Wilson Combat Berettas

wilson combat beretta

Wilson Combat, perhaps best known for high-end 1911 handguns, is now offering custom gunsmithing and enhanced replacement parts for the Beretta 92 and 96 series of pistols.

wilson combat beretta

There are a variety of gunsmithing packages available, with many custom options also readily available.  Wilson Combat is also selling a range of replacement products that are considered user-installable.

wilson combat beretta

According to Wilson Combat, they have used Ernest Langdon as a technical advisor on the development of the Beretta gunsmithing packages and parts selection.

wilson combat beretta


Richard Johnson

An advocate of gun proliferation zones, Richard is a long time shooter, former cop and internet entrepreneur. Among the many places he calls home is http://www.gunsholstersandgear.com/.


Advertisement

  • brett

    shut up and take my money

    • FourString

      this is especially great for the trigger!

  • russeh

    Nice looking pistols, and coming from WC I’m sure the parts work great. The M9 is an accurate, robust, and reliable handgun (except for the slide safety, which is a blight on an otherwise beautiful design).

    I just wonder: why the M9, and not some other handgun? It seems totally random.

    • Micki Mahoney

      I think you just answered your own question by referring to it as an M9 rather than a Beretta 92.

    • Anonymoose

      Would you rather they make custom Glocks? -_-

      • JLR84

        Yes.

        • Matt

          Then go buy a Salient, as I said to Karina.

      • http://www.thefirearmblog.com/ Phil W “Senior Writer TFB”

        No—:-)

      • Karina

        Yes, actually. There are -excellent- custom Glocks and I would love to see Wilson Combat make some.

        • Matt

          Then go buy a Salient.

      • Nicks87

        Why do you need a custom GLOCK? They are spectacular just the way they are.

        • FourString

          I can hear Bruno Mars serenading GLOCK right now

    • Matt

      Because the M9 is our service pistol. And like the 1911 before it, many shooters buy it for that reason and have become familiar with it for that reason. The custom M9 marketplace has been woefully underserved for many years. Now, we have a good shop with a big name working magic on the current service pistol. I hope they offer an AMU style gun.

    • FourString

      Does the U.S. military allow users to modify their M9’s? If so, this would be really sweet to qualify yearly with in, say, the Navy!

      • http://www.thefirearmblog.com/ Nathan S ” Staff Writer, TFB”

        Minor temporary cosmetic items are Up to the unit commander (at least in the Marines).

        Changing any operational parts is strictly forbidden.

        • LCON

          that include the M9A1’s?

          • http://www.thefirearmblog.com/ Nathan S ” Staff Writer, TFB”

            Yep. About the only thing I could get away with changing was my sling…

          • Matt

            Kind of a shame. Takes all of 30 seconds to slip a D spring into an M9 and make the trigger pull 100% better.

          • FourString

            I wonder if some people modify them anyway, kind of like photos of servicemen using Bear ADCOR piston uppers on their full auto M4 lowers, without their superiors knowing (or caring? not sure).

          • atypicaloracle

            That sort of field modification is unofficially between the user, God (or His representative on earth, the soldier’s direct superior) and their friendly neighborhood armorer, the guy who has to find parts for their weapon should it stop working.

  • greasyjohn

    Well, where’s the STARS model?

    • greasyjohn

      On a serious note though, this makes me want one more. And I hope they make Phrobis style slides.

      • iksnilol

        The middle one kinda looks like the STARS one.

  • Rich Guy

    I would mention HI Power or CZ… But CZ has its own custom shop, and Hi Power shooter seem to be a fading breed.

    • Steve Truffer

      Just quieting down I believe. ☺

    • nester7929

      I’d love to own a legit hi power if they didn’t cost so much damn money.

      • sauerquint

        Ah, been there. Bought one on Gunbroker last year. It’s used, obviously. But I have one now and that’s what matters to me.

        • nester7929

          There’s a local shop that wants 400 for an Argentinian FM HP, which was apparently licensed through Browning. It needs refinishing and a trigger job, but I suspect if I bought it I’d still wish for the real thing.

          • FourString

            save up and don’t spend for a few months. i’m sure you’ll be able to gather enough change for a Mk III from CDNN’s catalogues. they generally have some decent sales on new ones. of cz ull probably want to save up for some aftermarket work esp the removal of the magazine disconnect safety to make the trigger better. def doable though.

    • iksnilol

      Well, the CZ is pretty much perfect. That is why they don’t make an WC version of it.

      Right?

    • galllanu

      I’d imagine only the commonwealth countries still use the high power as standard military pistol. And judging by Australia and the UK they don’t value pistols much. Their special forces which do value pistols carry the HK USP.

      • LCON

        UK just bought Glock 17’s

        • http://www.thefirearmblog.com/ Phil W “Senior Writer TFB”

          And some Sigs

          • FourString

            Yep. designated in house as the “L106A1″

      • FourString

        As LCON mentioned, the UK just switched over from their ageing Hi Powers to the Glock 17 Gen 4, and several soldiers have been using Sig P226’s for some time now (more than a decade). Being second only to the U.S. military, the British military actually *does* value pistols.

        Didn’t know that about the USP though. Pretty cool.

        • iksnilol

          I would hardly call that progress (Sigs yes, Glocks no).

          • FourString

            I totally get what you’re saying. I’m a DA/SA hammer-fired kinda guy myself. However, the Glock 17 Gen 4 is lighter, has more rounds in the standard mag (dunno why standard Army-men didn’t use 20 rd Mec Gar’s in their Hi Power’s–special forces did), is cheaper per unit and doesn’t have a manual safety, so it made sense for the Ministry of Defence’s purposes.

        • gallan

          Well Australia’s still using their Vietnam era FN High Powers. And I don’t see them moving to anything else anytime soon. Maybe they don’t see pistols as worth their weight. Maybe supressed subsonic 5.56mm has replaced the suppressed pistols for it’s use in removing sentries.

          • FourString

            You’d have to ask a real Aussie soldier for a definitive answer to that question

          • Hedd Wyn John

            The British Army went with the Glock 17 because the ageing Hi-Power was not suitable for Green on blue incidents in A-stan. The hi powers couldn’t be carried with a round chambered (due to lack of firing pin safety I believe) and the manual safety lead to a delay in getting rounds off. When under a surprise attack from an ‘ally’ the British army figured that the glock is ideal as you can get rounds off quickly with it.

          • FourString

            Precisely. Thank you for articulating what I was thinking.

        • Cynic

          The sig and glock are both current issue but the brownings are more commonly availible as there’s more in the system plus most are more likely to have the browning handling course passed than they are the glockenspiel

      • Cynic

        Thw new hotness in the uk is the glock, the ally option was the sig but now everyone wants the hipower there are also some ppk’s floating around the system

    • http://www.thegunzone.com/556dw.html Daniel E. Watters

      Back in the late 1990s, Wilson offered custom build packages for Browning HiPowers, Kahr K9/K40, and S&W Model 66 revolvers. I guess these packages were not popular enough and/or too labor intensive to keep in the catalog.

  • Lance

    Like the new trigger and I like the OD finish so pretty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Matt

    I am glad to see this. I only hope they bring back the Brigadiers, Elites, G (Decock only like SIGs), and frame safeties. In other words, what the M9 should have been…

    • http://www.thefirearmblog.com/ Phil W “Senior Writer TFB”

      Beretta is very very unlikely to bring back the Elites etc. I wish they would. The Elite was the best Beretta I ever owned.

      • FourString

        Phil, would you guys at TFB please review a Wilson Combat tuned Beretta 92 when the time comes? I believe there would be much interest in it :D

        • http://www.thefirearmblog.com/ Phil W “Senior Writer TFB”

          I’d love to but I believe all they are doing is reworking the owners pistol. If they were I’d be all over it!

          This page explains it and shows the custom parts you can buy.

          http://wilsoncombat.com/new/custom-beretta.asp

          • FourString

            perhaps someone @ TFB could send in their Beretta 92A1? ;D

        • http://www.thefirearmblog.com/ Phil W “Senior Writer TFB”

          Custom Work On Customer Supplied Beretta Pistol
          Please fill out this form and submit it. You will get a copy emailed to you. Print the email and ship the gun and the printed form to the following address…

          Wilson Combat
          2234 CR 719
          Berryville, AR 72616

          CUSTOM GUNWORK TERMS
          – We will NOT work on firearms that have been previously modified by anyone other than the Wilson Custom Shop.
          – Parts installed will match finish of pistol unless otherwise specified by customer.
          – Any parts supplied by the customer must be accompanied by an invoice or the items will be credited at a discounted rate.
          – A $50.00 deposit on customer supplied pistols is required at the time the work is scheduled. The balance is due upon completion.
          – Cancelled work orders are subject to a $50.00 cancellation fee.
          – Please do NOT send items not necessary for the custom work. Example: gun rugs, gun case, etc.
          – All weapons left in shop at your own risk.
          – Due to Federal regulations, customer’s firearms must be returned to the address from which they were received. If you have a change of address, written request for such change is required.

    • Emir Parkreiner

      Wilson listed an FS to G conversion under their custom work section for $150. Considering that Beretta has spent years ignoring pleas for a Elite/Type G revival; this is the only viable course of action.

  • Adam

    This makes me want to buy a beretta…

    • FourString

      same man. didn’t want a 92 before and now i definitely do.

  • dp

    Aren’t they flogging wrong horse? Why not SIG, it would be more worth; Beretta 92 is mediocre gun at best.

    • FourString

      I would argue that the Beretta 92 needs more help from Wilson Combat than SIG. It’s only a few hundred more to step up to a SIG X5 (basically as much as you’d spend on a Wilson Combat tuning). Not only does Beretta not have anything equivalent in their stable that matches up to that custom level, but the SIG short reach trigger already exists. There was a bigger niche in Beretta begging to be filled and Wilson Combat stepped up to the plate.

      • Scott

        There are several comp tuned factory Berettas. Not sure if they are currently in the line up. They not only were unreal shooters, they are WAY more pretty to look at that the SIG offerings.

        • FourString

          oh cool, didn’t know that! i tried looking on their website though and it doesn’t seem like they still make them

    • http://www.thefirearmblog.com/ Phil W “Senior Writer TFB”

      As others have said lots of veterans coming home and I would think leaning toward what they trained on and used.
      I wouldn’t say it was mediocre. Long trigger pull yes but it’s smooth. I like the long sight radius also.
      Sigs a better pistol all around.

      • dp

        Yeah, I know these will be ‘specials’. I just keep fixed my first experience with them and was not very impressed. Oversized for the calibre, bulky and bit clunky overall. But, it may be that Wilson makes wonder out of them.

        • Matt

          Have you ever looked at a SIG side by side with a 92? They are about the same size….

          I would disagree that it is mediocre at best. I would say that the slide mounted safety makes it feel a lot worse than it is. They need to go to decock only like SIG or a frame safety.

    • BeGe1

      A failure rate of 1 in 17,000 rounds, accurate as anything else out there, runs anything from steel case to as open ended of an HP as you can design, long smooth DA pull (long is the POINT of the DA pull, never understood the complaints about that, don’t like a long smooth pull, then don’t get a DA gun) and a super nice SA pull, and tough enough for combat is mediocre? Put hogue grips on one and it even becomes one of the most comfortable guns in the hand you’ll find. Put mec-gar mags in it and now you have completely reliable 18+1. And a much better bore axis to hand then SIG’s. Is it big? Yep. It wasn’t designed for concealed carry. It’s a service pistol. Don’t like the slide mounted safety? Heck, I love it…because it stays the heck out of my way. I’m not gonna use the safety on a DA gun, so why would I want it near my thumb where it can get in my way? Keep it up on the slide, I’ll just mold my holster to keep it always off. Have complaints of military breakages? They don’t maintain them. They run them UNTIL they break before replacing parts. The fact that that can take sometimes 40k rounds without so much as a spring change is a point it its favor in my eyes.

      Are SIG’s fantastic guns too? Yep. But the 92 is every bit as good as anyone else. There’s always gonna be people butthurt that the 1911 isn’t the service pistol any more, and that hate its replacement just to feel better about that. But that’s all it is. The 92 is one of the best full size DA pistols out there even to this day. I have a SIG P239 for concealed carry, because my 92 is a bit big. But when size isn’t a problem I’ll grab my 92fs over my P226 any day.

      • seans

        If the 92 was every bit as good as any other pistol, then why has American SOF abandoned it. CAG uses glocks, SEALs got the 226, SF and the ranger recce tears are running glocks now. Hell Marsoc went back to the 1911 over the M9. Why would go out of there way to adopt a inferior or equal pistol?
        The Sig 226 was the superior pistol of the two, but lack of a manual safety and the slightly higher cost pushed the Beretta into service.

        • Frank

          I don’t think the P226 was even in the trials till later. Iirc the original version had a heel magazine release too. Too little too late is really all it was. What’s the big difference between the SIG and the Beretta? The Beretta is longer, but it’s thinner, the triggers are about the same, the decocker is better on the SIG. Magazine capacity is the same though better now with modern magazines for the beretta. Really functionally they aren’t very different and ones not much better than the other. A lot of the reason they use different guns is to make themselves feel different from the regular grunts. Why else would the marine special forces use 1911s over something like the HK45, or S&W M&P45. Both are higher capacity, more reliable, and lower maintenance. Probably because the 1911 is a historical piece and it’s more flashy.

          • seans

            The 226 and 92 were the only two pistols that passed the XM9 trials. The 226 was the superior, but again lack of manual safety and overall higher cost, the 92 was chosen. The Seals went with the 226 after having multiple catastrophic failures of the 92, with slides flying into operators faces. And while I agree the Marsoc going with the 1911 is a huge step backwards, SOF doesn’t go with Glocks and Sigs to look flashy. They choose what works. Why CAG dumped their 1911s for Glocks.

          • hallana

            Realistically though the only U.S military force that actually uses pistols in combat and not just training is Delta and SAD. And they use Glocks. And that’s the bottom line. Both the 92 and Sig are antiquated in the eyes of the only people that matter. Even the Russian elite use a Glock-like pistol the GSh-18.

          • seans

            So are you trying to say that the white side Seals and Damneck haven’t been getting kills with pistol? Cause I can guarantee you they have. And they use Sigs for the most part, every once in a while you will see a guy with a glock at Damneck. And SAD really doesn’t do much anymore. Anytime the CIA needs actual work done they have JSOC do it.

          • Cynic

            The issue was cost of spares and magazine costs plus of course the us needed the Italians to stay on side at the time the choice was made. So basically package cost and politics favoured the m9

        • BeGe1

          Lets go through them point by point, shall we?

          – Overall – special forces in general uses whatever weaponry each group/unit/or sometimes even individual wants. Choosing a different gun is not “out of their way”, it’s par for the course. They have the ability to choose whatever they want all on an equal field without what’s being currently issued playing into that decision. So if they decide they like this or that, that doesn’t mean they went out of their way for anything. I’ve addressed that the military has poor maintenance practices on their 92’s (and probably would have equally poor maintenance if they had chosen the 226, and we’d all be hating on the 226 right now). Even though I prefer my 92FS over my p226, in such a situation given such a choice I might choose to use p226’s just to make sure my group’s pistols (which I’m going to properly maintain) cannot possibly end up with some of the poorly maintained ones mixed in; or even worse, with some pencil pusher above me annexing my properly maintained ones into general rotation without my knowledge and then just saying “But you use the same type of pistol, what’s the big deal? Yours are all in Cuba now, just get more from our armory.”

          – Glocks are a completely different sidearm. If someone chooses Glock vs 92 then the factor influencing their decision likely has more to do with wanting a light striker fire gun with same trigger pull every time over a DA, otherwise they would have chosen another DA gun. Nothing wrong with that, and if that group decided that’s best for them then great. How that is evidence of the 92 being mediocre is beyond me though. Ever heard of apples and oranges?

          – Same for 1911, wanting a .45 or wanting single action cocked and locked just means you prefer a different type of weapon operation. Below you even admit that this is a step backward as far as the actual weapon quality. In doing so you admit that often these decisions are made for personal preference type reasons instead of what is “superior”. Yet, your argument is predicated on the idea that units choosing something other than the 92 means what they’ve chosen is superior!? Talk about painting yourself into a corner with that one…

          – In reference to your comment below: The 92FS slide breaking issues were from improper maintenance. My father-in-law is actually one of the SEALS that was there during the time they were using the 92fs and were having the broken slides when the whole “eaten italian steel” phrase started. Yet he has full confidence in them and owns mostly CZ’s and 92’s now. Why does he have 92’s after watching slides fly off?! Because he’s fully aware that they were shooting hot ammo with zero maintenance for 20k+ rounds through the things (sometimes significantly more) before it happened. Of course some part was going to break eventually…they were basically running them until failure. The point is not THAT they failed, it’s WHEN they failed. They put up with an incredible amount of abuse from those SEAL’s without maintenance before breaking. And that’s why such experience raised his confidence in them, not the other way around.

          – The SIG P226 also had pretty serious problems in the dry mud environment that the 92 did not. SIG had more reliability in normal conditions, but the 92 was less affected by conditions, and still had extremely high reliability overall. That was the main choice to be made. Because of that in the end they were considered on equal ground, so they based the choice on, as you say, the safety and the cost. Since the safety is, again, a preference, and low cost is not a flaw when it was still able to prove itself in trials that didn’t weigh for cost…again, how is that inferior?

          • seans

            First on the weapons issued to SOF. You will rarely see a individual have a custom weapon on the white side. Extremely rare. Happens more on the black side, but still not that common.

            As for Marsoc choosing 1911s that didn’t do Iraq, and they did not pay attention to the guys who did and ran 1911s. There is a reason Cag gave them up. 1911s make bad defensive pistols for the housework.

            As for the slides breaking. None of those guns made 25,000 rounds. The sigs never had a slide break in the test. I have worked with sigs that have over 50,000 rounds thru them, and that is a common occurrence. I have yet to see a M9 make it to 30,000. I have worked as GM in units that were issued the M9 and ones where they were issued a 226 and the sigs would last far longer than any M9.

            And what exactly is a dry mud environment? I have been issued a 226 the last couple of years now, carried it in the Stan. Shot with it every day, didn’t clean it much. Shot against guys who had to carry M9s, and their guns needed far more cleaning than mine. Also malfunction more. And I know for a fact that they had new M9s. I fired 14,800 rounds thru my pistol on my last deployment. Kept track of all my shots, and malfunctions. Would not clean my gun until it malfunctioned.(Had a different pistol for ops) I averaged between 800 and 1200 rounds between malfunctions, in a extremely dirty environment.

  • 1leggeddog

    Now THIS is pretty!

  • LCON

    any word on a rail mount for the slide? when i looked over the sight i did not see anything

    • Frank

      That’s an M9a1 style 92. Those have rails on the frame from the factory.

    • Matt

      Something like this?

      http://sight-mount.com/

      • LCON

        that would do the trick.

        • Matt

          Yea, they’re pretty sweet. I have an M9 with this mount and a Burris Fast Fire for use when I use the M9 as my suppressor host. I love how I can remove the optic and the mount has irons built into it. I had Tooltech put tritium vials into the slide and mount so I have night sights when I don’t have the optic on it.

  • galnnan

    Best looking pistol ever?

  • 1911a145acp

    Oh GOOD LORD Bill!… say it ain’t so…..

  • supergun

    Can you do this on the Taurus Model 92 also?

  • Douglas Ervin

    A few years back Wilson developed a new handgun in 9mm that was not all steel as their norm and held a contest over the internet. I was fortunate enough to win one by suggesting SPECOP9. However, since I am one of those lucking enough to live in CA, I could not own one. Wilson offered me a choice of any CA approved pistols in their inventory. Now that is a great gun manufacturer! (I now own a CQB in 45).

  • petru sova

    Competition shooters often need to alter guns but the average weekend sandbag plinker needs no such modifications nor can he often afford them either. Just remember the pistol you buy today may be discontinued putting it in the collectors category and if you alter it in any way then it is worth half of what it would have been worth unaltered. Remember too that future collector value will also be zero as it will not appreciate in value like a mint unaltered gun will. Usually when a person sells a custom altered gun he will be lucky to even recoup half the money he spent buying the gun and then paying to alter it. In other words custom altered guns are always a very bad investment. Think about this before you destroy a gun that may become a future collectors piece.
    My own Beretta is very accurate and I see no need to alter it as I am not competing in any sanctioned matches with it. This gun was not designed as a target gun and with its soft aluminum frame putting thousands of practice rounds through it would entail inserting steel frame rails into the gun. Considering the fact that steel framed guns like the CZ series of weapons already have steel frame rails screwing around altering an aluminum framed Beretta makes no sense what-so-ever.

    • Cynic

      If i was worried about future value I wouldn’t shoot wouldn’t field strip and would handle my guns only in a sealed clean room.