Questions answered
Tam posts a critique of the Beretta and its seemingly flawed machining. Gets a response from Beretta noting that, no, it’s not a flaw but a stress relief.
5 Responses to “Questions answered”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
August 20th, 2012 at 9:59 pm
It’s not a bug…it’s a feature.
August 20th, 2012 at 11:04 pm
The Blog-Fu is strong in this one.
August 21st, 2012 at 2:01 pm
It is a feature.
You avoid making angled cuts into a frame to avoid creating places for stress cracks to start.
This is why some 1911 smiths will cut a slot all the way down from the top for the slide release, and radius the corners in it.
Fail here was the sight maker for not making the sight properly fit the frame in question.
August 21st, 2012 at 2:01 pm
Sorry: “slide in question”
August 22nd, 2012 at 12:48 pm
Beretta is not a bunch of punters. As a machinist, I marvel at the number of ops that go into a single 92 frame, any one of which can have chatter or tool breakage that would cause it to be scrapped. Sharp corners on high stress parts are a surefire way to develop hairline cracks, and it makes sense that they would put a relief cut in to prevent that from happening, but it does seem like an oversight that they didn’t use a larger sight base.