Beretta 682. 02/01/02


The Beretta 682 owes much of its ancestry to the 680.

Through the mid 70’s to early 80’s, the 680 was Beretta’s main competition gun. At that
time Beretta was nowhere near the force in the British clay scene that are now. That
goes back really to the dawn of the 682.

The 682 was introduced in the early mid 80’s. And was part of a 3 model range which
has since been expanded. But in those days it was the 686, 687 and 682. The 686 and
687 were made in both clay and game specification, but the 682 was only ever a clay
gun. 

This followed much more closely the lines and weight of the 680. The guns were also
visibly similar in that both were silver action, and with little engraving. In fact the 682
had less than its predecessor with just a border engraving. It seemed strange for this
reason that the 682 was more expensive than the 687 which had a full covering of
game scene engraving. The reasons were though that the 682 have to be polished to a
higher standard because there is so little engraving, and this polishing is done by hand-
more expensive. Also the 687 has its engraving rolled on by machine, whereas on the
682 although it has only a limited amount of border engraving, it is none the less cut by
hand.

One of the most noticeable points of the 682 is its weight. To some it is an advantage
to others it is a minus point. The 682 weighs in at around 8lb. Not over heavy by
today’s standards where Krieghoffs, Perazzi and the like can easily weigh in excess of
these sort of weights.

Most of the weight was gained by making the action so much fatter. This is particularly
noticeable when looking at the thickness of the action sidewalls. The disadvantage of
this extra weight is the greater effort involved in making the gun point and swing where
you want. Though for most, the advantages definitely outweigh the disadvantages.
Those being that the heavier gun will point and swing that much more positively and
also the weight absorbs more of the felt recoil.

The action of the 682 is mechanically identical to that of the 686/7. And it has little
difference from the 680. The main one being the recoil spring that power the inertia
block is a folded wire spring in the 682 and was a coil spring in the 680.

The latest incarnation, the 682 gold E did have mechanical selection for the second
shot, when first introduced a couple of years ago. But the latest versions have gone
back to the tried and tested method of inertia. 

Other than that the classic Beretta mechanical features have remained the same over 

The years. There is still the U bolt locking system and the action hinged on stub pins or
trunnions. The trigger plate firing mechanism at a glance appears quite complex, but is
actually very simple.

Over time there has been little done to improve it. 

About 10 years ago the nuts that hold the mainsprings captive on the guide rods were
redesigned and beefed up as their predecessors did have a habit of breaking and
sometimes the bits would fall into the action causing it to stop. Also there was a
blocking device added to the trigger so that when the gun is opened and the top lever
is across. Then the trigger is blocked and the gun cannot be fired. This addition was
mainly to appeased American product liability laws, and really adds no benefit to the
gun.

Most of the changes to the gun over years have been cosmetic.

Wood work on the 682 has always been fairly chunky, with plenty to get hold of- like
some girls!

On the early guns the stocks were quite thick set, with a recoil pad. Length of pull was
14 5/8” but that seems to have got longer over the years; which suits most people.
Over time, the stocks gained palm swells, then they lost them. Then they would
become slimmer. Pistol grip depth changed as well, but all these changes were quite
subtle.

The forends were a semi beavertail on the first guns, then went to schnabel type which
is probably the most popular. On the latest 682E, you have the choice of schnabel or
semi beavertail.

As I have already said, the gun hasn’t altered mechanically, though there have been
cosmetic alterations. The top rib started off as a 8mm file cut top rib, but was soon
replaced by a 10mm version with a central sighting channel. The foresight also changed
from a strip type to a conventional screw in type. And also action weight has altered by
varying the thickness of the sidewalls mainly.

In fact the 682 has a continual battle with its weight. One of the main features of the
latest 682E was to get the weight down, although in the first versions of this, Beretta
had possibly over done it a little, and they have since been made a little heavier.

There was also the 682 supersport, which was a 682 with a few new features and ran
along side the existing range. It was a black action, with the name in gold on the side
of the action. The top rib was raised and tapered to give the barrel a longer appearance
when shooting. And it had a schnabel forend when at the time the other had the semi
beaver tail.

The latest version of the 682, the 682 Gold E, has certainly seen the most changes.
Mechanically there is little that can be improved. But Beretta have looked carefully at
the barrels. They have used a system of boring the barrels, called Optima that gives the
best possible most consistent patterns. This goes hand in glove with very long forcing
cones and new extra length choke tubes, to further enhance patterns. The action is
now engraved- in a manner of speaking- with a pattern of crests on the action. And the
woodwork has been dramatically changed with use of laser cut chequer patterns, the
idea being to improve grip in all weather conditions, as well as comfort gripping the gun.

Overall, the 682 have probably been one of the most successful guns ever produced in
term of competitions won with it. Yet throughout its life it has constantly evolved to
keep pace with demands put upon it, and those demands are fairly heavy on a clay gun
built to do this much shooting.

From this perspective it is very much in a class of its own.

[ back to top ]