Talk:Beretta M1923

"not powerful enough to be fully effective"

This statement is not supported by the link provided, so it is a personal opinion. The 9mm Glisenti cartridge was a 9mm charged like a 7.65 mm Luger. It fires a 124 grains bullet at 1050 fps with an energy of 412 joules (Barnes' Cartridges of the World). Less than a 9mm Luger, but much more than a 380 ACP, a 38 Special (270J), or a 9mm Makarov (313J), that, other that the 9mm Luger, are the most diffused 9mm pistol cartridges in the world. So It seems that the Glisenti fires a weaker cartridge than a 9x19mm Luger pistol, but it's power is, however, in the high part of the 9mm chambered pistols. Moreover, the Italian Armed Forces replaced it with a weapon (Beretta M1934) in 380 ACP, an even weaker cartridge. It is therefore difficult to think that they have found the 9mm Glisenti "not powerful enough to be fully effective". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.11.238.106 (talk) 09:21, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

M1915/1919 redirect is semantically inaccurate

So I was watching an episode of Forgotten Weapons on the 1915 (Beretta's first autoloading pistol), and it's pretty clear that the M1915/M1919 should not be redirected here, as they're substantially distinct pistols from the M1923, and Ian specifically says "not to be confused with the 1915/17, 1919, 1921, 23...". It's obvious in that the safety(ies) of the earlier models have a catch to hold the slide, whereas the 1923 does not, among other differences.

I might be picking up a 1919 and I have JB Wood's book on Beretta automatic pistols, covering everything up thru the 92, so maybe I'll just have to write another article so it has a place to go. Tbessler (talk) 17:05, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

References