Beretta's mammoth new service pistol contract

General Firearms Handguns - Semi Auto
1

OK, I’m sure everyone else has heard about this, but in the edition of American Rifleman (p. 24) that arrived today, they have an article about Beretta’s new service pistol contract with the US Army, which was revealed during the SHOT show. The contract is to provide up to 450,000 (yes, 450 THOUSAND) new 92FS pistols to US military customers worldwide. The article claims “it is the biggest handgun contract from the US government since the one awarded to Colt during WW II.” Apparently the first customer is the Iraqi military, which will get 20,000 units.

I have a few comments and questions about the implications of this contract.

  • Obviously, this locks in Beretta’s position pretty well as a major pistol manufacturer for years to come.

  • More interesting, is the fact that this also means we can assume that the 9mm pistol–and of course the 9mm caliber–are going to remain in use with the US military for many years to come. Which means we’ll not be going back to the .45, the .40, or anything else in the foreseeable future. I guess that isn’t really a new point, but this pistol contract has REALLY solidified this point. Beretta fans should be delighted, and so should 9mm fans.

  • Question: Why do you think the military just locked in Beretta, without even having any updated trials with other brands, nor did they check out other calibers? I know about the aborted JCP trials, but I’m surprised how they went about this. I have nothing against the M9, but just am curious why they wouldn’t have checked out some alternatives.

  • Question: Why do you think they stuck with 9mm, even though there are lots of complaints among the troops (see the 2006 survey of the troops) about the ineffectiveness of 9mm FMJ ammo (which is pretty much what they are going to be stuck using)? I personally love 9mm, but am surprised that, since they are limited to using ball ammo, they didn’t want to listen to the troops and consider going with a larger caliber.

2

I wonder what this will do to the price of magazines?

I have a Beretta that I never shoot. Yet, I keep finding myself wanting to buy more mags for it. It was the first gun that I ever bought, so I can’t even think of selling it.

3

While I personally think there are slightly better 9mm combat handguns available, I think the Beretta is an excellent handgun. However, if we are stuck with FMJ, we should go to .45, IMHO. The real solution is adopt JHP 9mm and ignore whatever stupid agreement that supposedly says we can’t used hollow-points. Hell, we ignored the ABM treaty, why not this?

4

I shoot mine from time to time. It was also my first gun. I’ve had about 7,500 rounds through it (it was my only handgun for the longest time.) I can count on one hand all the issues I’ve had with it. All were ammunition related. In any case Beretta magazines aren’t getting any cheaper. Stores seem to be jacking the prices up on them. Beretta’s site has the best prices on them, but they are rarely available. I’ve been trying to find new mags as of late because I was refreshing mine. Most of mine are very old at this point. All of my Beretta 92FS factory 15 round mags were purchased used during the AWB and all have served me well. Being that they are used I have no clue how many rounds they’ve all got through them. Back in the day I bought after market mags which was a mistake. They never really gave me any issues but I never fully trusted them. A couple years ago the springs basically turned to shit even though I used them less than the factory mags.

Since my Beretta was purchased during the AWB it came with two 10 round magazines and I just used those mags at the range. Well after the spring broke in one of my Beretta brand 15 rounders I put the spring and follower from the 10 rounder in it so I had 3 15 rounders and 1 10 rounder. I’ve also got off brand 20 and 30 round mags but I rarely use them. They were cheap gun show purchases from about a decade ago. I just use them at the range. They never gave me issues either. At any rate I went looking for 92FS magazines and I couldn’t find any, anywhere.Finally I stumbled on two a pair of PVD coated sand resistant 92FS/M9A1 magazines which I’ve also seen included in later model Vertec pistols. I grabbed them but they were expensive as hell. Come to find out that the 90-Two magazines work in the 92FS and as a result I’ve been buying those since they hold 17 rounds instead of 15 rounds. I also prefer the slightly thicker base pad on them. The finish also makes for a more “slick” reloading experience. You can also now get Beretta 90-Two sand resistant PVD magazines which cost only about $2.00 more than the standard mags.

The pricing of Beretta brand magazines is actually typically the lowest from Beretta directly. (Not always, but usually. ) Basically the pricing of mags according to Beretta works out like this:

92FS 15 round magazine=$30.95

Beretta 92/M9A1 Sand Resistant PVD voated magazines=$44.95

Beretta 90-Two 17 round magazines=$34.95

Beretta 90-Two PVD coated sand resistant magazine=$36.95

Or at gun shows I’ve seen the USGI Checkmate magazines for $10 each. They are out right crap, which is probably part of the main reason why many in the military feel the Beretta is a terrible weapon. The US Military doesn’t want to spend the money on Beretta brand mags, so they buy aftermarket mags. Previously they used Mec-Gar mags, then switched to Checkmate which was worse. Now they are using another supplier. Anyway many of the Checkmate mags were never issued and the military sold them off. So USGI Checkmate M9 mags are easy to come by. Probably ok for range use but not much else.

5

The survey of the troops is what seems to be the most important to me. If their experience leads them to think that there is a better option then they should have it. Why let politicians decide what handgun they can use?

6

Without a doubt there are better handguns out there in 9mm. As always though it comes down to cost and a variety of other factors. The military probably doesn’t want to spend the money to do what they believe is required testing to adopt a new handgun feeling the M9 is good enough for now. As for being stuck with FMJ, we aren’t. The military makes that decision. For whatever reason they just refuse to issue JHP ammunition. Cost, feeding issues in some weapons, or whatever may factor into it. JHP ammunition is only restricted by the Hague convention which the US never signed. There are no restrictions on JHP ammunition in any agreement the US has signed with anyone. (If I am wrong on this, feel free to correct me.)

7

That was a heck of a response. Thanks for the information. I’ve been looking everywhere, but on Beretta’s own site for the mags. An order is forthcoming, before there is a rush. As a purist, I think I’ll go with the standard 15 round mags.

I appreciate the time you took to write all that up.

8

No problem, glad I could help. Just so you know, the 17 round 90-Two magazines do work in the 92FS. I’ve tried them. They are real Beretta magazines and not aftermarket junk. They just have a new follower design and a different base plate design which gives them their added capacity. (I personally have found the 90-Two mags to be superior. They don’t scratch as easily as the standard 15 round 92FS mags do.)

9

I’ve had good luck over the last couple years with the MDS mags.

http://www.cdnninvestments.com/be92f9mm15it.html

$18.99

I usually stick to factory mags aside from a few Mec-Gar’s and the MDS mags for the 92.

If im not mistaken they’re the OEM for Beretta mags.

10

They are rumored to be the OEM for Beretta’s magazines but the design of Mec-Gar branded magazines is very different than the OEM Beretta mags. The quality is like night and day. The follower is different as is the mag body. The springs on the Mec-Gar’s are also spongy and soft. (Comparatively.) Beretta actually endorses MDS magazines (even selling them on their web page) and they seem to be the best low cost alternative but for my money I’d rather have Beretta brand mags.

11

Mec-Gar and MDS are two different manufacturers no?

The only Mec-Gar i own are for a P95.I only bought it as a favor to a friend needing cash.I wasnt about to spend the money on the factory Ruger mags for a pistol i dont have much interest in.So i havent used them much at all.

I havent really noticed a difference between the MDS mags and my factory Beretta mags…although i havent inspected them closely side by side.

I’ve yet to have an issue of any kind with my 92 MDS mags though.

12

The DOD on behalf of the U.S. military or other foreign militaries/governments can now purchase up to 450,000 M9s. There is no guarantee they’ll buy that many. If the Pentagon decides to switch to .45 next year, purchase of M9’s (at least for US end-users) will dry up instantly.

But there’s no question that this is a very good thing for Beretta.

13

Correct. MDS is owned by Beretta. They make Beretta marked mags and MDS marked mags. They are the same except markings and the MDS mags still use the older metal baseplates.

14

I’m not an industry insider or an expert on the inner workings of the DOD procurement process…but here’s my 2 cents:

It seems to me like the DOD is moving to stick with the status quo in small arms for the next 5-10 years or longer. Development and adoption of new weapon systems is expensive and laborious, and there’s no sex appeal for going through that for small arms. Nobody has ever gotten a star for work on a pistol program…

  • More interesting, is the fact that this also means we can assume that the 9mm pistol–and of course the 9mm caliber–are going to remain in use with the US military for many years to come. Which means we’ll not be going back to the .45, the .40, or anything else in the foreseeable future. I guess that isn’t really a new point, but this pistol contract has REALLY solidified this point. Beretta fans should be delighted, and so should 9mm fans.

Frankly I never expected the military to adopt any other caliber. It’s the same with 5.56.

  • Question: Why do you think the military just locked in Beretta, without even having any updated trials with other brands, nor did they check out other calibers?

Because a new pistol would mean a new RFTS, a new trial process, a new batch of lawsuits where X company complains that the testing process wasn’t fair because their gun didn’t do well in the tests, the announcement of a winner, a bunch more lawsuits from makers alleging that the testing was rigged or done improperly because their gun didn’t win, going through the gauntlet of congressional pressure to re-evaluate the product from x company that is located in their district, the final adoption of the pistol, crafting the details of the contract and of the production of the weapon, working through all the teething problems that will result from changes to the original design mandated by the military bureaucracy, creating a new training program for armorers and for troops who will be issued the new weapon…

You know…all that jazz.

OR the military could just call up Beretta and order more M9’s. It’s much less expensive in terms of money and man power to buy more of the same than to adopt a new weapon. That doesn’t mean it’s the BEST decision…but sometimes it’s the best you can do.

I know about the aborted JCP trials, but I’m surprised how they went about this. I have nothing against the M9, but just am curious why they wouldn’t have checked out some alternatives.

My personal belief is that there is absolutely zero appetite for the replacement of major small arms systems (M16 family, M9 family) in the higher echelons of the DOD.

Again, I’m not military and I’m not an expert on the inner workings of the legendary DOD bureaucracy, but that’s my hypothesis.

  • Question: Why do you think they stuck with 9mm, even though there are lots of complaints among the troops (see the 2006 survey of the troops) about the ineffectiveness of 9mm FMJ ammo (which is pretty much what they are going to be stuck using)? I personally love 9mm, but am surprised that, since they are limited to using ball ammo, they didn’t want to listen to the troops and consider going with a larger caliber.

9mm is the NATO standard, it’s been the NATO standard for years and will probably be the NATO standard until we are all dead and buried. The military as a whole won’t be moving away from the 9mm for the foreseeable future because of many factors, including cost, logistics, and the fact that the pistol isn’t really a weapon of primary importance in much of the military. 9mm is “good enough”.

15

To a smaller extent, Beretta is also selling the M9A1 to the Marines. There don’t appear to be huge numbers involved, though.

16

I hadn’t heard this before, but good to know. I’ve always heard the OEM mags were Mec-Gar, but never saw any proof of it or any real sources stating this was the case.

17

Couple of thoughts…

Why stick with the Beretta and 9mm? probably the same reason we stuck with the '06, and the M1 into the 50’s…we had them.

Signatory or not, we have continued to abide by the Hague accords, or whatever they are, not for reliability reasons, monetary reasons, etc. Its not the military decision, its law/political/ whatever…

Troop surveys, while much can be gleaned from them, they have to be put in perspective. Who is actually answering the questions, and how much experience do they really have? etc. How many of them are just repeating old wives tails, myths, and other war stories? As one squad leader I know said, “I’ve got troops that wish they could take 2 gold plated Desert Eagles to combat, doesn’t mean it right”
Also remember, we tend to latch onto that witch supports out point. Many surveys have found that “Joe” is quite happy with the M4 and 5.56, but that gets conveniently ignored.

Checkmate mags, get a bum rap…they produced a magazine as they were told to, and from my understanding it only gave any trouble in the sand. When the problem was discovered, it was corrected, and the new ones are fine. I bought a couple of the old style ones for 10 bucks, and may buy a few more, I can always smooth the inside of the tube and put a new spring in it. Remember they are OEM for a few gun companies, and GI M14 mags.
The govt doesn’t buy cheapest, it buys best value, or cheapest that meets the standard.

A very good friend of mine, who hopefully will chime in here, was a Co. 1Sgt when a private company, comprised mainly of former SOF types, was brought into to do weapons training, including the M9. his description of the M9 demonstration, and how it changed many minds about the gun, is comical and classic.

In the end, are better weapons and calibres available, for sure, but its what we got, and a little bit of training goes along way.

As Rumsfeld said, and he got unfairly hammered for it, you go to war with the Army you have, not the one you wish you had.

Bob

18

I also believe MecGar used to be OEM for Beretta, but they haven’t been for years. They still make good mags but Beretta and MDS are the best.

19

I’ve never tried the MDS magazines, only Beretta factory mags and Pro Mags. The Pro Mags are junk and the factory Beretta mags are excellent. They’ve all lasted for thousands of rounds and several years.

20

I’ve used CheckMates in the past both in the ARMY and as a civi and never had a problem. Doesn’t mean they suck in desert conditions though. The newer ones with the greenish/grey teflon finish were MUCH nicer. They came with a stronger spring and follower made of different material I was told. The new Airtronics (?) mags seem to work fine too.

I think I remember seeing a post by your 1Sgt. friend. That was a good read on the M9…if its the one I’m remembering correctly.