Yeah, I was going to say, I think I waited about 2-3 months for my last MBT-2S. Their 30mm CAN mount was backordered for even longer, ultimately just bought one from a different OEMOriginally Posted by mmc45414
Yeah, I was going to say, I think I waited about 2-3 months for my last MBT-2S. Their 30mm CAN mount was backordered for even longer, ultimately just bought one from a different OEM
Thank you for clarifying that point.
It does not surprise me as Beretta's marketing research should show that there is demand for "M9", "Lethal Weapon", and "Die Hard" pistols. The people on this website, who use 92G guns, are probably a small fraction of 92-series ownership. A lot of people are interested in DoD service weapons and those weapons used by childhood movie heroes. And I am not immune. I bought the Langdon M9 partially because it is a M9, not a 92FS. My user Berettas are Elite LTT models, but I prize my Langdon M9 for being an M9 made in Tennessee.
As for the OP's complaint, my experience with LTT has been nothing short of excellent. Aimee Langdon has done anything she could to meet my requests, including arranging to swap hammers on an order. No company, firearms or otherwise, has provided me with better service than LTT.
That would be a reasonable explanation, but 1. I guess superficial differences like "having a useable front sight" wouldn't detract from the nostalgia factor in my eyes, and 2. S&W is still selling revolvers with that stupid frame lock, so I am not convinced that nostalgia (or really, the preferences of the gun buying public) are THAT much of a consideration for an OEM like Beretta
Beretta had made a huge push towards the 92X guns as "the" 92, which are pretty darn close to the base of "what we want", and they were flowing pretty good at really decent prices prior to the world blowing up last year.
They are definitely slow to move, but had some good momentum going in recent years. I think their strong tether to the hive mind in Italy made them even more hard hit by Covid than some other manufacturers.
--Josh
“Formerly we suffered from crimes; now we suffer from laws.” - Tacitus.
I'll second the thought of @farscott. I've ordered several things from LTT, and had occasion to both email and talk with Aimee and Ernest. They could not have been nicer or more helpful.
Plus, I've also attended a couple of classes taught by Ernest: similarly first class. He not only knew his "subject matter", but he paid attention to the individuals, and offered suggestions when needed.
My thought, right or wrong, is the market for Beretta handguns is not monolithic, and Beretta is attempting to both fill the market niches and use existing tooling. History has shown that U.S. service weapons, once made obsolete, are extremely popular for both original and commemorative models. There are also buyers who want a Beretta and never plan on changing sights due to either cost concerns or a feeling that the existing fixed sights are sufficient.That would be a reasonable explanation, but 1. I guess superficial differences like "having a useable front sight" wouldn't detract from the nostalgia factor in my eyes, and 2. S&W is still selling revolvers with that stupid frame lock, so I am not convinced that nostalgia (or really, the preferences of the gun buying public) are THAT much of a consideration for an OEM like Beretta
The portion of the buyers who purchase for nostalgia are all about fidelity to the original service weapon to the point of swapping hammers without DoD markings for the same hammer with the markings. M9 guns proven to not be M9 commercial guns sell at huge premiums to the commercial samples.
The M9 and M9A1 are the only two models.
Between all the ones listed here (https://www.beretta.com/en-us/90-series/) plus the additional Wilson and LTT models, they are producing nearly 30 variations.
Does it take more tooling? I mean it already exists, so who cares. But they could probably pare down that lineup a little without losing any customers. Supplying the demand may be easier that way, but what do I know, I'm not a manufacturing supply line management specialist.
Gaming will get you killed in the streets. Dueling will get you killed in the fields.
-Alexander Hamilton
I ordered one in for a buddy, who is just a casual shooter, and we haven't installed it for him yet. When my most recent one went on backorder I asked him if I could borrow his, and he was cool with it, not really sure he knows what he agreed to...
I think anything Italian is screwed up, I think just now there are starting to be such a thing as a 1301 in stock.
It's been alluded to here and elsewhere, but I think the deal with the S&W lock is that a dude named Bob Scott, a former VP at S&W, owned a little company in Scottsdale, AZ that made and sold (though not a lot of them) locks. The company is called SAF-T-HAMMER. They bought S&W in 2001 post-Clinton/HUD when shares were like a nickel each, and I would not at all be surprised to learn they get a quarter for every lock sold with their intellectual property.That would be a reasonable explanation, but 1. I guess superficial differences like "having a useable front sight" wouldn't detract from the nostalgia factor in my eyes, and 2. S&W is still selling revolvers with that stupid frame lock, so I am not convinced that nostalgia (or really, the preferences of the gun buying public) are THAT much of a consideration for an OEM like Beretta
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/d...e10qsb.htm#008
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-...629-story.html
When they acquired S&W in 2001 they were not a huge company. According to their SEC filing the 4 month period in April 2001 they had a total revenue of $23,368. Not exactly a megacorp. Their acquisition of S&W to the tune of something like $5 million, most of which was a loan, was cheap but way way beyond what they were making as a lock company.
Screw dividends. Imagine having a successful company turned around from the brink of bankruptcy that pays you royalties for most of the guns they sell. They know the locks aren't popular, but I'm betting they're damn sure profitable to the dude that owns the lock intellectual property.
Reply With Quote
