Beretta 92x Performance Loaded Chamber Indicator

[Slipp]

Hello,

I recently purchased the firearm specified in the thread title. Reading the manual, it mentions a 'loaded chamber indicator' should stick out physically, and there should be a red 'flag' or other red indicator saying "hey there's a bullet in the chamber." When there's a bullet in the chamber, obviously.

Makes sense.

If you can tell which of these pictures shows a loaded or unloaded pistol, let me know what I'm missing. I haven't owned a 92 or an M9 ever. I mean, I'll take it in to have someone look at it, but that's an extremely weird thing for me to do. I do see a bit of red paint on the indicator, but no changes from loaded to unloaded : /. These are snap caps in the image(s); but I've used live rounds, no change (as should be the case).

I have tried Googling this issue, couldn't find much. Thank you.

 

[Reinz]

I see what you mean.

Just looking at the extractor, the first pic looks like the loaded one to me.

But I agree, the indicator doesn’t seem to indicate.

 

[Pure2nd]

I learned greatly the technical aspects of a true combat pistol such as the 92 type and appreciate greatly the aspects of its mechanics.

keeping that in mind I find the 1911 platform far more effecient.

My current and will continue to be carry firearm(1911 chambered in 10 mml) is always fully loaded with hurt and my only need to employ is dropping the safety.

My 92fs will always be my sentimental fave but if i ever have to actualy use such force I prefer the 1911 platform because i don't need an indicator...I know it's ready.

The 1st shot from a single action is in my opinion far more efficient than a da/sa platform.

 

[Jim Watson]

I think the picture on the left shows loaded.
But the deflection of the extractor is small, and not a reliable indicator. I have seen people wiping the extractor with a thumb, perhaps they can feel a difference.
I think the paint (and the little nub on a Glock extractor) are meant to satisfy legalistic requirements for a loaded chamber indicator, and the manufacturers are doing it on the cheap with no regard for operational use.

But say, if you know your 10mm is loaded, why do you not satisfy yourself the same way with the Beretta?

 

[Slipp]

"...the wise man, the good man, the philosopher is a man who lives in accordance with nature. He fears only abdicating his moral responsibility. He is not afraid of pain. He is not afraid of death. He is not afraid of poverty. He is not afraid of any of the vicissitudes of the human condition. He fears only that he should let himself down and that he should be less than a complete human being."

Now I look at that quote and I can think "eh yea that's part of why I don't, and won't ever, carry." My friend takes the complete opposite view - he feels its his duty to carry. What does this have to do with the topic at hand? Absolutely nothing, but we're almost off the rails two posts in so I figure let's rock the boat. Train. Boattrain.

I thought the same thing Jim - that I could feel the indicator with my thumb - there is a small groove in it, but I cannot tell any difference from loaded or unloaded. The pistol in question is 9mm.

I do faintly remember having a Ruger LCP, it was supposed to have a loaded chamber indicator, and it didn't seem to be very prominent at all, either. Maybe this is some big inside joke I'm not part of... I understand not wanting to have a gigantic safety feature screaming "oh god careful I'm a gun" ; but if this is a mechanical problem, well, it's a problem! And despite not carrying I guess I do like the idea of being able to confirm, in the dark, that its loaded. Anyway the extraction and loading is smooth, I haven't fired it yet.

(Oh I'm grateful I wasn't roasted for saying bullet instead of cartridge)

 

[JTQ]

... but if this is a mechanical problem, well, it's a problem!

If this bother's you, this is not the gun for you. I agree with Jim Watson, this feature is probably to fulfill a "legal technicality" and while there may be some that rely on this feature, I suspect most don't. You could conceivably return this gun for replacement and find the replacement gun has the same issue, and perhaps every other gun in their inventory.

Here is a video with Ernest Langdon where he will show how he does a press check with a Beretta 92 beginning at about the :55 mark.

 

[Jim Watson]

The Walther PP has a separate, effective loaded chamber indicator.
The Luger has enough deflection of the extractor for indication, stamped Geladen. Or Loaded in a few rare versions.

The Ruger Mk III loaded chamber indicator is mostly mentioned in connection with instructions on how to get it out, it is thought to cause malfunctions. Note that the Walther PP .22 does not have the indicator of the centerfires.

There are others, but I'd have to fire up Google and get out a book.

As I said, I think the painted extractor is a minimum response to requirements for an indicator.
Note that several makes and models of 1911oids have notches in the barrel hood so you can see the rim of a chambered round... if the light is very good. Same deal.

(I sometimes say "bullet" and even "clip" just to get the wind up.)

 

[JTQ]

I avoided buying two Ruger's, the P345 and the SR45, specifically because of their loaded chamber indicators. It was probably a good choice for other reasons, but those levers bugged the heck out of me.

 

[LaneP]

Speaking of Mk III's, both my Target and Hunter had the LCI everyone wrote their disdain of when these models first hit the shelves. I can attest that in the many thousands of .22 LR that has gone through them, the LCI did not cause any functioning issues. However it is another recess area for crud to build up in, and frankly not necessary. I can confirm chamber status by pulling the bolt back a mere 1/8". Once I discovered blanking kits were available for these, I got rid of them.

 

[The Glockodile]

You’ll have to really zoom in to show if it’s “proud” in a tactile sense...

 

[zaitcev]

I think the paint (and the little nub on a Glock extractor) are meant to satisfy legalistic requirements for a loaded chamber indicator (...)

But in case of Glock the indicator works. One can even give a pass to Walther for their reverse indicator on PPQ, although it indents rather than protrude. But in Beretta 92X there's no change in the position of the extractor. It's basically fraud. Not that I care, I press check anyway. But the whole point is that Beretta differs from all those other manufacturers.

 

[Jim Watson]

I looked at my G43. I can feel the bump but it takes good light to see it. If the light is that good, I can see the brass of the round in the chamber.

 

[CoalCrackerAl]

I never paid attention to the indicators. I know if my guns are chambered or not.

 

[Slipp]

But in case of Glock the indicator works...

...But the whole point is that Beretta differs from all those other manufacturers.

Zaitcev I completely agree - I found a "feature" (I do not care if people think it is a stupid feature) outlined explicitly in the owners' manual of a luxury item I purchased.

The feature is completely defective. It's worse than useless, as someone mentioned - it is basically a dirt catcher.

I took a closer look and the extractor functions perfectly, but there is no way a 9mm cartridge sitting snug in the chamber would cause the indicator to move at all.

I hate being anal about this stuff but I guess I'm at least going to notify the manufacturer...

**Edit** all guns being loaded, an indicator is kind of a stupid feature, yes, but a *non-functioning* indicator has got to be an order of magnitude more stupid**

 

[JTQ]

The feature is completely defective. It's worse than useless, as someone mentioned - it is basically a dirt catcher.

In the Beretta's case, the part is the extractor which is the primary function of the part. It is a part that needs to be there, whether works as a loaded chamber indicator or if it collects dirt or not.

In the case of the Ruger firearms that have been mentioned, the P345, SR45, and MKIII, it is a separate part, that the only function is as a loaded chamber indicator. These parts could be called dirt catchers, since they aren't needed for anything other than as a loaded chamber indicator.

 

[Slipp]

In the Beretta's case, the part is the extractor which is the primary function of the part. It is a part that needs to be there...

Ah, good to know! I shouldn't be so hard on catching dirt, I've been doing it since I was spat on this planet

 

[JohnKSa]

Looking at it from the side doesn't show much. Sort of like looking at a button from the top and trying to see if it's pushed in or not.

The red marking is on the top of the extractor and looking at the gun from the top should show a marked difference between loaded and unloaded chambers. At least it does on any Beretta 92 pistol I've ever messed with. It's also easy to feel the difference with a finger. When the chamber is unloaded, the front of the extractor is below flush with the slide. When there's a round chambered, the front of the extractor protrudes significantly from the side of the slide.

If yours isn't like that, maybe the extractor is binding on something that isn't allowing it full swing.

I took a closer look and the extractor functions perfectly, but there is no way a 9mm cartridge sitting snug in the chamber would cause the indicator to move at all.

Something's wrong then. I just checked a couple of 92 pistols and the extractors DEFINITELY move. There's absolutely no difficulty at all in telling the difference between loaded and unloaded chambers either by look or by feel of the extractor.

 

[zaitcev]

I just checked a couple of 92 pistols and the extractors DEFINITELY move. There's absolutely no difficulty at all in telling the difference between loaded and unloaded chambers either by look or by feel of the extractor.

Well, I checked too. Unfortunately, I only have the U.S.-made 92X. So, sssuming that both of us (and the OP) performed the tests correctly, my hypothesis is that Beretta changed something in the design of the extractor for the 92X series, or even in the middle of a production run, and they didn't realize that the change defeated the LCI feature.

 

[JohnKSa]

I didn't read the thread carefully enough and when I saw your earlier post on my initial pass through the thread I assumed it was another post by the OP.

So...we have two 92X pistols where the LCI function of the extractor doesn't work. Very interesting.

The two pistols I checked were a 92FS and a 92G with a Brigadier slide made in 1999 and 2000 respectively, according to Beretta's serial number search information.

I agree--it sounds like they have changed something in the 92X. I just don't understand why. It's not like the 92 design is new and needs tweaking. It was already a mature design 30 years ago.

 

[Electricmo]

All guns are loaded. Why the issue? Use the grey matter between the eyes. I’ve never paid attention to those indicators on my guns. I have never noticed if they work or not.

 

[JTQ]

I have a Beretta PX4 I bought about a year ago. This thread prompted me to check the LCI on my PX4. I was aware the gun had one, I just never looked at it before. It functions as advertised. Just a data point.