One of the principal advantages of the M9 is its simple takedown. The barrel and slide group slide forward and off the receiver as a whole.

There was also the fact that a U.S. service pistol was going to be made by an Italian firm. American shooters had no such aversion to using Beretta's well-built shotguns and rifles to win countless trophies and bag game, but it was a different story when it came to sidearms for our soldiers. As part of the initial contract to produce the first 321,260 M9 pistols, Beretta overcame this objection by agreeing to manufacture the guns in its then new Beretta USA factory located in Accokeek, Maryland.

But the M9's problems were just beginning. In 1987 and again in 1988, stories surfaced concerning cracked slides and frames, especially in the vicinity of the barrel-mounted locking block, which absorbs most of the recoil energy.

In all, four such incidences were reported, three during extensive testing by Navy SEALS (who were putting 3,000 to 5,000 rounds a week through the new guns--far more than the 5,000-round total capability demanded by the government) and one failure during testing by the Army.

Now, I'm no mathematician, but out of the total number of early guns produced, that represents about 0.5 percent.

Still, it was discovered that during startup, in order to meet initial quotas, some slides were not manufactured in the U.S. factory. A design change was immediately instituted by Beretta, all production was eventually moved to Beretta USA, and since 1988 there have been no further instances of frames or slides cracking. In addition, there have been three design improvements to the locking block, making for a much sturdier gun.

Just how sturdy? The U.S. Army Marksmanship Unit at Ft. Benning, Georgia, currently competes with modified Beretta M9s, and its seven-member team puts an average of 15,000 to 30,000 rounds a year through the guns (substantially more than any M9 experiences in combat) before anything has to be replaced.

Another thorn in the M9's side are occasional reports of failures to feed--almost always with faulty aftermarket magazines.

However, a more realistic problem concerning feeding malfunctions with the M9 has been traced to the hostile environs of Afghanistan and Iraq, where dirt and sand are omnipresent. To address this situation, two years ago Beretta introduced its sand-resistant M9A1 magazine, designed specifically for gritty environments and supplied with the M9A1 pistol for the United States Marine Corps.

And now we come to accuracy, one of the focal points for critics of the M9, which I find telling, because that was the same criticism of the Model 1911 when it first came out. But neither the 1911 nor the M9 were ever intended as cluster punchers. Both service pistols were designed with loose-fitting parts to enable them to function reliably under adverse conditions. It was because of these rather spacious dimensions, which also facilitate easy field stripping, that both guns came out on top during military trials.

Indeed, the M9, classified as a "close personal defense weapon," is primarily issued to members of crew-served weapons such as .50 caliber machine-gunners, tank commanders and their teams, rifle company officers, and headquarters support personnel. And although the maximum effective range of the M9 is officially listed at an optimistic 50 meters (roughly 164 feet), the standard M882 military round is hardly conducive to any great accuracy at this extended range.

Or is it? Under the auspices of Lt. Col. Frank Muggeo of the U.S. Army Marksmanship Unit, the service pistol team has flatly disproved any inaccuracy claims associated with the Beretta M9.