JohnKSa -
What kind of ammo are they using, and how often are the recoil springs getting replaced?
We are shooting NATO spec 9mm. And, as you eluded to in a later post, factory recoil springs are not up to handling NATO 9mm (essentially a +p+ round). I think (and more importantly so does the Armory Chief)replacement is irrelevant when the spring is inadequate, and I know for a fact we've submitted numerous QDRs on the recoil springs alone.
How do the armorers keep track of round counts?
Here at MCSFBN we shoot much more 9mm than normal USMC commands, since nearly everyone gets both an M16/M4 and an M9. Exact round counts from the armorers are almost certainly estimates based on when the gun was issued to a team member, and an estimation of how many rounds each member commonly shoots in a given time frame. We know our annual ammo consumtion, and what a platoon is allocated, so although this isn't exact science, the deduction will generate a ball park figure.
Based on a usage of 500 rounds a day (from your post), it only takes a bit more than a month to get to 20K, the point at which you say 66% of them have failed.
Now you're confusing my posts. 500 rounds per day is Det One shooting, and I didn't say I was at Det One, I said I was trading email with Pat Rogers (who trains the Det One shooters) on the subject. And, I said approx. 1 of 3 are breaking per year (or 33%), not 2 of 3 (66%). I also said that Det One was requesting Beretta armed augments to bring a second gun, since the Berettas were not holding up as well as the Det One Kimbers under the 500 rounds per day usage.
Are you saying that the Marines are replacing two thirds of their M9s before they've used them 2 months?
I neither said this, nor implied it. And, I was rather specific as to what we are "breaking" - almost 700 of approx 2,000 in 2002, and just over 700 of approx 2,000 in 2003. As I recall from recent conversations, the exact numbers were 693 in '02 and 720 in '03. As for the definition of "breaking", I think you're desire for a "careful definition" is completely irrelevant - if the local armorer can't fix the problem, then the gun is broke, it has to be removed from inventory and must be replaced. Could these be issues a civilian owner might not know about (or care about)? Absolutely, but if the weapon can't pass LTI (and then can't be repaired locally), then it's no good to us, whether it's good for you or not.
Frankly I've offered you more information than you have right to know, and I offered it only because I felt it was relevant to bring up the fact that Berettas have not been as durable for us as we would hope. That's our experience here at MCSFBN, and I don't really care what the rest of the gun community thinks about it. We are a small sample of the military as a whole, so take what I've said, digest it, then move on.
Quick Draw McGraw -
Unless you honestly planned to shoot hundreds of thousands vs. tens of thousands of rounds through a Beretta, I doubt it would give you any trouble. As I pointed out earlier, I just shot 1,500 rounds through my personal M9 last week, and it was totally flawless. Even one of the Glock shooters had a failure to feed, but the Beretta just ate it all up. For the most part, I really like the gun, and I personally have no problem recommending someone purchase one.
Best of Luck - Brad
Just wanted to set the record straight. Thanks for your input...
