Opinions on the TCU for the Beretta 92

[Joe in PNG]

Fellow lovers of pizza guns- what's the general consensus on the Wilson/Wolff Trigger Conversion Unit (http://shopwilsoncombat.com/Wilson-Combat-Trigger-Conversion-Unit-Reduced-Power-Beretta-92_96/productinfo/643/)?

Is it a good replacement for the mousetrap trigger spring? And is the regular or reduced power the way to go?

[Clobbersaurus]

I don't have any experience with the TCU.

But, I replace trigger return springs about once a year in my Elite II, and have never had one break. I dry practice so much that I was worried the trigger spring would be an issue, but I wanted to see how robust the new ones are. So far, so good.

[Willard]

I use one and much prefer it to the old spring for durability, but the newer trigger return spring was improved for increased longevity and this may not be necessary. You probably know this, but you must replace the polymer coated trigger with an all steel version to use the Wolff TCU. I use the standard weight for reliable ignition, but again, may not be required (I have no time with the reduced version).

[SoCalDep]

I had one a long time ago. I hated it. I don't remember if it was the standard or reduced power, but it made the trigger-return gritty and "hesitating" (if that's anywhere near the right word). I use the standard Beretta spring in all my guns and while I've seen some break, I've never had it happen to me... even in my one gun that ate around 30,000-35,000 with nothing but a recoil spring swap around 25,000 rounds.

[jeep45238]

https://youtu.be/ue8_uN0OIVs

Decent anecdotal evidence...

The new trs is supposed to be much more durable and not impact the trigger pull like the tcu does. Buy a few spares and replace every 6-12 months and you'll likely never have an issue.

I know Ben says he swaps them when he does a deep clean, but his volume of rounds fired is exponentially more than most I think.

[TCinVA]

Fellow lovers of pizza guns- what's the general consensus on the Wilson/Wolff Trigger Conversion Unit (http://shopwilsoncombat.com/Wilson-Combat-Trigger-Conversion-Unit-Reduced-Power-Beretta-92_96/productinfo/643/)?

Is it a good replacement for the mousetrap trigger spring? And is the regular or reduced power the way to go?

I've had them in my guns for years.

I recently switched to Wilson trigger return springs because they are more durable than the original trigger springs, and they make the trigger pull that little bit smoother.

[JonInWA]

I've run a reduced-power TCU in my 92D for around 8+ years, encompassing many thousands of live-and dry-fire trigger manipulations; Dave at Wolff specifically suggested I start out with that one, after I discussed with him that my 92D was used for both carry and IDPA-it replaced the OEM Beretta lever-type spring when it broke after around 2K manipulations.https://www.gunsprings.com/BERETTA/92,%2096,%20AND%20CENTURION/cID1/mID2/dID36
My triggerpulls operationally and feeling-wise are unmpeded from the OEM pulls. I'm a huge fan of the TCU, as I feel a coil-type spring in inherently far more durable and reliable than a lever-type. In fairness to the OEM spring, though, Beretta significantly re-engineered it, improving its durability and finish years ago, as evidenced by many of the respondents' results above.

ToddG and I discussed this; he was a fan of the improved OEM, I was, and remain one of the TCU. Wilson is also marketing an improved one using chrome silicon material, a lever-type, but I'm unsure if they're the actual manufacturer per se-they're apparently considered by Wilson to be a lifetime replacement part: http://shopwilsoncombat.com/Wilson-Combat-Trigger-Return-Spring-Chrome-Silicon-Beretta-90-Series/productinfo/750/

The good news is that there really doesn't appear to be a bad decision regarding this component today. If you have an older 92, though, I strongly counsel replacing the OEM with one of the newer trigggger-return springs, be it Beretta, Wolff TCU or Wilson. I believe the new OEM came about from Beretta some 10 years ago-I'd call Beretta to verify. As Willard mentioned, if your 92 has the polymer-coated trigger, you'll need to replace it with the all-steel one; Beretta has a nifty little replacement kit which provides a steel trigger, D spring, and the trigger return spring:http://www.berettausa.com/en-us/beretta-92-96-steel-trigger-spring-trigger-and-d-hammer-spring/e00691/

This kit also might be advisable for older 92s, if only to have on hand:http://www.berettausa.com/en-us/beretta-92-96-locking-block-kit/le9201/

Best, Jon

[LockedBreech]

I like Wilson stuff generally but none of my futzing with Beretta triggers (with the exception of a D spring) has improved them more than just shooting a lot.

[TCinVA]

I like Wilson stuff generally but none of my futzing with Beretta triggers (with the exception of a D spring) has improved them more than just shooting a lot.

Smoothing all the relevant parts with some emory cloth or a stone yields significant benefits in the smoothness of the trigger pull.

[LockedBreech]

Smoothing all the relevant parts with some emory cloth or a stone yields significant benefits in the smoothness of the trigger pull.

Never tried this! I'll do so. I wonder if the 1982 92S would benefit more. The 2013 92FS is pretty broken in and smooth, but the 92S is still painfully stiff in every regard (trigger, safety, action, everything though function is good.

[Edwin]

I've got a Wilson Chrome Silicon TRS in my 92 for almost two years now with a crap ton of dry and live fire. I wonder how much more it'll go.

[jeep45238]

Never tried this! I'll do so. I wonder if the 1982 92S would benefit more. The 2013 92FS is pretty broken in and smooth, but the 92S is still painfully stiff in every regard (trigger, safety, action, everything though function is good.



Check out the gunsmithing section

[JonInWA]

I've got a Wilson Chrome Silicon TRS in my 92 for almost two years now with a crap ton of dry and live fire. I wonder how much more it'll go.

Well, they guarantee it against breakage, and apparently feel it's a lifetime part; it's part of their Bulletproof component line. But they also feel pretty positive in their advertising blurb for the TCU that they also market.

It's probably just a matter of taste/preference between the two, but the TCU's price is 4 times more expensive than the Wilson chrome silicon lever spring-$20 vs $5. While I'm exceptionally pleased with the TCU, perhaps I'll get the $5 Wilson chrome silicon lever as an inexpensive (and probably unnecessary) back-up to protect against Mr. Murphy....

Best, Jon

[TCinVA]

Never tried this! I'll do so. I wonder if the 1982 92S would benefit more. The 2013 92FS is pretty broken in and smooth, but the 92S is still painfully stiff in every regard (trigger, safety, action, everything though function is good.

My 1992 vintage Italian manufactured 92FS has the typically heavy trigger pull because it is using the absurdly strong springs Beretta has to use to meet military primer-busting requirements. But the pull itself is smooth. Heavy, but smooth.

The trigger pull on my Wilson Brig Tac, in contrast, is much lighter...but also rougher.

I suspect that the small parts on the 1992 pistol had the benefit of being placed into some sort of vibrating tumbler that perhaps the Brig Tac's relevant parts (hammer, hammer strut) did not.

I would much rather have smooth and heavy than lighter and rougher as I find it's much easier to anticipate with the rougher trigger than the smoother one.

My beef with some of the TCU's I've used (all of mine were bought many years ago) is that a couple of them introduce roughness into the trigger pull that isn't there with the factory style spring. The TCUs Wilson sells appear to be better made than the original Wolff units I bought some time ago, but even so I think the factory style spring is a bit smoother in my guns.

[Joe in PNG]

My used Berettas already have the Wilson TRS, and the 'new' has the factory improved spring.

[Joe in PNG]

I just realized I should have made this a "Do you modify your pizza gun" thread with poll.