Beretta 92/M9 - Weight of Metal vs. Plastic Parts

Status
Not open for further replies.

OregonJohnny

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2008
Messages
1,072
Location
Oregon
I have finally made my Beretta 92FS a 100% metal gun. As most know, in the early 2000's, Beretta began putting plastic or plastic-coated parts in the 92 series. My circa-2007 92FS came from the factory with the following plastic or plastic coated parts:

• Guide rod
• Trigger
• Left side safety
• Magazine release
• Mainspring cap/lanyard loop

And of course, the stock grips have always been plastic, and magazine bases switched from aluminum to plastic at least 10-15 years ago, due to brittle aluminum bases cracking when dropped on hard surfaces.

So, last night I tore down my 92 and installed metal parts that I have sourced in the last week. Before I did, I weighed each piece on a 10-lb. digital postage scale, to compare weights of plastic vs. metal. Here are the numbers I came up with, for those interested:

Guide rod - plastic: 0.1 oz., steel: 1.1 oz.
Trigger - plastic coated: 0.2 oz., steel: 0.5 oz.
Left side safety - plastic: 0.3 oz., steel: 0.5 oz.
Magazine release - plastic: 0.1 oz., steel: 0.2 oz.
Mainspring cap - plastic: 0.1 oz., aluminum: 0.2 oz.

So switching out these parts for their original metal versions adds about 1.7 oz. to the gun. In addition, I have Alumagrips on the gun, which weigh 2.0 oz., compared to just 1.1 oz. for the stock plastic grips. So my gun now weighs almost 3 oz. more than it did the day I bought it. Since this is not a carry gun, I like the additional heft and the reduced felt-recoil it will bring. I also just like the idea of metal parts in a metal gun. The new steel trigger feels better and smoother somehow, but maybe it's just in my mind. Also, the new safety fits slightly closer to the slide and has a crisper feel.

Anyway, I thought this would be of interest to anyone looking to either lighten an older Beretta by switching to plastic parts, or to "fatten" a newer Beretta to make it even more pleasant to shoot, or just for that authentic metal feeling. :)
 
Can you really tell the difference in weight?

Two to three ounces in a gun this size isn't a night-and-day difference, but I think I can sense it slightly. If I had another 92 to compare to, it would be much easier. To me, the real difference is how much better the metal parts fit, feel and look.
 
So, metal vs plastic-covered-metal really makes you feel better?

Yes. ;)

Actually, the only parts that were plastic-covered-metal were the trigger and maybe the safety (not sure). And as you can see from the weights above, the metal inside the trigger must just be a piece of spring steel covered in polymer. But the guide rod, mag release and mainspring cap were 100% plastic.

I just wanted to get my Beretta to a pre-2000 configuration, and now it is (with the exception of the angled dust cover, which apparently is stronger than the original straight dust cover anyway).

People switch out the plastic guide rods for steel in their Glocks, Berettas and Sigs all the time. It's a pretty common practice, I just went a few steps further. And, as I mentioned, the metal parts actually fit better and have crisper operation than the plastic ones did.
 
Last edited:
Some people switch out steel guide rods for tungsten ones to get the weight on their pistol up.
 
My older 92fs was made before they changed to plastic on these parts. Someone told me (unverified) that the military wanted the guide rods to be plastic so that they could be easily broken to make the gun nonfunctional if they were captured.... I liked the story but I doubt it is true.

What I have wondered is if it makes much difference in the longevity of the parts. I don't like plastic parts in my guns which is one of the reasons I have an almost phobic aversion to Glocks but I have long wondered if these changes are really going to make that much difference in the long term reliability and durability of the firearm.

If anyone in the know could shed any light on this, I would be interested.
 
Depending on where the weight is 3-4 oz can have a huge effect on balance. An unbalanced gun will feel heavier than it really is, but this is usually more of an issue with long guns. In this case, it probably matters little.
 
Someone told me (unverified) that the military wanted the guide rods to be plastic so that they could be easily broken to make the gun nonfunctional if they were captured.... I liked the story but I doubt it is true.

I agree with you. When an enemy combatant is in the process of pointing a gun at you, screaming and taking you G-d knows where, I can't imagine that anyone thinks a soldier is going to pull out his pistol and starts disassembling it to break parts.
 
How about posting the list with part numbers and your source for the parts please sir.

Don't have part numbers, but my source for the guide rod, trigger, safety and mag release is a kit sold directly from Beretta, but I got mine from Midwest Gun Works. The mainspring cap I found from a private seller on Gun Broker.
 
I have long wondered if these changes are really going to make that much difference in the long term reliability and durability of the firearm.

My 92A1 that came with the plastic is just as reliable as my '87 92FS and '91 92C Type M..
Just a "personal thing" if ya ask me..
 
I don't care for the coated trigger since it has a rough texture to it which when shooting DA got to be rough on my finger. Could wear in with time.

The 1oz difference in the guide rod will make a difference since that is a bit of weight and at the end of the pistol.

Thanks for the info! Haven't seen it broken out like that before.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top