If you have an M4 and want 7-round tube + 922r compliant, and don't want to replace any of the externals (like me), you're going to have to replace internals in the fire control group (at least 2 if you are also going to replace the follower).

That leads you to trigger, disconnector or hammer replacement.  I opted to replace all three, keeping the original Benelli follower.

I'm putting this note here, because info on the Benelli forum is years dated, and ends with not a clear resolution to issues with respect to fitting these in the current polymer trigger guard on M4's.

Here's what I found in using the black phosphate FFT Trigger Pack (Freedom Fighter Tactical):

1. The components I received are indeed high quality.  The disconnector and hammer are definitely superior in terms of form/fit to the originals.  The OEM trigger is very nice, as is the FFT.

2. You can directly replace the disconnector and hammer in the OEM polymer trigger guard, and they function perfectly - no fitting needed, i.e. they appear to be exact dimensions to the OEM.

3. Trigger dimensions on the FFT are different enough though, that when placed into the polymer guard (along with the FFT disconnector and hammer), the hammer hangs heavily enough on the disconnector that fitting is not the answer.  It seems the trigger pin hole placement is ever so slightly different between the two triggers.

4. Expecting something like this, I ordered the OEM original aluminum trigger guard from Midwest Gun Works ahead of time - it's for real, they are the genuine article.  The FFT trigger, disconnector and hammer all function properly in the OEM aluminum trigger guard.  This makes sense, as the FFT components were manufactured prior to Benelli switching to the polymer trigger guard, so it seems things changed a bit in the trigger when Benelli went to the polymer.

5. Nevertheless, the tolerances are tighter on the FFT components, and I did find it a good idea to lightly stone the sears on the disconnector / hammer interface, as they brush past each other as the bolt cycles while the trigger is forward (i.e. finger off the trigger, as when you cycle the bolt to chamber a round).  The amount of fitting though is like 1/1000th of the fitting you have to do in fitting all new parts in an S&W revolver - thank God.  In line with this last point, you can't cycle the bolt with the safety on unless the hammer is already cocked - which is they way it's supposed to be.  If you can do this on an M4 (hammer released forward, safety on, and you can easily cycle the bolt) - then you likely have a gun with a non-functioning safety.

6. On the other hand, the trigger sear on the FFT really reminds me of a revolver sear, in that it is more of a notch, not a hook, as is the OEM trigger sear.  As a result, the break is much shorter.  You hit good resistance, but just past that, it smoothly breaks.

7. I had full safety of function, no possible fire on release, and a firm lock up between hammer sear / trigger sear.

8. The trigger function is a lot more refined now: Lighter pull, smoother break, but no sacrifice in terms of safety of function, it's like a rock everywhere it's supposed to be.  Also, the aluminum trigger guard is WAY easier insert / remove from the receiver.  All else equal, pretty much anyone would like the aluminum more than the polymer, but, from the above, it seems like you will run into trigger problems just substituting this part.

Posting this because I would have liked this info beforehand too, and I'm pretty sure I'm not the only Benelli M4 fan in the forum.

'Best to you and yours!