New Wilson Combat Beretta 92G Brigadier Tactical

[GJM]

Beretta 92G Brigadier Tactical pistol

Brigadier configuration with heavy duty slide
G configuration ambidextrous decocker only
4.7” Stainless match grade barrel with recessed target crown
Extra tight fitting tolerances for improved accuracy
All steel components (decocker, trigger, magazine release, guide rod)
Oversize magazine release with checkered pad
Checkered frontstrap and backstrap
Beveled magazine well
Rounded trigger guard
Rail for mounting light or laser
Elite skeletonized hammer
D hammer spring
WC rear Battlesight and tritium dovetail front sight
WC steel fluted guide rod
WC G-10 grips with WC logo medallion
Special serial number range with WC prefix
Ships with 3 sand resistant 15 round magazines
IDPA Stock Service Pistol approved
Initial run of 1,000 pistols

Available exclusively from Wilson Combat or Wilson Premier distributors,

MSRP $1195.00. In stock for immediate delivery

http://wilsoncombat.com/new/handgun-beretta-brigadier-tactical.asp


http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg251/GJMandes/BTinstock_zpsaed757e0.jpg (http://s250.photobucket.com/user/GJMandes/media/BTinstock_zpsaed757e0.jpg.html)

[GJM]

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg251/GJMandes/brigtac_zps0f4a765d.jpg (http://s250.photobucket.com/user/GJMandes/media/brigtac_zps0f4a765d.jpg.html)

[JHC]

Wow. A buddy is willing to sell his Brigadier G to me. Hmmmm. That's gorgeous.

[GardoneVT]

For Sale; my beat up old 92FS. Asking $1195.00 ,fixed price. :)

[JTQ]

Very cool.

With a Brigadier slide and a rail, what holsters does this gun fit? Vertec holsters? If not, the holster makers really must love Beretta (sarcasm included).

[Totem Polar]

Hmmm. Kidney too expensive; not even necessary at that price point. Anyone need a slightly used right gonad?

That's very hot.

[GJM]

Very cool.

With a Brigadier slide and a rail, what holsters does this gun fit? Vertec holsters? If not, the holster makers really must love Beretta (sarcasm included).

It will fit holsters for the Brigadier, Elite I, Elite II and the 92G-SD. Tony at JM is set-up to make holsters for the Brig slide pistols. Blade-Tech makes an OWB. Safariland is very close to a new 7000 series for railed Beretta models, including I believe, this model. Dale Fricke has made Brig slide holsters.

The Vertec slide is thinner than the Brig slide.

[LHS]

I have been waiting a while to express my joy at this :) As anyone who knows me will attest, it's a pain for me to keep quiet about something this awesome.

As for holsters, anything that fits the old 92G-SD should fit this gun. Then again, there are few holsters that fit the 92G-SD. But I have a feeling that Wilson will be selling a compatible holster :)

[Jeep]

A beautiful pistol. That slide makes it pretty heavy, but it probably also makes it even more controllable in rapid fire.

[JSGlock34]

The Wilson Combat Tactical Assault Holster (http://shopwilsoncombat.com/Tactical-Assault-Holster-Beretta-92_96-Right-Hand-15-Belt-Black-Kydex/productinfo/TA4BKR15/) is probably the best bet. It is sort of a universal holster for the Beretta 92 and advertised as fitting "all Beretta 92/96 variants, with or without light rail".

http://shopwilsoncombat.com/images/TA4BKR15-001.JPG

[JTQ]

It will fit holsters for the Brigadier, Elite I, Elite II
Did these guns have a rail, and would this railed gun fit in those holsters?

[GJM]

Did these guns have a rail, and would this railed gun fit in those holsters?

Depends. The Blade-Tech for the Elite I/II fits the 92G-SD for the rail, and thus the new Wilson. JM, Fricke and Safariland with the new 7000, understand the rail issue.

[WilsonCombatRep]

Depends. The Blade-Tech for the Elite I/II fits the 92G-SD for the rail, and thus the new Wilson. JM, Fricke and Safariland with the new 7000, understand the rail issue.

Our holster models below will fit

Tac Assault
Practical
Lo-Profile II

[JTQ]

Thank you both for the holster information.

It does look like a very nice pistol.

[LHS]

A beautiful pistol. That slide makes it pretty heavy, but it probably also makes it even more controllable in rapid fire.

Yes, and yes.

[GJM]

Bill Wilson weighed various slides a month or so back:

92FS Centurion 10.85oz
92FS full size 11.35oz
92FS Vertec 11.75oz
92A1 12.25oz
92G Brig Tactical 12.70oz

[PPGMD]

How is this SSP legal? Initial run is 1,000 pistols, and it is being produced by a custom shop. Oh wait I forgot Wilson Combat. But that is just typical IDPA hypocrisy.

I really wish I have $1200 to blow, was I would buy one of these.

[GJM]

How is this SSP legal? Initial run is 1,000 pistols, and it is being produced by a custom shop. Oh wait I forgot Wilson Combat. But that is just typical IDPA hypocrisy.

I really wish I have $1200 to blow, was I would buy one of these.

The pistol is produced by Beretta USA. Besides IDPA approval, with the formal announcement, USPSA approval in Production is also being sought.

[Magsz]

The pistol is produced by Beretta USA. Besides IDPA approval, with the formal announcement, USPSA approval in Production is also being sought.

They're going to need to produce another 1000...

[GJM]

They're going to need to produce another 1000...

I don't know the rules, and how the USPSA approval process works well enough to know. I don't believe there is anything on this new Beretta that hasn't been in another 92 variant.

Didn't the FNS 5 inch pave the way for an initial run of two?

[Magsz]

I don't know the rules, and how the USPSA approval process works well enough to know. I don't believe there is anything on this new Beretta that hasn't been in another 92 variant.

Didn't the FNS 5 inch pave the way for an initial run of two?

The FNS 5 inch debacle was just that, a crock of crap...

The frame on this Beretta is unique to the gun so 2k units must be produced.

[PPGMD]

I don't know the rules, and how the USPSA approval process works well enough to know. I don't believe there is anything on this new Beretta that hasn't been in another 92 variant.

Didn't the FNS 5 inch pave the way for an initial run of two?

FNH just signed the form, there was no hard evidence that there were less than 2,000 produced. But here we have open proof that only 1,000 have been made so far.

IDPA rules are similar 2,000 units required.

They can't use the 92G-SD is the linage, because they put a different name on the slide.

Don't get me wrong, I am drooling over this pistol, but the fact that this is IDPA SSP approved, while the Accu-Shadow isn't is blatant hypocrisy on the part of IDPA pure and simple. Maybe if CZ-USA, or Angus writes a big enough check they can get the Accu-Shadow SSP approved.

[Comedian]

Is a non railed version going to be released?

[Suvorov]

That's a dang nice pistol! But seeing as how I'm already in the dog house for my SB15 and M9A1 Compact purchases - Kalifornia is going to put the kabosh on SSEs before I can get the funds for such a fancy pistol.

Oh well, I can always go the custom route.......

[JTQ]

Bill Wilson weighed various slides a month or so back:

92FS Centurion 10.85oz
92FS full size 11.35oz
92FS Vertec 11.75oz
92A1 12.25oz
92G Brig Tactical 12.70oz
Thank you for sharing those numbers. It is a good reference point.

[Guinnessman]

It is going to be very interesting to watch the developments at Beretta USA in the next year. I hope this announcement is just the start!

I have wanted a 92 since I was a kid, but I need to wait and see what happens with future offerings. This pistol looks great, but I cannot justify $1100 for my first Beretta.

I really need to stay away from this thread so I don't impulse buy something. :)

[BLR]

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg251/GJMandes/brigtac_zps0f4a765d.jpg (http://s250.photobucket.com/user/GJMandes/media/brigtac_zps0f4a765d.jpg.html)

I'm not even into Berettas, and I want that.

Gonna ring up WC....

[TGS]

What's the point of the brigadier slide?

[orionz06]

Why do I get one of these? I've been wanting *a* Beretta for a while, largely because Super Dave, but this looks nice and seems kinda sorta maybe priced well for some amount of half decent work. Why this and not something else?

[Alpha Sierra]

Beretta 92G Brigadier Tactical pistol

Brigadier configuration with heavy duty slide
G configuration ambidextrous decocker only
4.7” Stainless match grade barrel with recessed target crown
Extra tight fitting tolerances for improved accuracy
All steel components (decocker, trigger, magazine release, guide rod)
Oversize magazine release with checkered pad
Checkered frontstrap and backstrap
Beveled magazine well
Rounded trigger guard
Rail for mounting light or laser
Elite skeletonized hammer
D hammer spring
WC rear Battlesight and tritium dovetail front sight
WC steel fluted guide rod
WC G-10 grips with WC logo medallion
Special serial number range with WC prefix
Ships with 3 sand resistant 15 round magazines
IDPA Stock Service Pistol approved
Initial run of 1,000 pistols

Available exclusively from Wilson Combat or Wilson Premier distributors,

MSRP $1195.00. In stock for immediate delivery


Unless every one of the things that I've highlighted are part swaps from other SSP-legal Berettas, I doubt this thing is SSP legal.


The fact that this is IDPA SSP approved, while the Accu-Shadow isn't is blatant hypocrisy on the part of IDPA pure and simple. Maybe if CZ-USA, or Angus writes a big enough check they can get the Accu-Shadow SSP approved.
+1

[HCM]

What's the point of the brigadier slide?

It was initially developed to improve the reliability of the Beretta 96 for the INS/USBP 40 cal pistol trials in the mid 1990s.

It's proven popular with 9mm cometition shooters as well since it results in a softer shooting gun than a standard. 92F while still running reliably.

[YVK]

Why do I get one of these? I've been wanting *a* Beretta for a while, largely because Super Dave, but this looks nice and seems kinda sorta maybe priced well for some amount of half decent work. Why this and not something else?

You get a feature set that many/most find optimal for a full sized 92. It largely depends how relevant for you to have a fully dovetailed ambi G slide married to arguably best available non Vertec lower.

[JTQ]

Does this frame have the "dished" backstrap of the current 92FS models?

[Lot2Learn]

Seriously? Beretta makes a gun that people want, and it costs $1200?! That is ridiculous, "limited run" edition where we get to charge an arm and a leg because it has a wilson combat logo engraved on the side. This is a $700 gun! Getting sick of that company, Beretta and wilson. Who cares if it is legal for IDPA. That game is so full of people running around saying "in the real world" or "real life situation" wearing their fishing vests and loading from behind cover with their glock 34 with a magwell on it. JUST MAKE THE ELITE II again for a reasonable price!

[Bill Wilson]

Unless every one of the things that I've highlighted are part swaps from other SSP-legal Berettas, I doubt this thing is SSP legal.


+1

I cleared this with the entire IDPA rules committee prior to committing to this project with BUSA. IDPA lumps all 92/96/M9 models with slide mounted safety/de-cocker together for production #s.

We are awaiting word from USPSA as to it's legality in production.

Bill Wilson

[Bill Wilson]

Unless every one of the things that I've highlighted are part swaps from other SSP-legal Berettas, I doubt this thing is SSP legal.


+1

Meant for my reply to go with this post, not too forum savy .......

[JV_]

Meant for my reply to go with this post, not too forum savy .......

I fixed it for you.

[orionz06]

You get a feature set that many/most find optimal for a full sized 92. It largely depends how relevant for you to have a fully dovetailed ambi G slide married to arguably best available non Vertec lower.

What does all this cost otherwise? I'm 100% in the dark here on these guys.

[PPGMD]

I cleared this with the entire IDPA rules committee prior to committing to this project with BUSA. IDPA lumps all 92/96/M9 models with slide mounted safety/de-cocker together for production #s.

I wonder if they do that with other models.


We are awaiting word from USPSA as to it's legality in production.

Other than production numbers I see any reason why it shouldn't be approved. There are no features that don't already appear on a production approved Beretta model. Particularly since the discontinued 92G-SD is approved and it has 99% of the features on your pistol.

[Lyonsgrid]

I think this pistol is a winner. Already emailed WC yesterday and got in line.
There is always going to be some hate and second guessing with anything new. I have to give Bill Wilson a lot of credit for breathing life back into the often stale Beretta line. Without his interest, I’m sure the recent 92G and 92 Brig would not be back in the current Beretta line. This pistol is unique and IMO priced reasonably. I’ve tracked used Brig / Elite / Vertec pricing over the last 18 months and have seen some used examples sale for more than this new WC Brigadier Tactical.
Won’t be everyone’s cup of tea, but I’m happy to see it and can’t wait to get my hands on one.

[JHC]

I think this pistol is a winner. Already emailed WC yesterday and got in line.
There is always going to be some hate and second guessing with anything new. I have to give Bill Wilson a lot of credit for breathing life back into the often stale Beretta line. Without his interest, I’m sure the recent 92G and 92 Brig would not be back in the current Beretta line. This pistol is unique and IMO priced reasonably. I’ve tracked used Brig / Elite / Vertec pricing over the last 18 months and have seen some used examples sale for more than this new WC Brigadier Tactical.
Won’t be everyone’s cup of tea, but I’m happy to see it and can’t wait to get my hands on one.

Yeah that's how I see it as well. I've seen some pretty stout evidence of how these tuned guns shoot from GJM already. A solid $600 pistol with $600 of Wilson Combat touches is a whole lotta premium pistol.

[Jeep]

I think this pistol is a winner. Already emailed WC yesterday and got in line.
There is always going to be some hate and second guessing with anything new. I have to give Bill Wilson a lot of credit for breathing life back into the often stale Beretta line. Without his interest, I’m sure the recent 92G and 92 Brig would not be back in the current Beretta line. This pistol is unique and IMO priced reasonably. I’ve tracked used Brig / Elite / Vertec pricing over the last 18 months and have seen some used examples sale for more than this new WC Brigadier Tactical.
Won’t be everyone’s cup of tea, but I’m happy to see it and can’t wait to get my hands on one.

I fully agree with this. I only hope WC can do something similar with a Vertec frame for those of us with smaller hands.

[TCinVA]

What does all this cost otherwise? I'm 100% in the dark here on these guys.

Looks to me like you're getting a rare configuration of Beretta 92 with the Wilson upgrades. The brigadier slide itself hasn't been widely available on a railed frame. The G configuration is pretty rare on any Beretta from the factory. The barrel seems to be similar/same to the one they used to put in the Elite II. Beretta ships guns these days with a lot of plastic parts in them that apparently Wilson has replaced those with steel ones. Plus sights, trigger job, and custom touches like the bevel on the mag well, rounded trigger guard, improved sights etc. You could buy an Elite II and get several of the major bits, but it will be between 700 and 800 bucks (if not more) and it won't have the Wilson trigger work on it.

It's like a greatest hits version of the 92, only done a bit better than what the factory would put out if they were doing a similar run. It would be a bit better if it was a Vertec frame, IMO, but I assume Wilson is kind of limited to working with the frames they can get from Beretta.

[Lot2Learn]

Just to be clear, Beretta is making these pistols, Right? I am all for this gun, it has a lot of features that I would want. I also applaud the efforts to re-introduce the best guns that Beretta ever built. I don't think Wilson sights, Wilson/VZ grips and a steel guide rod constitute $600 worth of upgrades. Just make the gun that everyone wants, charge a fair price for it and make more than 1000 of them. Beretta has made them before, they can do it again. This is akin to CZ guns. If I want an awesome CZ SP01, I can buy the $600 gun or I could get a tuned SP01 shadow with an really good trigger and the sights I want from Matt Mink or Cajun and everything in between. And that gun is only $1500, Just saying.

[David B.]

Why didn't Beretta sell the Elite 2 back in the day for 1200 bucks? This is basically an Elite 2 with boutique branding. Yes it does have some production refinements to the slide and frame, but that should be called product evolution throughout the course of natural production, e.g., Glock has its gen 1-4s, etc.

I would prefer to see an "Elite 3" with the same appointments (minus the Wilson logo and grips) sold at a normal MSRP. They already have production guns with frame checkering, flared mag well, etc.

Instead they give us a semi-custom, boutique branded, out of production auction priced gun. :confused:

No one can argue against the absolute total cool factor of a Wilson Beretta, but most of these appointments were standard production at one time with the Elite series.

Maybe I'm ignorant, but did the Elite 2's not sell well? Is that why they were taken out of production?

Sorry for the negative tone of my comments. Perhaps I'm a little frustrated as I look at Beretta through the narrow scope of a niche fanboy. I admit I don't have any experience with what actually sells to the masses.

God Bless,
David

[TCinVA]

Perhaps Mr. Langdon can comment on the birth of the Beretta Elite guns, but from what limited knowledge I possess it was not an easy product to get made in the first place. The Elite guns were limited runs. How well they sold I could not tell you, but I do know that the Elite II sold for considerably more money than a standard 92 on the gunstore shelf. I snagged my 1st generation Elite I for a bargain because a wholesaler had it sitting on a shelf collecting dust and wanted to move it cheap...so I got it for less than $500 several years ago. (More than 10 now that I think about it...)

I don't know how many Elites they made in total, or how many of each generation they made...but I gather it wasn't a whole lot on either front. Same with the Vertec Elite guns.

The spec Wilson is putting out does look a bit like an Elite III, but Beretta doesn't make an Elite III. This is Wilson basically offering a Beretta 92 that Beretta won't build. Only with some nice upgrades to what Beretta would build IF they built it...which they don't.

Beretta as a corporation may see no value in building guns with these specs. It would hardly be the first time that Beretta Inc. didn't want to build a gun that some people wanted. (Just ask Mr. Langdon about that) Mr. Wilson's company is smaller than Beretta but still apparently large enough that they can order parts from Beretta (I would imagine that the per-unit cost on these parts is a mite higher than for standard parts) and essentially build the spec for a targeted audience, put their own improvements on it before they ship them out the door, and still make enough of a profit to make it a worthwhile endeavor.

[orionz06]

Looks to me like you're getting a rare configuration of Beretta 92 with the Wilson upgrades. The brigadier slide itself hasn't been widely available on a railed frame. The G configuration is pretty rare on any Beretta from the factory. The barrel seems to be similar/same to the one they used to put in the Elite II. Beretta ships guns these days with a lot of plastic parts in them that apparently Wilson has replaced those with steel ones. Plus sights, trigger job, and custom touches like the bevel on the mag well, rounded trigger guard, improved sights etc. You could buy an Elite II and get several of the major bits, but it will be between 700 and 800 bucks (if not more) and it won't have the Wilson trigger work on it.

It's like a greatest hits version of the 92, only done a bit better than what the factory would put out if they were doing a similar run. It would be a bit better if it was a Vertec frame, IMO, but I assume Wilson is kind of limited to working with the frames they can get from Beretta.

So if one were looking at a 92G-SD this would offer the same desirable trinkets, be "custom", and be brand new? Seems like the price makes a little more sense though I am cautioned by some posts concerning the price.

[Matt O]

So if one were looking at a 92G-SD this would offer the same desirable trinkets, be "custom", and be brand new? Seems like the price makes a little more sense though I am cautioned by some posts concerning the price.

Last couple 92G-SD's I saw on gunbroker sold for between $1,500 and $2k.

[TCinVA]

So if one were looking at a 92G-SD this would offer the same desirable trinkets, be "custom", and be brand new? Seems like the price makes a little more sense though I am cautioned by some posts concerning the price.

Pretty much.

The price is, on the face of it, high. Until you try to go and get your hands on a 92G-SD, or an Elite II and then suddenly you're confronted with guns in that price range or even higher that still don't quite match up to the one on offer here. Especially if this is being shipped with the equivalent of Wilson's trigger work already done on the gun. (I'm guessing on that because I don't see it specified on the WC page) I have an Elite I with a Wolff TCU and the D spring in it and even with that stuff it's not anywhere close to the feel of a good trigger job. Even if it isn't a full trigger job, if Wilson is putting Elite II trigger parts in the gun it will yield a better trigger pull than you'd likely get on a typical 92G-SD because those guns used standard M9/92 fire control parts.

If you like I'll bring my Berettas to the class later this week and you can play with my Elite I some and try it side by side with my Langdon Tactical customized 92FS.

If I'm wrong about the trigger job assumption, Wilson folks, please correct me.


Last couple 92G-SD's I saw on gunbroker sold for between $1,500 and $2k.

Right...that was an extremely limited production gun, perhaps with fewer produced than the Elite guns, and the spec was originally intended for a sub-set of Army SF IIRC. It's a pretty rare bird and was sold for considerably more than standard 92FS price during the limited time it was available.

The Wilson gun is a different beast than a typical Beretta 92 selling for $600+ on the gunstore shelf.

[orionz06]

Pretty much.

The price is, on the face of it, high. Until you try to go and get your hands on a 92G-SD, or an Elite II and then suddenly you're confronted with guns in that price range or even higher that still don't quite match up to the one on offer here. Especially if this is being shipped with the equivalent of Wilson's trigger work already done on the gun. (I'm guessing on that because I don't see it specified on the WC page) I have an Elite I with a Wolff TCU and the D spring in it and even with that stuff it's not anywhere close to the feel of a good trigger job. Even if it isn't a full trigger job, if Wilson is putting Elite II trigger parts in the gun it will yield a better trigger pull than you'd likely get on a typical 92G-SD because those guns used standard M9/92 fire control parts.

If you like I'll bring my Berettas to the class later this week and you can play with my Elite I some and try it side by side with my Langdon Tactical customized 92FS.








Gotcha. While the SD sounds great this may be a better reference gun/tax write off/investment/something to have because reasons.

Bring them!

[TCinVA]

Gotcha. While the SD sounds great this may be a better reference gun/tax write off/investment/something to have because reasons.

Bring them!

Right. This is a Beretta 92 that a Beretta geek would build. Only Wilson Combat is building it and making some quality mods to the gun that a Beretta geek would make if he had the resources/ability.

If it's selling for ~ $1,200 bucks, I don't think you'll have much problem getting that much out of it should you wish to sell it.

And another thing: The 92G-SD didn't come with an Elite II spec barrel, either.

My Elite I...note the non-standard barrel. Doesn't have the recessed crown, though...that didn't happen until the Elite II:

http://www.gunnuts.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/photo-1.jpg

This is a better spec than the 92G-SD, essentially.

[Alpha Sierra]

I cleared this with the entire IDPA rules committee prior to committing to this project with BUSA. IDPA lumps all 92/96/M9 models with slide mounted safety/de-cocker together for production #s.

We are awaiting word from USPSA as to it's legality in production.

Bill Wilson
Thanks for your reply and explanation

[GJM]

Having bought a bunch of them, well used Elite II and 92G-SD pistols typically bring $1,200 on GB, and $1,500 for like new ones. Here you get a new pistol with arguably $400 worth of extras (3 PVD mags, Trijicon tritium front and Wilson rear sights, VZ grips, mag release, etc.) for a retail of $1,195.

Further, it wasn't Beretta taking the risk on this project - it was Bill Wilson, who bought 1,000 of them, and is on the hook for the project. 1,000 pistols is $1.2 million at retail, so he clearly was putting his money where his mouth is, from a guy who already had plenty of the most desirable 92 variants in his collection.

[Jeep]

Looks to me like you're getting a rare configuration of Beretta 92 with the Wilson upgrades. The brigadier slide itself hasn't been widely available on a railed frame. The G configuration is pretty rare on any Beretta from the factory. The barrel seems to be similar/same to the one they used to put in the Elite II. Beretta ships guns these days with a lot of plastic parts in them that apparently Wilson has replaced those with steel ones. Plus sights, trigger job, and custom touches like the bevel on the mag well, rounded trigger guard, improved sights etc. You could buy an Elite II and get several of the major bits, but it will be between 700 and 800 bucks (if not more) and it won't have the Wilson trigger work on it.

It's like a greatest hits version of the 92, only done a bit better than what the factory would put out if they were doing a similar run. It would be a bit better if it was a Vertec frame, IMO, but I assume Wilson is kind of limited to working with the frames they can get from Beretta.

TC: Are you sure about the trigger job being part of the basic package? When I read through the specs I didn't see that as part of the package, but WC does say that other things are available above the base price.

[TCinVA]

So to clear up my own misconceptions on this:

Wilson Combat spec'd these guns. Beretta USA is building them to that spec.

That spec works out to be a superior spec to the 92G-SD guns, turning into a sort of hybrid between the 92G-SD and the discontinued Elite II. Only with better sights, better grip panels, and some other small improvements to boot.

Beretta collectors will love these things.


TC: Are you sure about the trigger job being part of the basic package? When I read through the specs I didn't see that as part of the package, but WC does say that other things are available above the base price.

Nope...not sure at all.

I just talked to somebody I know at Beretta and my original assumption on the trigger job was incorrect.

...but it's worth noting that these guns are being built, as best I can tell, with the Elite II fire control parts (hammer, especially) which when combined with the "D" trigger spring yielded a nice enough trigger on the Elite II guns that most owners never bothered having trigger work done.

[Jeep]

Having bought a bunch of them, well used Elite II and 92G-SD pistols typically bring $1,200 on GB, and $1,500 for like new ones. Here you get a new pistol with arguably $400 worth of extras (3 PVD mags, Trijicon tritium front and Wilson rear sights, VZ grips, mag release, etc.) for a retail of $1,195.

Further, it wasn't Beretta taking the risk on this project - it was Bill Wilson, who bought 1,000 of them, and is on the hook for the project. 1,000 pistols is $1.2 million at retail, so he clearly was putting his money where his mouth is, from a guy who already had plenty of the most desirable 92 variants in his collection.

By the way, GJM, I meant to say this before, but thanks much for posting this and alerting us to the fact it was coming out. I appreciate the "heads up," and I think a lot of other people here do as well.

[TCinVA]

http://youtu.be/U0c6B-qIVKw

The description of the trigger given in the video is pretty close to what I have with my LTT customized 92FS.

[cathellsk]

Just ordered mine by phone, will ship today. He said they are flying off the shelf. I asked about getting the Militay/LEO discount but was told it doesn't apply to these. They are also not taking orders for options for further gun smithing. If you want something else done you have to order it then send it back in. $1225 shipped.

BTW...BerettaUSA just posted on facebook they are introducing the INOX Brigadier 92FS too.

[TCinVA]

I suspect that Mr. Wilson will sell all these guns pretty quickly. It's the kind of gun a lot of Beretta geeks have been wanting for quite some time.

[JonInWA]

I applaud Bill Wilson/Wilson Combat and BUSA (for their cooperation) in this effort. Yes, it's parts-bin engineering, but with the added fillip (and intrinsic added value) of Wilson's assembly and tuning. And the components selected (including the magazines) are excellent. They really thought this one out well. I think that the tariff, while somewhat steep at first look, is fair and justified. This is a Beretta 92 usable for carry, tactical/duty use, nightstand use, and IDPA.

Best, Jon

[Pennzoil]

I've been trying (not very smooth) to order mine over the phone because I wanted the action tune trigger job added on. Guess I should of went with the online order if I have to send it back. Not even sure I'll get in before they are sold out as I've been on hold for 30 mins now.....

[LtDave]

I've been trying (not very smooth) to order mine over the phone because I wanted the action tune trigger job added on. Guess I should of went with the online order if I have to send it back. Not even sure I'll get in before they are sold out as I've been on hold for 30 mins now.....

I ordered one online. Tried to call in to verify they got my dealer's FFL, but no joy getting thru on the phone.

[Magsz]

Again,

Wilson is not assembling these pistols...These are built by BUSA to Wilsons specs.

Mr Wilson, please correct me if i am wrong.

I would like to thank GJM for teasing us (Har) and Mr Wilson for making this happen. I appreciate the effort involved and the risk taken in order to offer something like this. I still go on record (if we even have a record here) as saying that these are over priced, over hyped and a dovetailed M9A1 would suit most end users just fine. IF you absolutely have to have a G then that makes this pistol a little more attractive. I DO see the value in these, i just cant get over the fact that BUSA is stuck in the 80's and really refuses to offer a "shooters" pistol.

[JonInWA]

So BUSA, and NOT Wilson is assembling/tuning (at least initially) these guns? All Wilson is providing is some of their components to BUSA-or is BUSA providing the basic guns to Wilson, and Wilson then does the component swapping and tuning?

If BUSA's doing everything, then the price is pretty steep, in my opinion. It's not like swapping OEM components requires Vulcan ministering to his forge...

I hope that Bill Wilson or his rep can clarify this; according to their site, it seems like they've collaborated with BUSA on the components and assembly standards (at least somewhat), but that BUSA's doing all the work...

http://wilsoncombat.com/new/handgun-beretta-brigadier-tactical.asp#.VFknOflzTy4

Best, Jon

[cathellsk]

Just got the email from Wilson announcing these. In it it states only two custom upgrades area available at this time...action tune and mag guide. I was told there are none. Would have liked to get the action tune. Mine ships today.
I called and got ahold of John T., didn't wait anytime to place order. Went through no problems. Had to run downtown to get a FFL to email him and he's since confirmed it was received.

[Magsz]

So BUSA, and NOT Wilson is assembling/tuning (at least initially) these guns? All Wilson is providing is some of their components to BUSA-or is BUSA providing the basic guns to Wilson, and Wilson then does the component swapping and tuning?

If BUSA's doing everything, then the price is pretty steep, in my opinion. It's not like swapping OEM components requires Vulcan ministering to his forge...

I hope that Bill Wilson or his rep can clarify this; according to their site, it seems like they've collaborated with BUSA on the components and assembly standards (at least somewhat), but that BUSA's doing all the work...

http://wilsoncombat.com/new/handgun-beretta-brigadier-tactical.asp#.VFknOflzTy4

Best, Jon

I am awaiting a response as well since the way i read it, and the way ive had it explained to me, BUSA is the one assembling these pistols with Wilson parts. I do not believe they have any action work done to them besides a drop in D spring, EII hammer and whatever "Hand Fitting" they're doing to the slides and "match grade barels"...

[TCinVA]

I am awaiting a response as well since the way i read it, and the way ive had it explained to me, BUSA is the one assembling these pistols with Wilson parts. I do not believe they have any action work done to them besides a drop in D spring, EII hammer and whatever "Hand Fitting" they're doing to the slides and "match grade barels"...

Best as I can tell, that's accurate.

[GJM]

Assembled by BUSA. As I understand it, if Wilson Combat modifies the pistol prior to sale, they (you) may be subject to an excise tax on the value of the whole pistol, hence the need to buy it and then return it.

[TCinVA]

So I'm seeing reports that they're already sold out?

[opmike]

So I'm seeing reports that they're already sold out?

Website said "Out of Stock" for a while. Now, it's showing "In Stock" again as of the time of this post.

[PPGMD]

Website said "Out of Stock" for a while. Now, it's showing "In Stock" again as of the time of this post.

I am only counting about 200 in the photo, so I am guessing that the rest will be made during the coming months.

It is unclear if this is a truly limited release or simply an ongoing though low production item. I am hoping it is the latter as that means I may eventually be able to buy one. As I've already spent my gun budget for the rest of this year.

[WobblyPossum]

I can't justify the cost with my limited budget. If there is no actual custom work done to it, the price seems a bit steep to me. If it continues to be made in further limited runs I might pick one up down the line. As it is, I'll hold out for the 92G Vertecs that were shown at AUSA.

[JSGlock34]

I was concerned that I missed out when I saw that, but just managed to place an order.

[Surf]

I got off the phone with WC about 4 hours ago from the time of this post and I was attempting to order one. Was told this run is sold out and back orders are being taken.

[GJM]

They got 183 in, with the first shipment. All those went ASAP today. There are some more, I think 67, that should arrive tomorrow. After that, the next batch won't hit until December, and then there may be a delay for a while due to the Beretta relocation from MD. For this reason, I would be on this in the am if you want one, as the "official promo" from BUSA and trade press coverage hasn't gotten underway, and most folks bought because of word of mouth from a few forums.

Bill Wilson told me the quality, cosmetic and mechanical, appears to be superb on these pistols, and the lock up rivals that on one of his 1911 pistols.

Bill's initial commitment was an order for 1,000 pistols. Depending on demand, there may well be more, but that is to be determined in the future.

[Surf]

OK, good to hear. Would like to pick one up. Hopefully another source is reserving one for me. If not, Hey Bill......

[Pennzoil]

Glad they have more coming in and hope WC does better with the next round of orders. I'm sure the demand caught them off guard today but I'd compare my experience today to dealing with the IRS.

[opmike]

Glad they have more coming in and hope WC does better with the next round of orders. I'm sure the demand caught them off guard today but I'd compare my experience today to dealing with the IRS.

No kidding.

I ordered online, got my order confirmation, my account was charged, but I got a voicemail message from WC saying there was an issue with my card. :confused:

I guess I'll get it figured out tomorrow morning; no idea if my order is still valid or not with the rate these were being snatched up.

[GJM]

Wilson Combat moved into a new building late last week, so between that and the arrival of these Beretta pistols, I am sure things are pretty chaotic there now.

[Bill Wilson]

Wilson Combat moved into a new building late last week, so between that and the arrival of these Beretta pistols, I am sure things are pretty chaotic there now.

That would be an understatement.......

We shut down mid week last week and moved into our new 27,000sq ft office/warehouse Wed. - Sat.. We were back up and running Mon am and then a pallet of Beretta pistols showed up. Our crew did an amazing job of shipping a lot of product on Mon and Tue along with a large # of Brig Tac pistols. We have however had several issues with our new a complex PH system and are working hard to resolve these issues.

Here is the straight scoop:

We have received 198 of the initial shipment of 250 pistols and expect the remaining 52 to arrive in the next week or so. The complete order with BUSA is for 1000 pistols to be delivered as follows:

250 Oct/Nov 2014
250 Dec 2014
250 Jan 2015
250 Mar 2015

Most of the initial 198 pistols have already been sold.

If they continue to sell though well we may order more, but delivery would probably be in the 3rd quarter of 2015 due to military M9 orders in process and the pending move of BUSA to TN.

These pistols are built to my specifications which include a tight slide to frame fit and tight barrel lock up with a match grade Elite II style stainless barrel. As customers take delivery of these pistols it will become evident that they are the best M92 pistols produced to date. Actions are also pretty darn good for an out of the box production pistol. Accuracy has proven to be very good. All in all I'm personally VERY happy with how they turned out and think BUSA did a great job on them.

The following up grades are available prior to shipment: Action work and installation of our new magazine guide, however this will delay shipment 5 weeks or so due to our backlog of Beretta work.

Apparently there has been some confusion on the availability of LE/Mil discount, yes this discount is applicable to these pistols.

Please be patient with us as we work through this move and new product introduction.

[cathellsk]

Apparently there has been some confusion on the availability of LE/Mil discount, yes this discount is applicable to these pistols.


I ordered one earlier today and was one told no LEO discount. How can that price be corrected then since I am a LEO?

[Pennzoil]

Thanks for the update. Maybe I'll try again tomorrow.

[Comedian]

I would be interested in this pistol minus the rail. Any chance of that happening Mr.Wilson?

[Sparks2112]

Looking forward to getting mine Thursday.

[JSGlock34]

Out of stock...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TCinVA]

I ordered, so we'll see what happens.

[Bill Wilson]

I ordered one earlier today and was one told no LEO discount. How can that price be corrected then since I am a LEO?

yes, ask for Tressa, sorry for the problem

[JonInWA]

This offering begs the perennial question "Is it really worth what they're charging?//What's the real value?//Is it really better than (insert the firearm of choice)?//What's a fair price?"

As I said earlier in the thread, I commend both Wilson and BUSA for coming up with this 92 variation; while basically exemplary of parts-bin engineering, it does go beyond that, in that some of the parts are clearly truly special mods (i.e.., the mods to the basic Brigadier slide, the barrel crowning, and the parts matching (I'm a little skeptical on that one-Beretta 92 series parts tolerencing/fit has always been pretty good, so what they're doing might be simply rejecting "out of acceptability" components, as opposed to the BUSA gnomes meticulously matching up each specific component with each specific gun-but that's supposition on my part).

Obviously, the market determines what the acceptable price/value equation is. And yes, just looking at the components, and the fact that there really isn't any Wilson tuning applied (at least initially), the price seems a bit steep. And that may be the case, but in retrospection, there's also both Wilson's and BUSA's R&D, developmental, marketing, shipping, and possibly some CAD programming and/or machinery re-design involved that in all fairness should be allowed to be factored in to the pricing so that the venture is economically viable.

After spending some time carefully looking at the guns on this and Wilson's site, the only things I somewhat question are the need for the fluted recoil spring guide (which I personally think is unnecessary-I think that the unfluted OEM one was, and is, perfectly fine, as well as the OEM polymer fluted one...and the flutes seem to provide a schizophrenic message/purpose-Do the flutes hold lubricant-which can then serve as a GSR attractant channel, or do they serve as a GSR gutter-counter-indicating the need to be a lubricant channel....), and the light rail (but that's a personal point, and I'm equally accepting the rationale/market for the rail). It also would have been nice if the receiver bottom would have been more effectively beveled for magazine insertion, but I've never had much of a problem with my unbeveled 92D and magazine insertions.

I suspect that the initial batch or two of these (the first 500) will pretty much leap off the shelves, due to the pistol-forum and berettaforum.net aficionados with the requisite tariff burning a hole in their pockets. After that, it'll be interesting. I can't say that I'm not personally tempted, but $1,200 buys a lot of ammunition/training/matches, and I'm pretty happy with my 92D as it is. But it's an excellent choice, in my opinion, to one looking for an excellent out of the box duty/IDPA/defensive 9mm handgun. Whether an individual is willing to buy into the price and intrinsic (and intangible) values inherent to the gun is, at the end of the day, pretty much determined by each given individual.

I guess that my final thought is while the price is somewhat steep, it's eminently justifiable, on several levels, and not "unfair."

Best, Jon

[JSGlock34]

yes, ask for Tressa, sorry for the problem

Thanks Bill...Tressa promptly squared me away. Terrific service.

[Jeep]

Please be patient with us as we work through this move and new product introduction.

Bill: I am probably going to be ordering one of these, but whether I order or not I commend you and your fellow WC employees for thinking outside the box and creating a superior version of a good basic pistol. We need more forward thinking like this--and because I am a firm believe in free enterprise, I hope that WC makes a nice return on its investment for this exercise.

[Bill Wilson]

Watch for the official Beretta press release this week, might answer some "value" for money spent ?s some people seem to have ...........

[LtDave]

I ordered one online. Tried to call in to verify they got my dealer's FFL, but no joy getting thru on the phone.
Finally got thru on the phone after my credit card company declined the charge. :confused: Got that squared away and my FFL sent to the right email address. Got tracking info tonight with Friday delivery scheduled.

[LHS]

Bill: I am probably going to be ordering one of these, but whether I order or not I commend you and your fellow WC employees for thinking outside the box and creating a superior version of a good basic pistol. We need more forward thinking like this--and because I am a firm believe in free enterprise, I hope that WC makes a nice return on its investment for this exercise.

^^This. I've been harassing Beretta for years about bringing back the G models in general, and the SD in particular. You've achieved something glorious here. I hope you sell every single one Beretta can crank out, and start a Renaissance of the G.

#BringBackOurGs

[JTQ]

^^This. I've been harassing Beretta for years about bringing back the G models in general, and the SD in particular. You've achieved something glorious here. I hope you sell every single one Beretta can crank out, and start a Renaissance of the G.

#BringBackOurGs
I suspect you are aware of this, but for those that may not, the Beretta 92G is back in their line-up http://www.beretta.com/en-us/92-g/

Interestingly, Beretta no longer shows the G or C models in the PX4 line-up, just the F model.

[1986s4]

I feel pretty lucky that I've had a 92 Golf for years. One of my favorite go-to pistols. Mine came with Trijicon NS that are getting old but still glow. A Beretta steel trigger kit, Wolff trigger return unit and a "D" spring yield a very smooth S&W revolver like DA. About 4 years ago my LGS had police trade in Beretta mags for $8.00 each, naturally I bought all I could. All still work 100%.

Glad now I can replace it if need be!

[Bill Wilson]

I suspect you are aware of this, but for those that may not, the Beretta 92G is back in their line-up http://www.beretta.com/en-us/92-g/

Interestingly, Beretta no longer shows the G or C models in the PX4 line-up, just the F model.

It takes all of 15 min to convert a F version PX4 to G decocker, detailed instructions on the Beretta forum

[1986s4]

Mr. Wilson,
I have looked with some interest at your Beretta work. I like the rear sight and may get one installed. Can you all recharge the Trij front? Also, is the barrel crown and trim mostly cosmetic? I do like the look but mine does not suffer from any lack in accuracy. Any appreciable velocity loss? Thanks for your efforts on behalf of Beretta shooters everywhere.

[jlw]

As for the rules of IDPA, remember that the Wilson's own IDPA. It stands to reason that they are familiar with the rules of IDPA, and even if there is a conflict, revert back to the Wilson's owning IDPA.

As to it being $1200, if you consider that to be too high of a price, then by all means, don't buy one. If they sit on shelves collecting dust the price will drop. If the sales outrun production, the marked accepted them at that price. It's called America.

[Lon]

Mr. Wilson,
I have looked with some interest at your Beretta work. I like the rear sight and may get one installed. Can you all recharge the Trij front? .

If they can't, Tooltech probably can.

[JonInWA]

When I checked with Tooltech last year, the price they quoted me was $55 for recharging/replacing the front sight vial on my 92D (which came with Trijcons as the OEM sights. Mine is a 1996 production piece; the tritium is still glowing, but I'm inclined to go with a brighter front/dimmer rears, to more effectively guide me to the front sight, and to preclude any sight/dot mix-ups when aligning.

Best, Jon

[SteveK]

I don't see $1195 as being unreasonable for what you are buying here. It obviously takes extra resources both on the part of Beretta and Wilson to make this happen. In business there is a lot more to account for than the actual end product. This looks like a winner and in today's market a fair value.

[Bill Wilson]

BUSA press release

http://www.thetacticalwire.com/story/332770

[Matt O]

Anyone know the height of the WC rear sight that comes on these? At first glance it seems noticeably taller than the .290 rear sight I have on my 92A1.

I'm still trying to find my calipers in the last couple boxes left after the move...

[cathellsk]

This was posted by Bill Wilson on the BerettaForum about why he did the Brigadier Tactical.....





I feel I'm mostly among friends here, so I'm going to be "candid" here :)

First off I didn't have competition shooters in mind when spec'ing this pistol, primarily a optimized service pistol.

That being said I want to give some history as to the "why" of the project. As many of you know I have been a big Beretta 92 fan since back in the 80s and am a serious Beretta collector. While my first love has always been and will always be the 1911 platform, the B92 is of major interest to me. One thing I have normally been successful at is turning interests/hobbies into profit. I want things that don't exist, so it create them for myself and then figure out a way for the project to pay for what I personally get out of it. Example: I wanted custom work on my own Beretta's but I can't justify taking bench time from my pistolsmiths building 1911s since we're 1-3 years our on delivery depending on the model. So I had to make it a profitable business venture to do custom Beretta work. Same with the Brig Tac, I personally wanted a pistol Beretta didn't build and probably never would build. Only way to do this was to dive in deep enough to make a it a real and profitable business venture. I have another must have model in mind so stay tuned......

So based on what I just said it really comes down to my personal preference, I just spec'd out the pistol "I" wanted for myself, with very little though as to how it would be received by the market.......

The pistols I had in my collection that was the nearest to what I wanted were Elite IIs and 92G SDs, so I basically took what I liked best from each of these two models and then added what was missing.

I'm guess in everyone's next ? will be "why" do you like this or that. So here goes a quick rundown.

Starting with the obvious and working down to the meat and potatoes.....

All metal parts: If you want a plastic gun go buy one (hopefully a Walther PPQ M2), plastic parts have no place on a fully machined quality pistol

Checkering: You can't shoot a pistol fast unless you can keep it from moving in your hand

Beveled magazine well: While the standard M92 is a pretty easy gun to re-load, every little bit helps under stress

D Hammer spring: Why Beretta puts the god awful heavy hammer springs in their pistols I have NO idea, the DA is basically un-shootable with these 26#ish springs and totally unnecessary to ignite quality ammo. In my opinion you shouldn't be shooting the Russian crap ammo in a quality pistol, so who cares if it misfires. I've done a lot of testing on this and a 16# Wolff or factory D spring will reliable light any US mfg primer double action. If you stick with Federal or Winchester you can usually get by with a 13# spring. I have guns that are sure fire with 12# springs and Federal primers.

Removable front sight: WHY BUSA DOESN'T MAKE THIS A STANDARD FEATURE OF EVERY MODEL EXCEPT THE M9 I HAVE NO IDEA ????

G de-cocker: It's simply the way all M92s/96s should be............ Why you would want a safety on a DA/SA pistol is beyond me. This is one place though that I did make a compromise to assure the pistol would be accepted in the marketplace. I went with the std parts so it would be more readily accepted my the masses and be IDPA SSP approved. Personally I would have dropped the right side lever, as a right hander it's nothing but something to get hung on something.

Light rail: I carry a pistol EVERY day ALL day! I also put this pistol on my nightstand every night and I prefer to have a light attached to it because if I need it in the dark I want a light on it! Do I like it aesthetically, NO I'd much prefer the sleeker look of a pistol without it.

Stainless match grade barrel and tighter slide to frame fit: Accuracy good, it's one of those things you can't get too much of. Maybe everyone can't utilize the difference between the accuracy of a S&W M&P and a Brig Tac, but those of us that can really appreciate it. To address those comments about tighter tolerances reducing reliability I call BS, WC has been building some of the most reliable 1911s since the late 70s and we build them as tight as possible. Granted if you were in a hostile environment of dust, mud, sand, etc. looser might be better, but lets face it most American's don't subject their pistols to this abuse and keep them reasonably clean and lubed. I carry everyday here on my ranch in TX and my main mode of transportation is a UTV, it's gets pretty dry and dusty in the summer and my guns get awfully dirty, but I don't recall ever having a malfunction with any of the 1911s, B92s or ARs I normally have with me.

Now to the less obvious.

Tritium front sight: As I mentioned I put my pistol on the nightstand at night, a tritium sight helps me locate the pistol in the dark and there are times I might not have my light attached and it allows me to make decent hits out to 10-15yds in pretty dark conditions. As to daytime range play, yes I'd rather have a fiber optic, but it's not real deal breaker for me as I try to focus on the top of the sight blade anyway.

Brigadier slide: I shoot my pistols a lot, even now that I've completely retired from formal competition I still shoot several hundred rounds (sometimes a 1000+) every week do durability of my guns is important to me. The Brig slide is simply bullet proof, I've never heard of one failing, ever. There is a big debate as to whether a lighter or heaver slide is easier/faster to shoot. I've tried to quantify this for myself and have never been able to conclusively prove which is better. I seem to shoot a 4" 1911 or Centurion better up close (under 12yds) and a longer sight radius heavier slide better past 12yds, but the difference is so minute that it's really not worth the debate to me. In a perfect world I would have rather have a Vertec slide that was .060" wider than normal, I think this slide would also be bullet proof as to durability and more aesthetically pleasing, but I was limited to mixing and matching parts Beretta had already built at sometime.

G-10 grips: This is a VERY strong material, so the grips can be made pretty thin and still be serviceable, thinner is good on a double stack pistol. It was basically about thinning the grip, but they do look "quality" and pretty cool to.

WC rear sight: I personally did the design of this sight and feel it's as good as it's gonna get considering the limited space available on a B92 and the fact we're limited by a fixed front sight on most pistols. The U notch is a big aid in reducing horizontal sighting errors due to the fact it naturally centers the front sight like a peep sight. The sight gives a good sight picture in both shaded areas and out in bright sunlight.

WC fluted guide rod: I probably have not mentioned, but I wanted to put as many WC produced parts on the gun as possible while keeping it IDPA SSP approved, so we were pretty limited and the guide rod was an internal part we could change. Also we were not allowed to use non BUSA mfg parts that have any effect on function if we were to have BUSA warranty these pistols. I'm into quality and this is a quality part, fully machined from barstock, heat treated and Melonite coated. The fluting is probably just cosmetic, but it only costs pennies extra to do and looks cool so why not......

Elite hammer: Picked it for cosmetic look only, functionally the std hammer is better since you can usually run a pound lighter hammer spring with the same ignition.

Oversize checkered magazine release: Never had an issue with accidentally ejecting a mag with one and they are definitely an aid in fast mag changes, especially for those with small hands. Had to stick with a Beretta part due to the previously mentioned IDPA/warranty issues.

Round trigger guard: I just like it! All of my customized M92 have been modified to a round T guard. Serious shooters never put their finger on the front of the trigger guard so why have that ugly hook or half finished look of the M9A1 trigger guard. Dramatically improves the aesthetics of the pistol and gives it a "different" look from the rest of the pack.

4.7" bbl length: As above, I just like it. This is just one of those "preference" things.

I think that's pretty much it, as stated above I just built my "personal" dream gun and hopefully the project is successful enough to justify building my dream Centurion in the future :)

[TCinVA]

As I understand it, the primary reason behind the weight of the mainspring in the 92 series is a pretty tough primer requirement from the military.

The D spring is certainly more than sufficient to bust most primers in the world, but military requirements are often written to absurd specs above and beyond reasonable limits.

[farscott]

Not a 92 fan, but I ordered one of these from my Wilson Combat dealer. This pistol looks to have resolved many of my issues with the 92-series pistols at a very reasonable price combined with Wilson Combat customer service and support.

I do wonder if this pistol and Wilson's emphasis on the 92-series will usher in the era of the custom M9 much like Wilson helped to popularize the custom 1911.

[BILLG]

The pistol warrenty is covered by Beretta and not Wilson Combat.

[JonInWA]

As I understand it, the primary reason behind the weight of the mainspring in the 92 series is a pretty tough primer requirement from the military.

The D spring is certainly more than sufficient to bust most primers in the world, but military requirements are often written to absurd specs above and beyond reasonable limits.

Correct. The specs were written to cover detonation of all known military primers-which meant that some of the heavy-primered stuff, presumably for use in open and/or closed-bolt submachine guns, as well as pistols probably drove the train. It's notable that some militarys have specified heavier springs for their pistols-Sweden come to mind with their Glocks (Glock actually has 3 striker springs of varying weights; the 2 heavier ones are unavailable in the US)

Best, Jon

[BILLG]

Just put my order in.No lunch money for me anytime soon.lol I could actually stand to lose a few pounds anyway.lol

[Stony Lane]

Anyone know the height of the WC rear sight that comes on these? At first glance it seems noticeably taller than the .290 rear sight I have on my 92A1.

I'm still trying to find my calipers in the last couple boxes left after the move...


The Wilson Beretta rear sight is .290. I shoot low with it at 10-15 yards. I'm going to try the .300 WC, but I may have to go to the Novak .320. (I like a "point of aim" and "point of impact" just over the front sight - I don't "drive the dot.")

[Suvorov]

As I understand it, the primary reason behind the weight of the mainspring in the 92 series is a pretty tough primer requirement from the military.

The D spring is certainly more than sufficient to bust most primers in the world, but military requirements are often written to absurd specs above and beyond reasonable limits.

That is my understanding as well. Firing pin energy was a specified requirement for the M9 trials. As I recall, the Smith and Wesson was disqualified because it lacked sufficient firing pin energy.

[Jeep]

That is my understanding as well. Firing pin energy was a specified requirement for the M9 trials. As I recall, the Smith and Wesson was disqualified because it lacked sufficient firing pin energy.

No doubt the folks who drafted those specs were used to military 1911's with rusted mainsprings that hadn't ever been replaced, and thus had the normal corresponding 14 pound trigger pull. Still it sure would be nice if the people drafting weapons specifications spent some time considering whether the specs make it difficult to impossible for the normal service member, who gets to shoot, maybe, 50 rounds per year out of his or her weapon, to achieve any level of proficiency.

To put it another way, in a world of trade-offs is it better to ensure that the pistol can bust the primers on 9mm ammo made for Swedish K submachine guns or that person carrying the pistol has some chance of hitting a target?

Unfortunately, Ordinance types tend, in my view, to overvalue technical specifications and undervalue things that make shooting easier for normal people.

[LockedBreech]

Just out of curiosity, how does a D-spring modified 92FS compare with other mainline guns (Sig 226, Glock 17, CZ-75B) in terms of how hard it hits primers?

[Jeep]

For what it is worth, I have a Glock 17 that had difficulty with some Underwood Ammo primers (from Winchester), but a M9 with the D spring had none. My conclusion was that it still hits the primer harder than a normal striker-fired pistol. Not sure about other hammer-fired guns.

[Clay]

For what it is worth, I have a Glock 17 that had difficulty with some Underwood Ammo primers (from Winchester), but a M9 with the D spring had none. My conclusion was that it still hits the primer harder than a normal striker-fired pistol. Not sure about other hammer-fired guns.

Same here. I've had more failures with Glock's and Russian ammo than I have my D spring equipped 92FS with the same ammo.

[LHS]

My Elite w/ original light Elite hammer and D spring won't reliably ignite .22LR primers when used with my factory .22LR conversion kit. A standard old 92F busts them every time. I'm waiting for the .22 kit to return to me so I can test it with an otherwise-standard 92G with D spring (and the standard 92 hammer).

[LtDave]

Took my 92G Brigadier Tactical to the range today. It was one of the guns assembled with the standard mainspring instead of the D spring. I changed it out for a D Spring I had on hand. Gun worked perfectly, no functional issues. For me, all loads shot to the right about 1 to 2". Gun was very consistent in group size with 115 and 147 loads with most going 2" to 3" at 20 yards from the bench. Speer G2 was at the upper end of the scale at 3.25". The most accurate load to date was a 115 Montana Gold JHP with 6.1 grains of WSF that went into 1.5". I assembled some of Bill Wilson's premium range load (147 Hornady FMJ with 3.4 grains of Bullseye) - those went into 2". Most accurate factory FMJ load was Remington 147 FMJ L9MM9 at 2.25". Most accurate JHP for me was Federal 147 Hydra Shok P9HS2G1, also at 2.25"

[Sparks2112]

Took my 92G Brigadier Tactical to the range today. It was one of the guns assembled with the standard mainspring instead of the D spring. I changed it out for a D Spring I had on hand. Gun worked perfectly, no functional issues. For me, all loads shot to the right about 1 to 2". Gun was very consistent in group size with 115 and 147 loads with most going 2" to 3" at 20 yards from the bench. Speer G2 was at the upper end of the scale at 3.25". The most accurate load to date was a 115 Montana Gold JHP with 6.1 grains of WSF that went into 1.5". I assembled some of Bill Wilson's premium range load (147 Hornady FMJ with 3.4 grains of Bullseye) - those went into 2". Most accurate factory FMJ load was Remington 147 FMJ L9MM9 at 2.25". Most accurate JHP for me was Federal 147 Hydra Shok P9HS2G1, also at 2.25"

I was going to say. Mine did not feel like a D spring. Guess I should order one.

[Lon]

I was going to say. Mine did not feel like a D spring. Guess I should order one.
Call WC. I think they were planning in sending replacements out.

[LHS]

Call WC. I think they were planning in sending replacements out.

Per the other WC Beretta thread, correct:



We have been informed by customers and also found a few pistols sold locally with the wrong hammer spring and/or spring plug. Apparently some of the guns got assembled with the standard full power hammer spring and a few with plastic spring plugs. We are working with BUSA to sort out the issue and should have some replacement parts on the way to us shortly that we can send out (obviously N/C) next week.

Wilson Combat will start taking each gun out and checking them over prior to shipment in the future.

Very sorry for the inconvenience

[El Cid]

Call WC. I think they were planning in sending replacements out.

Received mine yesterday.

[SamuelBLong]

A replacement came for mine the other day as well. So if you're due one, be on the lookout


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SamuelBLong]

Also anybody have a line on a duty holster that will fit these w/ an x300 / x300u?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GJM]

Also anybody have a line on a duty holster that will fit these w/ an x300 / x300u?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


http://www.safariland.com/holster-search?dwfrm_holsterfinder_gunid=272381&dwfrm_holsterfinder_lightid=&dwfrm_holsterfinder_addonid=&dwfrm_holsterfinder_guntype=pistol&dwfrm_holsterfinder_manufacturer=Beretta&dwfrm_holsterfinder_model=92+G+SD&dwfrm_holsterfinder_barrellength=4.92&dwfrm_holsterfinder_caliber=9x19mm+Parabellum&dwfrm_holsterfinder_haslight=&dwfrm_holsterfinder_lighttype=&dwfrm_holsterfinder_hasaddon=&dwfrm_holsterfinder_addontype=&prefn1=gunList&prefv1=272381&prefn2=lightListText&prefv2=none&prefn3=mountListText&prefv3=none

hmm, I selected light but think these may be non light holsters?

[nycnoob]

Is this gun supposed to be super accurate?

What kind of groups is everyone getting at 25 yards or 50 yards offhand?

[GJM]

Is this gun supposed to be super accurate?

What kind of groups is everyone getting at 25 yards or 50 yards offhand?

see post #117

[Will Fennell]

Here is a range report on the gun from Bill Wilson....

http://berettaforum.net/vb/showthread.php?t=111434

[GJM]

Here is a range report on the gun from Bill Wilson....

http://berettaforum.net/vb/showthread.php?t=111434

and here is a picture I received from Bill Wilson 2 minutes ago.

100yds, fired 25 shots offhand, 18 hits

92G Brig Tac #100
124gr Berry HBFN TP
4gr Tightgroup
F100

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg251/GJMandes/wilson100_zps2aad3db6.jpg (http://s250.photobucket.com/user/GJMandes/media/wilson100_zps2aad3db6.jpg.html)

[El Cid]

Is this gun supposed to be super accurate?

What kind of groups is everyone getting at 25 yards or 50 yards offhand?

Not my best work. Normally I keep everything in the black. This was the first 15 rounds through the pistol. I shot a DA followed by 2 SA and then decocked, doing that 5 times. Standing at 25 yards. Ammunition was Winchester 124 ball.

http://i828.photobucket.com/albums/zz209/El_CidAF_ResQ/Mobile%20Uploads/IMAG0249_zpsf7822630.jpg

[Skyviking]

I saw all those boxes and thought, "George bought out the first batch". Glad I was wrong.

[JDM]

I put some rounds through #31 today.

This pistol has the nicest DA trigger I've shot.

[SamuelBLong]

I put some rounds through #31 today.

This pistol has the nicest DA trigger I've shot.

It did put your various 228's to shame.

Sell them. Get a 92 Compact and send it to WC.

You know you want to.

I love being a bad friend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GJM]

From Bill Wilson:


It's my understanding the reason for the HEAVY standard hammer spring is a military spec requirement that filtered over to the commercial market pistols, personally I see no need for it. The factory D spring will light all USA mfg primers and most quality foreign mfg ones and do make a big difference in trigger pull, both DA and SA. The D spring is basically 16#, personally I use only Federal or Winchester primers in my handloads and when I shoot factory it's usually PMC or Federal so I run 13# or 14# springs in my pistols and they are surefire with these primers. DA hammer arch varies somewhat from gun to gun and even top quality springs do have a little variance so therefore there is no "one side fits all" as to the spring weight you can get by with in your individual pistol.

Also for those who experience a slight creep in the single action pull, here's a little trick that will usually fix it if it's not too bad.

MAKE SURE THE PISTOL IS UNLOADED !!!! Cock the hammer and dry fire the pistol while putting heavy pressure on the back of the hammer with your support hand thumb (like your trying to push the hammer forward to make it fire). Usually 1 to 12 times will result in an improvement in the single action pull. Basically what your doing is accelerating wear on the hammer/sear engagement surfaces and ironing out any minor surface finish imperfections.

[Clobbersaurus]

That is great information GJM, thank you for sharing it.

[tomr]

From Bill Wilson:

It's my understanding the reason for the HEAVY standard hammer spring is a military spec requirement that filtered over to the commercial market pistols, personally I see no need for it. The factory D spring will light all USA mfg primers and most quality foreign mfg ones and do make a big difference in trigger pull, both DA and SA. The D spring is basically 16#, personally I use only Federal or Winchester primers in my handloads and when I shoot factory it's usually PMC or Federal so I run 13# or 14# springs in my pistols and they are surefire with these primers. DA hammer arch varies somewhat from gun to gun and even top quality springs do have a little variance so therefore there is no "one side fits all" as to the spring weight you can get by with in your individual pistol.

Also for those who experience a slight creep in the single action pull, here's a little trick that will usually fix it if it's not too bad.

MAKE SURE THE PISTOL IS UNLOADED !!!! Cock the hammer and dry fire the pistol while putting heavy pressure on the back of the hammer with your support hand thumb (like your trying to push the hammer forward to make it fire). Usually 1 to 12 times will result in an improvement in the single action pull. Basically what your doing is accelerating wear on the hammer/sear engagement surfaces and ironing out any minor surface finish imperfections.

GJM, is this last, creep fix advice, part of Bill Wilson's quote or yours?

Never mind, sorry. I found it over on Beretta forum.

[GJM]

GJM, is this last, creep fix advice, part of Bill Wilson's quote or yours?

Never mind, sorry. I found it over on Beretta forum.

The whole thing is from Bill. I received it from him by email, and he asked me to post it here.

[JV_]

GJM: I added quotes for that text to make it more clear.

The idea of applying pressure to accelerate wear (and improve the pull) has been around for a while, I'm not sure where I first heard it, but it's not new. I'm glad to see someone like BW mention it.

[Suvorov]

GJM: I added quotes for that text to make it more clear.

The idea of applying pressure to accelerate wear (and improve the pull) has been around for a while, I'm not sure where I first heard it, but it's not new. I'm glad to see someone like BW mention it.

I have never heard of it and am excited to apply it to several ARs and a 1911. No need on any 92 series pistol I have ever known.

[taadski]

The "burnishing" idea via the methods mentioned have made a very noticeable difference with both a newer CZ and a handful of Sigs I own.

[opmike]

I have never heard of it and am excited to apply it to several ARs and a 1911. No need on any 92 series pistol I have ever known.

My Brigadier Tactical had a horribly gritty trigger in SA, even after a LOT of dry firing. Wilson's suggestion fixed most of my issues.

[Suvorov]

My Brigadier Tactical had a horribly gritty trigger in SA, even after a LOT of dry firing. Wilson's suggestion fixed most of my issues.

All my Beretta triggers have been pretty dang good out of the box with the D spring mod. Given the timing, my needs, and the fact I live behind the granola curtain I'm going to miss this boat on the brigadier tactical, but did pick up a new 92 compact last week. SA trigger is great! But this little trick just fixed the "hitch" that has been plaguing my Gen 1 Kimber Target since its purchase back in 97!

[GJM]

Gee, could be a new item for Wilson Combat -- the virtual trigger job option, with no overnight shipping charge or wait list to get it done!

[Up1911Fan]

GJM, any chance we could get your thought's on the Brig-Tac vs the Wilson 92A1? I'm leaning towards a 92A1 to send to Wilson, knowing if I like it i'll want at least one more, or a couple. Probably not an option with the Brig-Tac.

[GJM]

GJM, any chance we could get your thought's on the Brig-Tac vs the Wilson 92A1? I'm leaning towards a 92A1 to send to Wilson, knowing if I like it i'll want at least one more, or a couple. Probably not an option with the Brig-Tac.

Buying a Brig Tac is much more cost effective than modifying a 92A1.

[GJM]

Per YVK, using my holster, new Wilson Brig Tac fits perfectly in JM AIWB for the 92G-SD.

[TCinVA]

Per YVK, using my holster, new Wilson Brig Tac fits perfectly in JM AIWB for the 92G-SD.

Good to know!

[ToddG]

It was initially developed to improve the reliability of the Beretta 96 for the INS/USBP 40 cal pistol trials in the mid 1990s.

Durability, not reliability. Specifically, the heavier slide flexed less and changed the way recoil energy was delivered to the frame so there was less frame cracking with the Brig slide. Even with the Brig slide, Border Patrol would regularly see cracked frames in less than 10k rounds. Admittedly, BP used some ridiculously hot .40 S&W ammo.


It's proven popular with 9mm cometition shooters as well since it results in a softer shooting gun than a standard. 92F while still running reliably.

Each to his own, but most of the people I know who shot Berettas seriously dislike the Brig slide in 9mm. It's overly heavy which simply unnecessarily slows recoil impulse. It has more front sight movement per shot. The Brig slide was used on the E1 and E2 for exactly one reason: changeable front sight. As soon as the Vertec slide came along most folks preferred that slide. My guess for why the Brig slide was chosen here -- and I have no inside knowledge -- is that it was more a matter of the Brig slides still being produced and Beretta not being willing to restart production of the Vertec slides. In my personal experience having shot a lot of rounds through a lot of Berettas, and having dealt with countless LE/mil who've shot out barrels and cracked frames, the standard slide is not a weak link in the chain for 9mm.

The other main benefit of the regular sized slide is holster availability. While many of the big holster companies list Brig-compatible holsters in their catalog they're rarely produced because the gun has fallen so out of favor in the past decade.

re: price of this pistol ... I'm amazed people are surprised. Doing a limited run of specially configured pistols involves significant costs completely separate from the value of the individual parts. There's also some supply-demand economics here and it seems that Wilson Combat has correctly guessed that they'll have no problem selling these guns at the price point they've set. I honestly don't recall what a new E2 cost back when they were in production but $1200 for this gun as spec'd out seems like quite a deal to me.

[GJM]

Todd, the reason Bill Wilson spec'd then Brig slide was he has long viewed the 92G-SD as his favorite 92 variant, and the Wilson Brig Tactical reflects his ideas of a modernized G-SD with his frame mods, sights, grips, etc. Given how many they have sold, it appears a lot of folks share Bill's enthusiasm for it as well. I believe it is well accepted that Beretta has Vertec runs in the works for 2015. And, since Bill also adores the Centurion, I wouldn't be surprised to see something neat in Centurion form in 2015.

[ToddG]

G -- As the person who turned Super Dave's desire for a tactical Elite into a written spec at Beretta, and as the guy who came up with the idea to call it the 92G-SD (I told Beretta it meant Special Duty but I think we all knew it really stood for Super Dave), I can absolutely assure you that the Brig slide was chosen because Dave wanted a removable front sight. At the time, the engineers at Beretta insisted there was no way to produce a standard sized frame with a removable sight.

The reemergence of the Vertec surprises the bloody heck out of me but I'm very glad to hear it. My 92G Vertec is one of my most beloved guns though admittedly I shoot it rarely.

http://pistol-training.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/vertec-grp.jpg

[GJM]

G -- As the person who turned Super Dave's desire for a tactical Elite into a written spec at Beretta, and as the guy who came up with the idea to call it the 92G-SD (I told Beretta it meant Special Duty but I think we all knew it really stood for Super Dave), I can absolutely assure you that the Brig slide was chosen because Dave wanted a removable front sight. At the time, the engineers at Beretta insisted there was no way to produce a standard sized frame with a removable sight.

The reemergence of the Vertec surprises the bloody heck out of me but I'm very glad to hear it. My 92G Vertec is one of my most beloved guns though admittedly I shoot it rarely.

http://pistol-training.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/vertec-grp.jpg

I wasn't contesting your description of the origin of the SD, as you obviously were there, only explaining why Bill Wilson this year designed the Brig Tac the way he did. My three favorite Beretta 92 variants are the G-SD, the Centurion, and Ernest's hybrid Vertec upper with the M9A1 lower, so with the Brig Tac we are 1/3 of the way in to a joyous period for Beretta and Beretta 92 lovers.

[ToddG]

G -- Didn't think you were being argumentative. I was just trying to add a previous step in the process (why SDave picked that slide for the 92G-SD that Bill Wilson loves so much).

FWIW, I'm far more interested in a 92G Compact than a Centurion. The 92G Compact I used while at Beretta is the only gun I really wish I'd kept.

[GJM]

G -- Didn't think you were being argumentative. I was just trying to add a previous step in the process (why SDave picked that slide for the 92G-SD that Bill Wilson loves so much).

FWIW, I'm far more interested in a 92G Compact than a Centurion. The 92G Compact I used while at Beretta is the only gun I really wish I'd kept.

Interesting. As much as I have tried, I really prefer the Centurion to the Compact. I have a minty original 92G Compact that would be a great trade for that Langdon 92G. Even have some extra Compact mags that might look familiar to you.

[ToddG]

G -- I'll probably sell LTT#1 right after I sell my remaining kidney, soul, and wife. Not necessarily in that order. And it goes back to Ernest in my will, so even then you're out of luck. But I do appreciate your offer. :cool:

[WilsonCombatRep]

G -- I'll probably sell LTT#1 right after I sell my remaining kidney, soul, and wife. Not necessarily in that order. And it goes back to Ernest in my will, so even then you're out of luck. But I do appreciate your offer. :cool:

Nice to see you around TLG. Happy TGiving!

[opmike]

I also can't drum up too much excitement about a Centurion. It's the grip, not the barrel/slide, that I run into more issues with when it comes to concealment. It's also why I don't have a Commander in my safe.

I'd be all over a 92G Compact specc'd similar to the Brig Tac however.

[GJM]

I also can't drum up too much excitement about a Centurion. It's the grip, not the barrel/slide, that I run into more issues with when it comes to concealment. It's also why I don't have a Commander in my safe.

I'd be all over a 92G Compact specc'd similar to the Brig Tac however.

Since you can interchange the Centurion and Compact lowers with the same upper, a neat combo would be a Centurion along with an extra Compact lower.

[ToddG]

Since you can interchange the Centurion and Compact lowers with the same upper, a neat combo would be a Centurion along with an extra Compact lower.

When I was at Beretta, this was considered a no-go. The slides for the two are (or at least were) different and it was recommended that one not try to interchange them because the frame rail design is (or was) different. It will fit, but it's not a good idea.

[GJM]

When I was at Beretta, this was considered a no-go. The slides for the two are (or at least were) different and it was recommended that one not try to interchange them because the frame rail design is (or was) different. It will fit, but it's not a good idea.

Respectfully disagree. I was "educated" to this point by Ernest Langdon and Bill Wilson. It is an internal rail dimension, and the Centurion/Compact lowers share the same dimension, and it is different from full size pistols. So you can interchange Centurion/Conpact pieces, but not with full size 92 pieces.

[ToddG]

Respectfully disagree. I was "educated" to this point by Ernest Langdon and Bill Wilson. It is an internal rail dimension, and the Centurion/Compact lowers share the same dimension, and it is different from full size pistols. So you can interchange Centurion/Conpact pieces, but not with full size 92 pieces.

You're absolutely correct and I was misremembering. You're not supposed to put a Cent slide on a full size frame. Totally my bad. Mea culpa.

[GJM]

You're absolutely correct and I was misremembering. You're not supposed to put a Cent slide on a full size frame. Totally my bad. Mea culpa.


I have a picture showing the difference in rail dimensions, but can't find it. Before being educated by Ernest, I switched between Compact and full size, not knowing better. It ran, although I didn't shoot thousands of rounds. Obviously Beretta thought there was a difference, as they went to the trouble to do it.

Todd, you may know the history on this. YVK recalls you saying, or writing, that Beretta tested shorter barrel lengths and settled on the Compact/Centurion length slide, which is still pretty long, as the shortest they could go in slide/barrel and maintain reliability. Does that sound like something you said?


Ernest and I discussed how a Vertec upper and Centurion/Compact lower might be the holy grail of Beretta 92 carry variants. Here are his (EL's) comments around page 35 of the other massive Beretta 92 thread.

And I found out yesterday that Beretta made a 92G Vertec Centurion! I did not know such a thing existed. So a compact slide, G, with a dove tail front sight! That would be the bomb on my 92 Compact or an M9A1 Compact!

[ToddG]

Todd, you may know the history on this. YVK recalls you saying, or writing, that Beretta tested shorter barrel lengths and settled on the Compact/Centurion length slide, which is still pretty long, as the shortest they could go in slide/barrel and maintain reliability. Does that sound like something you said?

That's correct. The Cent/Compact slide was as short as they could make the gun due to the design of the locking block and the length needed for it to do what they wanted.


And I found out yesterday that Beretta made a 92G Vertec Centurion!

That truly surprises me. When I left ('03 I think) the guy in charge of such things was desperate to hit the delete button on the Vertec. If a Cent was made, I've never seen or heard of it and I'm absolutely certain it happened after I left.

[TCinVA]

There are some interesting things going on at Beretta these days...and hopefully some of the stuff we got a peek at a little bit ago is indicative of more interesting options hitting the market.

[LHS]

The last time I talked to Ernie, he mentioned that there had been a rare few compact Vertec G slides made, and he lusted after one.

If Bill can get Beretta to make a 92G Vertec Compact, I will be in hog heaven. If it's slicked out with the M9A1 Compact frame, all the better. I don't care about the rail on the compact, but the beveled mag well and checkering are nice. Now if CT would just make green lasergrips, my life would be complete.

[GJM]

The last time I talked to Ernie, he mentioned that there had been a rare few compact Vertec G slides made, and he lusted after one.

If Bill can get Beretta to make a 92G Vertec Compact, I will be in hog heaven. If it's slicked out with the M9A1 Compact frame, all the better. I don't care about the rail on the compact, but the beveled mag well and checkering are nice. Now if CT would just make green lasergrips, my life would be complete.

If anyone has the horsepower to get a Centurion length, Vertec Beretta made, my money would first be on Bill Wilson.

[PPGMD]

G -- As the person who turned Super Dave's desire for a tactical Elite into a written spec at Beretta, and as the guy who came up with the idea to call it the 92G-SD (I told Beretta it meant Special Duty but I think we all knew it really stood for Super Dave), I can absolutely assure you that the Brig slide was chosen because Dave wanted a removable front sight. At the time, the engineers at Beretta insisted there was no way to produce a standard sized frame with a removable sight.

I am curious has anyone pinged Dave since these were launched. After all it is basically his spec relaunched.

I see him at matches sometimes, but I figured some of your know him better and talk to him electronically on the interwebs.

[HCM]

Durability, not reliability. Specifically, the heavier slide flexed less and changed the way recoil energy was delivered to the frame so there was less frame cracking with the Brig slide. Even with the Brig slide, Border Patrol would regularly see cracked frames in less than 10k rounds. Admittedly, BP used some ridiculously hot .40 S&W ammo.



Each to his own, but most of the people I know who shot Berettas seriously dislike the Brig slide in 9mm. It's overly heavy which simply unnecessarily slows recoil impulse. It has more front sight movement per shot. The Brig slide was used on the E1 and E2 for exactly one reason: changeable front sight. As soon as the Vertec slide came along most folks preferred that slide. My guess for why the Brig slide was chosen here -- and I have no inside knowledge -- is that it was more a matter of the Brig slides still being produced and Beretta not being willing to restart production of the Vertec slides. In my personal experience having shot a lot of rounds through a lot of Berettas, and having dealt with countless LE/mil who've shot out barrels and cracked frames, the standard slide is not a weak link in the chain for 9mm.

The other main benefit of the regular sized slide is holster availability. While many of the big holster companies list Brig-compatible holsters in their catalog they're rarely produced because the gun has fallen so out of favor in the past decade.

re: price of this pistol ... I'm amazed people are surprised. Doing a limited run of specially configured pistols involves significant costs completely separate from the value of the individual parts. There's also some supply-demand economics here and it seems that Wilson Combat has correctly guessed that they'll have no problem selling these guns at the price point they've set. I honestly don't recall what a new E2 cost back when they were in production but $1200 for this gun as spec'd out seems like quite a deal to me.

IME the 96D Brigadiers were reliable but you are correct regarding their durability. I went through three 96D Brigadiers in four years shooting that 155 grain USBP ammo. It was "sporty". We were required to keep weapon logs and exchange any gun for a new one once it hit 10k. About that time, I had picked up a standard 96F top end for my 92. It was noticeably snappier than the Brigadier resulting in me picking up a 96G Elite I - a gun high on my "regret selling" list. I still have several brigadier holsters in the garage so a new 92G brigadier would be nice.

[JSGlock34]

My new Wilson Combat 92G Brigadier Tactical...

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x131/JSGlock34/Beretta_zps114eec88.jpg

...and its new scabbard, by Blackbeard Tactical (http://blackbeardtactical.com)...

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x131/JSGlock34/Blackbeard_zpsbd2429fb.jpg

[Suvorov]

My new Wilson Combat 92G Brigadier Tactical...

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x131/JSGlock34/Beretta_zps114eec88.jpg



Dude,

I am quite jealous.....

[GJM]

From Bill Wilson:

I just got notification today that the 92G Brigadier Tactical has been approved for USPSA Production division and will be listed on their approved list next week.

[farscott]

[snip]

I think that's pretty much it, as stated above I just built my "personal" dream gun and hopefully the project is successful enough to justify building my dream Centurion in the future :)

Based on how these are selling, I am looking forward to the WC Centurion.

Any plans for a WC 92D model?

[LSP972]

My Elite w/ original light Elite hammer and D spring won't reliably ignite .22LR primers when used with my factory .22LR conversion kit. A standard old 92F busts them every time. I'm waiting for the .22 kit to return to me so I can test it with an otherwise-standard 92G with D spring (and the standard 92 hammer).

Any further gouge on this? I bought the Beretta .22 kit for grandson #2's "M9" commercial (that had a D spring) and was getting spotty ignition on CCI Mini-Mags. Put a standard main spring in- with predictable results on the trigger pull- and reliability instantly became 100%.

I'm seriously considering one of these Brigadier Tacticals (been waffling back and forth between it and the M9A3; the latter won't be available for who-knows-how-long, and I think I like the features of this Wilson gun better anyway), but I wonder if the .22 kit will work with it.

.

[GJM]

If it doesn't, switch from the D spring to regular when you go .22 upper. Or have a dedicated FS lower for the .22, which can be bought for little.

[LSP972]

Or have a dedicated FS lower for the .22, which can be bought for little.

Still got that "M9" commercial, but I'd like it to work on the new gun without swapping springs.

You have any experience with Wilson's "short trigger"? I'm told it doesn't do much (as opposed to the dramatic difference on the Sig P-series short trigger) to reduce trigger reach. I can run a regular 92F; barely. If the short trigger reduces reach enough to notice, I'll get it on the in-hand M9 and this new Brigadier.

.

[GJM]

I am the wrong guy to ask on short triggers. I pulled them On Sig or Beretta pistols I have as they pinch my trigger finger.

[JohnN]

Still got that "M9" commercial, but I'd like it to work on the new gun without swapping springs.

You have any experience with Wilson's "short trigger"? I'm told it doesn't do much (as opposed to the dramatic difference on the Sig P-series short trigger) to reduce trigger reach. I can run a regular 92F; barely. If the short trigger reduces reach enough to notice, I'll get it on the in-hand M9 and this new Brigadier.

.

Vertec grips on a 92A1 shorten the trigger reach and in conjunction with an AGW short reach trigger makes folks with smaller hands better able to efficiently handle the platform.

[LSP972]

Thanks, John. I'm looking at the new Wilson pistol, and would want to stay with those stocks.

But it appears that none will be available for a couple of months, so...


.

[YVK]

Vertec grips and short trigger combo is in fact so effective that I find the reach reduction excessive, especially for SA shots. My hands aren't small though.
Another advantage is that those grips cost all of 21 bucks and I can stipple them in all the right places, unlike currently availability 75 bucks options.

[Jeep]

Still got that "M9" commercial, but I'd like it to work on the new gun without swapping springs.

You have any experience with Wilson's "short trigger"? I'm told it doesn't do much (as opposed to the dramatic difference on the Sig P-series short trigger) to reduce trigger reach. I can run a regular 92F; barely. If the short trigger reduces reach enough to notice, I'll get it on the in-hand M9 and this new Brigadier.

.

I put one of Wilson's short triggers in my commercial M9 and it helps a bit. It isn't dramatic, but it definitely helps.

[JohnN]

Vertec grips and short trigger combo is in fact so effective that I find the reach reduction excessive, especially for SA shots. My hands aren't small though.
Another advantage is that those grips cost all of 21 bucks and I can stipple them in all the right places, unlike currently availability 75 bucks options.
Have to agree, I will probably put the originals back on and wait for the new Wilson grips.

Sent from a SAMSUNG Galaxy Note 4.

[LSP972]

I put one of Wilson's short triggers in my commercial M9 and it helps a bit. It isn't dramatic, but it definitely helps.

Yeah, that's what Trooper224 said.

Moot point right now; dunno if I'll even still be interested when these become available again. I like the 92, clunkiness and all… but when I pick up my P30, my lizard brain says "So, tell me again WHY you want that brick when you have this???"

.

[GJM]

Yeah, that's what Trooper224 said.

Moot point right now; dunno if I'll even still be interested when these become available again. I like the 92, clunkiness and all… but when I pick up my P30, my lizard brain says "So, tell me again WHY you want that brick when you have this???"

.

The reason is while the P30 feels good, the 92 will shoot circles around any P30. That is a fact, not opinion.

[LHS]

Any further gouge on this? I bought the Beretta .22 kit for grandson #2's "M9" commercial (that had a D spring) and was getting spotty ignition on CCI Mini-Mags. Put a standard main spring in- with predictable results on the trigger pull- and reliability instantly became 100%.

I'm seriously considering one of these Brigadier Tacticals (been waffling back and forth between it and the M9A3; the latter won't be available for who-knows-how-long, and I think I like the features of this Wilson gun better anyway), but I wonder if the .22 kit will work with it.

.

Not yet; I'm still waiting to get it back.

[LSP972]

The reason is while the P30 feels good, the 92 will shoot circles around any P30. That is a fact, not opinion.


I suppose that depends upon your definition of circles.

Your statement is like the guys who confuse inherent accuracy with practical accuracy; and is a bit surprising, since you, of all people, understand that individual reactions to various features/abilities can generate profound differences in perceptions/performance.

To wit; perhaps the Beretta shoots rings around any P30 for YOU.

For ME, I have a lot of time behind TDA pistols, and enough behind several 92s to know that, if I'm shooting for all the cards (as in, my life or others' lives, not some competition or attempt to improve my split times), I want an HK LEM pistol in my hands.

And no, I'm not offended or otherwise annoyed by your statement… just surprised that you would make such a blatant/blanket pronouncement.

.

[GJM]

I am referring to pure shootability, and was answering your musing as to why anyone would want/carry/shoot a 92 when it feels like it does, and the P30, by comparison feels so good in the hands. If it were just my experience, as to shootability, I would call it my opinion. When you consider the experience of folks like Ernest Langdon, I call it fact.

It doesn't detract one bit from the P30 being a fantastic pistol. One that I would carry without a second thought into harm's way. I have used a P30 .40 to stop a moose charge inside five yards, that surely would have injured my wife and I, and did this in inclement winter conditions.

Despite my affection for the P30, pistol matches are designed to tease out small differences in ability, and on that count the P30 falls way short of a 92.

[YVK]

In a more laconic form, because nobody won nationals or made a gm with a LEM pistol. And you can't jerk it like Robbie says :-D

[David B.]

In a more laconic form, because nobody won nationals or made a gm with a LEM pistol. And you can't jerk it like Robbie says :-D

Thats's funny! :) (if you're familiar with the other thread)

God Bless,
David

[LSP972]

When you consider the experience of folks like Ernest Langdon, I call it fact.



Without taking anything away from Ernest… we're back to what YOU think. And back to competition-based opinions.

I'm glad the P30 saved you and your wife; which kind of reinforces my position on the matter. But its pretty obvious that we have widely differing ways of looking at the problem.

.

[JAD]

http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?8821-Why-the-P30

Sold me one.

[ToddG]

The reason is while the P30 feels good, the 92 will shoot circles around any P30. That is a fact, not opinion.

How the heck is that fact?

How was it quantified? You mentioned Ernest. Given his years and years of Beretta experience, for quite a while he chose an HK LEM as his carry gun. That's not to say it's quantifiable fact that the P30 shoots circles around the Beretta or even that Ernest, all things considered, even preferred the HK once availability of 'G' models, etc., became more equal. But I'd be hard pressed to believe that Ernest would say that the Beretta would be the best choice for every shooter under every circumstance.

[GJM]

This was the question I was responding to:

"I like the 92, clunkiness and all… but when I pick up my P30, my lizard brain says "So, tell me again WHY you want that brick when you have this???"

This is a Beretta thread, not a P30 thread. Ernest has personally told me that the P30 is a fine defensive pistol, but that the Beretta is far more shootable. That is also my personal experience. That is also what I have observed following YVK and his Beretta/P30 experience. That is consistent with Stoeger winning Production in the Nationals with a 92. Consistent with Ernest and Les K making GM with a 92. Frankly consistent with HK bringing out the VP9 and the difference in shootability between the VP9 and the P30. Consistent with nobody I am aware of making GM with a P30 LEM.

This is not to say the P30 isn't a fine pistol as I have said here and countless times over the years. Not suggesting the P30 isn't a great defensive pistol. I NEVER said the 92 is a better choice for every shooter or whatever you said. Only saying the 92 is more shootable than a P30. Frankly, I can't imagine any informed and skilled competitive shooter thinking otherwise.

[ToddG]

This is a Beretta thread, not a P30 thread.

If you didn't want to discuss the P30, you shouldn't have responded to the post involving the P30. Having done so, I'm sure you can understand that the rest of us feel equally justified in responding to your comments regarding the P30.


Ernest has personally told me that the P30 is a fine defensive pistol, but that the Beretta is far more shootable.

George, this isn't the first time you've put words in Ernest's mouth that are, at best, twisted from his intent. Someone has already linked to his post about the P30. Go back and read it if any of this remains unclear to you. Ernest may very well find the Beretta more shootable. He certainly has orders of magnitude more time behind one. He's also said many times that his unusually large hands make the Beretta a great choice for him.

Ernest is smart enough to know that a gun which is more shootable for him isn't necessarily more shootable for everyone.


That is also my personal experience.

Was that before or after your Glock-is-all experience, your SIG-is-all experience, your CZ-is-all experience, or??? Had you never fired a Beretta before you picked up any of those guns? If so, and if the Beretta is so shootable, why didn't you dedicate yourself to it and never looked back?


That is also what I have observed following YVK and his Beretta/P30 experience.

I'm sure Yuri is capable of speaking for himself, as well. You might consider the possibility that his insights into his shooting could be slightly different than your insights into his shooting.


That is consistent with Stoeger winning Production in the Nationals with a 92.

Is Ben still shooting a Beretta? Or has he found something he considers more shootable for him?


Consistent with Ernest and Les K making GM with a 92.

Who was the first person to earn a GM classification in USPSA (http://shop.blade-tech.com/pages.php?CDpath=3&pID=23)? Do you know what gun he shot to get there? I'll give you a hint: it wasn't a Beretta. He found something that was more shootable for him.


Frankly consistent with HK bringing out the VP9 and the difference in shootability between the VP9 and the P30.

If you think HK brought out the VP9 due to shootability or competition, you're utterly and completely out of touch with the industry in general and HK in particular.


Consistent with nobody I am aware of making GM with a P30 LEM.

Yeah, two or three Beretta GMs out of thousands is definitely proof that they're fantastically shootable and zero out of thousands is statistically different. Except not.


Frankly, I can't imagine any informed and skilled competitive shooter thinking otherwise.

And that continues to be your problem, George. You can't imagine that anyone feels differently about anything.

I shoot the P30 LEM better than I shoot the 92-series guns, and "I was a Beretta fan when being a Beretta fan was uncool." If I count as an uninformed and unskilled shooter in your books, I'll be able to live with that.

Once again, discussing things with you has become tedious to the point of worthless. I'm out.

[GJM]

In USPSA Production, the Tangfoglio and CZ are more shootable than the 92. The 92, in turn, is more shootable than the P30 LEM. Except perhaps here, this shouldn't be the least bit controversial.

[joshs]

In USPSA Production, the Tangfoglio and CZ are more shootable than the 92. The 92, in turn, is more shootable than the P30 LEM. Except perhaps here, this shouldn't be the least bit controversial.

GJM,

I think what everyone is trying to say is that you are making an objective comment about something that is very subjective. For example, while many people think the Tanfo/CZ are the best USPSA production pistol. I've met a number of people who switched back to a Glock or M&P after trying the Shadow. I'd also note that CZs and Tanfos are still pretty far from dominating the entire division, like the 2011 does in Limited/Open.

[LSP972]

George,

I think what everyone is trying to say is that you are making an objective comment about something that is very subjective.

BINGO!!!

That, and the constant referring back to this or that 'competition' angle… yeah, "tedious" was a good choice of word.

GJM, there's nothing personal in this, but… you seem to keep forgetting that there are a LOT of members on this forum who have just as much (if not more, though maybe different) experience as the folks you hold in such high regard. When you tell us that we're wrong because so-and-so said this or that… well, certain folks tend to tune out that sort of information exchange.

.

[LSP972]

Meanwhile, back at the ranch… I'm gonna call Wilson Monday (hopefully I can "get through"). Right now, I'm torn between one of these semi-custom Brigadiers, and sending in a plain vanilla 92 for a full custom work-over.

I'll ask this again… does ANYONE have any idea what the approximate wait time is for a 92 custom package from Wilson? I'm talking about one of their standard packages as described on their site, with maybe a "G conversion" thrown in?

GJM, your earlier "If you want to accomplish this, get that (92 model)" post was informative, but I'm not into mixing/matching pieces/parts. After a lot of reading and thought, I'v narrowed it down to the second sentence in this post.

Until then, I think I'll take grandson #2's M9 commercial to the range today and get re-acquainted with the beast.

.

[GJM]

You may think this is subjective, but it is hardly so when not a SINGLE top shooter is using the P30 LEM in USPSA competition. By contrast two current PF members, one a SME here, made GM with a 92, and a former PF member won the Production nationals with a 92. Surely to argue this is subjective, there needs to be at least a SINGLE example of someone shooting the P30 LEM at a similar level?

And, yes, the 2011 dominates USPSA Limited and Open division competition.

[joshs]

You may think this is subjective, but it is hardly so when not a SINGLE top shooter is using the P30 LEM in USPSA competition. By contrast two current PF members, one a SME here, made GM with a 92, and a former PF member won the Production nationals with a 92. Surely to argue this is subjective, there needs to be at least a SINGLE example of someone shooting the P30 LEM at a similar level?

And, yes, the 2011 dominates USPSA Limited and Open division competition.



Ok, so if one guy winning Production nationals means the Beretta is much more shootable, does that mean a G34 is much more shootable than a 92, since at least two guys have won nationals shooting a G34?

[GJM]

Ok, so if one guy winning Production nationals means the Beretta is much more shootable, does that mean a G34 is much more shootable than a 92, since at least two guys have won nationals shooting a G34?

To be clear, this is not comparing the Beretta 92 to ANY other pistol, except the P30 LEM. That was the subject of this discussion.

Would anybody reasonably expect to shoot the P30 LEM as well as the 92 in high level competition, when the P30 has a sub four inch barrel, weighs a third less, and has a long, heavy trigger designed for law enforcement?

[LSP972]

... the P30.. has a long, heavy trigger...

What???

Dude, you're jumping the track again. A LEM is long and heavy? Now you're sounding like a noob on HKPro.

Sure, the TAKE-UP is long; and most decidedly NOT heavy; but you don't run all the way back to the starting point on multiple-shot strings. You KNOW this; so where did that "long and heavy" nonsense come from???

.

[GJM]

What???

Dude, you're jumping the track again. A LEM is long and heavy? Now you're sounding like a noob on HKPro.

Sure, the TAKE-UP is long; and most decidedly NOT heavy; but you don't run all the way back to the starting point on multiple-shot strings. You KNOW this; so where did that "long and heavy" nonsense come from???

.

Have you ever felt a good Tangfoglio, CZ, or Beretta SA trigger?

[TCinVA]

To be clear, this is not comparing the Beretta 92 to ANY other pistol, except the P30 LEM. That was the subject of this discussion.

Would anybody reasonably expect to shoot the P30 LEM as well as the 92 in high level competition, when the P30 has a sub four inch barrel, weighs a third less, and has a long, heavy trigger designed for law enforcement?

For the sake of everyone's sanity, can we please let this tangent drop.

Your opinion has been stated, others disagree. Let's all just leave it there.

[Bill Wilson]

Dang, hate it that I didn't get to the party before it was over :)

Comparing one of the most shooter friendly pistols to one of the least shooter friendly pistols would have been fun..............but in the end all one has to do is go out and shoot a drill comprised of at least 50rds and targets from 7-25yds with a timer (doesn't matter if you score Comstock or Vickers count) using various pistols. It will quickly become obvious which make/model works best for you and I seriously doubt it will be a H&K product.

[GardoneVT]

Dang, hate it that I didn't get to the party before it was over :)

Comparing one of the most shooter friendly pistols to one of the least shooter friendly pistols would have been fun..............but in the end all one has to do is go out and shoot a drill comprised of at least 50rds and targets from 7-25yds with a timer (doesn't matter if you score Comstock or Vickers count) using various pistols. It will quickly become obvious which make/model works best for you and I seriously doubt it will be a H&K product



I'm not trying to punch Cthulu , but you can't say that. Neither can I or anyone else.

I'm shooting a Tanfoglio after starting with Beretta, experimenting with HK LEM and detesting it, and going back to Beretta before trying out a Match Tanfoglio. All three guns rock in different ways ,and all three suck in different ways.

FOR ME, the Tanfoglio stomps all over HK LEM in shootability, and Beretta in ergonomics. Someone else out there is assuredly rocking an HK LEM and for their own reasons thouroughly detests Tanfoglio and Beretta. Neither of us are "wrong" until I or that other person starts claiming our decision calculus applies to them. None of us are named Jeff Cooper and the calendar says 2014 , not 1976.

[Bill Wilson]

I'm not trying to punch Cthulu , but you can't say that. Neither can I or anyone else.

I'm shooting a Tanfoglio after starting with Beretta, experimenting with HK LEM and detesting it, and going back to Beretta before trying out a Match Tanfoglio. All three guns rock in different ways ,and all three suck in different ways.

FOR ME, the Tanfoglio stomps all over HK LEM in shootability, and Beretta in ergonomics. Someone else out there is assuredly rocking an HK LEM and for their own reasons thouroughly detests Tanfoglio and Beretta. Neither of us are "wrong" until I or that other person starts claiming our decision calculus applies to them. None of us are named Jeff Cooper and the calendar says 2014 , not 1976.

Simply stating that shooting a comprehensive drill requiring multiple targets, close to far shots, reloads, etc will allow anyone to quickly determine which make/model that specific individual shoots the best. Doesn't mean you have to like the gun, personally I shoot a S&W M&P pretty well compared to B92s and 1911s which I shoot the best and most, but I don't really like them very well. Who knows someone out there might actually be able to shoot an H&K the best???

[YVK]

Who knows someone out there might actually be able to shoot an H&K the best???

Working diligently on this.

And, since this is Wilson Combat Brig Tac thread, lemme say "thank you" for bringing this project to a fruition. It is a great gun but it is hard to carry concealed in urban civilian life. That being a reasonably agreeable on statement, when can we expect a Wilson Combat neither Brigadier nor Tactical (slim slide and railless) fully dovetailed G Compact or Centurion that masses are so hoping for :-)?

[Trooper224]

Deleted

[Jeep]

OK, here is a different question. I know a lot of people in the military who hate the M9. Many don't like the fact that it is too big for their hands and some don't like the weight and size, but the biggest single gripe seems to be the double action trigger, which is both gritty and extremely heavy.

The Wilson Brigadier is designed to be reliable and it uses the "D" mainspring. I've seen in the other thread that Beretta is proposing a change that will use the Vertec frame as a base with add on grip panels for those with larger hands--which sounds like a very good idea to me (particularly since I have smaller hands).

But that still doesn't do anything about the DA trigger pull. Is there any legitimate reason to keep the current mainspring instead of the "D" spring? From everything I've seen, the D spring will reliably bust M882 primers; do we ever really use any foreign 9mm with exceptionally hard primers (the Swedes made some ammo with very hard primers, I know, but they aren't part of NATO)?

If not, shouldn't the military adopt the D spring as part of an effort to make the M9 a more shootable pistol?

[Bill Wilson]

Working diligently on this.

And, since this is Wilson Combat Brig Tac thread, lemme say "thank you" for bringing this project to a fruition. It is a great gun but it is hard to carry concealed in urban civilian life. That being a reasonably agreeable on statement, when can we expect a Wilson Combat neither Brigadier nor Tactical (slim slide and railless) fully dovetailed G Compact or Centurion that masses are so hoping for :-)?

Trust me, I'm working on it............

I carry EVERY day, ALL day. I normally carry a 1911 4" compact or a B92 Compact, but since the Brig Tacs came out I've been carrying one just because it's my new toy. I'm 5' 10" 175# and am having no problem carrying it all day or concealing it in one of our Lo-Profile II pancake style holsters.

[Kevin B.]

From everything I've seen, the D spring will reliably bust M882 primers; do we ever really use any foreign 9mm with exceptionally hard primers (the Swedes made some ammo with very hard primers, I know, but they aren't part of NATO)?

If not, shouldn't the military adopt the D spring as part of an effort to make the M9 a more shootable pistol?

I had an M9 with a D spring that began experiencing failures to ignite M882 across multiple lots. No issues with the same lots in a G19. A switch back to the stock spring eliminated the issue and, frankly, after a slight period of adjustment I shot the M9 just as well.

Certainly not conclusive but it certainly changed my opinion about the value of the D spring in the M9.

[Bill Wilson]

OK, here is a different question. I know a lot of people in the military who hate the M9. Many don't like the fact that it is too big for their hands and some don't like the weight and size, but the biggest single gripe seems to be the double action trigger, which is both gritty and extremely heavy.

The Wilson Brigadier is designed to be reliable and it uses the "D" mainspring. I've seen in the other thread that Beretta is proposing a change that will use the Vertec frame as a base with add on grip panels for those with larger hands--which sounds like a very good idea to me (particularly since I have smaller hands).

But that still doesn't do anything about the DA trigger pull. Is there any legitimate reason to keep the current mainspring instead of the "D" spring? From everything I've seen, the D spring will reliably bust M882 primers; do we ever really use any foreign 9mm with exceptionally hard primers (the Swedes made some ammo with very hard primers, I know, but they aren't part of NATO)?

If not, shouldn't the military adopt the D spring as part of an effort to make the M9 a more shootable pistol?

Very good observation, I have no idea why anyone would want to use ammo that a 16# or D spring wouldn't light 100%. These springs will light all American mfg ammo and most other quality foreign produced ammo such as PMC, Fiocchi, S&B, etc.. The difference in the DA of a gun with a factory standard 21# and a D or 16# is dramatic. I run 13# springs in my carry guns but only carry ammo primed with Federal or Winchester primers.

[Slavex]

I used D springs or Langdon Comp springs in both my EII's that ate themselves, some have told me that the use of either of those springs can be a factor in accelerated wear on the gun. No idea if this is true or not.

[TCinVA]

I used D springs or Langdon Comp springs in both my EII's that ate themselves, some have told me that the use of either of those springs can be a factor in accelerated wear on the gun. No idea if this is true or not.

After installing the 13# spring in my 92 Brigadier I wondered about the exact same thing. The tension from the hammer spring absorbs a lot of the force generated in firing the shot. I've wondered what the long term effect might be or if perhaps a stiffer recoil spring might be recommended to offset the effect.

[ToddG]

I carry EVERY day, ALL day. I normally carry a 1911 4" compact or a B92 Compact, but since the Brig Tacs came out I've been carrying one just because it's my new toy. I'm 5' 10" 175# and am having no problem carrying it all day or concealing it in one of our Lo-Profile II pancake style holsters.

Doesn't surprise me. While I certainly found the 92G Compact more forgiving in terms of clothing choices, etc., I carried a Beretta Elite II (with a Wilson Armor Tuff green finish on the slide, coincidentally) for quite a bit of my time at BUSA and was always able to make it work in a Milt Sparks Executive Companion or Kramer #3.


I had an M9 with a D spring that began experiencing failures to ignite M882 across multiple lots. No issues with the same lots in a G19. A switch back to the stock spring eliminated the issue and, frankly, after a slight period of adjustment I shot the M9 just as well.

Out of curiosity was this CONUS or OCONUS?

I'd experienced the same with some foreign-manufacture "NATO-spec" ammunition when using the D spring and even more inconsistency when using the 8000F spring. The 92F spring is intended to be a lifetime part, essentially, and should ignite literally anything with a functioning primer no matter how many rounds have been put through the gun. The 92D spring improves the trigger pretty significantly and will certainly bust most US primers but I'd probably think about replacing the spring every 5-10k rounds just to be on the safe side.

[Slavex]

I had great success carrying my EII in a Milt Sparks VM2 (I think it was a VM2), for the two weeks I was in a place where I could carry it. It disappeared, was comfortable and relatively easy to get to.

[YVK]

EII in a JM Kydex and Vertec/92FS in a Shaggy for over a year. As I posted elsewhere, they conceal better than G19 or P30 for me, but 5 inch bbl/36 oz unloaded at the appendix site requires a special kind of dedication.
I have had several light strikes too with a D spring on unknown (that's a clue) and russian primers.

[GJM]

Bill or Ernest can elaborate on the technical details, but the new Wilson trigger bar should help here -- as it allows the DA and SA travel to be the same, and optimized, improving ignition with hard primers with the D and lighter hammer springs.

My first G-SD had intermittent ignition problems, related to trigger bar variation, until it got a trigger job. That fixed it.

[Kevin B.]

Out of curiosity was this CONUS or OCONUS?

I'd experienced the same with some foreign-manufacture "NATO-spec" ammunition when using the D spring and even more inconsistency when using the 8000F spring. The 92F spring is intended to be a lifetime part, essentially, and should ignite literally anything with a functioning primer no matter how many rounds have been put through the gun. The 92D spring improves the trigger pretty significantly and will certainly bust most US primers but I'd probably think about replacing the spring every 5-10k rounds just to be on the safe side.

OCONUS but the ammunition was all U.S. M882.

That is interesting about the replacement interval on the D-spring. I had assumed it was a lifetime part like the F spring. The D spring in question probably had just north of 15k on it when I began experiencing issues.

[Bill Wilson]

Bill or Ernest can elaborate on the technical details, but the new Wilson trigger bar should help here -- as it allows the DA and SA travel to be the same, and optimized, improving ignition with hard primers with the D and lighter hammer springs.

My first G-SD had intermittent ignition problems, related to trigger bar variation, until it got a trigger job. That fixed it.

Yes the new trigger bars will allow fitting so they hammer arch will be basically the same DA and SA, more hammer arch more ignition energy. Also as a fyi, the standard hammer hits with more energy than an Elite II hammer giving better ignition. The new trigger bars also have a fitting pad at the front so you can adjust overtravel internally and not effect the gun's suitability for IDPA SSP or USPSA Production divisions.

We are also close on the final design of chrome silicone hammer springs which should reduce the stacking feeling and be virtually a lifetime spring. We'll have 12#, 13# and 16#. If you set a pistol up with a std hammer, new trigger bar, 12# CS spring and shoot Federal or Winchester primers you can get a REALLY nice DA pull for competition.

[David B.]

Yes the new trigger bars will allow fitting so they hammer arch will be basically the same DA and SA, more hammer arch more ignition energy. Also as a fyi, the standard hammer hits with more energy than an Elite II hammer giving better ignition. The new trigger bars also have a fitting pad at the front so you can adjust overtravel internally and not effect the gun's suitability for IDPA SSP or USPSA Production divisions.

The world just seems to be a better place since you've come around here. Can I pre-order 6 of them. :)

God Bless,
David

[Clobbersaurus]

The 92D spring improves the trigger pretty significantly and will certainly bust most US primers but I'd probably think about replacing the spring every 5-10k rounds just to be on the safe side.

I wonder if the D spring should be replaced every 5-10k rounds or presses? I dry fire a lot and have many many more thousands of dry presses on my trigger than live fire. Combined I'm probably close to 7 or 8k presses.

[JV_]

every 5-10k rounds or presses?I could count dryfire as a fired round.

[YVK]

I wonder if the D spring should be replaced every 5-10k rounds or presses?

You probably should be doing it anyway for a trigger spring unless you're using a Wolff unit. The caveat is that trs would get affected even by simulated presses while hammer only by actual ones.
After years of using all and the same gun for carry, dry fire and live practice I have recently switched to separate guns for each of them. That was because of lead, but as a by-product I do a lot less counting now. Round of unexpected victory for GJM, he's been on my case forever. Sorry for a drift.

[Jeep]

OCONUS but the ammunition was all U.S. M882.

That is interesting about the replacement interval on the D-spring. I had assumed it was a lifetime part like the F spring. The D spring in question probably had just north of 15k on it when I began experiencing issues.

Just out of curiosity, with that many rounds through your M9 did you get any locking block issues? (Maybe locking blocks and D springs should be changed with the same frequency?).

[ToddG]

OCONUS but the ammunition was all U.S. M882.

I asked primarily because depending on where OCONUS and assuming it was where we all assume these days, I can see the talcum-like sand getting into place like the firing pin channel and causing enough resistance to make a lighter-than-normal strike that much worse. Even with a field stripped & cleaned gun, that area is often forgotten. It's just a WAG but something I'd wonder about. I never had issues breaking M882 with a D spring, but my guns weren't Frankensteins from the 80's maintained by guys who were bored out of their minds. :cool:

[Suvorov]

I asked primarily because depending on where OCONUS and assuming it was where we all assume these days, I can see the talcum-like sand getting into place like the firing pin channel and causing enough resistance to make a lighter-than-normal strike that much worse. Even with a field stripped & cleaned gun, that area is often forgotten. It's just a WAG but something I'd wonder about. I never had issues breaking M882 with a D spring, but my guns weren't Frankensteins from the 80's maintained by guys who were bored out of their minds. :cool:

However this might actually prove the wisdom behind Beretta specifying the much derided F spring for the M9?

[ToddG]

However this might actually prove the wisdom behind Beretta specifying the much derided F spring for the M9?

That was my point. :cool:

[Jeep]

I never had issues breaking M882 with a D spring, but my guns weren't Frankensteins from the 80's maintained by guys who were bored out of their minds. :cool:

Maintained? They are supposed to maintain them? Next you are going to be saying that pistols should be lubricated as well, when everyone knows they should be shot as seldom as possible and kept absolutely dry so they can pass the next IG inspection.

[ToddG]

I wasn't really even talking about individuals maintaining their own issued weapons. There are plenty of variables there but I have no doubt that Kevin was doing what he was supposed to. By "maintenance" I mean the fact that most M9s at this point have been rebuilt and parts-swapped so many times by armorers who don't really understand things that any given M9 is a roll of the dice.

Remember, if an M9 with 15,000 rounds through it comes through depot maintenance with a cracked frame, the rest of the parts (including the 15k round locking block) get "recycled" and thrown into a parts bin. Then when a gun comes in for, say, a broken locking block it's likely that well-worn 15k locking block will be used to replace it.

[Jeep]

Sorry Todd: I wasn't clear. I was talking about company-level armorers and commanders. Unless you are deployed, you turn in your weapon to the armorer after carrying it in the field, and the armorers inspect to make sure it is clean--and since oil picks up tiny traces of carbon and hence looks "dirty," which can get a weapon dinged on an IG inspection, they historically wanted them bone dry as well. Then, unless you have an unusually hard working armorer, they are left in the weapons racks until they are needed again. Essentially no maintenance is done with a lot of weapons unless they break, at which time they are sent up the maintenance chain and the parts are redistributed like you say.

My guess is that except in very well-led units (or units with a rare, hard-working armorer), most military small arms almost never even have their springs changed.

[ToddG]

I believe it. When I worked at BUSA I always used to use fighter jets as an analogy. If the military treated its M9s like it does its fighters (tracking how many hours of use on each engine, etc) the M9s would run like clockwork.

Curious based on something I saw at USMA a few years ago: do the racks for the M9s hold the guns in battery or locked back?

[Kevin B.]

Just out of curiosity, with that many rounds through your M9 did you get any locking block issues? (Maybe locking blocks and D springs should be changed with the same frequency?).

I had one locking block break, three hammer release levers break and a slide stop spring break. This particular M9 suffered a cracked frame at about 30k which deadlined it (obviously). While I replaced the M9, I began shooting Glocks exclusively at that point.


I asked primarily because depending on where OCONUS and assuming it was where we all assume these days, I can see the talcum-like sand getting into place like the firing pin channel and causing enough resistance to make a lighter-than-normal strike that much worse. Even with a field stripped & cleaned gun, that area is often forgotten. It's just a WAG but something I'd wonder about. I never had issues breaking M882 with a D spring, but my guns weren't Frankensteins from the 80's maintained by guys who were bored out of their minds. :cool:

This M9 benefitted from a fresh refinishing job before it became mine, which leads me to believe that it recently came out of the depot. Purely conjecture on my part though.

It received better care than the typical .mil M9. Once I received it, it had all the springs replaced and I had one of the gunsmiths (not a .mil armorer) go over the gun. The gun was gone over by the gunsmiths on a monthly basis which was about every 5k or so. Toward the end of my time with it, it was in to the gunsmiths more often because of parts breakages. I cannot speak to what they did each time they had it, but I have every confidence that they went through it thoroughly and addressed any issues identified.

[LSP972]

I had one locking block break, three hammer release levers break and a slide stop spring break. This particular M9 suffered a cracked frame at about 30k which deadlined it (obviously).



Toward the end of my time with it, it was in to the gunsmiths more often because of parts breakages.

This gives me pause. I have been told, by three different people- all of whom I hold in high regard- stories of 5th Group and other military types showing up at classes with their M9s… and an accompanying fifty cal ammo can full of parts and other support kit… per gun. Not SHOOTING kit… MAINTENANCE kit.

I was cleaning the grandson's M9 commercial this morning, and was amazed, yet again, at the tremendous number of nooks and crannies and teeny-weeny parts this pistol has. While I certainly won't shoot any of my guns at the rates Kevin B. is talking about, four or five thousand a year is definitely reachable.

I have ZERO, nada, zilch, armorer experience on the 92. I could learn, but as noted in the armorer's class thread, learning on one's personal piece is not the best of ideas.

Hmmm… got to think about this…


.

[Bill Wilson]

As mentioned elsewhere in this thread, the durability issues are not with the gun design, rather with the slip shod way the military maintains them.

I have M92s with 20k+ round counts that have never had a part breakage and have been shooting M92s since the original 92F variant. Over what I'm sure is 200k+ total rounds through M92s I have had a early 92G locking block and slide fail and that is all. I've also shot well over a million rounds through various 1911s and have only had Colt mfg slide stops/extractors and one WC mfg (cast) thumb safety break. As anyone who knows me well can attest, I'm certainly not obsessed with gun maintenance and rarely clean pistol more than every 1000rds. However I do keep them lubed properly and wear items like springs and extractors replaced as needed. My typical regiment is: Shoot 500rds, field strip and re-lube, shoot 500 more rounds and do a field strip and a fairly good clean re-lube while checking for wear and replacing anything that looks worn (normally only a recoil spring every 2-3k rounds). Full strip and clean every 5000rds. Obviously the lube interval varies depending on the lube your using, I usually use our UltimaLube oil or universal which will keep the pistol lubed for 500rds.. Note: Chrome silicone recoil springs will easily go 5k rounds.

I have approx 6k rds through Brig Tac #53 so far and have had no malfunctions, no parts break and have only changed the recoil spring.

[Jeep]

I had one locking block break, three hammer release levers break and a slide stop spring break. This particular M9 suffered a cracked frame at about 30k which deadlined it (obviously). While I replaced the M9, I began shooting Glocks exclusively at that point.



This M9 benefitted from a fresh refinishing job before it became mine, which leads me to believe that it recently came out of the depot. Purely conjecture on my part though.

It received better care than the typical .mil M9. Once I received it, it had all the springs replaced and I had one of the gunsmiths (not a .mil armorer) go over the gun. The gun was gone over by the gunsmiths on a monthly basis which was about every 5k or so. Toward the end of my time with it, it was in to the gunsmiths more often because of parts breakages. I cannot speak to what they did each time they had it, but I have every confidence that they went through it thoroughly and addressed any issues identified.

You were hanging with the right folks, Kevin, if you had gunsmiths in the unit!

Personally, I think the M9 is fine for almost all military uses. It isn't so great for infantry who have to walk a lot (too big and heavy), and it probably is not the best for very high volume shooting of the type you were doing (it is great to hear that you got that kind of ammo allowance, though), but it would be nice if we actually trained our armorers to really maintain the weapons under their care. That--and the D spring (which your experience suggests should be replaced every 10,000 rounds or so) would make the M9 a far more useful weapon.

[LSP972]

As mentioned elsewhere in this thread, the durability issues are not with the gun design, rather with the slip shod way the military maintains them.

I have M92s with 20k+ round counts that have never had a part breakage and have been shooting M92s since the original 92F variant. Over what I'm sure is 200k+ total rounds through M92s I have had a early 92G locking block and slide fail and that is all. I've also shot well over a million rounds through various 1911s and have only had Colt mfg slide stops/extractors and one WC mfg (cast) thumb safety break. As anyone who knows me well can attest, I'm certainly not obsessed with gun maintenance and rarely clean pistol more than every 1000rds. However I do keep them lubed properly and wear items like springs and extractors replaced as needed. My typical regiment is: Shoot 500rds, field strip and re-lube, shoot 500 more rounds and do a field strip and a fairly good clean re-lube while checking for wear and replacing anything that looks worn (normally only a recoil spring every 2-3k rounds). Full strip and clean every 5000rds. Obviously the lube interval varies depending on the lube your using, I usually use our UltimaLube oil or universal which will keep the pistol lubed for 500rds.. Note: Chrome silicone recoil springs will easily go 5k rounds.

I have approx 6k rds through Brig Tac #53 so far and have had no malfunctions, no parts break and have only changed the recoil spring.

Thanks for the information. What is the recommended replacement interval for the recoil spring on the Brigadier slide?

.

[Bill Wilson]

Thanks for the information. What is the recommended replacement interval for the recoil spring on the Brigadier slide?

.

I normally change conventional round wire recoil springs every 3-4k rounds on any pistol, probably overkill on a 9mm though

[Jeep]

Curious based on something I saw at USMA a few years ago: do the racks for the M9s hold the guns in battery or locked back?

I think that will depend on the individual unit, but some commanders will like having pistols in racks locked back because it is immediately clear that they are unloaded, and the military really doesn't like loaded guns, because then you get accidental/negligent discharges with them, which in turn can lead to a commander's career terminating early. Far better to have prematurely worn out recoil springs, since they probably aren't going to be changed on a regular basis anyway.

[Kevin B.]

As mentioned elsewhere in this thread, the durability issues are not with the gun design, rather with the slip shod way the military maintains them.

I have M92s with 20k+ round counts that have never had a part breakage and have been shooting M92s since the original 92F variant. Over what I'm sure is 200k+ total rounds through M92s I have had a early 92G locking block and slide fail and that is all. I've also shot well over a million rounds through various 1911s and have only had Colt mfg slide stops/extractors and one WC mfg (cast) thumb safety break. As anyone who knows me well can attest, I'm certainly not obsessed with gun maintenance and rarely clean pistol more than every 1000rds. However I do keep them lubed properly and wear items like springs and extractors replaced as needed. My typical regiment is: Shoot 500rds, field strip and re-lube, shoot 500 more rounds and do a field strip and a fairly good clean re-lube while checking for wear and replacing anything that looks worn (normally only a recoil spring every 2-3k rounds). Full strip and clean every 5000rds. Obviously the lube interval varies depending on the lube your using, I usually use our UltimaLube oil or universal which will keep the pistol lubed for 500rds.. Note: Chrome silicone recoil springs will easily go 5k rounds.

I have approx 6k rds through Brig Tac #53 so far and have had no malfunctions, no parts break and have only changed the recoil spring.

I am not sure the issues I experienced with the M9 can be completely attributed to the Army's maintenance system. While I would agree that it leaves something to be desired, my G19 benefitted from the same care and attention that my M9 received and had no parts break despite heavier use. My M4, which saw quite a bit of use as well, also had no parts break. That tells me the preventive maintenance my guys were doing worked.

I am not picking on the M9. I genuinely liked this gun. I was superbly accurate and I did some excellent shooting with it. Other than the parts I had break and the issues with the D spring, I do not recall a stoppage.


You were hanging with the right folks, Kevin, if you had gunsmiths in the unit!

I definitely was. It was the best assignment of my career and I consider myself extremely fortunate to have had it.

[Sigfan26]

As mentioned elsewhere in this thread, the durability issues are not with the gun design, rather with the slip shod way the military maintains them.

I have M92s with 20k+ round counts that have never had a part breakage and have been shooting M92s since the original 92F variant. Over what I'm sure is 200k+ total rounds through M92s I have had a early 92G locking block and slide fail and that is all. I've also shot well over a million rounds through various 1911s and have only had Colt mfg slide stops/extractors and one WC mfg (cast) thumb safety break. As anyone who knows me well can attest, I'm certainly not obsessed with gun maintenance and rarely clean pistol more than every 1000rds. However I do keep them lubed properly and wear items like springs and extractors replaced as needed. My typical regiment is: Shoot 500rds, field strip and re-lube, shoot 500 more rounds and do a field strip and a fairly good clean re-lube while checking for wear and replacing anything that looks worn (normally only a recoil spring every 2-3k rounds). Full strip and clean every 5000rds. Obviously the lube interval varies depending on the lube your using, I usually use our UltimaLube oil or universal which will keep the pistol lubed for 500rds.. Note: Chrome silicone recoil springs will easily go 5k rounds.

I have approx 6k rds through Brig Tac #53 so far and have had no malfunctions, no parts break and have only changed the recoil spring.

Mr. Wilson, what are your thoughts on using high pressure ammo with the Brig Tac (ex 9BPLE)?

[Bill Wilson]

Mr. Wilson, what are your thoughts on using high pressure ammo with the Brig Tac (ex 9BPLE)?

The pistol is rated for +P ammo, but like all guns a steady diet of high pressure ammo will reduce the service life. This is one of the reasons civilian pistols seem to have less issues than military issue guns, most civilian shooters shoot 115gr FMJ ball ammo from Fed, Win, Rem, PMC, etc and these loads are very low pressure compared to the NATO ball ammo which is basically +P. The common 115gr ammo is usually around 1125fps (129k PF) and NATO ammo is 124gr at 1250fps (155k PF).

[Bill Wilson]

BladeTech OWB ASR exact fit holsters in stock now http://shopwilsoncombat.com/Blade-Tech-Wilson-92G-Brigadier-Tactical-Right-Hand-OWB-Holster-15-Belt-Black-Molded-Kydex/productinfo/NW420/

[KeeFus]

BladeTech OWB ASR exact fit holsters in stock now http://http://shopwilsoncombat.com/Blade-Tech-Wilson-92G-Brigadier-Tactical-Right-Hand-OWB-Holster-15-Belt-Black-Molded-Kydex/productinfo/NW420/ (http://shopwilsoncombat.com/Blade-Tech-Wilson-92G-Brigadier-Tactical-Right-Hand-OWB-Holster-15-Belt-Black-Molded-Kydex/productinfo/NW420/")

Linky no worky. To many http...FIFY.

[Bill Wilson]

Linky no worky. To many http...FIFY.

http://shopwilsoncombat.com/Blade-Tech-Wilson-92G-Brigadier-Tactical-Right-Hand-OWB-Holster-15-Belt-Black-Molded-Kydex/productinfo/NW420/

[JV_]

The spring design discussion has been split:
http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?14461-Spring-Design

[Clobbersaurus]

Does Wilson have any plans to produce a flat wire recoil spring for the Beretta? I'm not entirely sure this is even possible but perhaps a FW for the mainspring as well?

[Bill Wilson]

Does Wilson have any plans to produce a flat wire recoil spring for the Beretta? I'm not entirely sure this is even possible but perhaps a FW for the mainspring as well?

No, we're happy with the chrome silicon round wire springs for upgrades. Will have a 11.5# CS spring available soon and this is what I run in my pistols with a SHOK-BUFF, the lighter spring weight makes the gun recoil flatter, thus faster sight recovery time.

[Suvorov]

No, we're happy with the chrome silicon round wire springs for upgrades. Will have a 11.5# CS spring available soon and this is what I run in my pistols with a SHOK-BUFF, the lighter spring weight makes the gun recoil flatter, thus faster sight recovery time.

I have run the shok-buff for years with no problems EXCEPT with my old 92 Compact, which would experience cycling issues (usually a failure to go into battery) with the buffer installed? Have you seen this before? I have yet to install a shok-buff on my new M9A1 compact so I don't know if it is an issue with the shorter spring and recoil travel of the Compact or an issue with that particular pistol.

[PumpGunGuy]

When I went to the website, the gun is out of stock. Will there be another run? Sorry if this has already been addressed.

[Bill Wilson]

I have run the shok-buff for years with no problems EXCEPT with my old 92 Compact, which would experience cycling issues (usually a failure to go into battery) with the buffer installed? Have you seen this before? I have yet to install a shok-buff on my new M9A1 compact so I don't know if it is an issue with the shorter spring and recoil travel of the Compact or an issue with that particular pistol.

Your compact must be a pre L series with the shorter slide travel, you can't use a buffer with them.

[Bill Wilson]

When I went to the website, the gun is out of stock. Will there be another run? Sorry if this has already been addressed.

Yes we are out of stock, demand has been a LOT more than we expected, we're taking orders and shipping them as fast as we can. We're getting guns in every 3-4 weeks, we have 500 in transit now, but they are all pre-sold.