Beretta 92FS or Taurus 92? - Page 2

ShipWreck · October 7, 2009, 02:51 PM

My point is that tons of current semi autos have polymer guiderods - even metal ones.

However - I don't need the guiderod issue to avoid Taurus. Sorry

Sevens · October 7, 2009, 07:15 PM

Full disclosure: I bought the Taurus (Pt-99AF, circa '94) and I'm not sure which one I would recommend now. Fact is, I've put more than 10,000 rounds through this pistol without a hiccup, but never having shot the Beretta, I can't sit here and rail against it.

I can say that I think the Taurus PT92/99 is in a whole different area of quality compared to many of their other offerings. No way I could put this many rounds down the pipe in 15+ years if this pistol were junk. These days, I feed it only my 125-gr LRN handloads, and it eats them and begs for more.

There is one point I would REALLY like to get across-- I'm just not on board with folks calling this pistol a "clone." Fact is, it's no more or less a clone than the Beretta. Simply put, this pistol is more the real deal than the 92F is when you consider that Taurus built them on Beretta equipment and meanwhile Beretta went back to Italy to change the design of the pistol they had been making... the same pistol that Taurus continued to make when they purchased the machinery and licensing to produce them.

You can make an argument about the Brazilian workers operating them or the standards to which they are expected to meet and how that may differ from the Italians, but don't try and tell me that it's a fake or a copy or "clone."

IanS · October 7, 2009, 07:39 PM

Although I much prefer the older safety/decocker placement on the Taurus than the Beretta I'd still get the Beretta. I simply believe QC would be more consistent with Beretta esp. since they're producing them for our troops as well. I've also owned a few Beretta 92's myself and never had a problem or issues with any of them.

BTW most of the Beretta 92's available for sale in the U.S. are made here in the U.S. by Beretta USA. Although I've seen more and more Italian made 92's available as well recently so that's pretty cool.

ShipWreck · October 7, 2009, 08:00 PM

Quote:

BTW most of the Beretta 92's available for sale in the U.S. are made here in the U.S. by Beretta USA. Although I've seen more and more Italian made 92's available as well recently so that's pretty cool.

The US factory is filling the latest military contract - they are bringing in the Italian ones to help fill in the civilian gaps.

Sevens · October 8, 2009, 07:57 AM

And -- there have never been any questions about the metallurgy on the PTs, unlike the Berettas.

Quote:

That's not even an issue since the first handful in the 1980s... Don't know why the naysayers bring that up all the time.

...because it's REAL, it HAPPENED, and people REMEMBER IT.

And those were U.S. Military Govt contract pistols that were letting loose, ya know?

snail · October 8, 2009, 11:48 AM

Quote:

because it's REAL, it HAPPENED, and people REMEMBER IT.

Yes 20 years ago. The Beretta has never been well liked by anyone near the military. In it's infancy the pistol did have some issues that were dangerous and unacceptable, but that was 20 years ago. At some point in time everyone will just have to get over the fact that the US military decided to field the Beretta 92. I am sure the PT-92 is a fine gun, I have never had one so I don't know. I would like to see the PT-92 go through the same processes that the Beretta has gone through, and then maybe I would save the $100 and buy one. Remember that most manufactors have had issues with their guns at some point in time, it isn't just a Beretta thing.

ShipWreck · October 8, 2009, 12:06 PM

They wer also using ammo way too hot for that pistol.

U didn't put out ALL of the facts.

Quote:

Early analysis of the breakages by the Army suggested that the problems experienced were due to problems with the pistols themselves. Beretta responded to these reports by requesting testing of the M882 ammunition. Dissatisfied with the progress and methodology of the Army's tests of its ammunition, Beretta obtained independent tests of the ammunition that disclosed excessive pressure levels in the rounds (average pressures exceeding 345 MPa (50,000 psi), compared with the maximum NATO-allowed service pressure of 252 MPa (36,550 psi)).

Logs · October 8, 2009, 12:14 PM

I had both and the Taurus Grip was a bit larger for my hands vs the Beretta. I traded my Taurus for the Beretta, but it was only for the grip. Both were very accurate. I have seen Stainless / Nickel Taurus guns used in the $300 range.
It really comes down to what feels better for you, I don't think you can go wrong either way.

http://www.louisvillemojo.com/classi...aneous#topcats

GetYerShells · October 8, 2009, 01:43 PM

Now, I could be wrong about this so someone correct me if I am but I believe that both the Beretta and the Taurus are built on the same tooling equipment. I believe Taurus builds there version of it on Beretta equipment, purchased from Beretta. So it's basically the exact same gun under two different manufacturers. Could be wrong but I remember reading that somewhere.

MLeake · October 8, 2009, 01:46 PM

.... however, the QA/QC may not be the same.

ShipWreck · October 8, 2009, 03:31 PM

They are using older equipment from a factory Beretta set up to fulfill a contract. Yet. Since that time, Beretta has made some internal changes to the design a few times.

Brian48 · October 8, 2009, 08:30 PM

Well, I bit the bullet today and picked up a brand new 92FS. To be honest, I never thought I'd ever do this. Being a 1911 (and .45ACP) man, this is quite a turn for me, but of late I've been misty eyed about my USMC days.

Anyway, fit and finish is good as far as I can tell (remember), however I was a little taken back at the polymer parts. I mean, I knew Beretta was using them these days, but never thought that it would bother me as much as it does. Oh well, I guess I'll get used to it.

Beentown71 · October 8, 2009, 08:38 PM

Or you could change them out for a very small amount of money. I think a guide rod runs about $25.

Beentown

gun nut · October 8, 2009, 08:45 PM

Go with the beretta. I've had mine for almost 20 years and it has been excellent.

spodwo · October 8, 2009, 08:51 PM

I will speak about PT92 quality - of course mine is from the 90s....

It is great. No issues with it ever...very solid and frankly it is from the former Beretta Brazilian plant.

I cannot speak to the quality of the newer ones.

Frankly - I like this Beretta...

Brian48 · October 8, 2009, 09:44 PM

Quote:

Or you could change them out for a very small amount of money. I think a guide rod runs about $25.

Well, the guide rod doesn't bother me as much. I know I can replace those. It's just the decocker levers that bother me.

ShipWreck · October 8, 2009, 09:52 PM

1 side is metal, 1 is polymer.

On the 92s, never heard of any complaints about the polymer one. Apparently, one reason for polymer was because of finish wear on the metal ones from people who carried the gun for a living (in and out the holster)

as it is a high point, it got a lot of wear

rickyjames · October 8, 2009, 10:34 PM

i purchased a new beretta 92, it was a good gun. i gave it as a present to my brother. i replaced it with a blued taurus pt-92 for myself. the taurus has been totally reliable out of the box, the beretta did need some break in. i liked the taurus enough to buy a second one in stainless steel. i like the safety better on the taurus. my taurus outshoots my brothers beretta, maybe it's the gun, maybe it's my brother. the taurus pt-92 is widely regarded as one of taurus better guns.

Firepower! · October 9, 2009, 01:11 AM

Beretta 92. There is simply no comparison with Taurus.

I also dont understand folks who are talking about locked and cocked 92fs. The safety on Beretta 92 is a decocker as well. Its not a locked and cocked.

Firepower! · October 9, 2009, 02:27 AM

Beretta 92. There is simply no comparison with Taurus.

I also dont understand folks who are talking about locked and cocked 92fs. The safety on Beretta 92 is a decocker as well. Its not a locked and cocked.

Maromero · October 9, 2009, 06:57 AM

Quote:

. I had both and the Taurus Grip was a bit larger for my hands vs the Beretta. I traded my Taurus for the Beretta, but it was only for the grip

The difference are the grips not the frame.

Sevens · October 9, 2009, 07:17 AM

Quote:

I also dont understand folks who are talking about locked and cocked 92fs. The safety on Beretta 92 is a decocker as well. Its not a locked and cocked.

Yes, you don't understand. The folks talking about cocked & locked are those that enjoy carrying a handgun in this manner, which the Beretta is not designed to do. The Taurus however, can do this.

I don't think it's a deal breaker myself, but it does detail one of the differences.

October 7, 2009, 07:15 PM	#27
Sevens Senior Member Join Date: July 28, 2007 Location: Ohio Posts: 11,756	Full disclosure: I bought the Taurus (Pt-99AF, circa '94) and I'm not sure which one I would recommend now. Fact is, I've put more than 10,000 rounds through this pistol without a hiccup, but never having shot the Beretta, I can't sit here and rail against it. I can say that I think the Taurus PT92/99 is in a whole different area of quality compared to many of their other offerings. No way I could put this many rounds down the pipe in 15+ years if this pistol were junk. These days, I feed it only my 125-gr LRN handloads, and it eats them and begs for more. There is one point I would REALLY like to get across-- I'm just not on board with folks calling this pistol a "clone." Fact is, it's no more or less a clone than the Beretta. Simply put, this pistol is more the real deal than the 92F is when you consider that Taurus built them on Beretta equipment and meanwhile Beretta went back to Italy to change the design of the pistol they had been making... the same pistol that Taurus continued to make when they purchased the machinery and licensing to produce them. You can make an argument about the Brazilian workers operating them or the standards to which they are expected to meet and how that may differ from the Italians, but don't try and tell me that it's a fake or a copy or "clone." __________________ *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.

October 7, 2009, 07:39 PM	#28
IanS Senior Member Join Date: October 7, 2000 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 2,632	Although I much prefer the older safety/decocker placement on the Taurus than the Beretta I'd still get the Beretta. I simply believe QC would be more consistent with Beretta esp. since they're producing them for our troops as well. I've also owned a few Beretta 92's myself and never had a problem or issues with any of them. BTW most of the Beretta 92's available for sale in the U.S. are made here in the U.S. by Beretta USA. Although I've seen more and more Italian made 92's available as well recently so that's pretty cool. __________________ Owning a certain handgun isn't a Lifestyle Choice nor is it a Personal Statement. It either works for you or it doesn't. The best article about the 1911 on the internet: http://www.10-8performance.com/1911_Duty_Use.html

October 8, 2009, 12:14 PM	#33
Logs Senior Member Join Date: November 26, 1999 Location: BLUEGRASS STATE KY USA Posts: 1,780	I had both and the Taurus Grip was a bit larger for my hands vs the Beretta. I traded my Taurus for the Beretta, but it was only for the grip. Both were very accurate. I have seen Stainless / Nickel Taurus guns used in the $300 range. It really comes down to what feels better for you, I don't think you can go wrong either way. http://www.louisvillemojo.com/classi...aneous#topcats Last edited by Logs; October 8, 2009 at 02:06 PM.

October 8, 2009, 01:43 PM	#34
GetYerShells Senior Member Join Date: September 29, 2008 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 118	Now, I could be wrong about this so someone correct me if I am but I believe that both the Beretta and the Taurus are built on the same tooling equipment. I believe Taurus builds there version of it on Beretta equipment, purchased from Beretta. So it's basically the exact same gun under two different manufacturers. Could be wrong but I remember reading that somewhere. __________________ Sig P226 .40, Mossberg 500 Persuader, Springfield 1911 GI, M91/30

October 8, 2009, 01:46 PM	#35
MLeake Senior Member Join Date: November 15, 2007 Location: Outside KC, MO Posts: 10,128	Same as the revolvers were built on old S&W equipment... .... however, the QA/QC may not be the same.

October 7, 2009, 02:51 PM	#26
ShipWreck Senior Member Join Date: November 9, 2005 Location: Texas Posts: 1,744	My point is that tons of current semi autos have polymer guiderods - even metal ones. However - I don't need the guiderod issue to avoid Taurus. Sorry

October 8, 2009, 03:31 PM	#36
ShipWreck Senior Member Join Date: November 9, 2005 Location: Texas Posts: 1,744	They are using older equipment from a factory Beretta set up to fulfill a contract. Yet. Since that time, Beretta has made some internal changes to the design a few times.

October 8, 2009, 08:30 PM	#37
Brian48 Senior Member Join Date: December 21, 2001 Location: Boston, People's Republic of MA Posts: 1,616	Well, I bit the bullet today and picked up a brand new 92FS. To be honest, I never thought I'd ever do this. Being a 1911 (and .45ACP) man, this is quite a turn for me, but of late I've been misty eyed about my USMC days. Anyway, fit and finish is good as far as I can tell (remember), however I was a little taken back at the polymer parts. I mean, I knew Beretta was using them these days, but never thought that it would bother me as much as it does. Oh well, I guess I'll get used to it.

October 8, 2009, 08:38 PM	#38
Beentown71 Senior Member Join Date: March 1, 2009 Location: Midwest Posts: 1,560	Or you could change them out for a very small amount of money. I think a guide rod runs about $25. Beentown __________________ Μολὼν λάβε Time for the Mall Ninja list: Beretta 92fs, Springer XD9, High Standard Model HB, RRA bull bbl...aw heck with it time to go plink

October 8, 2009, 08:45 PM	#39
gun nut Senior Member Join Date: June 7, 2009 Location: midwest Posts: 303	Go with the beretta. I've had mine for almost 20 years and it has been excellent. __________________ The only stupid question is the one not asked! (Unknown)

October 8, 2009, 08:51 PM	#40
spodwo Senior Member Join Date: August 31, 2008 Posts: 839	I will speak about PT92 quality - of course mine is from the 90s.... It is great. No issues with it ever...very solid and frankly it is from the former Beretta Brazilian plant. I cannot speak to the quality of the newer ones. Frankly - I like this Beretta...

October 8, 2009, 09:52 PM	#42
ShipWreck Senior Member Join Date: November 9, 2005 Location: Texas Posts: 1,744	1 side is metal, 1 is polymer. On the 92s, never heard of any complaints about the polymer one. Apparently, one reason for polymer was because of finish wear on the metal ones from people who carried the gun for a living (in and out the holster) as it is a high point, it got a lot of wear

October 8, 2009, 10:34 PM	#43
rickyjames Senior Member Join Date: July 5, 2009 Posts: 558	i purchased a new beretta 92, it was a good gun. i gave it as a present to my brother. i replaced it with a blued taurus pt-92 for myself. the taurus has been totally reliable out of the box, the beretta did need some break in. i liked the taurus enough to buy a second one in stainless steel. i like the safety better on the taurus. my taurus outshoots my brothers beretta, maybe it's the gun, maybe it's my brother. the taurus pt-92 is widely regarded as one of taurus better guns.

October 9, 2009, 01:11 AM	#44
Firepower! Senior Member Join Date: February 3, 2008 Posts: 2,109	Beretta 92. There is simply no comparison with Taurus. I also dont understand folks who are talking about locked and cocked 92fs. The safety on Beretta 92 is a decocker as well. Its not a locked and cocked.

October 9, 2009, 02:27 AM	#45
Firepower! Senior Member Join Date: February 3, 2008 Posts: 2,109	Beretta 92. There is simply no comparison with Taurus. I also dont understand folks who are talking about locked and cocked 92fs. The safety on Beretta 92 is a decocker as well. Its not a locked and cocked.