Beretta Nano 1000 Rounds Review

Beretta Nano Muzzle

Beretta Nano 9mm

Beretta Nano Review after shooting 1000 rounds of all types of ammunition. Included are a few other range reports that provide both positive and negative comments.

I think the Beretta Nano is an outstanding 9mm subcompact pistol. Previously I shot 300 rounds during two different range sessions. Today I drove an hour to the nearest indoor range. Shot 700 rounds through the Nano in two hours, and experienced 3 failures to eject. The FTE happened twice with Sellier & Bellot 115 grain FMJ and once with Federal 115 grain FMJ Wal-Mart ammo. The FTE I’m sure was my fault because after shooting several hundred rounds I got lazy with the grip when firing cheap ammo. When I held the pistol firmly with a tight grip I had no more Failures of any kind.

Here is a list of ammunition fired through my Nano during this range session.

  • 50 rounds Federal 115 grain FMJ from Wal-Mart
  • 100 rounds Remington UMC 115 grain FMJ
  • 150 rounds American Eagle 124 grain FMJ
  • 125 rounds Federal Classic 115 grain Hi-Shok JHP
  • 100 rounds ECO 124 grain FMJ made in Switzerland
  • 100 rounds 115 grain Sellier & Bellot FMJ
  • 50 rounds Tula Ammo 115 grain FMJ made in Russia steel case

Before shooting, the pistol was cleaned and oiled. After two hours and shooting 675 rounds the Nano was still running fine but I was tired and happy the range time was up. I shot $150 worth of ammo, plus the two hours range time at $24, so my play day cost $175.00 and well worth it. I wanted to test the new 9mm, and now I now feel strongly that the Beretta Nano is a very reliable little pistol.

The Accuracy seems to be very good. My accuracy depends on a firm grip, smooth trigger pull, and focus on the front sight. My biggest problem was trigger pull, and occasionally relaxing my grip. As I got smoother with the trigger pull, towards the end of the 675 rounds, my group size reduced to 3 inches wide by 6 inches high at 21 feet.

This Beretta is a comfortable gun to shoot. After shooting continuously for almost two hours, and 675 rounds, I experienced no discomfort what so ever. I could have shot another 700 rounds, that is how comfortable the Nano is to shoot. Compare this to a KelTec PF9 which can be quite uncomfortable even painful after shooting just a few rounds.

The magazines are easy to load. Firing 675 rounds required reloading the magazines 135 times. Even when loading the full 6 rounds it was not a problem and the Nano cycled normally.

Beretta Nano Reliability

The Beretta Nano has demonstrated the reliability and accuracy required to make it an outstanding concealed carry 9mm subcompact pistol. My opinion of the Beretta Nano so far is excellent.

Targets are made on 8.5 x 11 paper. The groups are about 3 inches wide by 6 inches high, 50 rounds in each target shot at 21 feet.

50 rounds American Eagle 124 grain 21 feet

American Eagle 124 grain 21 feet

Beretta Nano Federal JHP 115 grain 50 rounds

Federal JHP 115 grain 50 rounds

I caution all about the reviews you read in the formal national magazines and Blogs. I read those reports about the Kimber Solo and couldn’t wait to buy one and that turned out to be a huge mistake. To date I have not read one negative remark about the Kimber Solo in any commercial or national publication magazine or blog that receives advertising money from Kimber, the NRA included. Read these personal accounts and range reports in the blogs and forums and wait until the Nano establishes its reputation, good or bad, and then make up your own mind.

So far, the only negative performance experience I know of about the Nano, and have personally experienced is failure to eject, and I think that was caused by a lazy, relaxed grip while shooting low buck ammunition. However, I include a couple accounts of Beretta Nano owners who have experienced the FTE problem while shooting the Nano.

Here is another range report after 440 rounds shooting mostly quality JHP ammunition. Most of the ammo I used shooting 1000 rounds through the Nano was various quality FMJ.

The Beretta Nano is building a reputation for reliability and accuracy. So far the only common complaint seems to be the trigger, which reminds me of a long, slightly stiff Glock trigger, and the FTE problem. Although the Nano trigger is a little long, it is not nearly as long as the Ruger LC9. I found that the LC9 trigger affected my accuracy much more than the Glock like Nano trigger.

This post about the Beretta Nano range report by kal0 on the Defensive Carry forum:

“Well today I took for the first time my Beretta Nano 9mm to the range and

in summary I’m very happy with it.

This is the ammo I used today (No failures to report)

Because this will be one of my carry guns I make sure I test several boxes of what I will carry plus FMJ that have the similar grains, etc. (in this case 124) and I got two boxes laying around of 147 so I also brought that.

  • 100 rounds of 147gr 9mm JHP Winchester Personal Protection (white box)
  • 300 rounds of 124gr 9mm FMJ Winchester NATO (white box)
  • 20 rounds of 124gr 9mm JHP + P Winchester PDX1
  • 20 rounds of 124gr 9mm JHP + P Gold Dot (This will be my carry ammo)

I must say, that my first shots were not that impressive… I was shooting to the left really bad  the trigger took me a little bit by surprise.

My excuse :

You know this is my first DAO/9 pound trigger type of gun so it will take me some time.

But the trigger is very smooth, so I had no problems adjusting to it once I started getting the feel of it.” Read the entire range report including pictures by kal0 on Defensive Carry forum.

It is a good sign that the range reports for the Nano are coming in and it looks for the most part like Beretta has a homerun in the making with the Nano.

Here is another range report for the nano by Russ  on the Kahr Talk forum:

“I shot 250 rounds of Winchester white box, reloads, S&B, all 115 grain.

I had zero FTF & FTE. (I like how the Nano racks every time with authority.)

I included attachments of some of the targets. (If it doesn’t work sorry I have never done it before)

I don’t have the best eye sight and shooting with bi-focal glasses has its challenges. Several 7 rounds shoots I hit nothing but the black of the target at 7 yards with no support.

I was surprised how accurate I was with the Nano which had tighter groups than the Sig 229 we fired and the Nano held its own with a Beretta 92 at 7 yards.

I did one rapid point shooting series and hit the target at 7 yards 6 out of 7 rounds and surprisingly the groupings were not all that bad.

I also hit the target 3 out of 7 rounds at 25 yards. I had never fired a pocket firearm at that distance and I only tried it one time. If I had better eye sight I probably could have done better. It was blurry at that distance.

My honest assessment of the firearm is I am honestly shocked how dead on I can shoot. I have never been a great shot and I have never been able to hit nothing but black of a target with a full magazine at 7 yards and it was not a fluke because I did it several times with no support and my friend who has better eye sight and more shooting experience put 13 out of 14 rounds in a 1 1/2″ group at 7 yards and the one that was off was the very first shot he had ever fired from the firearm. I would say impressive when someone with zero experience shooting my Nano can place two magazines of shells in a 1 1/2″ inch group at 7 yards. Russ” Read the entire post by Russ on the Kahr Talk forum  here along with other comments.

Negative reports about the Beretta Nano

Here is a range report after 800 rounds. The owner experienced failures to eject and as I also experienced, he had difficulty clearing the jam because the Nano has no external slide release. Freeway on the AR15 forum provides this informative account of his experience with the Beretta Nano:

“[UPDATE: 12/17/11 I sold the Nano today because out of 800 rounds now tested, it had five FTEs. The last two happened at 700 rounds and almost at 800 rounds. I also sold it because it would be nerve wracking to clear a malfunction without a slide stop if you were in a defense situation. And the main reason I sold it is that it is not much smaller or thinner than a Glock 26.]

Four hundred and twelve rounds produced two failures to extract. Fired twelve rounds of Double Tap +P 124-grain JHP, 200 rounds of Hansen (Israeli) 115-grain FMJ and 200 rounds of 115-grain Wolf FMJ. Completely comfortable to shoot and quite accurate.” The entire post along with comments can be found here.

Another problem with FTE while shooting the Beretta Nano. This could turn out to be an important issue. We need to determine if this FTE issue is the fault of the gun, the fault of the ammunition, or the fault of the shooter. I experienced failures to eject while shooting the Nano and I attribute the problem to limp wresting. However, I plan to shoot a few more range sessions to learn more.

Here is a post by DogDoc15 on the AR15 forum who describes his FTE issue with the Nano:

“I purchased a Nano last week. Fired 100 rounds of WWB and had 7 out of the 100 rounds that failed to eject.

Started searching as much as I could and found the Beretta forum, and this FTE issue is occurring with a fair number. There is allot of discussion about ammo, extractor, recoil spring, magazines, etc… But at this point it is unclear as to the cause. The extraction issue is unique, as the fired casing remains in the chamber as if the extractor is not catching the rim of the casing. Going tomorrow to put another 200 rounds through the pistol to see what happens.

Incidentally, this pistol feels amazing to shoot and I find it very accurate, just waiting to see what is ironed out with this issue.” Although mention is made of the FTE problem this owner also praises the Beretta Nano. Read the original comments by DogDoc15 on the AR15 forum here.

Watch my Beretta Nano 1000 Round Report Video

Incoming search terms:

  • beretta nano review
  • beretta nano reviews
  • beretta nano problems
  • beretta nano ammo
  • beretta nano fte
  • nano 9mm review
  • winchester white box 9mm 147gr hp for beretta nano

Comments on this entry are closed.

  • Chuck Burns Aug 20, 2014, 4:33 pm

    Thanks very much for your in depth and informative remarks about the trigger adjustment you performed on your Nano.

  • Mike Aug 20, 2014, 1:06 pm

    Read your review and the subsequent comments. I like the Nano and have had zero problems with it. It is very Glock-like in feel and function. I share the common complaint about the trigger pull both in length and poundage. There is a mod posted on line. If you are interested, Google it and you’ll find a video. Being an engineer, I had two concerns about the mod. One was safety; the second was reducing the striker drive distance prior to release which would reduce the strike slightly. I spoke with a friend who is an experienced gun smith, who noted, that since the striker was not fully cocked in the carry condition the reduction of the sear overlap would not impact the safety because you could only get near the break point when you intentionally pull the trigger. He did note that shorting the striker drive distance would reduce the energy from the pin and the only way to know if it was critical was to test fire it after the mod. Not wanting to mess up the factory striker, I found a replacement striker on line and did the mod on the striker tang. I made a fixture from two pieces of wood clamped in the vice. I then drilled into the wood at the mating sections, to create a channel in both half’s so I could clamp the barrel between them, holding it securely in the vice. I kept the sear angle on the tab perfectly horizontal so I could I very carefully file the surface and measure the progress. Using the existing sear wear marks on the original striker as a witness mark, I measured half that distance as my desired goal to remove. I removed 0.060″ from the striker tang using a very sharp new file, not a stone, making certain to keep the sear angle the same and the surface edges crisp. This shortened the pull noticeably. I polished everything in the process with jeweler’s rouge, like you would do in a Glock fluff and buff. The originator of this mod hyper compressed the trigger spring overnight, which I did as well. I found it brought the trigger into a near Glock feel. The spring tweak didn’t do as much as I had hoped. The pull was reduced by a pound so it’s about 6lb, but it’s significantly shorter. No primer strike issues from the mod. Overall it took a couple of hours as I’d never pulled the Nano apart, previously. Like every learning curve, the next one could be done in 30 min. I’m happy with the results, and have the factory striker if I ever need to return it to factory specs.

  • Chuck Burns Jun 11, 2014, 7:28 pm

    The spent case in the chamber or the stove pipe is a classic symptom of low power ammo. In this scenario the case is actually extracted from the chamber but the slide is not powered back far enough to contact the ejector. The slide pushes the case right back either into the chamber or as a stove pipe.

    You are doing the right thing, sending the gun to Beretta for evaluation. If there is a problem they will fix it however, they will not test the gun with Winchester White Box or Walmart Federal. They will test it with higher power quality ammo that will most likely cycle the Nano with no problems.

    There have been Nano’s with extractor issues but those were the early manufacture dates. Beretta has addressed that problem. Let us know how this turns out.

  • Kenneth Risenhoover Jun 11, 2014, 5:56 pm

    I recently purchased the Barette Nano for my daughter to carry. We both shot a total of 400 rounds. 200 Winchester 124 grain and Federal 124 grain.
    out of that 400 rounds, we had at least 10 FTE. The empty cartridge would remain in chamber. It was not a grip issue. It was not an ammo issue. it is a gun issue. I will be contacting Barreta. I really regret this purchase.

  • cebur19 Aug 1, 2012, 8:41 am

    Sorry I can’t read your comment, I assume it is Russian. I visited your website and because it is about guns and related content to my blog I’ll leave the link.