Beretta VS Taurus


PDA






George Hill
May 4, 2003, 12:37 AM
I went to a local shop that had a not very used Taurus in the case. With permision I examined it side by side with my Beretta.
Very similar guns indeed... but there are differences.
I like the Tauri's frame mounted safety. Up is Safe, down to go... down further to decock. Good system. The gun felt every bit as solid as my Beretta... similar weight as well.
The Tauri wasn't as smooth as my 92... but then again, this gun was only 300 bucks, and Berettas are generally a lot more jingle.
The question would be, if your in the market for a full sized 9mm, which one would you go for?
Spend the extra for the Beretta, save the coin for a good holster and get the Taurus?

If you enjoyed reading about "Beretta VS Taurus" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
TheLastBoyScout
May 4, 2003, 12:59 AM
Cause I'm a perpetually semi-broke student, I'd grab the Taurus and use whatever extra "gun money" I had for a few extra magazines and ammo. But thats because carry will not be an issue for me for another 5 years or so, so I could care less about a holster.

cratz2
May 4, 2003, 01:17 AM
I grew up with 1911s and after using a Beretta for a few months, I traded it in for a Rossi 357 Magnum and a Taurus PT99AF. Traded the Rossi in again later. :uhoh:

I have almost nothing but praise for the Taurus. I spent an intensive spring and summer with an ex Marine using mine. I know there's 15,000 rounds through it but I bought it before I started keeping track... My guess is just over 18,000 total. It's been 100% reliable - not a single failure ever! Can't get much better than that. Mostly Winchester and S&B ball ammo but it's seen it's share of 115 Gr +P CorBons and 124 +P Gold Dots. And the odds and ends GoldenSabers, Rangers, HydraShoks etc... I've replaced the springs a couple times and changed the locking block kit because I had some cash and read about how the Beretta locking block is prone to failure. But again, it never failed and nothing ever broke.

The triggers can be rough and the slide doesn't work as smoothly on my Taurus at least... about half the finish is missing from the high points of the slide rails on the frame. If you're the type to tinker, a little polishing on the slide would probably work wonders.

Finish has held up well too. Coated in a bit of FP10, it almost looks new... trust me, it isn't perfect. The other side's worse. I was using a Fobus paddle holster and it fit against the left side more firmly than the right.

I give it thumbs up as high as possible! I got a great deal on mine and didn't have much of a choice, but if I had it to do over, I'd absolutely get fixed sights.

http://photos.imageevent.com/cratz2/guns//DCP_0783.jpg

Mark IV Series 80
May 4, 2003, 01:26 AM
Hello George,

I have examined and fired both guns.

The Beretta had better fit and finish. The Taurus had some sharp edges. I did not care for the laser engraving.

The trigger on the Beretta was better..... and I could shoot the Beretta more accurately.

If I were carrying either pistol concealed, I would leave the safety off.

I have heard it said that if you were under stress with the Taurus, you may push the safety all the way down to decock, when you only wanted to push the safety into the "fire" position.
I still think that this safety is better than the "flip-up-to-fire" system on the Beretta.

There are more Beretta magazines available, and police or soldiers may be able to provide you with some extras in an emergency. Spare parts may similarly be more available with the Beretta. I don't know which (if any) parts will interchange.

Even with the $200-$300 price difference, I would go with the Beretta. If you already have a Beretta, that is a good reason to get another..... the magazine and parts commonality and the same handling characteristics.

Tacblack
May 4, 2003, 01:27 AM
I did the same thing my first gun was a PT92, I got it for less money and to see if I like this whole shooting thing.
Years later the only Beretta I want is a competion model with the frame mounted safty. Mine is a lock and cock only.

I can one up ya cratz2 my Taurus has close to 25000 through it. The firing pin flash hole in eroding away a little. But like you said I have feed it everything I can think of and never had a problem with it.

faustulus
May 4, 2003, 02:03 AM
Tac is lying I know for a fact the locking block broke after only 24,500 rounds and his trigger is getting loose. Fess up tac you know that Taurus is getting long in the tooth :)

Tacblack
May 4, 2003, 02:05 AM
You just want all my high cap mags

Shes got another 10k left in her. And then I will just send it back to the Factory:D

Did I mention a woman shot one mag through it and thats when I broke, think the gun was trying to warn me:what:

SodaPop
May 4, 2003, 02:43 AM
I have a couple friends that have owned a few Taurus 9mm and they thought they were reliable, but not as nice as the Beretta.

There is just something lacking with the whole contour of the Taurus. I wish they didn't hi-lite the engraving with the white. It makes them look a little gaudy.

The Beretta is a great gun, but Sig makes a better 9mm than Taurus. IMHO

355sigfan
May 4, 2003, 03:55 AM
All the Taurus Autos I have shot save one have been jamamatics. Buyer beware. Get the Beretta.
PAT

buttrap
May 4, 2003, 08:17 AM
Really? that shocks me as the Taurus is made on Barreta tooling. Never had any jam problems with the ones I have owned.

PakWaan
May 4, 2003, 09:46 AM
Carried my PT-92 for years, had thousands of rounds through it and never had a problem with it. I really liked that pistol.......

Blueduck
May 4, 2003, 10:52 AM
Bought one years ago, not sure how many but it was $220 NIB on sale at WalMart and my mommie had to fill out the paperwork which might tell you something:eek:

I never shot all that well with it and it ended up my dads gun to this day, still borrow it occasionallly. Never had a single malfunction of any any kind and it has never needed a part replaced. I've no doubt the Beretta's are a bit smoother and maybe most are a bit more accurate.

One factor in the Beretta's favor these days is that the price difference between the two has shrunk considerably over the years.

Frankly as well as my Taurus has behaved the Beretta 92FS is an important enough pistol for many reasons that I think I'd be happier in the long term to kick in an extra $100 or so to get the "real thing". 'Course if an excellent condition Taurus could be taken home for something silly like $230 or so I'd snap it up in a heartbeat.

TonyB
May 4, 2003, 10:59 AM
I have a PT99...never jams,accurate as heck and I can go Cocked and locked.Mine's older and has no decocker.Only problem I had was the pin that holds the rear sight on would work it's way out after a few rounds.I took it to a gun smith and he fixed it.Cost me $329.
That being said,if I could afford it I'd buy a Beretta.Nicer trigger and better finish.
But if money's a concern you can't go wrong w/ a Taurus PT99 IMO.My Taurus was made in the old Beretta factiry in Brazil w/ the same machines as Beretta.I call it my poor man's Beretta.:D

PCRCCW
May 4, 2003, 11:45 AM
Im gonna call BS on a couple of posts here....."Taurus guns jam"
Uh huh...whatever. Taurus PT9* guns were initially made from Beretta's bar stock, on their machines with their tooling. BIG DIFFERENCE! :neener:
The steel/metal framed Taurus auto's are very nice guns.
Get 5 Beretta's and 5 Taurus guns and go shoot them. You will see a difference in the triggers...some like the Taurus better..some dont. Fit, finish, accuracy, dependability etc etc will be NO DIFFERENT!
As far as the safeties are considered...the Taurus SMOKES the Beretta in every regard. You carry Cocked and Locked and sweep the safety down to "fire" the gun...just LIKE EVERY OTHER GOOD COND. 1 CAPABLE GUN MADE!. :what: You can carry hammer down, decock it......... whatever. And its on the frame...whats not to like?
My Taurus autos have been as good as my Sigs, CZ's, Kahrs, S&W's and Kimber......and the triggers dont stack like a Beretta.
Get whatever you want...just make you decision based on facts and what you think.........not this very entertaining thread.
Shoot well

TheLastBoyScout
May 4, 2003, 11:53 AM
Wait a sec I'm confused. When you guys talk about carrying cocked and locked, do you mean with the hammer back like on a 1911, with a single action first shot?
Sorry, I'm new to the whole DA/SA thing, the only pistol I have experience with is a glock.

PCRCCW
May 4, 2003, 12:10 PM
Yes.....Taurus safety design lets you do any damn thing you want with the gun....
Cond 1 / SA first shot with safety ON!
Cond 2/ Hammer down/round chambered....
Cond 3, 4 and so on...who cares.
Shoot well

JohnKSa
May 4, 2003, 02:34 PM
The fact that the tooling is the same means absolutely NOTHING.

Let's say I go visit Wilson Combat, come home and buy an identical set of tooling. Then, I start turning out products. Anyone care to venture a guess as to why my finished products might not have the same level of quality and function as the ones from Wilson Combat?

The tooling is one tiny part of the equation. The skill of the machine operators, raw materials, designers (yes, Taurus has modified the Beretta design), manufacturing processes, the morale and quality of the employees, and quality control procedures and policies all have a tremendous effect on the finished product--MUCH more so than the tools used to produce the product.

SodaPop
May 4, 2003, 02:44 PM
JohnKSa

I second that!

I worked in the Injection Molding business for 5yrs (plastic manufacturing business) and the tooling is secondary. Just because it was cooked in the same pot doesn't mean its gonna taste the same.


What's the difference between the mags on these guns?

355sigfan
May 4, 2003, 03:01 PM
Im gonna call BS on a couple of posts here....."Taurus guns jam"
Uh huh...whatever. Taurus PT9* guns were initially made from Beretta's bar stock, on their machines with their tooling. BIG DIFFERENCE!

END

Ok I guess I need to go into specifics. The first Taurus I shot was a Pt101 (full size blue 40sw may have the wrong number). I recommended it to a friend because of what I had read about Taurus being a good product.

The gun constantly failed to feed and extract a variety of 40sw factory ammo. The double action trigger on the thing was in the neighborhood of 20 pounds while the single action was about 9 pounds. Overall crappy pistol.

Next Taurus I shot was another friends PT99 (Full size Blue 9mm) it had a problem with extraction. It would not extract any ammo reliably. It would not make it through a magazine without at least 2 malfunctions.

Next Taurus I tried was reliable; it was a full size stainless 9mm. It worked fine. Its trigger was heavy but at least it would go bang.

Next Taurus I shot was a fellow officer's PT908. This thing would not even feed ball with any degree of reliability. It went back to Taurus twice before he got really frustrated and sold it. Take a look at some of the gun tests articles with Taurus guns. Most of the time the articles are not favorable.

I have owned 5 Beretta 92's over the years and one Cougar in 40sw. They were all flawless. The Beretta is not my favorite design. But it can't be denied that it works. If you check the various forums on net, the general feeling is that if you buy a Taurus you will be using their lifetime warranty again and again.
PAT

Mark IV Series 80
May 4, 2003, 03:04 PM
What's the difference between the mags on these guns? The big functional difference is the cut-out for the magazine release.

I hear that one type may be modified (cut-out enlarged) to work in the other.

boing
May 4, 2003, 03:56 PM
Personal opinion? As Blueduck said:

...the Beretta 92FS is an important enough pistol for many reasons that I think I'd be happier in the long term to kick in an extra $100 or so to get the "real thing".

I don't like slide mounted safeties, and I'm a cheap bastard, so for a working gun I'd probably give the Taurus a whirl.

But since I already have enough working nines to suit my needs, I'd be buying more for history and cachet than anything else: Beretta.

COK
May 4, 2003, 04:11 PM
I have put about a 1000 rds through a PT-100 , Had 2 FTF's in the first 25 rds and never a problem since. I have never been real impressed with the accuracy when compaired other .40 pistols of the same barrel length.

JohnKSa
May 5, 2003, 12:17 AM
Just because it was cooked in the same pot doesn't mean its gonna taste the same. LOL!
Excellent analogy!

denfoote
May 5, 2003, 12:29 AM
I HAD both!! The Beretta went bye bye, traded for a BHP. The Taurus is still in my possession. No problems here!! :D

Handy
May 5, 2003, 01:31 AM
The Taurus 92 and 99 pistols are built with the machinery and training of Beretta plant engineers. Their have been minor changes since the Beretta contract, but the Taurus is actually closer to the design of the original Beretta 92 than the 92FS is.

If the price is right, contract made guns are great. I have a Greek made HK91 that is perfect. Many people are currently raving about their FM Argentine BHPs, 1927 Sistema Colts, etc.

The ingrediants and kitchen are so close, the soups are 99% identical where it counts. For a long time, Taurus locking blocks were the prefered replacements, even.

Frequently, you can find a barely used Taurus 92 for little more than $200. A similar, or even rough Beretta is going to be closer to $400. If you're buying a workhorse, I don't see any reason to go Beretta, unless you're going to buy enough hicap mags to make up for the price difference.

Longbow
May 5, 2003, 02:26 AM
Its odd, but considering the price difference between the two, I hear more locking block breakage on a Beretta 92's than a Taurus 92's. :(

355sigfan
May 5, 2003, 03:36 AM
I hear more locking block breakage on a Beretta 92's than a Taurus 92's.
END

Thats simply because there are more 92's in circulation than Taurus guns. The Military and several police forces use Beretta's. No one uses Taurus guns.
PAT

Lennyjoe
May 5, 2003, 05:59 AM
denfoote, you still own a Taurus?:rolleyes: ;) :D

gharsh
May 5, 2003, 09:14 AM
I have the PT92AF and have had no problems with it. I have a hard time hitting targets at any great length (35 yrds +) but that is probably my fault not the guns. I used my PT92 this weekend at an IPSC shoot and had a great time. CDNN investments has MecGar mags for nine dollars for the Taurus which work great. Got the gun for about $300. I've ordered four MecGars from CDNN.

Around here, you can find new Taurus 92s in the mid to high $500 range. For another $100 you could get the Beretta.

Beretta mags have a smaller catch on the magazines. File it larger and they work in a Taurus.

Only thing I'd like to do is put adjustable sights on the rear. MecGar makes a set I found in Brownell's catalog. Other than that, I really like this gun. Not as much as my Springfield 1911, but close.

George Hill
May 5, 2003, 11:36 AM
CDNN investments has MecGar mags for nine dollars

At what capacity?

Adjustable Rears... THere is a shop here in town with a Tauri with an adjustible rear for 350.
Considering the comments here - that is a great deal.

Longbow
May 5, 2003, 01:29 PM
I think I need to rephrase my statement.:D
I hear locking block breakage on Beretta's but not Taurus's. Not even once, I know its somewhat less accurate(I've shot both) than the Beretta, but locking block breakage, none!

boing
May 5, 2003, 01:59 PM
$10 CDNN mags are 10-rounders. The prebans are $35.

Handy
May 5, 2003, 03:11 PM
Like I said earlier, Taurus locking blocks have been a prefered replacement for broken Berettas for quite awhile.

I'm sure some Taurus blocks have broken as well, that's just the way the gun is designed. But the Taurus blocks (until the recent Beretta upgrade, at least) seem to be stronger.

10-Ring
May 5, 2003, 03:20 PM
I was never that happy w/ the Taurus semi auto I owned. Jammed frequently, had a heavy trigger & was not all that accurate. Total opposite of what my Berettas have been!
Go Beretta! :D

355sigfan
May 5, 2003, 03:53 PM
That old saying you get what you pay for is true.
PAT

MaxSE PT99
May 5, 2003, 11:44 PM
Hi all!

I just recently found you fine folk's forum.....heheheh.

Anyway, if it's worth anything.....my PT99 is awesome. Had it about a month now, and the thing has yet to jam. I've shot probably 2000 rounds and not a single problem. I've shot reloads, factory ammo, and it goes bang evrey time the trigger is pulled!

My buddy has a Glock 19 and it would jam up on Federals' lead free Ballistaclean ammo. Not my little Bull. Now, I'm not gonna put down Glock, they make excellent guns. Heck I've even owned a G19 and a G26, but i prefer my SA guns better. Just makes me think.....my buddy paid 450 new for his Glock, and I paid 250, his Glock jams more than my "inferior" Taurus. Just food for thought.

Have another friend who has a Beretta 96. It's a nice looking gun, but I can't hit a barn with it. Now my Taurus can hit a coke can at 25 yards open sights, free-hand all day long, and I know it's the gun and not me.....i've owned a .45 and got excellent results. No flinch at all. Maybe i've just been lucky, but I'm glad I have if that's the case.

Well, I've probably wasted too much time already, so C YA!

Take care
Jon

SouthpawShootr
May 5, 2003, 11:51 PM
Just from the curiosity point of view, I think you should get the Taurus. You already have a Beretta. You like what the Taurus has to offer. You will eventually decide you like the Beretta better. You'd probably be able to get the Taurus as slick as the Beretta, but then what you save would have evaporated away. I have both and am looking to get rid of neither.

Handy
May 5, 2003, 11:52 PM
A friend of mine is going through a police training course. He needed to buy a handgun, and only something that fits standard gear (CZ was out).

He wanted a Glock, but after seeing prices, went alternative shopping with me.

Off of our list, he picked up a new PT92. They fired 3000 rounds in training. He told me today that he didn't have a single malfunction, and that he was glad he didn't get the Glock, as he saw many failures and jams in his class.


Anequedotes are just that, but that's one guy who won't be bad mouthing Taurus or talking up Glock.

SouthpawShootr
May 5, 2003, 11:57 PM
This design is inherently reliable. About the only ways you can muck it up is: a- aftermarket mags b- wear and tear on parts (lack of maintenance) c- bad or low quality ammo.

I've had one beretta and 2 Tauri. None has ever jammed. Still have the Beretta and a PT92.

Big Mike
May 6, 2003, 06:20 AM
George,

I had the PT92 for @ a year or so. I shot close to 1500 rounds through it. No problems at all. It was all blue.

The only reason I sold it is a fellow college buddy/shooter didn't have any "hi-cap" pistols right after the AWB in '94. He made me a deal of $400 and I couldn't pass it up. And at the time I had lots of hi-cap pistols.

I now own a Beretta Brigadier 92FS and wouldn't hesitate to purchase a Taurus PT series pistol. I really like the heavy slide on my Beretta. If it wasn't available, I would seriously consider the Taurus again.

Hope this helps. Mike

Pico
May 6, 2003, 07:32 AM
The price diff isn't as great as it used to be plus the resale potential more than makes up for it. Although I like the safety setup of the Taurus better than the Beretta's, I would still pay a little more and get the Beretta and get used to the weird safety system.

Something I may have missed while scanning these posts... are mags compatable between the two guns?

How about a new CZ 75-B instead of either gun used?

Pico

igor
May 6, 2003, 11:13 AM
I've had two 99's, the first one was a blued AF and the current one is a blued AFD with the decocker. Uncle Mike's neoprene grips, a polished feed ramp and a very moderate trigger job put a little bump to the price of it ten years ago. Not the most ergonomic tool, but it sure has taught me to shoot.

Reliability has been perfect, accuracy on par with shooter and functionality very good. I chose the Tauri both times in comparison with the Beretta and just didn't want the slide-mounted safety.

A word of warning that I've posted before though: stay away from the 99 because the rear sight is a disaster! Get the 92 instead. Aftermarket sights are a better option than the poor, "pasted-on" Brazilian experience.

The rear sight's tubular pin that holds the front portion in place will shake loose or to bits. Everything about the sight is pretty roughly made. My rear sight is now fixed in place with a joint screw right through the top front portion down into the slide. Will hold now, didn't before. All adjustment screws have to be fixed with Lok-Tite or I'll lose zero in a mag's time.

The gunsmith said that drilling and tapping the hole in the slide was like working on cheese. The materials definitely aren't Beretta quality, never mind the tooling. Not that this had affected the durability or accuracy of the gun that much - I'm getting close to the 20.000 mark now and the gun rattles no more than when new and will group five rounds in 6 cm's from 25 meters if I do my part.

My next handgun will be a Walther P99QA. And yes, I mean the German original...

Russ
May 6, 2003, 11:28 AM
I once owned a Taurus 92. Sorriest gun I ever owned. Don't waste your money!

MAKOwner
May 6, 2003, 05:50 PM
I've got a PT-92AF I bought new for $325 dollars with a couple hi-caps back around 95-96 (leftover from before AWB I guess).

I have put right at about 1200 rnds through it. Really just started shooting it alot recently, bought a 1000rnd case of cheapass Wolf 9mm and ran it through there this last year. Not one single failure to fire or jam of anykind, with what some would label the crappiest ammo available. I have no complaints with the gun... Seems like a nice well made gun to me. I have however noticed that the Berettas I've handled did cycle a little more smoothly. I have no doubt they have a better fit and finish but as long as it works I frankly don't care about that crap...

If you enjoyed reading about "Beretta VS Taurus" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!