More internet / gunshop nonsense, I�m afraid.
The problem with Beretta 92 slide cracks was a design problem � not a manufacturing issue � and they initially occurred with the European manufactured guns with high round counts.
The fix was a change in design � not where it was made. When Beretta introduced their pistol into the military Service Pistol fiasco, there were no production facilities for the pistol in the U.S.
The reported problems were sheared off barrel lugs, frame cracks and slide separations.
The slide failure fault was determined to be metallurgical. Picatinny Arsenal, in a document coded MMB-01-89 pointed out the material employed in the slides had difficulties in it's microstructure, the sulphide morphology, and the element added for sulphide shape control in the AISI 8640 re-sulphurized steel. It was not a hardness problem. Rather, it was the chemical element added to control sulphide shape. The sulphides found in the low toughness slides were globular and contained tellurium (Te) as an additive to control the shape. Work done by the Army Science Board in the Materials Evaluation Section, AET-M demonstrated that Beretta slides represent two distinct populations: one with a low fracture toughness of about 40 ksi V in. and one with a high kv of about 71 ksi V in. The low fracture toughness slides separated much sooner and magnaflux did not reveal the faults. For instance, one slide magnafluxed at 6,000 rounds showed no faults, but suffered a catastrophic failure at 6,007 rounds.
It is interesting to note that a modification was made to the military M9's so as to prevent the rear portion of the slide from departing the frame. No such modification was made to civilian pistols.
Of course I don't know any of that to be true. It was told to me by an old guy with early onset dementia sitting on a stool in a gun shop drinking coffee and chewing tobacco....
