defensive ammo than by switching slides. The slide change affects the weight by 0.7oz while going from 115gr ammo to 147gr ammo would change the weight of the fully loaded gun by 1.17 oz.
 
I didn't realize the difference was that little. I guess it's been a while -- I need to get the brigadier out of the safe and compare them side by side.

The brig is my only inox one. Are those heavier than the standard models?
 
I don't really know--if I had to guess, I would say yes, but not by very much at all. Fortunately both the slides were INOX so I could do an apples to apples.
 
JohnKSa said:
I have a 92FS and a 92G Elite II which uses the Brigadier slide.

Some caveats. The EII has front slide serrations which remove a tiny bit of metal compared to a standard Brigadier slide. My EII wears adjustable sights which are probably slightly heavier than the stock sights. Both of my slides are stainless steel.

Here are the stats from my measurements.

Standard 92FS stainless steel slide weight: 11.3 oz.
92G Brigadier stainless steel slide weight: 12.0 oz.

Standard 92FS stainless steel slide thickness: 1.11"
92G Brigadier stainless steel slide thickness: 1.165"

So the Brig slide is about 0.7 oz heavier and is about 0.055" thicker than the standard slide. It is unquestionably heavier and bigger than the standard slide, but we're talking less than three quarters of an ounce heavier and just a hair over half of a tenth of an inch thicker.

For perspective on the weight comparison, you can change the weight of the gun more by carrying 147gr defensive ammo vs 115gr defensive ammo than by switching slides. The slide change affects the weight by 0.7oz while going from 115gr ammo to 147gr ammo would change the weight of the fully loaded gun by 1.17 oz.
Click to expand...
Thanks for that. It feels like a lot more to me! My only points of reference are an older blued 92FS and an INOX Brig 92FS with stainless steel safeties. I wonder if that makes any difference.
 
The standard and stainless alloys will certainly have slightly different densities, and therefore different weights. Using the density range of steel alloys from Wikipedia and running the numbers indicates that if a blued Beretta slide is at the extreme lower end of the density range for steel and an otherwise identical INOX slide is at the extreme upper end of the range, the difference in weight, due to density variations alone would be about 0.46 oz. It is true that stainless alloys tend to be more dense so that's not a totally off-the-wall supposition, but that's going to be pretty much the maximum difference in slide weight you could theoretically have due to density variations alone.

There's also the barrel which is stainless steel, but I happen to have a standard barrel on hand and there is no measureable difference in weight there compared to a stainless barrel. The frames are all aluminum so no difference there either.

So I think we're looking at the total maximum weight difference in the guns (assuming the maximum density difference in the slide alloys) of about 1.2 oz more for an INOX Brig vs a blued standard 92FS.
 
Dumb question. This brigadier that I've got started its life with an Inox finish but the previous owner had Wilson Combat turn it black (amongst other work.) What are my chances of getting it back to looking like it originally did via bead blasting?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
Beretta 92 Brigadier Inox
Replies
1
Views
469
KurtC
K
Shipwreck
  • Locked
New Beretta Brigadier
2 3
Replies
51
Views
3K
Shipwreck
Shipwreck
O
  • Locked
Several New (and Old) Beretta Handguns Being Announced
2
Replies
38
Views
3K
OregonJohnny
O
S
  • Locked
Beretta 92 Brigadier (why?)
Replies
18
Views
5K
BerettaNut92
B
K
  • Locked
Beretta 96 Brigadier
Replies
4
Views
487
madmattmd
M
Back
Top