The Beretta 93R (“Raffica”) was developed in the 1970s by Beretta engineer Paolo Parola at the request of Italian military special forces. It took the basic Beretta 92 pistol design and added a well-thought-out burst mechanism under the right-side grip panel. It does not have a plain full-auto setting, but only semiauto and 3-round burst. To help keep the gun controllable, it has a heavier slide to reduce cyclic rate, a detachable shoulder stock, and a folding front grip to help control the muzzle. It uses extended 20-round magazines and is actually remarkably controllable (or so I am told; I have not had a chance to shoot one myself).
For a look at a 93R on the range, I suggest this video from James Reeves on TFBTV:
Many thanks to the Royal Armouries for allowing me to film and disassemble this very famous machine pistol! The NFC collection there – perhaps the best military small arms collection in Western Europe – is available by appointment to researchers:
https://royalarmouries.org/research/national-firearms-centre/
You can browse the various Armouries collections online here:
https://royalarmouries.org/collection/
“(…)3-round burst(…)20-round magazines(…)”
This would make last burst being 2-round one. Does said mechanism reset during magazine change or you will start with 1-round burst after reload?
“(…)developed in the 1970s by Beretta engineer Paolo Parola(…)”
It should be noted that it was not first machine pistol by Beretta, as they earlier offered M951R http://modernfirearms.net/en/handguns/handguns-en/italy-semi-automatic-pistols/beretta-951-eng/ select-fire(…)M951R, had been developed circa 1955 and been in limited production until early 1980s, when it was replaced by Beretta M93R.
Now I am wondering if M951R was made by same person or another one?
It resets every time you release the trigger. The mechanism is shown in the clip.
[OFF-TOPIC so ignore if you wish]
Recently I learned about new Winchester .21 rim-fire cartridge
https://winchester.com/Blog/2024/09/Please-Welcome-the-21-Sharp
basically .22 LR cartridge updated with internal-lubricated bullet, which resulted in .21 caliber. It is known to exists with following bullet variations
– hollow point
– FMJ
– Matrix, made entirely of cuprum
It is claimed to be is slightly faster than standard-velocity .22 LR loads with more energy.
But it is unclear for me if it requires totally new fire-arm or some or all existing .22 LR fire-arm could be reworked for said cartridge? Is gain in ballistic enough to justify change from existing .22 fire-arms? What would happen if someone would attempt to use .22 LR in .21 Sharp fire-arm?
The 21 Sharp bullet has a slightly smaller diameter than the .22 bullet. The case diameter is the same as a 22. So I do not think you could reasonably and safely use a 21 Sharp cartridge in most firearms chambered for .22 LR.
See: https://saami.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Public-Introduction-21-Sharp-2023-06-14.pdf
It sounds like Winchester has tried to come up with a more “commercial” and less finicky version of the .12 Eichelberger LR;
https://firearmwiki.com/wiki/.12_Eichelberger_Long_Rifle
Or to put it another way, a rimfire version of the various .22 Hornet variations (.22 K-Hornet, etc.) in terms of ballistic performance.
I could see a .22 WMR version of this in a handgun like the Kel-Tec PMR-30 changing some of our opinions about defensive pistol performance, especially loaded with FMJ or JHP bullets.
clear ether
eon
.21 Sharp is simply .22LR with a tiny-bit-smaller bore diameter so it can use non-heeled, jacketed bullets. .22WMR (which doesn’t need heeled bullets) is already a .22WMR version of this.
> Many thanks to the Royal Armouries for allowing me to film and disassemble this very famous machine pistol!
Until they arbitrarily decide to force you to remove the video.
Couple of nits to pick at…
Ian states that the 93R was a product of Italian special forces requirements. My understanding was that it was pretty much the same as the Glock 18, an answer to the 1985 airport terrorist attacks in Vienna and Rome, built to the specifications of the Italian counter-terrorism forces of the national police Nucleo Operativo Centrale di Sicurezza and Carabineri Gruppo di Intervento Speciale.
Obviously, from the dates of development, that “understanding” of mine isn’t quite correct.
They basically wanted something capable of full-auto, and concealable. Same spec as for the Glock 18, in effect. I think the 93R might have been in development, and only got started being noticed about the time of the airport attacks, and then someone conflated the 93R with the Glock 18, so far as causative development history. This was all “lore”, back in the day; I don’t think that the usual gun rag writers knew the facts, and were operating off of rumor.
Which, , is why I have to go and check this crap every time I pull something up from the recesses of my memory. I know I read that both automatic pistols became prominent at about the same time, but… Again, .
The other quibble is that when Ian points to the M9 clone he has for comparison, he makes it out that there was a switch between the safety on the slide vs. on the frame. Not so; early Beretta 92 versions had frame-mounted safeties and magazine releases on the butt, just like (ta-da!!) the Taurus PT-92, which had the original 92 layout. It was not until they had to satisfy US ergonomic conventions that they put the safety on the slide and the mag release behind the trigger guard. Why the US changed from frame to slide? No idea, but that was in all the JSSAP requirements. I think someone wanted to buy the Walther P-38 or the Smith & Wesson 39/59. I honestly see no effective difference between the locations, but I’m sure someone, somewhere had a rationale for it all.
I think the 93R made a better job of answering the requirements than the G18, but then they’d had a lot longer to work on it. It’s also a bit of a quibble to argue that “special forces” are different from what the Italians do their usual domestic counterterrorism with, but the two agencies behind the 93R are both rated by NATO and other treaties as paramilitary police branches, and not counted against CFE numbers. Unless something’s changed… They’re cops; not military.
You leave airport security to the Italian Army, odds are the troops are gonna be doing their patrolling with full-on assault rifles, and there will be machinegun nests set up as security checkpoints throughout the airports. Also, expect innumerable “incidents” wherein putative “civilians” get rather heavily shot up. You do not want the Italian Army doing internal security missions, unless you’ve lost your cotton-picking mind… Especially the Alpini or Bersagliere.
Fifth paragraph down, there ought to be a (heavy sigh) after “Which”, and a (sigh) after the final “Again”.