I Went To Get A New Beretta, but came home with...

[daferg2]

...a Taurus :eek:

I like everything about it more than the Beretta 92. The quick pic I took here doesn't do it justice (it's beautiful) and it shoots like a dream. Why didn't I buy one of these before?

I would like to know from those that have a PT 92 if there are any potential problems I need to watch out for (I hope not. It's a little late now). Thanks!

http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm190/daferg2/Guns/TaurusPT92.jpg

[Ben]

Those are excellent guns. Taurus builds really nice metal-framed guns. Stick with those, and you will likely never have a problem. At least you didn't get those ugly pearl grips. I'm a Beretta guy though. So I would have paid more for the Beretta name.

enjoy,
Ben

[jlj676]

nice gun how much $$ if you dont mind me asking

[daferg2]

how much $$ if you dont mind me asking

Don't mind at all. $460 at Academy Sports, over $100 less than blued Beretta.

[David the Gnome]

I like the fact they have a frame-mounted safety instead of slide-mounted like the Beretta but I can't get over that rainbow color that Taurus stainless guns have.

[Playboypenguin]

I had that very same gun. I ended up giving it to my nephew to shut him up when he was griping about wanting a 9mm to shoot. I always found it to be a very nice gun. :)

[daferg2]

I can't get over that rainbow color that Taurus stainless guns have.

Looking at it in person, the frame color hue isn't really there like in the picture (looks bluish to me). It just looks like bare aluminum to me and slightly lighter that the stainless steel of the slide/barrel. To me, it's the "prettiest" gun I have. I'll try to submit a better picture in a minute with better lighting. We'll see if I can't get it more accurate.

[Playboypenguin]

yeah, they look much better in person. Here is the pic of the one I had.

http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r89/PlayboyPenguin/Departed%20guns/PT92AFS.jpg

[daferg2]

Playboypenguin beat me to it (always great pics and guns BTW), but here is my Taurus without the flash. Still not a great pic, but it's closer to the actual look of the gun.


http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm190/daferg2/Guns/TaurusPT92_b.jpg

[scorpion_tyr]

Just thought I'd join the club :D I've never had any problems out of mine!

http://thefiringline.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=44538&stc=1&d=1238026101

[Colokeb]

They said they preferred the PT-92 because it was able to be carried Cocked and Locked.

[daferg2]

Thanks for the replies folks. I have to say I'm feeling a little better about my impulse purchase. If one was good enough for PBP, then it must be a pretty good gun ;)

BTW, scorpion, I really dig your two-tone model. Very cool.

[Ronbo1]

I had an early one. The slide metal was soft on mine and the case head pressure caused marring of the bolt face. I shipped the slide in to Taurus and was sent a new one back no problems after that.

[Gregory Gauvin]

I dunno about Taurus. They do make a decent gun for those on a budget, but why buy a copy of anything when you can get the real deal for another $200 or so. To me, it's like owning a copy of a van Gogh versus the real deal for a nominal difference. Secondly, upon close examination of the Taurus 1911 I do have, the quality of the machining just isn't up to par compared to a real deal American built piece of steal. They work, and work fine, but it wouldn't be the one gun I'd want to keep as a favorite. Pick up a used one if you're in the market for a quality beater. As for the Taurus 92, because I'm a military collector, it would definitely not suffice my desire to owning a copy of the M9 pistol. It would be a lot like a polytech M14....I dunno about that.

[scorpion_tyr]

If one was good enough for PBP, then it must be a pretty good gun


Very true, makes me feel better about mine :D

BTW, scorpion, I really dig your two-tone model. Very cool.

Thanks. I never planned on owning one, but when I saw this one I knew I wasn't leaving the store without it. :D

but why buy a copy of anything when you can get the real deal for another $200 or so.

I like the color scheme on mine. I've never seen a Beretta like that. And $200 is a lot of money to some of us. The "real" thing would have broken then budget. Personally I favor the safety switch on the Taurus A LOT more than that on the Beretta. It just feels a lot better. I'm not saying the Taurus is better... I just like mine better. Add that I paid almost $300 less for it... and I came out far ahead. I still want to get a Beretta though :D

[Shadi Khalil]

scorpion, I gotta agree, that's a great looking gun....Daferg, congrats.

[LanceOregon]

http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm190/daferg2/Guns/TaurusPT92.jpg


Only a Pimp would carry such a shiny firearm. I believe that was also General Patton's opinion on gaudy handguns.

You need to carry a much more manly looking pistol that this.

Who would consider such a gun being pointed at them to be a serious threat??

.

[spyderdude]

Congrats on the Taurus PT92. That is one Taurus semi-auto I would not mind owning. It looks like a really nice piece, but I still prefer the original!

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b387/spyderdude18/BerettaM92.jpg

[Singlesix1954]

Hey! I'v shot a lot of stuff. Even 2 legs in combat. I'm the kind of guy to be scared of a gun like that if it is pointed at me. If he is less a man than you because he has a pretty gun, then so am I. So tell us what line do or have you stood on in the stead of those who can't?

[FyredUp]

scorpion_tyr

That is a sharp looking pistol. What is the model number on that?

Thanks

[cracked91]

walker texas ranger carrys a shiny gun. . .

[jgcoastie]

walker texas ranger carrys a shiny gun. . .

If it's good enough for Chuck, then it's good enough for anybody... Guess I should go buy a shiny gun now...:p

[Sixer]

LanceOregon, you're kidding right? Lol, your either really dumb or really brave to worry about the finish on a gun pointed your way.

[LanceOregon]

walker texas ranger carrys a shiny gun. . .

I'm pretty confident that he carries a SIG with a Matte Stainless finish.

No shiny bright guns for Chuck Norris!!

.

[Pico]

Chuck doesn't NEED a gun.

Besides, his Total Gym is shiny enough. I shouldn't knock his Total Gym gig, at least he gets to hang with Christie Brinkley.

Pico

[daferg2]

Only a Pimp would carry such a shiny firearm. I believe that was also General Patton's opinion on gaudy handguns.

You need to carry a much more manly looking pistol that this.

Who would consider such a gun being pointed at them to be a serious threat??

Lance, I never said I planned on carrying it. I've got smaller, better options for that. This will be a range, truck, or night stand gun. I'm not sure where it'll end up. All I know is when I saw it and held it, I had to have it.

I also doubt any BG would laugh at my shiny pretty gun when pointed at his under-powered cranium.

As for being a pimp, I wouldn't knock it. They probably have more job security than you or I in this economic mess.

but why buy a copy of anything when you can get the real deal for another $200 or so.

Because these are made in the same factory Beretta used to make them in, on the same tooling, by the same people. If you do a little reading, you'll find that these are widely regarded as being on the same quality playing field as the Beretta. I, unlike a lot of folks, like to buy what works, not just a name on the side (although Ive got plenty of those too, including Beretta's). Plus $200 is a good chunk to put toward my next gun purchase....Hmmm....I wonder what that it could be....I'd like to find a compact Beretta like the one PBP has posted here....

[Ben]

I know a place locally that sells brand new Beretta 92FS's for 480. I know that price isn't typical, but you still saved about 100 from the price that Beretta's go for normally around here. I'm going to finally buy a Stoeger Cougar when I get the funds together, even though Beretta doesn't make it any more. Why? Because it's a steal right now and it's the same darn gun.

Ben

[bbrian]

I own the Beretta 92FS, but have always heard that the slide mounted (opposed to the frame mounted on the Taurus) safety is a design problem. I don't understand, why is a slide mounted safety a bad thing?

[B.N.Real]

I owned a PT101 in 40 S&W exactly like that gun (except no light rail)

I can definitely attest to how spectacular the gun looks.

All the pictures I've seen make the alloy frame look a different color but in real life,the finishes are very close to the same.

My handgun was outstanding both in finish and function.

I got cheap and traded it in on a Smith 617 that I should have simply bought straight up.

Enjoy your PT92.

It being 9mm means you can actually afford to enjoy shooting it.

Congratualtions on buying your new Taurus.

[Sixer]

As for being a pimp, I wouldn't knock it. They probably have more job security than you or I in this economic mess.

This should be your new signature line :D

[Homerboy]

Beretta sold their tooling to Taurus like 20 years ago. It is NOT the same gun as a Beretta. I almost bought a Taurus PT92 when i saw it, but the Beretta is of FAR better quality and workmanship. And as for the "yeah, but this was $100 cheaper" argument, i just don't get it. if you own the gun for 10 years, that's 10 bucks a month, ($2.50 a week). Most of us spend more than that on papers and coffee in the morning.

When it comes to guns, I buy quality, and NO TAURUS is the same quality as a Beretta.

[gb_in_ga]

I would like to know from those that have a PT 92 if there are any potential problems I need to watch out for (I hope not. It's a little late now).
I've got one, a plain vanilla one in black, I've had it somewhat longer than 2 years now.

It has been nothing but stellar since day 1. The ONLY issue I've had with it is with some light handloads that I had loaded up for a different gun, they didn't stroke the action enough to engage the end of magazine catch, and that's it. And that's an ammo issue, you can't blame the gun for that.

Things to watch out for: Not a whole lot. The stock Taurus mags are kinda hard to completely top off with that 17th round, but it'll go in with some effort. A mag loader helps, and it gets easier with time. Or, get some MecGar mags for it, they don't have that problem. Heck, ya' oughta get some MecGar mags for it anyway.

As far as Homerboy's take on things: Well, let's just say that I take a 180 degree opposite view. For my purpose, not only is the PT-92 an equivalent gun as opposed to the corresponding Beretta, it is actually a superior gun. Personally I could care less about how pretty the finish is, and my Taurus's fit and finish isn't bad at all. The lack of a chromed bore interests me not in the least. The safety -- the location of it and the ability to carry C&L at my discretion -- is the clincher. No, I don't particularly care that the PT-92 is a bit cheaper, although it is a bonus. Even if they were the same price, I'd still pick the PT-92. Comparing apples to apples, feature to feature, I find the PT-92 is the better gun for me. If Homerboy wants to pay more for a lesser gun, that's entirely his prerogative, more power to him.

[Homerboy]

You must be the only person EVER to say the Beretta is a lesser gun over the Taurus! The Taurus is a okay weapon, but who the hell carries a TDA weapon cocked and locked, anyway? This isn't a 1911. The fit, feel, and finish on the Beretta is superior, just like a Toyota is a better car than a Hyundai. Sure, they'll both get you to where you're going, but they're not even close!

The Stoeger Cougar is the same gun as the Beretta Cougar. it's made on the same machinery, with the same tooling, and the same materials, as the Beretta Cougar. Stoegeris owned by Beretta, so the quality control is still there. Beretta doesn't own Taurus. They sold them the plant and machinery over 20 years ago!

Sorry, the Taurus is not the same gun, and there is a reason why they are cheaper (just like the Taurus S&W clone revolvers are cheaper then the S&W they copied).

[gb_in_ga]

Sorry, the Taurus is not the same gun, and there is a reason why they are cheaper (just like the Taurus S&W clone revolvers are cheaper then the S&W they copied).
A> Yes, there is a reason why the one is cheaper than the other. Brand name markup, marketing, and higher labor costs. I wouldn't know about service after the sale since mine hasn't needed any.

B> No, there isn't any comparison between the quality of the PT-92 series and Taurus's revolvers. They are completely different product lines. FWIW, my revolvers are all S&W. Older S&W. I'll pay more when the product actually is superior. S&W revolvers are superior to Taurus revolvers (although less so now than in the past), but that can't be extended to making sweeping generality statements about the entire product lines of either company, or any other company. Just because Taurus revolvers have been spotty over the years doesn't mean that the PT-92 has been, because it hasn't. And calling the PT-92 a clone isn't really accurate, either. It isn't, it is a sibling, or cousin perhaps. It is an authorized member of the greater 92 family, superior in many (but not all) respects to the current Beretta offerings and superior to the current Beretta offerings for my intended purposes.

To me, the PT-92 IS superior to the Beretta 92 offerings of today, and price difference aside I'd still pick a PT-92 over a Beretta.

[srm970]

i had the taurus first.. and in some respects liked it better.. as someone mentioned.. i like the frame mounted safty better than a decocker. shot great.. reliable and acurate. the beretta.. smoothest handgun i have ever shot.. actuate loved it.. only got rid of it because my dad wanted a 9mm and offered me an old model ruger blackhawk 357 in trade.. so it is still in the family . and i told him he cant sell it without talking to me first.

shawn

[amd6547]

If you like cocked and locked carry, then the Taurus is a good weapon. Though I have used Browning HiPowers and 1911's in cocked and locked mode, I much prefer my Beretta 92FS's DA first shot for my HD weapon...I can't concieve of a situation where I would rather have it cocked and locked.
The Beretta is a better weapon. I trust their metalurgy and design experiance more than Taurus. Beretta has upgraded their locking block, something Taurus has not done, to my knowledge. I just prefer having the same weapon issued by Uncle Sam, rather than the one sold by Uncle Jose.
I got my 92FS used, like new in a trade for a revolver I had less than $275 in.

[scorpion_tyr]

scorpion_tyr

That is a sharp looking pistol. What is the model number on that?

Thanks :D. It's a PT 92 AFS. I bought it NIB and all the numbers match. I've never seen another one quite like it. Kinda hope I run into another one so I can have a matching set.

[guntotin_fool]

Beretta made a 92 with a frame mounted safety, it was called the 92 stock, it was all that the 92 should havebeen. but they wanted your left one to buy it.

[robctwo]

Very nice gun. I took my friend to the gun shop this morning to buy has very first gun. He had shot a bunch of mine, and wanted a full size metal frame 9mm with a safety.

We looked at a CZ85, Beretta 92FS and the Taurus you bought. I like the 1911s, so the Taurus cocked and locked appealed to me. He is not very comfortable with guns yet, and was looking for what he considered to be the safest. He bought the Beretta. He liked the decock/safety feature, and the long DA pull for the first round. We spent some time getting used to handling it, but he did not have time to go to the range. I did, and I enjoyed myself.

I have the Beretta 84FS and really like it. One of my first center fire guns was a Beretta Cougar in .40. For some reason that gun grouped like a shotgun at 20 yards. Never did find a load it liked and ended up selling it to a guy I knew with a "full disclosure" about my impression of it's accuracy. As far as I know he still has it.

Never bought the 92, but it looks like I'll be getting to shoot one in the near future.

[Kraziken]

I own the Beretta 92FS, but have always heard that the slide mounted (opposed to the frame mounted on the Taurus) safety is a design problem. I don't understand, why is a slide mounted safety a bad thing?

I don't think it is a problem, just some people find the frame mounted safety easier to manipulate. I've practiced with the slide mounted safety, so it isn't a problem for me, but when it came for me to buy a personal one, I chose the Elite series, so my Beretta's operate like Sig's. Decocker only, no safety.

I have no opinion on the Taurus, other than it looks like a well made gun, but then it is following a well made original. You'll miss out on some of the features of the newer guns, like the extra thick slide in some of the Beretta's.

My two Beretta's

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v281/kraziken/Firearms/DSCN2745.jpg

[OhioAAA]

Who would consider such a gun being pointed at them to be a serious threat??

I would.


Owning a Taurus PT-99 is on the top of my list for 2009.

[daferg2]

Beretta sold their tooling to Taurus like 20 years ago. It is NOT the same gun as a Beretta. I almost bought a Taurus PT92 when i saw it, but the Beretta is of FAR better quality and workmanship.

Homerboy, I used to think just like you do and normally I would agree that Taurus isn't in the same league with Beretta or other top brands, but I believe the PT-92, at least, is very close.

Like I said in my original post, I went to buy a Beretta 92FS. It is one of the few iconic pistols I don't or haven't owned. The guy I deal with at Academy isn't some uninterested twenty-something kid that doesn't know his stuff. He has been a firearm expert for more years than I've been alive (ex Green beret, police officer, firearms instructor).

He had me look at the Taurus and told me that he owns one, loves it, and knows many others that also love 'em. He feels that the Taurus is every bit as good, and better in some ways, as the Beretta. We took both guns apart and compared the two. I couldn't see any appreciable difference in the fit or finish between them. I liked the stainless over aluminum look better than the blued Beretta anyway. I also liked the frame-mounted safety. I liked the trigger feel and smoothness better. I liked the price.

I'll probably still buy a Beretta just because I still want one and I'm lucky enough to afford what I want (and I have an understanding wife that would rather see me fondling guns than other women).

I appreciate the comments and opinions, but all I really wanted was for owner here to point out issues to watch for, that might be problematic, to the PT-92.