Most Durable/Longest Lasting 9mm Handguns

[Guest Lester Weevils]

I'm not knocking Taurus in general, but back in the 90's I had a PT 92, and shot it a good bit. Problem was, I broke the locking block completely 3 times. Taurus, under warranty, promptly replaced it. I couldn't trust my life to it.

 

I've not yet broke a locking block on 92FS but am not denying that it occasionally happens. Are taurus 92 locking blocks 100 percent drop-in compatible with beretta 92 locking blocks? One would assume that the internal dimensions of the rails and other stuff surrounding the locking block ought not to have drifted too far away from the beretta specs, since taurus bought the s. american beretta machinery? Dunno, and everybody knows what assuming does to a person. Just wondering, if it is generally true that taurus is slightly more likely to eat locking blocks, whether that would be the result of changed design or dimensions, or maybe SOME taurus locking blocks were made of less durable metal then beretta locking blocks? Idle curiosity.

 

I'd have to disagree there. I've broken two locking blocks myself and have seen at least a dozen more break. Granted, they were being abused with thousands of rounds at a time, but that seems to be the failure point in the design.

 

Am not "defending" the 92 design as most reliable ever, just pondering the odds-- Granted if a 92 ate a locking block in the heat of battle it could make a very bad day. OTOH it is pretty simple to repair, unless maybe sometimes it chews up the gun in the process?

 

Are there many instances of a beretta 92 eating new locking blocks, or is it "almost always" elderly locking blocks? Beretta does recommend changing out the locking block as routine maintenance (7500 rds?, 10,000 rds maybe?), along with certain springs. Even the most reliable car will leave you on the side of the road if you don't do recommended maintenance. My old G10 chevy van was incredibly reliable, never left me on the side of the road and I hardly ever did recommended maintenance, but one thing about it was weak wheel bearings. Hardly anything broke on that hunk of junk after a decade of criminal abuse and neglect, but every wheel bearing on the thang had to be replaced at least once. Maybe the locking block issue would be like calling my old G10 van unreliable because the wheel bearings were crap? :)

 

Statistical ponderings, in the case of "bet yer life" on a defense or war gun-- Assume that ALL locking blocks will fail with flat odds of failure sometime in the first 10,000 rds-- Failure would be equally likely on the first firing or the last firing out of 10,000-- So you would have 1 in 10,000 odds of the gun not going bang ON THE SECOND SHOT of a self-defense encounter. It would go bang the first time, but not the second time because the locking block broke. So except in the heat of a war battle or defending against a horde of zombie hells angels on pcp, if the first shot was aimed well you MIGHT not be SOL even if it don't go bang the second time?

 

But more realistically, I bet there are locking blocks that have lived thru tens of thousands rounds. One of them might be in one of my 92's. :) Wonder if a steady diet of strong NATO ball wears out locking blocks quicker?

 

If the failure incidence happens to be a bell curve with a mean somewhere in the ballpark of 15,000 or greater rounds-- If you take a random sample of 100 new 92FS, and you keep shooting them until the locking block has broke on 50 of the guns. Whatever the round count had risen to after half the locking blocks have broken is the center of the bell curve. I'm gonna make a wild guess that more than half of the pistols would still be working after 20,000 or even 30,000 rounds. Maybe a lot more than that but perhaps I'm being wildly optimistic.

 

Just sayin, if this is the kind of failure mode that follows a bell curve, then if the mean is 20,000 rounds, then the odds of breaking the locking block rise with each shot. At 20,000 rounds you would have 50-50 odds of the locking block having failed, but the math would be trickier to figure the odds of failure ON THE 20,000th shot. The per-shot odds would still be rather low even at 20,000, assuming the gun ain't broke already before you got to 20,000.

 

But if it follows a bell curve, then if you ALWAYS change the locking block down about 3 or 4 standard deviations below the average failure count, the per-shot odds of failure ought to be microscopically small?

 

edit-- On my browser this message appears in bold but I didn't set it bold, and can't figure out how to turn off the bold. Tried toggling bold on/off and setting the font to arial, but that didn't change anything. Just didn't want folk to think I'm "shouting". :)

Edited December 23, 2012 by Lester Weevils

[Guest carter]

id say a 5906 with fixed sights...wish i had never sold mine :(

[Jamie Jackson]

Good points Lester Weevils Sir.

 

 

My personal experience with [b][i]my[/i][/b] PT 92 may well have been a metallurgy issue for the material being used, at that particular time. But it was enough for me to view that particular make and model with caution.

 

I have a little J-frame model 85 Taurus purchased in 1987 that has been a gem. It has a very nice blue finish, a decent stock trigger, and is very reliable…but it’s my wife’s gun and hasn’t seen a tremendous amount of rounds put through it.

 

Maybe the metallurgical issues have been resolved with current or recent production Taurus handguns. I hope so.

 

I agree that with proper maintenance and parts replacement at scheduled intervals will (or at least should) increase reliability and longevity.

 

My personal criteria for a carry gun is that it has proven itself, to [b]me[/b], to demonstrate that reliability under adverse training conditions and less than optimal maintenance.

 

[b]And[/b] [u]all[/u] things mechanical break, and[i]Thanks to Murphy[/i], at the worst possible moment.

 

That’s why I carry two guns. :cool:

 

 

 

An aside: I've noticed the bold typing in a number of threads and seen comments regarding it... ?

[personDJ]

Glock or Glock or maybe a Glock.

[TMF]

[quote name="Lester Weevils" post="867200" timestamp="1356295564"][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]Are there many instances of a beretta 92 eating new locking blocks, or is it "almost always" elderly locking blocks? Beretta does recommend changing out the locking block as routine maintenance (7500 rds?, 10,000 rds maybe?), along with certain springs. Even the most reliable car will leave you on the side of the road if you don't do recommended maintenance. My old G10 chevy van was incredibly reliable, never left me on the side of the road and I hardly ever did recommended maintenance, but one thing about it was weak wheel bearings. Hardly anything broke on that hunk of junk after a decade of criminal abuse and neglect, but every wheel bearing on the thang had to be replaced at least once. Maybe the locking block issue would be like calling my old G10 van unreliable because the wheel bearings were crap? :)[/quote] I haven't seen a newly replaced one break, but I've seen at least one break with less than 10,000 rds through it. I think it is more to do the type of use rather than the amount, or at least more in regard to the former. I usually seizes the gun up, but is a pretty easy fix and doesn't seem to damage the gun in any way. Other than that it is a great design. Perhaps the locking block just needs to be made from better material.

[Mike]

How come you hardly see people recommend the XD for situations like this?

I have seen many of these guns fail during classes. They don't begin to keep up with glock or an m&p.

Mike

[Guest hi im drummer03]

Glock and H&K are both extremely reliable.You wont have a problem with either one. I agree above with the feel and quality of the 1911 is hard to be matched. Although at the end of the day the H&K is 900 where a Glock is mid 500.The craftsmanship and overall quality of the H&K is superior.Behind those i would say S&W M&P or Spring Field XD.I feel in most cases the Springfield XDM is a great median and great gun for the money between the H&K and Glock.

Edited December 24, 2012 by hi im drummer03

[Guest DarylDixon]

<blockquote class='ipsBlockquote'data-author="Mike" data-cid="867914" data-time="1356379439"><p>
I have seen many of these guns fail during classes. They don't begin to keep up with glock or an m&p.<br />
<br />
Mike</p></blockquote>

I wonder how many of those failures were due to user error. When you rack the slide on an XD, you have to do it gingerly. If you do it sheepishly as many rookies would do, you can have a double feed easily. Once you know that the gun likes to be handled, you shouldn't have problems. I have 3 and they all function very well. I would trust my life to them.

[glock55]

GLOCK gets my vote for the following reasons: 1) They just dont break if used as designed

                                                                             2) should it break anyone can fix in 10 minutes

                                                                             3) parts are availabe and cheap

                                                                                    a- 3 pin kit 7.00

                                                                                    b- slide stop lever 7.00

                                                                                    c- recoil spring 7.50

                                                                                    d- trigger spring 2.00

                                                                                                               23.50 total

if you have a problem with a glock it will likely involve one of these parts. all are easily tested and replaced. i keep 1 of each in my tool box in the unlikely event its needed. however i do regular maintance and inspection on my guns and have never had an issue. i know anything mechanical can fail but if i were going into harms way i would want my glock.

[Mike]

<blockquote class='ipsBlockquote'data-author="Mike" data-cid="867914" data-time="1356379439"><p>
I have seen many of these guns fail during classes. They don't begin to keep up with glock or an m&p.<br />
<br />
Mike</p></blockquote>
I wonder how many of those failures were due to user error. When you rack the slide on an XD, you have to do it gingerly. If you do it sheepishly as many rookies would do, you can have a double feed easily. Once you know that the gun likes to be handled, you shouldn't have problems. I have 3 and they all function very well. I would trust my life to them.

These guns were broken, as in had to be sent back to Springfield to be repaired, broken. Broken trigger bars, broken roll pins, roll pins MIA, and broken extractors.

Mike

[Will H]

I'd have to disagree there. I've broken two locking blocks myself and have seen at least a dozen more break. Granted, they were being abused with thousands of rounds at a time, but that seems to be the failure point in the design.

Mine fired 32,000 rounds with the original locking block and never had a single issue.  As with anything else results will vary.

 

For Semi Autos I would stick with Beretta, Glock, or XD.

 

Then again if you are looking for the highest reliability get a Ruger Revolver.  You can shoot them forever, then your kids can shoot them forever, then your grandkids can do it too.  Nothing from Glock, Beretta, Sig, etc. will even come close to the Ruger GP-100, Redhawk, or Blackhawk.  There are companies out there that rework Ruger's .357 magnums to also run 9mm from moon clips.

Edited December 25, 2012 by Will H

[Djay3]

"I'd like this pistol to have readily available magazines, holsters, (night) sights, etc. In other words, I'd like it to be a combat proven "standard" pistol."

The better selling polymers should fill these requirements i.e Glock. The classic Sigs and Beretta's not far behind.

A paraphrase of the old saw applies "I show my Custom 1911 to my friends; those threatening my safety would be shown my Glock".

Of course if one has high level, ingrained training with a specific firearm that fact likely trumps all other selection criteria.