The finest Beretta 92 of all time?

qxsoup

Just an ACARS message
with feelings
Picture of qxsoup

posted

The finest Beretta is this one:

This is the actual 92 used by Bruce Willis in Die hard and Mel Gibson in Lethal Weapon.

This one pistol has sold more than any other.

Having said that I really like the old 92SB.

____________________________

220/229/228/226/P6/225/XO/SP2022/239

Posts: 3062 | Location: The Queen City (the one in Ohio) | Registered: May 12, 2008

Ignored post by qxsoup posted

soggy_spinout

addicted to trailing-throttle oversteer

posted

quote:
The finest Beretta 92 of all time?

The Beretta 93R? That would get my vote.

Some really pretty Berettas in this thread. But for whatever reasons I've always looked at the Beretta 92 family as workhorse guns. I have a tough time thinking of any of them as the pistol equivalent of the DT11, not when certain dealers locally were selling NIB M9s for $399 last Christmas.

Posts: 8983 | Location: Drippin' wet | Registered: April 18, 2010

Ignored post by soggy_spinout posted

sns3guppy

Member

posted

quote:
Originally posted by qxsoup:

This is the actual 92 used by Bruce Willis in Die hard and Mel Gibson in Lethal Weapon.

They used the same actual pistol, same serial number, in both movies?

I carried a Beretta for a few years, and it was a bit worn. The most worn I've seen were in Iraq. Some of the kids there seemed to have a thing about polishing them until there was no finish left, which was ridiculous, but I saw quite a few like that, or just so worn on their own that little black still showed.

Posts: 6650 | Registered: September 13, 2006

Ignored post by sns3guppy posted

qxsoup

Just an ACARS message
with feelings
Picture of qxsoup

posted

quote:
Originally posted by sns3guppy:
quote:
Originally posted by qxsoup:

This is the actual 92 used by Bruce Willis in Die hard and Mel Gibson in Lethal Weapon.

They used the same actual pistol, same serial number, in both movies?

I carried a Beretta for a few years, and it was a bit worn. The most worn I've seen were in Iraq. Some of the kids there seemed to have a thing about polishing them until there was no finish left, which was ridiculous, but I saw quite a few like that, or just so worn on their own that little black still showed.

Yup same exact pistol. Notice it has extended controls- because Bruce had small hands.

____________________________

220/229/228/226/P6/225/XO/SP2022/239

Posts: 3062 | Location: The Queen City (the one in Ohio) | Registered: May 12, 2008

Ignored post by qxsoup posted

Strambo

Member

posted

Is the frame mounted safety also a decocker on the DA/SA model?

“People have to really suffer before they can risk doing what they love.” –Chuck Palahnuik

Be harder to kill: https://preparefit.ck.page

Posts: 5043 | Location: Oregon | Registered: October 02, 2005

Ignored post by Strambo posted

SgtGold

fugitive from reality
Picture of SgtGold

posted

quote:
Originally posted by PGT:
several models have been made, as you know. Billennium, Steel-1, Centennial, etc. I think there was a plain-jane 92 model made with steel frame as well, if memory serves.

I have a franken pistol I put together using a stainless 92FS frame.

_____________________________
'I'm pretty fly for a white guy'.

Posts: 7073 | Location: Newyorkistan | Registered: March 28, 2007

Ignored post by SgtGold posted

PGT

Member

posted

quote:
Originally posted by Lord Vaalic:
quote:
Originally posted by PGT:
I've owned two and sold both. I strongly dislike the Vertec frame and I don't believe its really a proper 92, though I get some people prefer it.

My favorite is my frankengun (bottom left); a Steel-I upper on an alloy 92 Competition lower, all e-nickel plated.

What is the pistol on the bottom right?

M9A1 lower converted to frame safety with a Billennium slide, milled to remove the logo and all of it has been refinished by CCR.

That pic is a couple years old now. Here's how she sits in my safe at the moment (still need to swap some parts over, notably a silver plated hammer). I had a factory threaded barrel plated to match

Posts: 3089 | Registered: December 21, 2014

Ignored post by PGT posted

Zebulon

Thermonuclear Vulcan
Picture of Zebulon

posted

Bread and Butter 92FS..........Zebulon

Posts: 2761 | Location: Central North Carolina | Registered: November 19, 2000

Ignored post by Zebulon posted

DSgrouse

Member

posted

quote:
Originally posted by PGT:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Vaalic:
quote:
Originally posted by PGT:
I've owned two and sold both. I strongly dislike the Vertec frame and I don't believe its really a proper 92, though I get some people prefer it.

My favorite is my frankengun (bottom left); a Steel-I upper on an alloy 92 Competition lower, all e-nickel plated.

What is the pistol on the bottom right?

M9A1 lower converted to frame safety with a Billennium slide, milled to remove the logo and all of it has been refinished by CCR.

That pic is a couple years old now. Here's how she sits in my safe at the moment (still need to swap some parts over, notably a silver plated hammer). I had a factory threaded barrel plated to match

how hard was it to do the frame safety conversion?

Posts: 6633 | Location: Virginia | Registered: December 23, 2010

Ignored post by DSgrouse posted

Member

posted

quote:
Originally posted by Strambo:
Is the frame mounted safety also a decocker on the DA/SA model?

No, safety only. Its just like the original 92.

Posts: 1324 | Registered: September 20, 2004

Ignored post by bac1023 posted

Member

posted

quote:
Originally posted by bac1023:
quote:
Originally posted by Strambo:
Is the frame mounted safety also a decocker on the DA/SA model?

No, safety only. Its just like the original 92.

Who did yours? One of the smiths who are on the beretta forums?

Posts: 76 | Registered: April 11, 2018

Ignored post by ScubaCat posted

Member

posted

quote:
Originally posted by ScubaCat:
quote:
Originally posted by bac1023:
quote:
Originally posted by Strambo:
Is the frame mounted safety also a decocker on the DA/SA model?

No, safety only. Its just like the original 92.

Who did yours? One of the smiths who are on the beretta forums?

I’m confused

Who did what?

Posts: 1324 | Registered: September 20, 2004

Ignored post by bac1023 posted

soggy_spinout

addicted to trailing-throttle oversteer

posted

quote:
Originally posted by bac1023:
quote:
Originally posted by ScubaCat:
quote:
Originally posted by bac1023:
quote:
Originally posted by Strambo:
Is the frame mounted safety also a decocker on the DA/SA model?

No, safety only. Its just like the original 92.

Who did yours? One of the smiths who are on the beretta forums?

I’m confused

Who did what?

I think the questioner may not be aware that the 92 once came with frame-located safeties as a regular thing.

So to answer his question: the Beretta factory did it when they made the gun. The frame position is the original safety configuration for the first 92, before some guy who probably earned way too much for his position in the company thought that mounting it on the slide would be the way of the future (starting with the 92S, I think).

Actually I believe some agencies requested the slide mount safety, and that's the way it's generally been ever since, aside from occasional special model runs.

Posts: 8983 | Location: Drippin' wet | Registered: April 18, 2010

Ignored post by soggy_spinout posted

Member

posted

quote:
Originally posted by soggy_spinout:
quote:
Originally posted by bac1023:
quote:
Originally posted by ScubaCat:
quote:
Originally posted by bac1023:
quote:
Originally posted by Strambo:
Is the frame mounted safety also a decocker on the DA/SA model?

No, safety only. Its just like the original 92.

Who did yours? One of the smiths who are on the beretta forums?

I’m confused

Who did what?

I think the questioner may not be aware that the 92 once came with frame-located safeties as a regular thing.

So to answer his question: the Beretta factory did it when they made the gun. The frame position is the original safety configuration for the first 92, before some guy who probably earned way too much for his position in the company thought that mounting it on the slide would be the way of the future (starting with the 92S, I think).

Actually I believe some agencies requested the slide mount safety, and that's the way it's generally been ever since, aside from occasional special model runs.

Very true Soggy

It was actually the Italian Police that wanted a new model to be developed before they adopted it, hence the 92S.

Posts: 1324 | Registered: September 20, 2004

Ignored post by bac1023 posted

Strambo

Member

posted

Thanks for the answer regarding the safety. I'm only familiar with the 92 starting at the M9 adoption. I always hated the slide mounted safety/decocker...

“People have to really suffer before they can risk doing what they love.” –Chuck Palahnuik

Be harder to kill: https://preparefit.ck.page

Posts: 5043 | Location: Oregon | Registered: October 02, 2005

Ignored post by Strambo posted

Member

posted

quote:
Originally posted by PGT:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Vaalic:
quote:
Originally posted by PGT:
I've owned two and sold both. I strongly dislike the Vertec frame and I don't believe its really a proper 92, though I get some people prefer it.

My favorite is my frankengun (bottom left); a Steel-I upper on an alloy 92 Competition lower, all e-nickel plated.

What is the pistol on the bottom right?

M9A1 lower converted to frame safety with a Billennium slide, milled to remove the logo and all of it has been refinished by CCR.

That pic is a couple years old now. Here's how she sits in my safe at the moment (still need to swap some parts over, notably a silver plated hammer). I had a factory threaded barrel plated to match

Who did yours? One of the guys on the beretta forum?

Posts: 76 | Registered: April 11, 2018

Ignored post by ScubaCat posted

Member

posted

quote:
Originally posted by bac1023:
quote:
Originally posted by ScubaCat:
quote:
Originally posted by bac1023:
quote:
Originally posted by Strambo:
Is the frame mounted safety also a decocker on the DA/SA model?

No, safety only. Its just like the original 92.

Who did yours? One of the smiths who are on the beretta forums?

I’m confused

Who did what?

Sorry, quoted wrong person.

Posts: 76 | Registered: April 11, 2018

Ignored post by ScubaCat posted

Member

posted

quote:
Originally posted by soggy_spinout:
quote:
Originally posted by bac1023:
quote:
Originally posted by ScubaCat:
quote:
Originally posted by bac1023:
quote:
Originally posted by Strambo:
Is the frame mounted safety also a decocker on the DA/SA model?

No, safety only. Its just like the original 92.

Who did yours? One of the smiths who are on the beretta forums?

I’m confused

Who did what?

I think the questioner may not be aware that the 92 once came with frame-located safeties as a regular thing.

So to answer his question: the Beretta factory did it when they made the gun. The frame position is the original safety configuration for the first 92, before some guy who probably earned way too much for his position in the company thought that mounting it on the slide would be the way of the future (starting with the 92S, I think).

Actually I believe some agencies requested the slide mount safety, and that's the way it's generally been ever since, aside from occasional special model runs.

No, I knew that, but the pic is of a 92a1 lower modded for a 1911 style safety, I wanted to know who did it.

Posts: 76 | Registered: April 11, 2018

Ignored post by ScubaCat posted

Member

posted

quote:
Originally posted by ScubaCat:
quote:
Originally posted by soggy_spinout:
quote:
Originally posted by bac1023:
quote:
Originally posted by ScubaCat:
quote:
Originally posted by bac1023:
quote:
Originally posted by Strambo:
Is the frame mounted safety also a decocker on the DA/SA model?

No, safety only. Its just like the original 92.

Who did yours? One of the smiths who are on the beretta forums?

I’m confused

Who did what?

I think the questioner may not be aware that the 92 once came with frame-located safeties as a regular thing.

So to answer his question: the Beretta factory did it when they made the gun. The frame position is the original safety configuration for the first 92, before some guy who probably earned way too much for his position in the company thought that mounting it on the slide would be the way of the future (starting with the 92S, I think).

Actually I believe some agencies requested the slide mount safety, and that's the way it's generally been ever since, aside from occasional special model runs.

No, I knew that, but the pic is of a 92a1 lower modded for a 1911 style safety, I wanted to know who did it.

Oh ok

Yeah that one isn’t mine

Posts: 1324 | Registered: September 20, 2004

Ignored post by bac1023 posted