Wrong, but closer than most things you post. Per Beretta's website, it's 11.8 empty, not 10.5; which is a difference of 12%, and so definitely closer to right than most of your statements. https://www.beretta.com/en-us/21-a-bobcat/...The M21 is 10.5 ozs.
m21 Beretta needs steel cap added to the slide so that you have the needed metal to fit a dovetailed rear sight and the extractor. a vertical pin thru the slide retains the extractor.
...I preferred the speed safety lever and cocked and locked carry anyway. I put the luminous front sight on the can and the rear of the slide, and the sight that I dovetailed into the thread protector was just plain blued steel.
...m21 Beretta pocket .22. 7.5" OAL. needs sights, extractor, slide lock, the longer PT22 Taurus mag, speed safety...
All those added items mean added weight; no way around it. I know you don't like being reminded of the laws of physics, but they're laws that simply can't be ignored anywhere other than a drug-induced fantasy....the SA-only, re-worked M21 Beretta as my only .22lr handgun. I'd have about $900 in it, by the time the luminous sights were fitted.
When you add the silencer to the M21, you can hunt any time and anyplace. That 9" 15 oz, 2" at 25m combo constantly entertaining on the trail. Adding the can would be another $400...
Then again, I don't think a one-pound Sig P938 weight only 9 ounces either...A 9" long, 15 oz silenced M21 .22lr Beretta AND a Sig P938, also 9 ozs, weigh no more, (both fully loaded)...
In Melvins defence, while he generally lacks "clarity" (can't think of another word without insulting him), he does bring out well thought out responses from others.
Didn't at all mean to bail him out of anything; was trying to point out detailed examples of ignorance & stupidity, rather than the tempting (and completely true) "holy god, you're about a 9 on the ignoramous scale" comments.
More & more of these old threads springing up. Kind of fun sometimes. Fwiw, the specs on the suppressor, from the mfr's page:3 oz 22 silencer, even with poor designalmost 3x as long as the one I made for the beretta, when I was in CO. So John is once again proven to be fos. The M21 is 10.5 ozs.
So this 5.95" suppressor is "almost 3x as long" as yours. Yours was 2" long or so? Had to be substantially less than 3 inches, because if yours was 3 inches, then this one is not only way less than "3x as long", it's LESS than 2x as long.Specifications:
Tube Material……………….Hard Anodized 6061 T6
Baffle Material………………Hard Anodized 6061 T6
Design………………………..Monocore, Take-apart Tool Included
Finish…………………………Matte Black Anodized
A .22LR rimfire rifle at 200 yards has approximately the same muzzle energy as the 21A has at the muzzle. And surely nobody would recommend a .22 rimfire as a rational 200-yard defensive gun....It's a well-made gun, but other than the tip-up barrel (which you claim to get rid of anyway), it's nothing special at all. In that caliber and with that barrel length, it has less than 60 ft/lbs with almost all loads that I've chronographed, and less than 55 ft/lbs with some of them. Basically, it has about the same energy at the muzzle as the same rimfire ammo has from a rifle at 200 yards or so; and a .22LR rifle at 200 yards is unacceptable power-wise for defensive purposes.
Meaning that the 21A at the muzzle still has less than HALF the power of a .32acp pocket pistol loaded with good factory ammo at a HUNDRED YARDS. So even if we were to miraculously believe that a .32acp was a viable 100-yard defensive caliber, the 21A's short barrel means that even at contact distance it's still only half of that. Good call...I also really like the Beretta 21A. It's beautifully made, it's very reliable when you find a load it likes, and it's in a caliber that's cheap to shoot.
Its main problem is that it's a wimp power-wise. It was great when it came out, just as with the Colt Paterson was in its day. But to consider a Paterson a good choice for any serious purposes today would be lunacy. It could be fun, it could even be a good learning platform potentially, but it would not be a good choice for defensive use, offensive use, hunting, or anything where performance was important. Exactly the same with the 21A - it's fun to shoot and it's very nicely made, but it's not powerful enough to accomplish much anytime that performance is important. It's less than half as powerful as a well-loaded .32acp micro-pistol like the P32, running 57 ft/lbs compared to the P32's 149 ft/lbs.
...The pretty much undisputed best of the good, consistent, reliable, rimfire loads are minimags and stingers. And Stingers & Minimags both ran not only less than 70 ft/lbs, not only less than 65 ft/lbs, but less than 60 ft/lbs. The Minimags run 57.4 ft/lbs and even the very-good Stingers run only 57.8 ft/lbs. That's pitiful power-wise; as I've pointed out before, it's right about the same energy as a little-league pitcher's fastball. And for defending my life, or my wifes' life, or anyone's life, I want more power than a little league pitch. And you should too. You're the one that says the .380 is a joke - yet you praise the rimfire 21 with only one-third as much power.
But the claim from our favorite internet gun preacher is that the 21A will "rock your world", while the .380 is "lame" and "a joke". Got it....Got me curious whether I was remembering it wrong, so I looked it up on my spreadsheet. I was remembering right - stingers from the little 21A averaged 57.8 ft/lbs.
Out of curiosity I checked factory-ammo ballistics, because I suspected that even a .32 or .380 pistol would have those same power levels out to a couple hundred yards. I was very wrong on the 'couple hundred yards' thing. Turns out that even a little .380acp (federal hydrashok, from their website calculator) still has that same energy (59 ft/lbs) at a staggering 450 yards. Again - the 21A, even loaded with stingers, has less energy at the muzzle than a .380acp pistol has at a quarter mile. There's just no way I can bring myself to trust that power level for defensive purposes.
So gunkid admits that it's "feeble", that it's "barely lethal", that it's "highly likely to fail you", and that "there's no reason to settle for such a feeble gun". And then also regularly praises it as a defensive pistol, even going into details about custom modifications that turn it into a $3000 combat piece; so good that oil sheiks would love to have them....a 2.5" barreled .22lr has just 65 ft lbs, barely lethal, highly likely to fail you if you have to fire
...there's no reason to settle for such a feeble gun.