Perhaps a way to shed more light on PT-145 "frame cracking" issue...


PDA






Forseti
December 29, 2002, 11:14 PM
Perhaps there is a way to gain more insight into this frame cracking issue with the PT-145...a strong indicator of whether the problem is gone or not is if Taurus plans to produce the PT-145 into 2003. I forgot to ask them this question...

It is a "revealing" question in that if they DON'T plan to produce it, then they probably did not fix the frame cracking, and have mislead me...they would have stopped production to prevent creating a continuing warranty liability...

The reverse is true as well. If they continue to produce it, they are probably confident in the design.

For Taurus, producing a pistol with an unlimited warranty that must be constantly repaired is a cost nightmare...especially when the pistol cost a bit less than $400 to the end user...

Consider the problem if the frame issue is not resolved...you make Pistol A. Pistol "A" must be repaired every few hundred rounds...continuously. Fix it once, and a few hundred rounds later, it must be fixed again.

Now make Pistol B with the same problem.

Now make Pistol C...with the same problem...

Soon you have an unending cycle of free repairs that must be made, a geometrically increasing problem of free parts and labor as you produce more and more problem pistols.

There are only two ways I can think of to arrest such a problem. One is to fix the pistol, so that as new ones come in for repair, they are fixed "permanently" (or at least so the failure would occur so FAR into the future, it doesn't matter in terms of financial liability).

The other way is to stop producing the problem design. Then, at least, there is only a finite number of guns to be dealt with from then on...

The third possibility is that Taurus does not think these things through as they make weapons with an unlimited warranty financial liability. In which case they will drive themselves out of business. I can't imagine they would have made the "unlimited warranty" decision without considering the financial repercusions...

If you enjoyed reading about "Perhaps a way to shed more light on PT-145 "frame cracking" issue..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
boing
December 29, 2002, 11:23 PM
A thousand rounds through your 145 would shed more light yet...

I hope they have fixed the problem, but it'll take a goodly number of positive, exhaustive range reports to clear the air. High round count in off-the-shelf units is essential.

Word of mouth spread news of the failures far and wide, and word of mouth can do the same if the design has been fixed.

Blackhawk
December 29, 2002, 11:32 PM
I think that's exactly parallel to what happened with Kel Tec's P-40. It was getting back an inordinate number of pistols to repair that had "nothing" wrong with them. Users were, however, having trouble hitting their targets and not holding them firmly resulting in jams, etc. KT looked into the future, IMO, and saw that huge contingent liability getting bigger every year, and figured "We don't really need to be making a .40 S&W pistol...." They dropped it, and apparently applied their resources to QC issues on the remaining two pistols, the P-11 and P-32. Funny enough, the quality of those two offerings has improved dramatically, and KT is making enthusiastic friends of all its new customers. Dropping the P-40 was a GOOD move for KT.

Between you, me, and the fence post, I fully expect to see NWAxxxx PT-145s rolling out from Taurus next month.... :D

emann
December 29, 2002, 11:48 PM
Why don't you just call Taurus and ask them straight up if the frame problems have been fixed and if so how long ago. Don't talk to the little girl that answers the phone either. Ask for tech support or whatever they call it and ask them. Ask them how they fixed it. You should be able to tell just by talking with them if they're telling the truth or just telling you what they think you'd like to hear.

wild billz
December 30, 2002, 08:41 AM
Ok, since I'm interested in this pistol I called Taurus this morning and asked about the PT-145.

The customer service rep was very nice, proffessional and immediately acknowledged there had been problems with the polymer in the frames. It had been corrected, they will be making the pistol next year. If I had a pistol with the frame cracks they would pick it up from me and pay all shipping, replace the frame and return it to me- at noo cost to me.

i think that answere the questions. They acknowledged fault, they fixed fault, they will continue production, they will pick up & replace frame and return at no cost.

Sadly she couldn't give me a month of manufacture for where the error was fixed. I would suggest anyone who buys one follwe Forseti's advice and look for a high serial number or wait until more positive comments are made.

I also asked about pin shearing with the PT-111 and she didn't know anything about that, and had no record of it. that's another can of worms.

wild billz
December 30, 2002, 09:15 AM
they said frames were cracking around 250 rounds

SouthpawShootr
December 30, 2002, 09:11 PM
Well, it's nice to see they are owning up to the problem. I never doubted they would honor their warranty. I just didn't want to lose the gun every couple of hundred rounds for repair. I may get one yet. BUT there are lots of new pistols over 1 year old still sitting on dealers shelves. The storm isn't over yet.

wild billz
December 30, 2002, 10:07 PM
i'm looking to get one. as long as its a late 2002 model i'll risk it. it also needs to be stainless stell and cost no more than 350ish out the door.

Forseti
December 31, 2002, 01:28 AM
wild billz, you are an expert negotiator if you get a stainless slide PT-145 down to $350!

If you DO get it for that amount, be sure to tell us how...mine was $365 at a gun show, and I got that price by playing one table off another. Other tables offered it for varying amounts in the high $300 range.

wild billz
December 31, 2002, 08:09 AM
one can always hope, 350 is the ideal, if i can match the 365 i'll be happy. besides if people have been shying away from them maybe they'll want to move inventory- i hope. if i can't get what i feel is a fair deal i can wait or get another pistol, but lets keep our fingers crossed.

mini14jac
December 31, 2002, 09:14 AM
I wouldn't be surprised if I end up getting another PT145.
(I've already been fondling them. :rolleyes: )
I've had two KelTec P11s, and I never liked the trigger.
I did like the size, caliber, price, and customer service.

My first PT145 had a rear sight that spun around, pins that walked out, and then it cracked.
I am disturbed to hear that the safety can shear off if it is raised slightly when you pull the trigger.
I would consider having the safety removed if I got another one.

I like the caliber/size/price combo a lot.
When mine cracked, Taurus was not admitting a problem, and I had to pay shipping, so they had room for improvement in the CS department.

The guy behind the counter at one of the local shops said he has put aobut 650 rounds through his, and he loves it.
I didn't ask him about the frame crack issue, and I don't know when he bought his.
(Not surprisingly, he wasn't very "gun savvy". Told me he had bought a "clip" for his. I asked if he had fitted it with a belt clip, like a KelTec. No, he bought a ribbed "clip" for the ammo, because it fed more relaibly, he says, looking at me like I must not know much about guns. :confused: )

Anyway, I had heard complaints about the triggers being hard and gritty, but the one I bought had a smooth trigger.
It was a super accurate gun, and recoiled about the same as my 9mm Ruger P95.
If Taurus had been a little nicer to me, I would probably have kept the gun. :(

Forseti
December 31, 2002, 03:59 PM
The "safety shearing off" thing is because the safety lever is designed to block the slide from being moved by the user. However, unless the safety lever is completely "on" (meaning the gun is safe, the trigger is blocked, and the safety lever is in the full up position) the gun can fire.

When the gun fires with a "half up" safety, the heavy machined steel slide will rack back with considerable velocity, and hit the safety lever slide block which is now in its path...and most likely run right though it, cutting it off, since it was only designed to prevent a human from racking the slide, not a .45 caliber explosive shell.

Is this a design defect? Debatable...

The first thing to consider...do you want the gun to have the ability to fire if the safety is off in any way, or only if it is FULLY off? I've thought about that, and decided that if the safety is off in any way, and I pull the trigger, I want the gun to fire. Remember, the safety is tensioned in such a way that it wants to be fully on, or fully off.

Second thing...do you want the slide blocked when the safety is up? If not, it means a live round could be chambered regardless of safety position. This is less important to me, but is is a safety feature.

Add to this the warranty coverage, and I am ok with the design. This is a fairly inexpensive weapon, and usually compromises must be made in terms of safety and ability to fire...

Pain
January 22, 2003, 12:09 PM
I bought a PT145 on December 22 2002. I was very Impressed with it, But was concerned that after I bought it i was reading of the Frame cracking, but never found 1 person that had actually had on crack or seen one that was cracked. so I assumed it was a Rumor. After fireing around 150 rds through her, I looked down and there it was a crack on the Frame right below the back part of the Slide.. and it ran all the way to where the serial # was , on both sides. I called Taurus and gave them my serial number NDV84xxx . They did'nt ask me any questions and sent Fed-ex to come pick it up the next day. After a few days I called and spoke with their customer service MGR, he was a very nice guy ( I won't mention his name), he told me that the cracking was due to a step that was skipped when the Poly frames were made in the earlier models. I then asked him if mine was an earlier model .. he told me no that it was manufactured in April of 2002 , and should Not have cracked it was a newer model and he had'nt seen any of the new models crack before. Leave it to me to get the defective one. Anyways they replaced the Frame and had it back to me within a few days. I received the firearm back , and the frame was visibly thicker and actually looked much better than the original I took it to the range immediately to test it out, I fired 100 rds through it , and it jammed on me 4 times in a row on the second clip... Im willing to chalk it up as cheap range round because it did'nt jam anymore and i fired 8 more clips through it without issues and most importantly NO CRACKS. I was assured by Taurus that it would not crack again, and that it had a lifetime warranttee if it did. But I feel like I can't trust this weapon anymore, and I bought this for personal protection and CHL, so if it does crack again I'll have to send it back and be without my weapon unless I buy another. I guess to make my long story short, Taurus's customer service was impecable they did everything they told me they would but the first time I saw the crack the Damage was already done.. I have'nt had it three months and I'm already looking for a different handgun..it's really rather dissapointing !!

Forseti
January 22, 2003, 09:38 PM
Did it ever fail to fire after it cracked? Did the crack in the plastic stop it from functioning? Previous owners said it did not stop it from firing, and I would like to know if that is a consistent story.

Also, your serial number...you posted NDV as the first three characters. Was it actually NVD?

Were the primers on the non-functioning rounds hit as firmly as the fired rounds? (just what kind of ammo was this, anyway...if it is the same ammo you are using for personal protection or the range, I would drop it...)

Pain
January 23, 2003, 09:31 AM
Yes the first 3 letters are NVD, and the cracking did'nt effect the functionality of the pistol as far as I could tell it was purely cosmetic. It might have effected it's performance in the future. As far as the rounds go they were just rounds that the range provide and they appeared the be struck with the same force as the rounds that did fire ( the pin dent in the rounds were the same depth) im assuming that they just misfired. The ammo was Winchester .45acp. Im using Speer Gold dot 230gr rounds now. and have fired 50 or so with no eject problems or feeding problems as of yet. The whole deal just concerns me as this is the first semi auto that I have purchased and it kind of leaves a bad taste in my mouth so to speak. Im sure (god forbid) that if I had to use it to protect myself it would do the job but there is always going to be this doubt in the back of my mind. I'm thinking of going with a Colt defender , something that it a tried and tested design, and to steer away from the Poly Frame. What do you think of that weapon!!!??

Forseti
January 24, 2003, 12:44 AM
I have no personal experience with the Colt Defender. However, I have fired 1911's. They are very nice at the range, but I would not buy one to carry concealed.

This is all personal opinion now. LOTS of people love the 1911 design...its a very good design, but not one I want for concealed carry.

I want to carry the weapon ready to fire, but with the safety on, and low risk of accidental discharge. That means a round in the chamber. With the 1911 design, it also means the hammer is back, ready to go, and a slight trigger pressure will fire the weapon, assuming the back of the grip is depressed as well, and the rather easy to throw safety "switch" is off as well

Some find this a very safe configuration...it makes me a bit nervous, though.

Risk of accidental discharge is also why I did not get a Glock 36...the Glock design is also nice...my Dad has a 34. At the range, no problem. But I would not want to carry one.

I also own a P7M8...VERY nice safey feature on that one. Love it. Its a bit heavy though. The PT-145 is VERY nice on weight, and firepower.

And I think it is a very safe gun as well. Very simple firing mechanism, long trigger pull (low accidental discharge risk), a thumb safety as well, a blocked firing pin (unless the trigger is pulled)...VERY nice weight for carry.

If your purpose is target plinking, competition, shooting steel, or just having fun trying to be as accurate as possible on paper targets, the PT-145 is not the best pistol for those jobs, mostly due to its long, hard (for a semiautomatic) trigger pull

However, if you are carrying a pistol as personal protection, and want a lightweight, simple pistol with good safety features that are easy to disable in a heartbeat, something with a trigger that would be unlikely to be depressed by accident, but easy to pull in an emergency, the PT-145 is great for that. Better than I expected, actually.

There is no other pistol I know of that offers the same weight, firepower, and price in .45. The Kimber Ultra Ten II matches in weight and firepower, but you have to pay quite a bit of a premium for it...the ones I've seen are roughly double the cost of the PT-145....and I just can't get over carrying the pistol with the hammer back (just me).

Zander
January 24, 2003, 01:02 AM
Hasn't Taurus introduced a new generation of their polymer-framed pistols?

Does the model 'Millennium Pro' strike a bell? Could be my faulty memory. Perhaps the SHOT Show next month will shed some light on this problem.

Pain
January 24, 2003, 03:45 PM
Forseti,

Very Good Point about the Defender and one that I had not thought about. One of the reasons that I purchased the PT-145 was the safety features, and the amount of Pull it took to Fire the weapon, For me that is the most important part for concealed carry I don't have to worry about it accidentally fireing unless I squeeze the Trigger. I too do not like the Idea of the exposed hammer being back in the "cocked" position when carrying Very Good Point. I have been very gun shy for the last ten years and safety is my number one concern. My roomate in College about 10 years ago had purchased an SKS assault rifle. We were having a party and he decided to bring it out and show it to people ( Bad Mistake). Well when he was attempting to pull the clip out and remove a round from the breech, the gun discharged 7 rounds fully automatically and killed a guy sitting across the table from me , two rounds struck him in the head , and blew off the back of my chair I don't know how I lived. The incident was investigated by the atf ( since the weapon fired fully auto) and the weapon was found to be defective, and no criminal charges were filed against him. I have not seen the guy since, but it is a memory that will live with me for ever. My point is I won't own a weapon that I have to question its safety. Thanks for all your input Forseti, it is greatly appreciated. Pain

Humble Texan
January 24, 2003, 06:50 PM
Pain,

What a story and what a tragedy! In a split second, a slight oops, and momentary brain f... and......

So, I carry a PT145 for all the same reasons expressed. The trigger on mine is much better. I have shot it about 2,000. The frame did crack but not till 1,500 rounds and +p ammo. The crack is and was cosmetic and I continued shooting until I was ready to send it in.

I have a very dependable USP 45f, but I carry the PT145. Easier to handle and retain if need be and very safe as I carry Mexican syle often and also in a Smart Carry. I have shot a lot of different ammo but have settled on Georgia Arms 230gr ball. Handles all hollow points as well. I also like the "second strike" feature. Have used it a few times on some misfires.

Safe, safe, safe.......

I would be very interest in a second one.

Forseti
January 24, 2003, 11:25 PM
The shooting accident sounds terrible. I think you are VERY right to always stress safety.

I once thought of getting an SKS when they were around $100. Very happy I did not.

Pain
February 24, 2003, 01:50 PM
I have now broke the 500rd mark on the New Frame .....still no cracks !!!!

denfoote
February 24, 2003, 03:31 PM
I had a PT-145 that broke. I sold it and went to the Glock 36. It has worked for a while, but now it has developed feeding problems related to the slide stop lever. I think that I'm gunna go for Old Slabsides!!!! :D

Logistar
February 24, 2003, 05:26 PM
I always have a spare CCW. When my Beretta 92 was "at Beretta", I had my Taurus PT-111 for carry. When I was experimenting with recoil springs on the Taurus, I was sure that the Beretta was functional.

I still prefer the PT-111 to anything else I have tried (to carry that is). Am I afraid it will break? No. I keep a close watch on it - pins.. everything. Last Friday, I was at my grandmother's farm. I was carrying as usual. I set up a target in the field and grabbed the Taurus and fired it just as if it was a defensive situation. -Worked perfectly and accurately. Draw was clean....etc. I think everyone should do that from time to time with no prep (other than hearing protection and a good backstop).

I will keep a polymer gun for carry because I know I won't carry all the time if I don't. I am confident that I will get at least a few rounds out of any gun I have - or else I won't have it.

Would I prefer an all-metal gun? Yes - but NOT for CCW. -Just too heavy to carry all the time. Don't worry... be READY! :)

Logistar

I know Denfoote probably thinks I am crazy! :eek:

Stevie-Ray
February 24, 2003, 06:18 PM
I had a PT-111 for a short while. Nice gun, but I had a problem with inadvertantly popping the magazine release. Not good for reliability even though the fault was mine. I guess it just wasn't designed for my hand. Bought and started shooting a G26. Was everything I wanted in a nine. More accurate than the Taurus also. So I sold the Millenium in favor of a Kimber CDP. Now I alternate between the CDP and the G26 for my main carries.

If you enjoyed reading about "Perhaps a way to shed more light on PT-145 "frame cracking" issue..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!