I stand by the 96D not being the touch stone of durability. Even if other .40s were worse at the time frame the testing was done (early 90s, I'm guessing?), you're still looking at a gun that the manufacturer calls for 1/3 the service life of the parent platform. You're still looking at a gun that's been phased out by most, if not all, entities of any size that adopted it...with many reporting longevity issues as the reason.
I'm glad you guys got good service out of them, but they simply aren't as durable as many other choices...including the M9/92 it was designed around.
I have to agree on the Beretta 96; ISP was issued 96G's (decocker only), and they simply did not hold up, with significant slide cracking issues. That is one of the few service weapons I did not buy back from ISP when we traded them in.