Beretta poor quality?

[Guest]

Hello all, this is my third thread in as many days.

I've just bought a new gun the other day, part exchanged a Beretta for a Browning. Anyway the thing I've noticed is whenever I've gone in the gunshop the consensus seems to be that the older 682 is FAR superior in terms of quality to the current offerings from Beretta.

Does this not bother anybody else?

Why would you buy beretta these days if you thought they were making sub standard guns?

I can't speak in terms of longevity but I've certainly noticed the older 682s feel much more solid and the current 686 looks rather **** next it.

Edited September 14, 2015 by Guest

[Guest]

Controversial stuff no?

[Underdog]

Not really, they always felt like a chair leg to me.

The only Beretta I did like was the muzzle loader but that had its barrels the wrong too!

[Dominicrobed]

love my beretta just build quality is the same as my browning. If you don't like the new ones don't buy one simples

[norfolk dumpling]

Can't fault my SP 20g. 7 yrs old and hasn't missed a beat. I suspect it is Browning owners who make such comments.

[fruity]

Purchased two new berettas last year , had some fairly big issues with both , and the one has only just come back from yet more warranty work, were you experience repeatedly poor overhaul service from gmk.

 

Would I sell them, NO way I love berettas and would buy another tomorrow :)

Bostonmic will be along soon to say there perfect everythime and never go wrong to put your mind at rest lol :)

[welshwarrior]

Difficult question yes Berretta have had QC issues with some gun but in the grand scheme of thing with very few.

 

Now you not comparing apple with Apple a 686 and a 682 the 682 should be better. Compare a new 682 to a new 686 the 682 is a higher model.

 

But compare an old 682 to a new 682. You'll probable notice the wood is better on the older gun (annoying but we want different grades)

 

the action is wider on the older gun, a design choice was made to narrow and lighten the action, someone thought it was a good idea.

 

Modern gun has blacked barrels older normally have a ceramic paint finish (often replaced by blacking) so new guns win on that one.

 

Lazer chequering choice of taste I prefer hand cut on the older gun but know people who prefer the ovals.

 

Engraved over plainish sliver action again question of taste.

 

I still prefer my orginal sliver action beretta 682s to a modern 682 or any 686.

[Charlie_79]

My beretta a302 is built very well cycles anything I put through it and nothing seems to show any real signs of wear and it's getting fairly old now

[Hamster]

Hello all, this is my third thread in as many days.

I've just bought a new gun the other day, part exchanged a Beretta for a Browning. Anyway the thing I've noticed is whenever I've gone in the gunshop the consensus seems to be that the older 682 is FAR superior in terms of quality to the current offerings from Beretta.

 

 

People need something to knock so in the mid sector it's Beretta, Hatsan occupies the poverty segment and people who've never held a K80 longer than 10 seconds will emphatically tell you how awful the handling is , in short you'll find people who don't happen to shoot Beretta's well will tend to knock them, interestingly most can't shoot their own revered make for toffee either but that's a different story.

 

I've owned the old spec 682 which was bullet proof but as Welshwarrior says pointless comparing that to a 686, I've owned two 682e for ever too which have needed the usual (cheap) spares to keep them tight and proper, again bullet proof as neither has broken down, unlike stories one hears of Perazzi for instance.

 

Now anyone who says the 682/682e are FAR better than any current Beretta is simply foolish and unknowledgeable, the DT10/DT11 are superb guns although some have had teething problems, same as the 692, early ones had a poor showing and I am the first to admit for a company such as Beretta that is unforgivable but to pretend you can't get your hands on one that'll "out everything" a typical Browning will do is again, a bit silly.

 

I have owned Remingtons, Beretta auto's, Browning, Miroku, Laurona, Zoli and others besides, they're all good but will need time and expertise to get the best out of them. The Miroku and Brownings wear and go slack like you wouldn't believe, they're not immune from ejector, trigger and firing pin problems either and tightening them up is not as straightforward as your average Beretta oh and some rust for England if you don't oil them fastidiously, Beretta in contrast almost never do. Horses for courses, just don't pay too much attention to armchair gunsmiths.

Edited September 14, 2015 by Hamster

[bostonmick]

As some of you may realise I am quite partial to a beretta.I do also recognise that some have had some problems with them.mostly minor.I do not accept that the are any more prone to fail than any other brand taken on a pro rata basis they are by far the largest manufacturer so you would expect a higher number although this does not mean a higher percentage. I would also ask what are the qualifications of those calling into doubt the quality to actually make these statements.As the cnc machinery used by all makers these days work within tolerances that can never be achieved by hand and in such numbers.So 15or20 minutes in a gun shop you can tell the quality of an engineered product of which you can't actually see a lot of it.Another point I do smile at is when some compare a sp1 to say a 525 and how much better quality the browning is well sorry to burst your bubble but you ain't got a browning you have a Miroku rebadged nothing wrong with them a good usable gun at a reasonable price.You will have to pay around 7 or 8 times the cost of your 525 to have a real browning.However as has been said the shops are full of guns of many makes if you don't like one buy another.I can only speak as I find beretta have served me very well for many years as I am sure other makes have done for others.atb

[Scully]

I'm not a Beretta fan. The only exception to this is the DT10 and the old black-actioned and ported 682 Supersport, but even I can't knock their guns. They are immensely popular and for a reason.

I think the problems arose with the advent of the 692 and the quality of finish on some guns, especially the 692 around this period. I know two people who had reason to return their 692's after many months of waiting (possibly a rush through QC to meet demand partially to blame here?) due to some components being misaligned and another who owned a new 68 series gun due to the woodwork swelling and blooming after a day out in the rain.

Despite glitches such as these I don't think any of them could be described as poor quality.

[grrclark]

Don't people say a similar thing about a huge number of products? stuff isn't made the same way anymore, things never last like they used to etc.

 

I have 2 modern Beretta's, a modern Browning, a Guerini and an el cheapo Webley and Scott 20b. I have sold a couple of others too.

 

Other than the cheapo W&S that I knew full well what I was buying, but I wanted something cheap that I could cut the stock down for a kid to use on very rare occasions, all the guns have a level of engineering/manufacturing tolerance that is exceptional in a mass produced product.

 

To my eye the quality of the finishing on the wood of the Berettas is a bit poor, the finish on the Browning is a little bit better, but only a little, and the finish on the Guerini is excellent, but it was £2000 more expensive than the others.

 

The roll or laser engraving on the Silver Pigeons is a bit thin, but it is ok, the 725 action is dull, easily marked and looks trashy with the orange paint, the CG is lovely, but again more than twice the price of the others.

 

I have had the stocks off the Berettas and the Browning and to my eye the quality and standard of casting/machining on the trigger mechanisms are excellent.

I know that some of the newer Beretta models had some issues, especially with the top lever and extractors/ejectors on the 692, but I honestly think that so much of the gossip around newer Berettas being poor compared to the older ones is exactly that, gossip.

Edited September 14, 2015 by grrclark

[Savhmr]

I bought a new Silver Pigeon last year and quality wise, after inspecting the usual suspects when looking for a new gun, the Beretta was up with most other guns in the price range. Cerrtainly no worse, and better than some. Compared with my old Linclon, it is generally better but so it should be at twice the price. Things like the laser engraving do little for me, and the Lincoln if anything was better imho. The only niggle that I have is that sometimes, the ejectors dont eject properly. The Lincoln ejectors would have taken a bird out at 5 paces behind the gun!. The other diappointment was that spending £1500 on a gun, I would expect features like auto-safety and the Beretta doesn't have this. The wood is a nice quality piece of Walnut but poorly finished. I tend to re-finish all my own gunstocks so this isn't especially a problem.

 

On the positives, it uses quality Optibore barrels and chokes, the action is well made and the balance is near perfect for me along with the fit.

 

Comparing with some of my older guns, and with a few old stalwarts from Miroku, other than the obvious poor engraving quality, I can't see anything poor about the gun that would concern me and I agree with the above, that it's mostly gossip. Most owners of newer Silver Pigeons I talk to are delighted with them. I do think that they are a bit pricey for what they are though and that Browning and Bettinsoli probably offer better comparative value from new. I bought on fit and balance, not on value. True value or worth for me comes 20 years down the line when I'm still using a gun. Until then, nothing new represents especially good value.

Edited September 14, 2015 by Savhmr

[welshwarrior]

I bought a new Silver Pigeon last year and quality wise, after inspecting the usual suspects when looking for a new gun, the Beretta was up with most other guns in the price range. Cerrtainly no worse, and better than some. Compared with my old Linclon, it is generally better but so it should be at twice the price. Things like the laser engraving do little for me, and the Lincoln if anything was better imho. The only niggle that I have is that sometimes, the ejectors dont eject properly. The Lincoln ejectors would have taken a bird out at 5 paces behind the gun!. The other diappointment was that spending £1500 on a gun, I would expect features like auto-safety and the Beretta doesn't have this. The wood is a nice quality piece of Walnut but poorly finished. I tend to re-finish all my own gunstocks so this isn't especially a problem.

 

On the positives, it uses quality Optibore barrels and chokes, the action is well made and the balance is near perfect for me along with the fit.

 

Comparing with some of my older guns, and with a few old stalwarts from Miroku, other than the obvious poor engraving quality, I can't see anything poor about the gun that would concern me and I agree with the above, that it's mostly gossip. Most owners of newer Silver Pigeons I talk to are delighted with them. I do think that they are a bit pricey for what they are though and that Browning and Bettinsoli probably offer better comparative value from new. I bought on fit and balance, not on value. True value or worth for me comes 20 years down the line when I'm still using a gun. Until then, nothing new represents especially good value.

Auto safety is easily added and comes on the field but not sporter models.

[a303]

I have a 692 I bought new.

 

Only bother I've had in 4000 rounds is the stock getting marked in the rain which I'm putting down to the very poor stock finishing. It must have had only a single coat of oil at the factory.

[Savhmr]

Auto safety is easily added and comes on the field but not sporter models.

Yes, I understand that I can have it converted by a gunsmith easily enough but I shouldn't have to. I have the Sporter model.

[a303]

If a sporter came with an autosafe installed i think it would put a lot of potential purchasers off.

 

Browning 725 sporters come with the autosafe gubbins but it is a gunsmith fit.

[silver pigeon69]

Yes, I understand that I can have it converted by a gunsmith easily enough but I shouldn't have to. I have the Sporter model.

Im a bit lost? if you bought it new and wanted auto safety, why did you buy the sporter and not the field? They are the same price arn't they?

[MrPhantom]

Im a bit lost? if you bought it new and wanted auto safety, why did you buy the sporter and not the field? They are the same price arn't they?

 

The difference between field and sporter models is not just auto-safety. Sporters are heavier, stock dimensions may be different, field guns have solid rib, etc.

[Underdog]

 

People need something to knock so in the mid sector it's Beretta, Hatsan occupies the poverty segment and people who've never held a K80 longer than 10 seconds will emphatically tell you how awful the handling is , in short you'll find people who don't happen to shoot Beretta's well will tend to knock them, interestingly most can't shoot their own revered make for toffee either but that's a different story.

 

I've owned the old spec 682 which was bullet proof but as Welshwarrior says pointless comparing that to a 686, I've owned two 682e for ever too which have needed the usual (cheap) spares to keep them tight and proper, again bullet proof as neither has broken down, unlike stories one hears of Perazzi for instance.

 

Now anyone who says the 682/682e are FAR better than any current Beretta is simply foolish and unknowledgeable, the DT10/DT11 are superb guns although some have had teething problems, same as the 692, early ones had a poor showing and I am the first to admit for a company such as Beretta that is unforgivable but to pretend you can't get your hands on one that'll "out everything" a typical Browning will do is again, a bit silly.

 

I have owned Remingtons, Beretta auto's, Browning, Miroku, Laurona, Zoli and others besides, they're all good but will need time and expertise to get the best out of them. The Miroku and Brownings wear and go slack like you wouldn't believe, they're not immune from ejector, trigger and firing pin problems either and tightening them up is not as straightforward as your average Beretta oh and some rust for England if you don't oil them fastidiously, Beretta in contrast almost never do. Horses for courses, just don't pay too much attention to armchair gunsmiths.

Still a chair leg lol.

[silver pigeon69]

 

The difference between field and sporter models is not just auto-safety. Sporters are heavier, stock dimensions may be different, field guns have solid rib, etc.

Ok, Thanks. Thought it was just the safety thing.

[fat_jay]

Was in a shop just last week looking for a first gun for my wife.

I had in mind that she would go the Beretta route as these always seem a little slimmer in the hand to me (i am Browning man, i shoot an old 32" 325 which is very clunky in comparrison, but i love it and it fits me well)

We had a choice of several brand new silver pigeon's and a couple of used ones, in the end we went for a 10 year old silver pigeon iii game. The difference between new and old was massive, you could feel the quality in the older guns, and the timber on the new guns was as plain as i have seen on anything, airguns included.

[Westward]

The problem isn't simply the build quality of the guns although it's been pretty spotty over the last few years. It's more Beretta's disdain for their customers and their corporate arrogance in seeming to think they're above doing market research. If Krieghoff, Blaser and even (gasp) Browning can introduce new products based on customer feedback, why can't Beretta? Surely they know by now that hardly anybody wants switchable ejectors on a sporter or self tensioning forends yet they keep plugging on with them and keep having problems... Which revision of selector type are we on now? Do they care that the 'O' rings only last 10-15 K rounds? Do they care that some of their oiled stocks are so lacking in oil that people can't take them out in the rain until they've added 4 or 5 more coats?

 

Frankly there's not much evidence to suggest that they do care! The 692 cost £2.7K+ in the shops and you can't take it out in the rain! When are they going to learn?

 

All Beretta has to do is understand that they can't dictate what the market wants. Until they do, competitors such as CG will continue to run rings around them, both in terms of specification and attention to detail.

 

As for old v new, everyone gets misty eyed about something and for clay shooters it's often the early 682s. All the old time gunsmiths will tell how much better they were back then and they're probably right, but they also admit that if they were still built that way today the price for a 692 would £4 - 5K. But at least you'd be able to take it out in the rain... :lol:

Edited September 14, 2015 by Westward

[Underdog]

I don't like the newer autos but the old ones were great.

Ironically, I thought the b80 was a better gun all be it a Beretta!

[welshwarrior]

Yes, I understand that I can have it converted by a gunsmith easily enough but I shouldn't have to. I have the Sporter model.

That doesn't make sense you wanted a sporter the spec is with out auto safety, would you have been 'upset' if your field model came with sporting wood work? If you want an optional extra you have to have it fitted at an extra.