They fit the full size only, not the Centurion.Originally Posted by MandoWookie
I have one which I have run on a M9A3 (D spring, 92X type frame) and a full size LTT.
I got light strikes with both pistols, and found I had to increase weight to 18lb hammer spring to get reliable ignition with Federal bulk 22lr.
With that heavy spring compared to the LTT stock spring or even a D spring the difference in trigger pull is considerable and really diminishes its value as a trainer.
Good to know. Any info on why it won't work on a Centurion? I thought the frame was the same as a full size, only the slide was different?
I am open to being corrected if I am wrong, but my understanding is the Centurion and Compact share the same slide rails and take the same slides. The full size has different slide rails that only fit its own slides. You probably could mash them together but they would wear out the slide rails or corresponding part in the slide.
This is correct. Plenty of people (myself included) have run Compact size uppers on fullsize frames, but it will wear out the frame faster.
I don’t recall much about my old Beretta .22lr conversion kit & have not seen the newer style yet, but my Ceiner kit will work with a Compact lower.
As stated by others, not recommended for use on the compact or centurion frames.
I’ve got one of the 22LR kits that I use on a regular full sized frame. The setup I use is a D spring with a standard hammer (so no elite 2 hammer or any of the newer ones). Mine works well enough for me as long as I keep it in mind that it is a rimfire and it’s not a G17. It helps a ton to wipe the crud off of it, give it fresh lube, stuff like that periodically.
I do get the occasional misfire, usually with cheap bulk pack ammo. For peak reliability I’ve found that something like CCI Mini-Mag should be used. Ultimately, it’s a trainer, so if there’s a malfunction or a misfire I just try to clear it and go on. I’ve gotten good value out of it.
Well, I've got the 92X Centurion, so I guess it's a moot point for me. Just seems strange that, as far as I can tell the Centurion frame is otherwise identical in size to a full size, just seems uneconomical to have different frame dimensions for a 1 inch difference in barrel length.
I don’t have a pic handy, but there are rails on the frame that the barrel travels back and forth on when the slide reciprocates. Those barrel rails on the frame are shorter on the compact and Centurion frames. That’s where the actual difference between a Cent and a Full sized frame. I’m assuming that it was necessary to do it that way, otherwise I can’t see why they would have had the different styles.
The centurian frames are slightly shorter. AT least the old ones are. Mine is a police trade-in I bought used maybe 12-15 yrs ago.
!cid__downsized_0513121641 by craig stuard, on Flickr
Hopefully, I am not out of line resurrecting this thread, but I am at that awkward stage where I think I may need to get a relatively front-heavy, full-size, double-stack DA/SA 9mm with a manual safety and weaponlight rail for nightstand/credenza use buy two people with varying degrees of experience. The full-size 92X seems - at least on paper - to be a contender.
Though you are moving to other platforms, how close did you feel that the 92X came to being a 5" 9mm 1911 analogue?
gn
"On the internet, nobody knows if you are a dog... or even a cat."
I found that my 92X-D balanced much more like a 5" 9mm 1911 after I installed a factory stainless steel guide-rod.
Reply With Quote