Beretta M9 Service Pistol: Positive “Hatchet-job”?

[Mad Magyar]

I really think its fashionable now-a-days to run-down, or in this case; be negative in order to reinforce a weak argument. Like many of us that have a military background, whether in Special Forces or otherwise; a little knowledge & experience can be dangerous. Disgruntled or complainers are not a new phenomena in the military…I remember how it was decades ago and nothing has changed.
After reading Larry Vickers article in the latest issue of Shotgun News, this was a perfect example of blind-siding & creating doubt amongst our soldier’s weaponry.
A number of points were made clear in this article.
1. Our military doesn’t adequately train our forces in proper cleaning & maintenance.
2. Our procurement policy of low-bidding as the prime consideration is faulty.
3. The after-market magazines being purchased are slip-shod. BTW, he doesn’t bother to identify these magazines. His suggestion of loading the mag to a lowly 10 rds was ludicrous and dangerous. A little more research would have given him the information & insight needed in this matter.
4. He’s "whiner" from the 80’s when the Beretta was picked over others and eliminating the 1911 as our short-arm of the future.
5. He doesn’t understand that any pistol exposed to war-time conditions are going to have problems…
6. If he is still contracted to train some of our troops; our military must be desperate….
His occasional efforts of praising the M9 seemed like an afterthought so as not to appear so biased. The article offered nothing new or worthwhile other than a two-page filler….

 

[PPGMD]

I don't own a M9 nor a 92FS, but there are quite a few at the range that do, it doesn't seem that bad of a pistol.

Once and for all I would like to see someone take a 1911 (Government issue one, not one of these custom jobs) and a M9 and do a side by side torture test and put the debate to rest once and for all.

 

[1911 guy]

However, he is right.

I hate to break it to you, but he's dead-on about a few things.

1) You can add USE to the training that's lacking, when it comes to handguns. The level of proficiency is abysmal.

2) Outside of certain communities that get to make their own rules and have large budgets, cost is and has been the primary consideration when purchasing any and every thing.

3) Directly related to point #2. The manufacturer was Checkmate Industries. They are vastyly inferior equipment and were purchased only because they are a few bucks cheaper than OEM. Loading to full capacity ruined the poorly made springs. What's ludicrous and dangerous is ignoring advice given by someone who has experience with the subject.

4) Seems a lot of people who take weapons into combat are whining. Most who have BTDT judge the 9mm adequate, the .45 better.

5) You had better explain to the folks injured (and 1 sailor killed that I know of) on ranges that they aren't hurt or dead because those pistols weren't in wartime conditions.

6) I can't speak to the level of his expertise or lack of, so I'll refrain from comment.


The M9 is a serviceable weapon, now that changes have been made to eliminate the locking block problems experienced in the 80's and early 90's. It's not a good weapon, due to large size, small caliber and a terrible lack of training.

 

[tipoc]

PPGMD,
I think this has been done a number of times in the gun mags and by various individuals over the years. Both guns have done well. The M9 has shown itself to be a durable pistol and has not had all that many problems in the field particularly once the first glitches were worked out over 20 years ago.

The debate is usually over the caliber (many believe the .45acp to be a better service caliber round in ball ammo than the 9mm ball) and over the size of the gun. That is it's big for a 9mm. The debate is not usually over the durability of the pistol so much as the caliber and it's features.

The U.S. military was set to dump the 1911 at the end of the second World War. They wanted to switch to an alloy framed pistol in 9mm along the lines of the Walther P38. For budjetary reasons they did not do so. 35 or so years later they did. The 1911 has not been in the running since then. Except for various special forces units (which are the backbone of the military anyway) I don't expect that it will be in the running ever again as a general issue service sidearm.

tipoc

 

[asknight]

Does anyone know what the .gov was paying Checkmate for the magazines? I'm going to guess around $2 per magazine. Am I a few cents too low?

 

[HorseSoldier]

1. Our military doesn’t adequately train our forces in proper cleaning & maintenance.

He's right. When I was in the Big Army and had an M9 assigned as my duty weapon, training on cleaning and maintenance beyond simple disassembly was non-existant. (I'm willing to believe some MOS's, like MPs, do get better instruction.) The only thing more lacking was actual marksmanship training with a handgun . . . but the pistol qual course is ridiculously easy, so I always shot expert (and I'm not bragging on my skills back in those days, trust me), and my main job was crewing a Bradley in those days anyway, so I suppose the army was not overly concerned with my potential personal defense needs if the Brad went down.

3. The after-market magazines being purchased are slip-shod. BTW, he doesn’t bother to identify these magazines. His suggestion of loading the mag to a lowly 10 rds was ludicrous and dangerous. A little more research would have given him the information & insight needed in this matter.

Downloading to 10 rounds was the official army response to widespread reliability issues stemming from bad magazines and the M9 during the invasion of Iraq.

4. He’s "whiner" from the 80’s when the Beretta was picked over others and eliminating the 1911 as our short-arm of the future.

He's a retired CAG operator with been-there-done-that time downrange and a pretty impeccable record as a combat marksmanship instructor/trainer for CAG and as a civilian after retirement. If you're going to take anybody's word on whether a weapon is good or not, he's the kind of person one should listen to.

5. He doesn’t understand that any pistol exposed to war-time conditions are going to have problems…

M9s exposed to routine training in special operations units fail at an astonishing rate -- I say this from first hand experience as a support guy in an SF unit. Never saw one break back in the Big Army, but never saw one that fired more than about 100 rounds a year. In my current unit, five training days on the flat range are usually sufficient to break the locking blocks on 10% of weapons used. This is not a confidence builder for the guys who have to take a substandard weapon downrange.

I haven't read Vicker's article, but if he says the M9 is lacking, he's correct.

 

[Geronimo45]

"Most who have BTDT judge the 9mm adequate, the .45 better."

How many of 'em have actually used the .45, though? Seems to me that the switch to 9mm was long enough ago that there's not many folks would remember it, even if they'd used it in combat. Appears that it's a bunch of post-M9 soldiers parotting what they heard the old guys say, even though they(new troopers)'ve never used a .45 in combat.

 

[Ultima-Ratio]

Larry Vickers

Had to mention here that Larry Vickers builds and sells custom 1911s and they ain't budget guns.
I have a very difficult time believing anyone could break the 92 in a weeks time, the locking blocks and lower barrel lugs break at around 88K in my personal experience.
On the magazine issue I have no experience other than stock Beretta brand mags, why wouldn't/couldn't the GI issued substandard mags just buy some of the good ones or at least have the arms room guy call Wolff?

 

[Confederate]

The M9 is a serviceable weapon, now that changes have been made to eliminate the locking block problems experienced in the 80's and early 90's. It's not a good weapon, due to large size, small caliber and a terrible lack of training.

The Beretta's size has never been a problem as far as I'm concerned. What was a problem was Beretta claiming there wasn't an issue with its failures when everyone knew there was. I depise coverups when their purpose is to save the sorry asses of those who are responsible. I'm also sick of political restrictions made by people who never seem to find themselves in harm's way. The 9mm pistol is a damn respectable weapon when used with JHPs. And lately our enemy doesn't seem to be playing by the same rules we are.

Some maintain that the problem with Beretta 9mm was machine gun ammo being loaded at pressures far in excess of the norm, but I also know that there were some catastrophic failures with conventional ammuntion and that the guns never showed any indication whatsoever that they were about to fail, even when scrutinized by fatigue measuring devices and microscopic examination.

I'm glad I'm too old for wars. I don't think I'd ever put my own butt on the line when my commanders are so micromanaged they can't pick their noses without consulting Washington.

 

[pdowg881]

The 92fs was the first pistol i ever shot, and I really enjoyed it and did well with it. It pointed well, and I liked it way better than the sig I shot after(don't know crap about them or what model). I can't say I can even lend any kind of though or opinion on how it would be in a combat situation though. Too bad I'm still not old enough to buy one in a gun store.

 

[1911 guy]

M9 barels are consumeable items.

Quote:
the locking blocks and lower barrel lugs break at around 88K in my personal experience.

The barrels are considered a consumeable item, replacment is called for well below the 88K mentioned here. This is an attempt to mitigate the failure problem.

Quote:
How many of 'em have actually used the .45, though? Seems to me that the switch to 9mm was long enough ago that there's not many folks would remember it, even if they'd used it in combat

Quite a few of us, even in the age of the M9, used gov't supplied 1911's. I know for a fact that the Navy still had a few .38 revolvers in our armories during the early 90's, as well as .45's and M9's. Qual was with the M9, but you carried whatever the armory issued you at the moment. I personally saw all (revolvers and both autos) in use during my time in the Navy.

Quote:
why wouldn't/couldn't the GI issued substandard mags just buy some of the good ones or at least have the arms room guy call Wolff?

It would cost more. See point #2 of my first post (third in thread).

Quote:
The 9mm pistol is a damn respectable weapon when used with JHPs

Agreed. However, you're comparing apples to oranges. Hardball only.

Quote:
The Beretta's size has never been a problem as far as I'm concerned.

A lot of folks felt the same as you. There were also a lot who couldn't wrap their hands around the grip frame properly.

Look, it's not a terrible weapon. It just wasn't the be-all and end-all that proponents claim it to be. Handguns in general are only marginally effective, lets not put one on a pedastal just because it's new(er) and fires a "cool" round.

 

[Onmilo]

Special Operations Group has managed to break every single weapon issued to them during training excercises.
1911A1s, M9s, M16s, M4s, M249s, M60s, M2s, M14s, Benelli, Remington and Mossberg shotguns, you name it those guys can and will make it fail in training.

By doing so they learn how to handle the weapon correctly in actual combat conditions.
Very rarely do weapons fail in SOG hands during combat operations.

The M9 pistols fail no more often than any other weapon in the system

 

[HorseSoldier]

I have a very difficult time believing anyone could break the 92 in a weeks time, the locking blocks and lower barrel lugs break at around 88K in my personal experience.

Berettas shooting a steady diet of M882 ball, fired all day with the occasional night shoot thrown in as well, will not hold up well over the course of a week. The rule of thumb where I work is that you need 1-2 replacement locking blocks per day per 50 shooters on the range. That rule holds up pretty consistently.

Civilian shooters seem to never have problems with their Beretta 92s, and as I noted above, when I was in the conventional Army, I never saw a Beretta break. I attribute both to lower round counts and less demanding use (which I know is the case with military pistols outside of SOCOM). Whatever the issue is, the M9 has a general reputation as a POS in special operations units, at least as far as mechanical reliability is concerned (don't get me wrong -- it has some pluses too, durability just is not one of them).

The M9 pistols fail no more often than any other weapon in the system

That's because most of them are rarely used and holster wear is a bigger concern than anything else. Even in combat, they're rarely employed. They don't hold up to heavy use, however.

Had to mention here that Larry Vickers builds and sells custom 1911s and they ain't budget guns.

I don't think Larry Vickers is too worried that a guy who is prepared to put down $2800+ for one of his custom 1911s might be led astray by a Beretta in the gun case next to it unless he takes a hatchet to the M9.

On the magazine issue I have no experience other than stock Beretta brand mags, why wouldn't/couldn't the GI issued substandard mags just buy some of the good ones or at least have the arms room guy call Wolff?

Issue one is money, of course. Were I a guy in a line unit with a crappy pistol with crappy magazines, I'd do what I could to remedy those problems, but most units don't have the funds to just replace all the magazine springs in the arms room. That's the sort of thing the army supply and maintenance system is supposed to identify and correct (which they eventually did).

The other issue is that guys mostly did not know there was a problem. In a line unit, you shoot your pistol a time or two a year, and you're worried about qualification score. The magazines, like the pistols themselves, hold up okay under such minimal use. The problem started cropping up when mags were left loaded for days and weeks on end in a very dusty/sandy environment.

 

[Cosmoline]

I've never cared much for the pistol, but a friend of mine has been carrying an old 92F for a decade and using it in some very extreme conditions. She shoots it a lot, down to -40 f., and has never been good about keeping it clean. No problems so far, and few jams. But it has two fatal flaws in the eyes of most. No. 1--it ain't a 1911. No. 2--it ain't in .45 ACP.

To some extent I agree with No. 2. As a combat handgun, limited to RN FMJ, there's no way I'd want a 9x19 over a .45. Though if you open it up to proper ammo, the difference becomes moot.

 

[4fingermick]

Most soldiers in any army other that the US would not carry a pistol even if it was offered to them, why?

poofy ballistics, they'd rather carry a few extra rifle mags or an extra water bottle.

makes you look like you are an officer or different to the rest, bad news, gets you shot.

heavy to carry for something you are not hardly ever going to use.

The only training I got for pistols was when I was in the armoured corps. No one else other than MPs and headquarters types carry them. Our cavalry officers who dismounted and moved and liaised with the infantry usually didn't carry their pistols, just an M16. Look at me I have a pistol, I am a specialist, shoot me first!

As to the 9mm/45 debate this is a US thing only. 9milly is the go everywhere else. Don't get me wrong, I love the 45ACP and shoot a lot of it out of my Ruger 45 Convertibles.

If I ditch the pistol, and spare mags for it, I can carry a spare 30 round rifle mag, 2x cans of soda pop, a big choclate bar and a stick book???? decisions, decisions!

 

[XDKingslayer]

I can only comment on my experience on the 92 in the Marines.

Anyone saying that military personel aren't properly trained on cleaning weapons has clearly never been in a Marine line platoon. I can attest that I have more hours cleaning weapons that range from the 92, M16A2, Mrk19, M2, M60D and M60E than I did shooting them at the range. We went to the armory every Friday to maintain our weapons. After each cleaning/maintenance session, the armor always inspected the weapon with a qtip and if had black on it, you started over.

Improper training on the 92 I can believe. I was handed a 92, 2 magazines and told to go qualify. That concluded my training. Luckily, my father had a Taurus PT-92 before I went in and I was familiar with it.

 

[Smurfslayer]

The rule of thumb where I work is that you need 1-2 replacement locking blocks per day per 50 shooters on the range. That rule holds up pretty consistently.

PP indicated and the factory confirms that the locking block is a wear item that is to be replaced routinely along with the recoil spring, hammer spring (albeit less frequently) etc.

If they're failing on the line at that rate on the line, then they're not being maintained and that would be true of any firearm.

 

[Geronimo45]

"Berettas shooting a steady diet of M882 ball, fired all day with the occasional night shoot thrown in as well, will not hold up well over the course of a week."
Not sure about this - but I have heard that 9mm NATO rounds are loaded hotter than normal 9mm Parabellum... could be wrong, though.

 

[otomik]

"Berettas shooting a steady diet of M882 ball, fired all day with the occasional night shoot thrown in as well, will not hold up well over the course of a week."
Not sure about this - but I have heard that 9mm NATO rounds are loaded hotter than normal 9mm Parabellum... could be wrong, though.

Olin sells some of their M882 commercially as Winchester RA9124N, 1185 fps at the muzzle. hotter than your average winchester value pack yet milder than my current choice in defense rounds, the 127gr. Ranger-T at 1250 fps.
http://www.winchester.com/lawenforcement/catalog/handgundetail.aspx?symbol=RA9124N&cart=OW1tIE5hdG8=

 

[Chuhhuniban]

1) You can add USE to the training that's lacking, when it comes to handguns. The level of proficiency is abysmal.

There, unfortunately, is the problem. I spent 14 years in the Active Army and my primary weapon was the M1911A1. I shot mine (bought my own) a lot (by the expedient of volunteering to be OIC of the marksmanship teams who had their own range without restricted hours and who got all the ammunition they wanted). As a consequence of lots of shooting and good coaching by long-service NCOs, I was reasonably proficient. Most of my fellow soldiers who were similarly armed (whatever the rank) were atrocious. They would probably have done about as well throwing the pistol as shooting it. I was in the Army when we changed over from aimed fire (with the rifle) to "rock and roll," so it wasn't just with the pistol.

 

[Confederate]

There were also a lot who couldn't wrap their hands around the grip frame properly.

That's undoubtedly true of any of the double stacked mag pistols. The 459 also had large, unweildy grips. I'm also sure that many of the gals they let into the military had similar problems. Still, the gun had 16 rounds stuffed into it, which was nothing to sneer at.

Look, it's not a terrible weapon. It just wasn't the be-all and end-all that proponents claim it to be. Handguns in general are only marginally effective, lets not put one on a pedastal just because it's new(er) and fires a "cool" round.

Not a terrible weapon at all! The Beretta was the first of the real ultra-reliable autoloaders, period. Their performance in the military trials was stellar! The guns just wouldn't jam, and that was unprecedented. Even the venerable Colt .45 choked enough to be a miserable failure. The 1911 design was great in its day, but it can't compete against modern designs. (Yet it is still one of the most expensive...don't get me started.)

It's true that all handguns may be "marginally effective," but it's not enough to stop there. I don't think many people would call a .357 125gr JHP "marginal," but even if it were true, there's marked differences between round nose and hollow point designs. A 9mm pistol loaded with ball ammo is probably no better or worse than a .45 loaded with ball ammo, but the fact remains, they're both pathetic performers. For civilian users who don't have the restraints of military personnel, the 92 is a formidable weapon. That design has been followed by other ultra-reliables. Sig, Smith & Wesson, Glock, Springfield, to name a few. Still, few 1911 pistols come anywhere near these standards out of the box. Most require a lot of work.

 

[tbtrout]

There is a definate lack of handgun training unless you have an MOS that requires you to use and carry one. In 88 when I went through Parris Island you were handed a .45 and one mag, pulled the trigger 7 times and you were trained. Thankfully, I had an MOS that required extensive training with a .45 and I learned a lot. The average Jarhead did not recieve much training at all.

 

[berettaman]

I'm a little lost here. Since when is the handgun the main battle implement for the military? What's the designation of the M9 Battalion?

 

[Redhat]

Confederate,

In what trials did the 1911A1 turn out to be a "miserable failure" as you put it?

I'd like to read that

Thanks

 

[Confederate]

It was called the Joint Service Small Arms Program (JSSAP) that began in 1981. The contestants included the Beretta 92S-1, Colt SSP, Smith & Wesson 459, SIG-Sauer P226, H&K P7 and PM13, Walther P88, Steyr GB and FN Browning. A Colt 1911 was used as the control. The clear winner was the Beretta 92, which malfunctioned once in an average of 1,290 rounds if memory serves. The next was the Smith 459, which malfunctioned once in an average of 952; then the others fell drastically. The Colts scraped the bottom of the barrel.

The 459 didn't stand up too well in sustained firing, which brought its score down. Subsequent improvements, as well as all steel versions of the gun, greatly enhanced it. All the losing manufacturers complained that adequate time was not granted to give fair competition to all contestants.

Anyway, the 1911 performed miserably, registering an average of one malfunction in something like 60 or 70 rounds.

Even today, in 2007, I see 1911 malfunctions all the time on the firing line. They seem to be about on a par with the Ruger Mark II reliability wise. The Berettas function flawlessly...every one that I've shot, and that includes the Taurus versions. It's just a solid design.