Friend is selling a mint unfired 1986 Beretta 92F for $750. The only difference between the F and FS as far as I know is the lack of an oversized hammer pin to catch the back half of the slide should the slide break in half. Is there anything else that’s different? Should I be concerned about the F lacking the slide retention pin? Would Berettas of that era be better quality than current specimens?
I wouldn’t worry about the lack of the slide safety. I wouldn’t consider them to be of any better quality either (less actually as it would the lack the newer locking blocks). $750 seems too much to me as you should be able to get a nice 92FS for quite a bit less.Originally Posted by Dcowboyscr
Do you want it as a shooter or collector? If a shooter, you can get a decent shooter for less. As a collector, bring unfired, that might bring a premium to the right buyer.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It’s subjective… but… the fit and finish on my 1989 92F feels/seems (is?) slightly better than what I experienced on the 2015 vintage 92 I had. Not that the latter was bad, at all. But the F feels just a bit better put together. You get all metal parts, too—the newer 92s have plastic triggers, guide rods and levers.
The thing I really hate about the newer Italian 92s is all the warning copy and serial numbers festooned all over the slides.
You’ll get none of that with the F. But you also won’t get the radiused backstrap (which is a nice feature) or the most up to date locking block, as Suvorov said. But unless you’re gonna pile rounds through it… I’m sure it’s fine.
To me, the F feels more special. But all 92s are good guns, in my experience. I paid $800 for my F, also unfired.
Last edited by MattyD380; 03-08-2023 at 09:38 PM.
For astute purveyors of pew: hipstertactical.com
I do agree that as a collector piece it might be worth it, but if you want a shooter there are better options.
Also I would always put a $50+ premium on a “paperless” gun.
It would be a shooter
I shoot mine. It shoots damn good, too.
For astute purveyors of pew: hipstertactical.com
For a shooter I'd get a 92X or 92A1 for that price. A lot of practical improvements.
I have owned and deeply loved older Berettas though, so I really think if it's worth $750 to you to have the John McClane gun, that wouldn't be a letdown either.
State Government Attorney | Beretta, Glock, CZ & S&W Fan
Beretta has redesigned the locking block several times, in an effort to increase life. That early a 92 is going to have the first type, which has the greatest/quickest incidence of wing cracking, then breaking.
https://berettaforum.net/vb/showpost...3&postcount=18
For virtually all purposes, I much prefer the "G" version, which has a decoder, but no safety.
Arms Unlimited is selling 92s for $510. Comes with three 10 round magazines, which is a boon if you're behind enemy lines and not worthless even if you aren't.
https://armsunlimited.com/beretta-92...to-9mm-pistol/
Reply With Quote