Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!bellcore!att!cbnews!military From: nobody%tekgvs.labs.tek.com@RELAY.CS.NET (-Unprivileged user) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: M-16 reliability (was Re: early bad press may be justified) Summary: Please do get started about the Beretta 92f! Message-ID: <10260@cbnews.ATT.COM> Date: 16 Oct 89 01:37:32 GMT References: <10145@cbnews.ATT.COM> <10181@cbnews.ATT.COM> Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM Organization: Tektronix Inc., Beaverton, Or. Lines: 25 Approved: military@att.att.com From: -Unprivileged user From: daveme@tekirl.LABS.TEK.COM (Dave Mead) Path: tekirl!daveme > mechanical failure due to manufacturing or design defects. The M16A2 has proven to be a very accurate, fairly easy to maintain service rifle. I would be What do you consider accurate? Most of the older 55gr. FMJ stuff was limited by the bullet itself. How do the new heavy slugs/fast twist barrels do? > interested in hearing your reasons for slamming it. > > This, of course, is the A2. The A1 was a problem child; I've never used the > Stoner AR, so I can't comment. (just don't get me started on the Beretta 92F!) Please tell me the problems with the 92f. Are you referring to slide failures in five over-pressured samples after thousands of rounds, or something else? My overall impression is that these are one of the best 9mms around. Fill in the details! Dave Mead Tek Labs >