The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Semi-automatic Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old December 23, 2013, 01:13 AM   #1
militarygamer
Junior Member
 
Join Date: September 3, 2013
Posts: 12
What's the difference between M92F and Taurus 92

Other than the looks and the safety pin, what are the differences between these 2 handguns? Which one is better and why?
militarygamer is offline  
Old December 23, 2013, 02:27 AM   #2
Sevens
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 28, 2007
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 8,921
Berettas are made in Italy and Maryland. The Taurus is made in Brazil on what was formerly Beretta tooling, sold to Taurus.

The Beretta pistols have a finer finish and attention to small details than the Taurus is likely to have across the board.

The Beretta has a completely different style of manual safety than the Taurus, and it is mounted on the slide. It might feel a bit "in the way" for some, but most don't mind where it sits. The Taurus has a lower safety lever mounted on the frame that allows decocking like the Beretta, but also allows for a "cocked & locked" condition that the Beretta is not capable of.

The two pistols use magazines of exactly the same dimensions, but the magazine catch hole in the forward part of the magazine is in slightly different locations.

Most would argue that the Beretta is a higher quality piece, and all else equal... it likely is. In the event of a problem with either handgun, Beretta has a far better reputation for service and customer care.

I prefer the design of the Taurus, and mine has been a very good and durable handgun for many thousands of rounds. I don't particularly care for the basic layout of either of these similar pistols, but I believe the Beretta is a higher quality handgun, but I still prefer the safety design/execution of the Taurus.

Given that I'm not particularly fond of these guns, I would choose the one I liked better -- the Taurus, because of the safety and lower price. If I were choosing which one to take if offered, knowing that I'd end up selling it, the Beretta would be a -FAR- better choice.

I don't think it's a stretch to say that the PT-92/99 pistols may be some of the best guns that Taurus has ever made.
__________________
Attention Brass rats and other reloaders: I really need .327 Federal Magnum brass, no lot size too small. Tell me what caliber you need and I'll see what I have to swap. PM me and we'll discuss.
Sevens is offline  
Old December 23, 2013, 04:05 AM   #3
lamarw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2010
Location: Lake Martin, AL
Posts: 1,796
Back during the competition for the U.S. Military Side-Arm, Beretta won a very extensive and grueling competitions with some of the other finer firearms in the world. I do not think Taurus submitted a proposal. I could be wrong since I was not on the selection board. I was too busy preparing the response from the Army to the Air Force on their new Unmanned aeriel vehicle. (UAV)

That was then, and now is now. Is Taurus doing better. Maybe so but I doubt it is to such a higher level. I hope I am wrong.

We all hope Taurus continues to improve their line of handgun to the point they are top contender in design, quality and customer support.

It would be nice to say one day - I like this Taurus just as much as this Sig, Beretta, Colt and/or S&W. It would be a big plus for all of us gun owners.
lamarw is offline  
Old December 23, 2013, 04:11 AM   #4
lamarw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2010
Location: Lake Martin, AL
Posts: 1,796
Back during the competition for the U.S. Military Side-Arm, Beretta won a very extensive and grueling competitions with some of the other finer firearms in the world. I do not think Taurus submitted a proposal. I could be wrong since I was not on the selection board. I was too busy preparing the response from the Army to the Air Force on their new Unmanned aeriel vehicle. (UAV)

That was then, and now is now. Is Taurus doing better. Maybe so but I doubt it is to such a higher level. I hope I am wrong.

We all hope Taurus continues to improve their line of handgun to the point they are top contenders in design, quality and customer support.

It would be nice to say one day - I like this Taurus just as much as this Sig, Beretta, Colt and/or S&W. It would be a big plus for all of us gun owners.
lamarw is offline  
Old December 24, 2013, 11:16 PM   #5
shep854
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 4, 2004
Location: Birmingham AL
Posts: 555
Both pistols are parallel developments of the original Beretta 92. This pistol had a frame-mounted safety and the mag release on the lower corner of the grip.
Taurus developed an ambidextrous frame safety and moved the mag release behind the trigger guard. Later, a hammer-drop feature was added to the safety.
Beretta went with the slide mounted hammer-drop safety, like its P.38 ancestor, and the mag release moved behind the trigger guard as well.
Despite similarities, few parts interchange.
__________________
Powder smoke- The Smell of FREEDOM!
I don't shoot to kill; I shoot to live.
Registration? NEVER!!
shep854 is offline  
Old December 25, 2013, 04:08 AM   #6
LockedBreech
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 6, 2009
Location: Rocky Mountain West
Posts: 3,055
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevens View Post
Berettas are made in Italy and Maryland. The Taurus is made in Brazil on what was formerly Beretta tooling, sold to Taurus.



The Beretta pistols have a finer finish and attention to small details than the Taurus is likely to have across the board.



The Beretta has a completely different style of manual safety than the Taurus, and it is mounted on the slide. It might feel a bit "in the way" for some, but most don't mind where it sits. The Taurus has a lower safety lever mounted on the frame that allows decocking like the Beretta, but also allows for a "cocked & locked" condition that the Beretta is not capable of.



The two pistols use magazines of exactly the same dimensions, but the magazine catch hole in the forward part of the magazine is in slightly different locations.



Most would argue that the Beretta is a higher quality piece, and all else equal... it likely is. In the event of a problem with either handgun, Beretta has a far better reputation for service and customer care.



I prefer the design of the Taurus, and mine has been a very good and durable handgun for many thousands of rounds. I don't particularly care for the basic layout of either of these similar pistols, but I believe the Beretta is a higher quality handgun, but I still prefer the safety design/execution of the Taurus.



Given that I'm not particularly fond of these guns, I would choose the one I liked better -- the Taurus, because of the safety and lower price. If I were choosing which one to take if offered, knowing that I'd end up selling it, the Beretta would be a -FAR- better choice.



I don't think it's a stretch to say that the PT-92/99 pistols may be some of the best guns that Taurus has ever made.

You know, I'm pretty strongly biased against Taurus, but this is a very even-handed and fair analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of the two.

I would much prefer the Beretta in a life or death situation but I sure wish they'd make a current production frame safety run of the 92.
LockedBreech is offline  
Old December 25, 2013, 10:32 AM   #7
DMacLeod
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 19, 2008
Location: Maine
Posts: 383
I'm not sure of the Taurus's reliability but do trust the Beretta.

Fit and finish on the Beretta is hands down nicer than the Taurus.
DMacLeod is offline  
Old December 25, 2013, 12:38 PM   #8
Sevens
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 28, 2007
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 8,921
Quote:
You know, I'm pretty strongly biased against Taurus, but this is a very even-handed and fair analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of the two.
Thank you. Maybe the rest of my story is relevant...
I bought a PT-99AF in 1994 mere weeks before the Crime Bill went in to effect. I truly had no desire for a 9mm pistol, but the political climate made it seem like it was sensible to buy a hi-cap handgun and I had the money. I was an avid reader of Guns & Ammo and was convinced by two writers... of two things. One was that "Wondernines" were a horrific choice (Jeff Cooper! ) and that Taurus made a lot of gun for budget money (Jan Libourel.) Since I merely wanted to own it and make noise on a range and I had no service / duty / defense intentions for it, I "lowered" myself to a 9mm handgun.

I went to the biggest local gun store and asked for the Taurus and wanted the adjustable sight version and I didn't do much to interview the pistol. They had it, everyone was buying hi-caps, and I wanted it, so I bought it. Of course, the Brady Bill had me waiting to actually take it home and when I returned to the store a week later to take delivery of my handgun, I gave the double action trigger a try and I was horrified.

I asked to see another and tried the DA trigger on that one, and it too was bad, but it was -far- better than the one I had bought. I was not happy with the difference and I asked if I could have the one with the better trigger. And the salesman was good enough to say that indeed I could have it... but I'd have to wait (and pay for...) a second background check. Which I did.

There's a morbid curiosity in me that wishes I had the other one also just for the absolute, jaw-dropping DA trigger on it.

I've put some 10,000 rounds through this pistol with no problems until a few years ago when I broke the rear adjustable sight. To be sure, I broke the rear sight, it wasn't simply a parts failure. I got ham-fisted with it and gave it a gorilla twist and snapped it. Beyond that, the pistol has always given good service. In the first years when I ran -the- cheapest factory fodder I could buy (Norinco!) it ran mostly well and wasn't very accurate. When I finally started making my own 9mm handloads, it then ran 100% and accuracy tightened up a notch, but still not target grade.

Fast forward 19 years and I picked up a lightly used Beretta 92F from the used market because a buddy turned me on to a deal form an acquaintance. It was cheap enough that I could "interview" the pistol and forward it to the next owner without losing any money and that's what I ended up doing. The Beretta was perfectly fine and better finished than my Taurus, but it's trigger was no better at all, both DA and SA. And my buddy's 92A1 (maybe a 2011 manufacture) had a trigger worse than both and he probably put a solid 4 or 5000 rounds through that pistol and the trigger never cleaned up.
__________________
Attention Brass rats and other reloaders: I really need .327 Federal Magnum brass, no lot size too small. Tell me what caliber you need and I'll see what I have to swap. PM me and we'll discuss.
Sevens is offline  
Old December 25, 2013, 07:12 PM   #9
shep854
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 4, 2004
Location: Birmingham AL
Posts: 555
I too have owned both, and still have the Taurus. I have always been pleased with the Taurus pistol, though admittedly I have not run mine hard.
Back when the M9 was first adopted, and I finally got over my disgust at the pure 'ugliness' of the pistol (I don't think so anymore), I read an article by the late Chuck Karwan, in which he unreservedly endorsed the Taurus 92 as the best budget DA 9mm, period. To be sure, this was back in the early '90s. Mas Ayoob also recommends the Taurus as an excellent budget or starter pistol.
__________________
Powder smoke- The Smell of FREEDOM!
I don't shoot to kill; I shoot to live.
Registration? NEVER!!
shep854 is offline  
Old December 25, 2013, 08:20 PM   #10
RBid
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 10, 2012
Posts: 1,059
Background: I own neither, have handled, fired, and sold both. I am not a fan of Taurus or Beretta, though I appreciate Beretta quality.

I am of the opinion that the PT92 is the best Taurus on the market, and I prefer it to the 92FS. The Beretta does have better fit and finish, but it doesn't translate to much actual difference in use. They both tend to run well, are easy to shoot accurately, and gobble up recoil. I haaaaaaate the 92fs safety (and own a PX4 with it), and find the PT92 safety a considerable improvement.

Because of my personal preferences, I wouldn't buy either. I only use my PX4 for dry fire, and will probably dump it. I like Sig far better for DA/SA.
__________________
Currently Own: Beretta PX4 9mm, Glock 23 (Gen 4), Glock 19 (Gen 4) x2
RBid is offline  
Old December 25, 2013, 08:45 PM   #11
51.50
Member
 
Join Date: December 1, 2010
Posts: 44
Taurus needs to improve their workmanship.
51.50 is offline  
Old December 25, 2013, 10:43 PM   #12
PT-92
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 20, 2007
Location: "Undisclosed Bunker"
Posts: 1,419
I have both and prefer the location of the Taurus safety. If this is moot for you, than I say today it's literally a toss-up as the prices are much closer in-line than 12 years ago when I bought my Taurus PT-92--Back then I used the substantial savings to purchase accessories.



Merry Christmas
__________________
NRA Life Member
“A free people ought...to be armed..."
George Washington
PT-92 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.08879 seconds with 9 queries