I'm for the same sort of weapon choice as yourself - although in the real world you can't "tool-up" the way you can wear a dress watch or tux instead of jeans. Bond needs a weapon for all occasions - concealable, powerful, large-capacity etc etc and I suppose it's almost impossible to meet those demands - there will always be a compromise.
Amazon #1 Bestselling Author. If you enjoy crime, espionage, action and fast-moving thrillers follow this link:
In Bond's case the overriding equation is power+concealability. High-capacity would be nice, but a balanced combination of those first two is a must. That's why I tend toward the PPS.
He could easily compromise capacity--particularly since the action sequences in the Craig films are more intimately-scaled than the massive shoot-outs of the Brosnan-era (I'm pretty sure any given action sequence in any Brosnan film saw more rounds discharged that in CR and QoS combined).
In Bond's role the PPS would be a good weapon, especially as it's so narrow for concealment. 9mm would be handy and still have 7/8 rds for him to play with. It's a pretty ubiquitous calibre and found almost everywhere. .40s&w is harder to find in former Soviet countries, the mid-east and far-east.
Amazon #1 Bestselling Author. If you enjoy crime, espionage, action and fast-moving thrillers follow this link:
I have the LCP and it is a fine little pistol. Goes well with the little CRKT dagger that Bond carries in QOS.
The Ruger LCP makes a good disposible handgun. Construction wise, it varies little from the Walther P99, metal slide/ plastic frame. It is just a whole lot smaller and not as fancy in the looks department. It is prehaps a worthy sucessor to the Beretta .25. Like the Ruger the Beretta was a "mid range" pistol in terms of quality back in it's day.
But I still think Bond's old PPK does everything he needs a small pistol for. As long as the UK military doesn't run out of stock, or all the available PPK's get demilled for collectors, Bond should be fixed for some time.
BTW ASP wrote a very nice and well-illustrated article!
j.bladesCurrently? You must be joking?Posts: 530MI6 Agent
^ I respect you're oppinion so out of curiosity 7289, what gun could potentially (God forbid) replace the walther ppk? IOW what is functionally the best arm, looks good, and is easily consealable on the same or even better level then Bonds present gun?
Can any gun match it?
"I take a ridiculous pleasure in what I eat and drink."
James Bond carrying a Ruger? What next? Having him drive a Toyota hatchback?
He already drives a mondeo... )
I've got to say, I've used Ruger mini 14's before and they are extradorinary quality, especially when compared to any M16 derivitive. And I've owned a Ruger 10/22 for fifteen years and thoroughly abused it. It's still rock-solid.
Amazon #1 Bestselling Author. If you enjoy crime, espionage, action and fast-moving thrillers follow this link:
^ I respect you're oppinion so out of curiosity 7289, what gun could potentially (God forbid) replace the walther ppk? IOW what is functionally the best arm, looks good, and is easily consealable on the same or even better level then Bonds present gun?
Well, what can I saw when Asp9mm beats me to the punch and shows off his S&W Conversions!
I stand by the German PPK for 007, as I would never presume to contradict Ian Fleming with regard to things Bondian. But.....
IMO the S&W 640-1 is one of the nicest handguns ever made. Based on the Fleming approved - Bond used S&W Centennial Ariweight this stainless steel revolver is capable of firing .357 magnum cartridges, and is a very easy handgun to conceal and shoot. One can even achieve credible scores with this model at 25 yards - which is pretty far for a "combat" handgun.
Should Bond want something lighter, then the Centennial Airweight is still available as the S&W 442. While not chambered for the .357 magnum, this airweight revolver is one of the most popular carry handguns in the States. Versions are also available constructed using very light titianium elements. The ultra-light pieces are a bit challenging to shoot though.
In the small auto which Bond favors, I do suspect he would like the Ruger. The LCP is a pretty new handgun and I would prehaps give it another couple of years in general use before recommending it for Mr. Bond.
Most likely though a real oo7 would use a Glock or other more common handgun. Custom pieces are nice for the stylish secret agent - someone with a geniune "license to kill" would want to carry something that 1) Works 2) Is Common 3) not traceable.
Despite the above observations, I do like the .32 PPK. It has surprisingly good penetration, excellent reliablity and accuracy, best of all it does all these thing and looks great while doing it.
James Bond carrying a Ruger? What next? Having him drive a Toyota hatchback?
Rugers are good guns. He carried one in his car in Gardners books.
Yeah, his car. The SAAB! So we can considered Gardner's judgement on these matters a bit hit-and-miss.
Rugers are fine economy guns--excellent compared to others in their price range--but c'mon, this is Bond. He doesn't need to carry a mid-price weapon any more than he'd buy his suits at the separates rack at Macy's. His accessories need more class and savior faire. Plus, there's the problem of the .380 round. Why use it when you can upgrade to a 9mm just as easily?
An Intratec TEC-DC9 with a backup as a Jennings J-22.
But seriously, I'd have him carrying a Walther PPK/S. If anyone remembers these, they were Walther PP's with PPK-length barrels and slides. You don't upset the purists that all want the PPK back, but he gets an extra round to work with, more controllability if he's forced to fire rapidly due to the longer grip, and still has the advantage of concealability. Hardly an expensive gun, but still made by Walther with the kind of quality you'd expect from them.
The PP line is manufactured by Smith and Wesson now, and has had nightmarish quality issues.
The Ruger Blackhawk .44 and Redhawk .44 that Gardner had Bond using are 100% bad ass handguns, and nice looking in my opinion.
"I've got to say, I've used Ruger mini 14's before and they are extradorinary quality, especially when compared to any M16 derivitive. And I've owned a Ruger 10/22 for fifteen years and thoroughly abused it. It's still rock-solid."
I agree about the 10/22, however...I know many, many a veteran of both law enforcement and the US military whom I've asked about the Mini-14, since I've always been tempted to get one. As in, at least two dozen ex-LEO's and current or ex-military. Without exception, I've had the AR recommended over the Mini-14. The problem lies with the Mini-14's barrel harmonics. Basically, the barrel was designed too thin to get a rifle that's capable of getting MOA groups at 100 yards. I've seen guys accustomed to getting 1.5"-2" groups at 100 yards with an AR-15 get 4"-5"(!) groups with the Mini-14. As if to add insult to injury, these very same guys are generally capable of getting better groups with a 5.56x45-chambered AK (!) than a Mini-14 (for example, the Norinco 84S, the PolyTech AK-223, whatever the 5.56x45 version of the Arsenal SLR is...). Ruger FINALLY corrected this is in the Ruger Mini-14 Target Rifle, but an off-the-shelf, run of the mill Mini-14 or Ranch Rifle is not as accurate as it should be. I know this is OT, but I'm an AR guy.
I've had okay luck with the three S&W-licensed PPK/s pistols I've owned, but I've heard some pretty serious complaints about them from other people. The recent recall on PPK/S and PPKs doesn't inspire a lot of confidence, either.
Asp9mmOver the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,535MI6 Agent
"I've got to say, I've used Ruger mini 14's before and they are extradorinary quality, especially when compared to any M16 derivitive. And I've owned a Ruger 10/22 for fifteen years and thoroughly abused it. It's still rock-solid."
I agree about the 10/22, however...I know many, many a veteran of both law enforcement and the US military whom I've asked about the Mini-14, since I've always been tempted to get one. As in, at least two dozen ex-LEO's and current or ex-military. Without exception, I've had the AR recommended over the Mini-14. The problem lies with the Mini-14's barrel harmonics. Basically, the barrel was designed too thin to get a rifle that's capable of getting MOA groups at 100 yards. I've seen guys accustomed to getting 1.5"-2" groups at 100 yards with an AR-15 get 4"-5"(!) groups with the Mini-14. As if to add insult to injury, these very same guys are generally capable of getting better groups with a 5.56x45-chambered AK (!) than a Mini-14 (for example, the Norinco 84S, the PolyTech AK-223, whatever the 5.56x45 version of the Arsenal SLR is...). Ruger FINALLY corrected this is in the Ruger Mini-14 Target Rifle, but an off-the-shelf, run of the mill Mini-14 or Ranch Rifle is not as accurate as it should be. I know this is OT, but I'm an AR guy.
I understand the foibles of many different weapons, but my point was quality. I've used most AR's, especially M4s and they are all clunky and springy inside. There is a lot of noise made by the machinary of the working parts. Shoot one, then move direct to an H&K G3 for instance, and it's another world. The Ruger mini 14 is a quality piece, and few shooters would ever keep one standard anyway. It's interesting what you say about accuracy - I didn't suffer 4-5inch humiliation, but the ones I used were customised New Jersey (Union County) SWAT medium range sniper rifles. So, they would be tried and tested. I did however, once own a 77/22 Ruger in .22 Hornet that was just so inconsistant that I worried it was all over for me - so I hear you. But as for quality, I still think Ruger are right up there.
Amazon #1 Bestselling Author. If you enjoy crime, espionage, action and fast-moving thrillers follow this link:
"but the ones I used were customised New Jersey (Union County) SWAT medium range sniper rifles."
That explains it; you probably weren't shooting an out-of-the-box rifle. Although I've spoken to former and current LEO's, as mentioned, most had been issued the rifle or purchased one as a patrol car carbine in "out of the box" configuration. The ones you were shooting were almost certainly equipped with what's known as harmonic dampeners. These gadgets are generally weights that have been added to the barrel or, in the case of the recently-released Ruger Mini-14 Target Rifle, it looks more like a fake suppressor attached to the muzzle. These literally prevent the pencil-thin barrel from "torquing"; a bit like an AK barrel when fitted to a rifle with a stamped receiver, albeit worse.
"The Ruger mini 14 is a quality piece, and few shooters would ever keep one standard anyway."
Maybe in the UK. In the US, most that I've seen are in factory configuration barring perhaps the installation of a Butler Creek folding stock or extended magazine release. In fact, with the 1980's "first generation" rifles, they're worth more in original configuration (especially the ones with factory-installed folding stocks).
"Shoot one, then move direct to an H&K G3 for instance, and it's another world."
Well, naturally. You're firing 5.56x45 in one and 7.62x51 in the other, for one. But even then, an HK-91-type rifle has to be the singularly-most annoying rifle to clean barring perhaps the old Martini-Henry if you've fired it with blackpowder (yes, you can get away with using light smokeless loads in a Martini-Henry; for more info, google "gunboards") due to the HK-91's fluted chamber. A better comparison would be an HK-93; same mechanism, in 5.56. But still, it requires a ridiculous amount of cleaning. Being clunky and springy inside doesn't matter. What ultimately does is when I fire the rifle, the reliability of said rifle, and the results it's going to give me with regard to grouping.
I'm not exactly taking my AR-15 into the jungles of Vietnam or the Middle East where sand would ruin it. And to be honest, most LEO's aren't, either, unless they are/were US military veterans. To be honest, I think the AR gets a bum rap simply because of conditions it malfunctioned in that, realistically, no police officer, security detail, FBI agent, ATF agent, or what-have-you can expect to face in the US.
"I did however, once own a 77/22 Ruger in .22 Hornet"
Ruger pistols are truly fine guns. I don't own one, but I've fired many, both revolver and semiauto. But their long arms (except for the indestructable 10/22) are a different story. A very good friend of mine about five years ago purchased a Red Label O/U 12 Gauge shotgun in stainless steel and after FOUR shots, the forearm broke off. Within a few months, I was haggling over something at one of the two local gunshops when some guy came in, producing a Ruger Red Label 12 Gauge O/U with the forearm broken off. "Ten shots, it came right off," he tells me. Ruger later fixed that particular problem (turned out to be one of the additives in the mixture for the synthetic stock combined with the rather weak design of the Red Label's forearm), but the gunsmith (whom I consider to be the best I've ever known) made a remark I made sure to remember: "Ruger and stainless again?" The guy bringing in the Red Label asks something to the effect of "what do you mean?" The gunsmith responds: "In the '80's, it was 77's having the stainless finish flake off and in the '90's, it was broken stocks with Ranch Rifles. I guess this is what Ruger gave us for the 2000's."
Fortunately, I should add that Ruger will fix your firearm for free.
By the way, are you gonna eat that?
j.bladesCurrently? You must be joking?Posts: 530MI6 Agent
Very insightful guys, the question had always plagued me. Really enjoyed reading your recommendations! {[]
"I take a ridiculous pleasure in what I eat and drink."
I say he should use the Asp for sure. I would like to see that Comedian Jone Reese of whoever from TWINE and DAD actually give him the Asp over the PPK for stopping power. He could even say the Asp is chambered in .40 S/w for effect! Man that would be cool. And he could comment on the grips and the sighting system. Yes that would be great. Time to bring James Bond back to class and quality while keeping some degree of realism! Personally I think the two best Bond films for From Russia With Love and Goldeneye. But that is just me. Both had that touch of intrinsic class- and I would so love to direct a james bond movie or atleast talk to the director about what made the great ones great. It was the class and warmth! Somthing the world is lacking a lot of these days. But definetly bring forth he .40 smith and wesson asp!
"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people...To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." -George Mason, during Virginia's ratification convention, 1788
Man that IS the gun of the new movie and it goes with the reboot concept for the series that Craig was to bring.
Also I would like to see Bond with a 1911 one day for a change. There is no reason he cant weild the best once in a while.
"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people...To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." -George Mason, during Virginia's ratification convention, 1788
"Also I would like to see Bond with a 1911 one day for a change."
It may the best, at least in my opinion, but it is NOT Bond. If we do see him with a 1911-style pistol, though, I'd like to see him with a .45 ACP Lightweight Commander (the Combat Commander has a steel frame versus the Lightweight having an aluminum frame; believe me, the Lightweight Commander would make it easier for Bond to carry), Series 70 or later, as the pre-Series 70 .45 LWT Commanders pretty much all shoot loose. At least marginally concealable and also reliable. The Officer's Model .45 based on the 1911 frame has jamming issues, as do many other "sub-Commander" 1911 derivatives.
One thing I haven't read being suggested in this topic (or I just plain missed it) is to have Bond carry a Beretta with a skeleton grip and a sawn-off barrel just like in the first 5 novels. Since Casino Royale rebooted the series, shouldn't Bond go back to his first gun? I know this is not going to happen (and it wouldn't look good if it did) but I was wondering what you guys think. I think it would make a good scene: Bond getting his new gun and altering it to fit his wishes.
One thing I haven't read being suggested in this topic (or I just plain missed it) is to have Bond carry a Beretta with a skeleton grip and a sawn-off barrel just like in the first 5 novels. Since Casino Royale rebooted the series, shouldn't Bond go back to his first gun? I know this is not going to happen (and it wouldn't look good if it did) but I was wondering what you guys think. I think it would make a good scene: Bond getting his new gun and altering it to fit his wishes.
There really aren't any modern Berettas you can do that with. I think that is why the ASP is so loved, as it has the mods that Bond actually carried out on his Beretta.
Comments
http://apbateman.com
He could easily compromise capacity--particularly since the action sequences in the Craig films are more intimately-scaled than the massive shoot-outs of the Brosnan-era (I'm pretty sure any given action sequence in any Brosnan film saw more rounds discharged that in CR and QoS combined).
http://apbateman.com
http://www.jamesbondlifestyle.com/index_articles.php?m=articles&g=art080702
http://apbateman.com
I always thought they should have armed the Dalton Bond with the P5 Compact. A bit too late for that, I guess...
It's a Ruger LCP in .380 cal.
http://apbateman.com
Rugers are good guns. He carried one in his car in Gardners books.
The Ruger LCP makes a good disposible handgun. Construction wise, it varies little from the Walther P99, metal slide/ plastic frame. It is just a whole lot smaller and not as fancy in the looks department. It is prehaps a worthy sucessor to the Beretta .25. Like the Ruger the Beretta was a "mid range" pistol in terms of quality back in it's day.
But I still think Bond's old PPK does everything he needs a small pistol for. As long as the UK military doesn't run out of stock, or all the available PPK's get demilled for collectors, Bond should be fixed for some time.
BTW ASP wrote a very nice and well-illustrated article!
Bond’s Beretta
The Handguns of Ian Fleming's James Bond
Can any gun match it?
~ Casino Royale, Ian Fleming
He already drives a mondeo...
I've got to say, I've used Ruger mini 14's before and they are extradorinary quality, especially when compared to any M16 derivitive. And I've owned a Ruger 10/22 for fifteen years and thoroughly abused it. It's still rock-solid.
http://apbateman.com
There's one that can beat it
http://apbateman.com
I stand by the German PPK for 007, as I would never presume to contradict Ian Fleming with regard to things Bondian. But.....
IMO the S&W 640-1 is one of the nicest handguns ever made. Based on the Fleming approved - Bond used S&W Centennial Ariweight this stainless steel revolver is capable of firing .357 magnum cartridges, and is a very easy handgun to conceal and shoot. One can even achieve credible scores with this model at 25 yards - which is pretty far for a "combat" handgun.
Should Bond want something lighter, then the Centennial Airweight is still available as the S&W 442. While not chambered for the .357 magnum, this airweight revolver is one of the most popular carry handguns in the States. Versions are also available constructed using very light titianium elements. The ultra-light pieces are a bit challenging to shoot though.
In the small auto which Bond favors, I do suspect he would like the Ruger. The LCP is a pretty new handgun and I would prehaps give it another couple of years in general use before recommending it for Mr. Bond.
Most likely though a real oo7 would use a Glock or other more common handgun. Custom pieces are nice for the stylish secret agent - someone with a geniune "license to kill" would want to carry something that 1) Works 2) Is Common 3) not traceable.
Despite the above observations, I do like the .32 PPK. It has surprisingly good penetration, excellent reliablity and accuracy, best of all it does all these thing and looks great while doing it.
Bond’s Beretta
The Handguns of Ian Fleming's James Bond
Yeah, his car. The SAAB! So we can considered Gardner's judgement on these matters a bit hit-and-miss.
Rugers are fine economy guns--excellent compared to others in their price range--but c'mon, this is Bond. He doesn't need to carry a mid-price weapon any more than he'd buy his suits at the separates rack at Macy's. His accessories need more class and savior faire. Plus, there's the problem of the .380 round. Why use it when you can upgrade to a 9mm just as easily?
I'd still keep him with a Walther PPS.
But seriously, I'd have him carrying a Walther PPK/S. If anyone remembers these, they were Walther PP's with PPK-length barrels and slides. You don't upset the purists that all want the PPK back, but he gets an extra round to work with, more controllability if he's forced to fire rapidly due to the longer grip, and still has the advantage of concealability. Hardly an expensive gun, but still made by Walther with the kind of quality you'd expect from them.
The Ruger Blackhawk .44 and Redhawk .44 that Gardner had Bond using are 100% bad ass handguns, and nice looking in my opinion.
I agree about the 10/22, however...I know many, many a veteran of both law enforcement and the US military whom I've asked about the Mini-14, since I've always been tempted to get one. As in, at least two dozen ex-LEO's and current or ex-military. Without exception, I've had the AR recommended over the Mini-14. The problem lies with the Mini-14's barrel harmonics. Basically, the barrel was designed too thin to get a rifle that's capable of getting MOA groups at 100 yards. I've seen guys accustomed to getting 1.5"-2" groups at 100 yards with an AR-15 get 4"-5"(!) groups with the Mini-14. As if to add insult to injury, these very same guys are generally capable of getting better groups with a 5.56x45-chambered AK (!) than a Mini-14 (for example, the Norinco 84S, the PolyTech AK-223, whatever the 5.56x45 version of the Arsenal SLR is...). Ruger FINALLY corrected this is in the Ruger Mini-14 Target Rifle, but an off-the-shelf, run of the mill Mini-14 or Ranch Rifle is not as accurate as it should be. I know this is OT, but I'm an AR guy.
Actually, the Interarms-import PPK/S's of the '70's are what I was referring to.
Nothing wrong with that Saab, it was a great car. Besides, he only used it for three novels, in the rest he had a Bentley.
I understand the foibles of many different weapons, but my point was quality. I've used most AR's, especially M4s and they are all clunky and springy inside. There is a lot of noise made by the machinary of the working parts. Shoot one, then move direct to an H&K G3 for instance, and it's another world. The Ruger mini 14 is a quality piece, and few shooters would ever keep one standard anyway. It's interesting what you say about accuracy - I didn't suffer 4-5inch humiliation, but the ones I used were customised New Jersey (Union County) SWAT medium range sniper rifles. So, they would be tried and tested. I did however, once own a 77/22 Ruger in .22 Hornet that was just so inconsistant that I worried it was all over for me - so I hear you. But as for quality, I still think Ruger are right up there.
http://apbateman.com
That explains it; you probably weren't shooting an out-of-the-box rifle. Although I've spoken to former and current LEO's, as mentioned, most had been issued the rifle or purchased one as a patrol car carbine in "out of the box" configuration. The ones you were shooting were almost certainly equipped with what's known as harmonic dampeners. These gadgets are generally weights that have been added to the barrel or, in the case of the recently-released Ruger Mini-14 Target Rifle, it looks more like a fake suppressor attached to the muzzle. These literally prevent the pencil-thin barrel from "torquing"; a bit like an AK barrel when fitted to a rifle with a stamped receiver, albeit worse.
"The Ruger mini 14 is a quality piece, and few shooters would ever keep one standard anyway."
Maybe in the UK. In the US, most that I've seen are in factory configuration barring perhaps the installation of a Butler Creek folding stock or extended magazine release. In fact, with the 1980's "first generation" rifles, they're worth more in original configuration (especially the ones with factory-installed folding stocks).
"Shoot one, then move direct to an H&K G3 for instance, and it's another world."
Well, naturally. You're firing 5.56x45 in one and 7.62x51 in the other, for one. But even then, an HK-91-type rifle has to be the singularly-most annoying rifle to clean barring perhaps the old Martini-Henry if you've fired it with blackpowder (yes, you can get away with using light smokeless loads in a Martini-Henry; for more info, google "gunboards") due to the HK-91's fluted chamber. A better comparison would be an HK-93; same mechanism, in 5.56. But still, it requires a ridiculous amount of cleaning. Being clunky and springy inside doesn't matter. What ultimately does is when I fire the rifle, the reliability of said rifle, and the results it's going to give me with regard to grouping.
I'm not exactly taking my AR-15 into the jungles of Vietnam or the Middle East where sand would ruin it. And to be honest, most LEO's aren't, either, unless they are/were US military veterans. To be honest, I think the AR gets a bum rap simply because of conditions it malfunctioned in that, realistically, no police officer, security detail, FBI agent, ATF agent, or what-have-you can expect to face in the US.
"I did however, once own a 77/22 Ruger in .22 Hornet"
Ruger pistols are truly fine guns. I don't own one, but I've fired many, both revolver and semiauto. But their long arms (except for the indestructable 10/22) are a different story. A very good friend of mine about five years ago purchased a Red Label O/U 12 Gauge shotgun in stainless steel and after FOUR shots, the forearm broke off. Within a few months, I was haggling over something at one of the two local gunshops when some guy came in, producing a Ruger Red Label 12 Gauge O/U with the forearm broken off. "Ten shots, it came right off," he tells me. Ruger later fixed that particular problem (turned out to be one of the additives in the mixture for the synthetic stock combined with the rather weak design of the Red Label's forearm), but the gunsmith (whom I consider to be the best I've ever known) made a remark I made sure to remember: "Ruger and stainless again?" The guy bringing in the Red Label asks something to the effect of "what do you mean?" The gunsmith responds: "In the '80's, it was 77's having the stainless finish flake off and in the '90's, it was broken stocks with Ranch Rifles. I guess this is what Ruger gave us for the 2000's."
Fortunately, I should add that Ruger will fix your firearm for free.
~ Casino Royale, Ian Fleming
Man that IS the gun of the new movie and it goes with the reboot concept for the series that Craig was to bring.
Also I would like to see Bond with a 1911 one day for a change. There is no reason he cant weild the best once in a while.
It may the best, at least in my opinion, but it is NOT Bond. If we do see him with a 1911-style pistol, though, I'd like to see him with a .45 ACP Lightweight Commander (the Combat Commander has a steel frame versus the Lightweight having an aluminum frame; believe me, the Lightweight Commander would make it easier for Bond to carry), Series 70 or later, as the pre-Series 70 .45 LWT Commanders pretty much all shoot loose. At least marginally concealable and also reliable. The Officer's Model .45 based on the 1911 frame has jamming issues, as do many other "sub-Commander" 1911 derivatives.
One thing I haven't read being suggested in this topic (or I just plain missed it) is to have Bond carry a Beretta with a skeleton grip and a sawn-off barrel just like in the first 5 novels. Since Casino Royale rebooted the series, shouldn't Bond go back to his first gun? I know this is not going to happen (and it wouldn't look good if it did) but I was wondering what you guys think. I think it would make a good scene: Bond getting his new gun and altering it to fit his wishes.
There really aren't any modern Berettas you can do that with. I think that is why the ASP is so loved, as it has the mods that Bond actually carried out on his Beretta.