Beretta 81 in .32 - who has one?

[afultz075]

I've been lucky enough over the past year to acquire a couple CZ 83's in .32 for very reasonable prices, and those little hi-cap .32's have since become some of the most prized guns in my collection. Super fun to shoot, reliable, and accurate. I recently learned that Beretta makes a counterpart, the model 81, and there seems to be some NIB models still available.

I've owned Beretta 92's in the past, but they are long gone and my handgun collection is all CZ and Glock currently, but those Beretta 81's really catch my eye. Does anyone own one of these?

How do they compare to the CZ 83 in .32? Reliability?

[bonj]

The Beretta 81 should have more parts and magazines readily available. And may even be a more accurate and ergonomic pistol.

[larryflew]

Had one long ago along with a CZ in .32.  Although I liked both I really like the CZ much more. Now have the CZ in .32 and 380 and also a vintage 1903 chrome Colt.  If you like the .32 and can find one I would go for the Ruger to add to your collection. Probably would have kept the one I had if had had better blueing but it was pretty worn.

[Psyop96]

The Beretta 81 should have more parts and magazines readily available. And may even be a more accurate and ergonomic pistol.

Looking forward to your evidence for more accurate and ergonomic pistol [emoji6]


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[bonj]

I owned both. Just an IMOO [In my own opinion]

[Psyop96]

I owned both. Just an IMOO [In my own opinion]

Thanks for clarifying.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Skookum]

Looking forward to your evidence for more accurate and ergonomic pistol

The CZ 83 and the Beretta 81 seem almost functionally equivalent to me.  The 83 mag holds three more rounds than does the 81 mag — a little less time spent loading mags at the range with CZ, and a few more precious rounds (important given the weakness of the .32 Auto) should you carry the CZ for self defense.  With its steel frame, the 83 is about 20% heavier than the aluminum-framed 81, so the 83 has the potential to be softer shooting and more accurate (although the recoil of both is de minimus relative to compact, metal-framed pistols chambered in service calibers).  And, an average used 83 will probably cost su stantially less than an average used 81.


What the 81 has going for it is its Italian styling.  It frankly looks better than the commie brutalism of the 83's design (although from an ergonomic perspective, the 83's design is darn good).

[Fuzzy Sights]

Had a CZ-83 when stationed in Germany.  Fine pistol and other than a couple of break-in misfeeds it was incredibly reliable and accurate.  Keeping everything in the black at 25m was no issue at all.  Sadly sold it before I PSC'd.  Have a Beretta 81 and it is a nice soft shooting gun, very reliable, but is not as accurate.  Sights and trigger are not as good as the 83 was after break-in.

Granted this is in both cases a sample size of one, but it is my experience.

JW

[RSR]

Not aware of any NIB 81s as they haven't been imported in awhile now...  You might find a safe queen/collectors sale, but certainly not in quantity.  Most for sale now is Italian surplus that has come into the country the past few years.  Some really fine/great condition examples among them though.

The 81s sights are pretty minimal/terrible.  The 81 BBs are fairly improved, relatively.  83s you can replace both front and rear, while the 81s are just the rear since front sight is integral to frame.  Nod to 83s for the win here.

B/c of all the safety mechanisms in 81 BBs, the 81s tend to have a better trigger however (firing pin block, trigger disconnector instead of block, etc.)  And if memory serves, I think both 81s have a better trigger all things considered than the 83.  Haven't shot my 83 in a couple years now.

The 81s barrels are removable, whereas the 83s are fixed.  Nod to 83 on repeatable accuracy.

Re: recoil, I've only shot 81s in 32 acp and 83s in .380, so not 1:1.  Slide weight on 81s is likely less however (haven't put on a scale though), so should be slightly less perceived recoil despite the alloy frame.  81BBs slides are very slightly beefier than 81s too.
Recoil on either of the 81s is mild -- I'd put it in the ballpark of +20-25% or so of shooting cci velocitor out a 22lr pistol.

The 81s tend to fill my hand more than the 83s especially around trigger finger, since 81s don't have scalloping on upper grips like like 83, so length of pull feels quite a bit longer.  So, the 81s when decocked would be a challenge for most women to reach the trigger during the DA pull IMO.  I bought my 81s primarily to be an option for recoil sensitive folks and a transition gun for new shooters, and it's really too thick of a grip for anyone with smaller than medium sized man hands...  So I'm on the lookout for 82 Cheetah (single stack) or maybe another make/model instead for this role.

81s are definitely better looking.

81s takedown is more involved since separate barrel and needing to ensure recoil rod properly aligns with frame and takedown lever.

Haven't had any reliability issues w/ 81s, but then I don't shoot them terribly much due to not having .32 acp stacked deep pre-covid/subsequent price explosion like other calibers.

Wojtek makes new production firing pins for the 81s/all cheetahs, and that was historically the main weakpoint AFAIK when it came to long-term reliability.

So whether to buy really depends on your wants/needs/goals.  Most folks will be more excited about a cheetah than a Cz83 however, but that's largely just on looks and brand name alone.

[bonj]

Nice detailed assessment up RSR !

[RSR]

Nice detailed assessment up RSR !

Thanks. 

Should also note that 81's safeties activate at decock and half-cock, as well as full cock.

If memory serves, the 83 doesn't have a half-cock location, and safety only activates at full cock.

Depending on how/where you carry, that might matter to you.

[RSR]

*Had the 81 and 81bb side by side this afternoon, and the 81's sights are actually less bad than I recalled previously. 
Rear sight is similar size to Bersa Thunders/Firestorms, and front sight was only marginally slimmer than same.  It's actually better than 81bb IMO for well-lighted target shooting, but is still pretty terrible in low light unless you paint it -- a decent paint job to sights however you prefer it would help tremendously.
Unlike the aforementioned Bersas however, there's no checkering on top of slide or barrel, so you can get light reflection issues of the blued and fairly polished (if good condition) slide and barrel however, depending on sun angle -- at the range under a shade cover or indoor range, not really an issue so just noting.

The 81 BBs front sight and rear sight are both larger and wider and the front sight also appears to be slightly shorter than 81s -- might just be my perception but might also be such as intended more for self-defense distances than 25m target shooting...  Don't have the time to get out calipers.
The 81bb is a "dot the i" type paint job.  It's much better in low light than 81, but also less precise for target shooting.

Basically, if you want a range target shooter given better trigger and smaller but also more precise sights, 81 is probably the way to go (recognizing that less thick slide may eventually crack after a high quantity of rounds -- why 81 bb slides were beefed up).  If you're wanting something for combat, combat action, more dynamic shooting, where precision/accuracy isn't paramount, than the 81bb is the way to go.

Given all the sight options for the 83s, it's really not worth comparing their sights to the 81s IMO.

Good luck!