Beretta 92FS vs. Taurus 92B-17


PDA






brentwal
February 5, 2007, 12:54 AM
After almost buying a used Beretta 92FS yesterday, I simply was going to have the shop order a new one.

But of course somebody on Glocktalk throws a money wrench into the gears and suggests the Taurus 92 into the mix.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v491/brentwal/92FS_S_maxi.jpg

The Beretta web site is listing it at $600 but only 10rnd mag capacity.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v491/brentwal/92B-17.jpg

The Taurus web site is listing it at $625 with a 17 rnd mag capacity.

Reasons to buy the Beretta
It's a Beretta
It's the Original design
It should have better quality

Reasons to buy the Taurus
The shop's a stocking Taurus dealer, the price would be lower in the end.
It has a rail, giving it a more M9 look
It's got a 17 rnd cap mag
It's got a frame mounted safety, something I think I'd like better then the slide mounted safety on the Beretta.


So I need some input about the desision.

If you enjoyed reading about "Beretta 92FS vs. Taurus 92B-17" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
gudel
February 5, 2007, 01:30 AM
Get the real thing!

possum
February 5, 2007, 01:37 AM
In my personal opinion i prefer the taurus, as you mentioned the taurus is cheaper, which is a great thing, but also i prefer the frame mounted safety as well. i have shot many of each kind and prefer the taurus over the beretta. about the only berretas i like is the px4 and cx4 storms.

after putting many rds through berretta m9's in the army, and many 92's and 96's, and as a matter of fact i owned a ss 92 for a while, i just have come to not really liking the berreta. if i was in your shoes i would get the taurus and with the money you save get ammo and more mags.

btw www.sportsmansguide.com had a special on berreta factory mags not to long ago, they were 6 for $89 and now they are 6 for $99, you might want to grab some before they go up again, my dad bought a whole bunch for his storm, oh yeah they are the 15rd mags.

fugi
February 5, 2007, 01:54 AM
In my opinion the taurus is just as good as the beretta, plus I like the frame mounted safety alot better. Pay no attention to the MSRP on taurus's site, figure on paying roughly half that. I've no idea why the MSRP is always listed so high.

wooderson
February 5, 2007, 01:55 AM
Taurus would do well to make their markings a touch less flashy.

Idano
February 5, 2007, 02:29 AM
I have a 92FS that I bought new about six years ago that I would never part with it. When I bought my Beretta the Taurus was using the old Beretta molds and the fit and finish just wasn't as good. Time changes all things and I understand now the new 92's have some of the alloy parts replaced with polymer which may be a good thing or not and I also understand that the quality in the Taurus products have improved. I guess I would have to compare the two side by side and see who has fewest machinist marks and smoothest triggers and if all things are equal I would go with the Beretta because of the reliability I have come to trust out of mine.

Autolycus
February 5, 2007, 02:40 AM
You can find the M9s a lot cheaper if you look around. Try gunbroker. Also try www.ordnanceoutsellers.com

I also believe CDNN has a few on sale.

otomik
February 5, 2007, 02:51 AM
Reasons to buy the Taurus
The shop's a stocking Taurus dealer, the price would be lower in the end.something i've learned, as long as the gun is somewhere in the standard price range you find modern pistols the annual cost of ammunition for someone that likes to shoot ends up making the original purchase price less significant. YMMV depending on what ammo you buy and how many guns you have.

It has a rail, giving it a more M9 lookthe M9 does not have a rail, perhaps you want to save up and buy Beretta's M9A1 or others which feature a rail.

It's got a 17 rnd cap magTaurus mags are different from Beretta mags actually due to the placement of the mag release notch. If you buy a Beretta you'll be able to buy high quality 17 and 18+2 round mags for it from MecGar of Italy. Also the Beretta will come with 15 round mags and not 10 round mags as long as you live in a state that allows it.
http://www.mec-gar.com/mags/mgpb9218.html

It's got a frame mounted safety, something I think I'd like better then the slide mounted safety on the Beretta.now that Taurus added a decock feature it's looking pretty good indeed, I'm tempted but I also find Taurus' politics/corporate culture kind of revolting with their totally unprincipled and now abandoned smartgun project. Then there was their completely wrong and misleading ad campaign about second strike capability and their 24/7.

hexidismal
February 5, 2007, 03:00 AM
Well.. I can't really say if people are right or wrong when they say the taurus is just as good as the beretta. I have fired both. To be absolutely fair, the taurus models I have tried were both a PT92, and a PT99 in the older pre-decocker model configuration. Now, I have fired the beretta 92fs 3 separate times in my life, each time was a different gun, and each time had one or more jams. I have owned both the aforementioned taurus 92 and 99 , and neither one ever gave me a jam.. and these as I said were the older "less quality control" models. I still own the Taurus PT99 and it serves me well still at the range every time.

I say go for the taurus. The price you're mentioning is the MSRP, but my local Gander Mtn. has the stainless variety at $400. For a blued version , and somewhere maybe a little cheaper, you can probably do somewhat better than that even. Oh and, also you might want to check out the 99 variety instead of the 92 .. the adjustable sights are a big plus.

fattsgalore
February 5, 2007, 04:11 AM
Get what you like, but if any one talks do-do about the PT-92 they ain't shot it before. And if they've shot it they've never owned one. So don't count it out.

The PT-92 in stainless is just a good deal. I trusted my life with it and know mine and all my friends(they were going for $386 before tax locally at one point, so everyone and their moms got one. no, for real!) know it wont fail.
Good luck regardless.

Pimpstar00
February 5, 2007, 09:32 AM
I have to say get the beretta. I have and recommend the 90-two, not the 92fs. It is an awesome gun, with rail, and factory( beretta) 17 round mags. I have put several thousand rounds through it with zero malfunctions. Plus, it just is a beautiful gun. Check it out. Plus never been a fan of cheap knockoffs.


http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=65165299

MikeJackmin
February 5, 2007, 10:02 AM
Personally, I'm a big fan of the Taurus decocker. However, the fit and finish of the Beretta is top-notch, no doubt about it.

Here's another monkey wrench for you - which gun offers a cheaper 40 cal conversion?

ddj8052
February 5, 2007, 10:03 AM
I prefer the Taurus over the Beretta. I have owned both guns and the Taurus in my opion is the better of the two. These threads will always bring out the Taurus haters. On these forums this is normal. What I have found is that the people that hate on Taurus have never actually owned one. The reason I like the Taurus is that it has the frame mounted saftey/decocker lever. This alows the gun to be carried coked and locked. Also the safety is in the right place and moves in the right direction. As a 1911 shooter I realy appreciate it. The slide mounted safety is really akward to engage and disengage unless you have super long thumbs. I really really dislike slide mounted safeties. The Taurus reliabiltiy in the gun I owned and all the other models I have shot has been very very good. Go with the Taurus I am sure you will like it.

phantomak47
February 5, 2007, 10:12 AM
92s run $470 around here NEW. Taurus are like $399

doubleg
February 5, 2007, 10:13 AM
Toyota vs. Lexus. Same damn car just one has a cooler name a slightly different design. IMO the taurus has tighter tolerances so it is a little more accurate it also has a frame mounted safetey wich alot of people perfer over Beretas slide mounted one. But the beretta definatley has a better finish. Good luck!

Lonestar
February 5, 2007, 10:14 AM
I shot both and they are pretty much the same. I like the Taurus decocker/safety setup better, but the beretta fit and finish is a little nicer. For the cost of a used Beretta, you can buy a new Taurus and have a lifetime warranty. Seems like a no brainer, unless you really want the status of saying you own a Beretta.

Lonestar
February 5, 2007, 10:24 AM
92s run $470 around here NEW. Taurus are like $399

$470 for a new Beretta 92f , and Taurus for $399??? Where is that??? A Beretta 92f for $40 less than a Glock 19, WOW. Your getting a steal for the 92f and getting slightly ripped of on the Taurus. Prices here are $550 to $580 for a 92f and $340 (blued) to $399 (Stainless) for the Taurus. That is a $200 difference.

fattsgalore
February 5, 2007, 02:57 PM
Average price locally in Central Florida
$550 and up for the Beretta, non-negotiable(blued only, stainless is still $700)
$499 and under for the Taurus Pt-92 in stainless, negotiable.

hexidismal
February 5, 2007, 03:04 PM
These threads will always bring out the Taurus haters. On these forums this is normal. What I have found is that the people that hate on Taurus have never actually owned one.

I've found that to be .. partially true. Most of the Taurus haters I know actually have owned one, but they typically have not owned one of the Pt92/99 variants. Most common is that they have owned other model older Taurus autos, which definitely did have some issues. The PT92/99 line has long been the Taurus strong point.

Cheeseybacon
February 5, 2007, 03:12 PM
I snagged a genuine made-in-Italy 92FS NIB this past fall for $540 and I absolutely love it. Don't know what advantages there are (if there are any at all) to the Italian versus the American-made version, but it's still cool having one since the American-made ones are so common. My hands are on the lower-end of medium-sized, so the wide grip did take some getting used to at first. I don't mind it at all now that I've been shooting it for a while. Also, given it's large size and weight, it really dampens the recoil of the 9mm round, so it's a really light shooter. It's the next gun that I have new shooters try after they've been well-warmed up and familiarized with the .22 and are ready to turn things up a notch.

shep854
February 5, 2007, 04:36 PM
I, too, have owned both and kept the Taurus. The Beretta is a great pistol, but the Taurus with it's frame safety/decocker feels just a little better to my hand.

Of course, the PT92 doesn't have 600+ years of history behind it...:what:

10-Ring
February 5, 2007, 05:11 PM
You'll find more & more shooters w/ positive results w/ Tauri. Me, I've bought only 2 but both left a lot to be desired - especially in the sights & the triggers :barf:
Go w/ the Beretta! I've got 2 that have been great shooters :cool:

Texas9
February 5, 2007, 05:34 PM
Couple of pointers in Pietro's favor:

1. Even though Beretta's website STILL lists the 92FS to have 10-rd mags, it comes with two 15-rd mags standard (provided you don't live in a communist state).

2. If you REALLY must have the frame-mounted safety, all it takes is a phone call to Beretta. You CAN get a 92 with that feature, you just have to request it. It's one of those things you have to dig to find, kinda like the 92 FS Deluxe. If you want to see what it looks like, check here:

http://www.beretta.com/index.aspx?m=74&idc=2&ids=28
http://www.beretta.com/index.aspx?m=74&idc=2&ids=27

The first one is the new Steel-I, with the frame-mounted (ambidextrious, too) safety standard. The second one shows (at the top of the page) the 92FS Vertec, with an accessory rail.

I won't knock the Taurus, but I do LOVE my 92FS Inox, and wouldn't get rid of it for any reason.

Milkmaster
February 5, 2007, 07:13 PM
I vote for the 92FS. Made in the USA. Mine came with two 15 round mags. Take down in about 3 seconds and back together in about 5!
But that's just me!

phantomak47
February 5, 2007, 07:55 PM
"$470 for a new Beretta 92f , and Taurus for $399??? Where is that??? A Beretta 92f for $40 less than a Glock 19, WOW. Your getting a steal for the 92f and getting slightly ripped of on the Taurus. Prices here are $550 to $580 for a 92f and $340 (blued) to $399 (Stainless) for the Taurus. That is a $200 difference."


Carters country is running 92s for $479

Academy here is $499

brentwal
February 6, 2007, 12:54 AM
I think I figured out my course of action.

I'll go with either the Beretta 92FS

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v491/brentwal/92FS_S_maxi.jpg

or the Beretta M9A1 depending on the price, if I can snag one for under $650.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v491/brentwal/M9A1_small_maxi.jpg

Of course I'll need a Cx4 Storm. EBCarbine ya know.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v491/brentwal/beretta_storm500.jpg

But I'm not going to snub Tuarus. (Pun some what intended) ;)

I've been looking for a .45ACP that's not a 1911.

The new 24/7 OSS in .45ACP looked fine in AR.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v491/brentwal/24-720OSS.jpg

But the regular 24/7 in .45ACP looks good too.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v491/brentwal/247-45BP-10.jpg

Pimpstar00
February 6, 2007, 09:35 AM
Boo, take a look at the 90-two. Nobody around here seems to be talking about them. 17 round mags, reliability, rail, and interchangeable backstraps, for about the price of a 92a1. I have one and love it. Please at least check it out! Respond damn it! Does anyone else have an opinion about the 90-two? I do have a Sig 226 but the beretta is awesome!

hexidismal
February 6, 2007, 10:45 AM
Boo, take a look at the 90-two. Nobody around here seems to be talking about them. 17 round mags, reliability, rail, and interchangeable backstraps, for about the price of a 92a1

The 90-Two in my opinion is one nice looking gun. Some would disagree but I think Beretta went just the right direction in modernizing their classic. The Problem I have with this statement though is the mention of reliability. I'm not sure anyone can really tout the reliability of the 90-Two just yet. I would love to hear from at least a few people with around 10,000 rounds through one, but til' then discussions of its reliability are up the air.

shamrock404
February 6, 2007, 11:07 AM
I have owned the PT 99 AF and the PT 101 both good guns have the decocker and safety that can be engaged when decocked. I have owned the M92 and the 92G Berettas both were good guns. I have not expirenced any difficulty with either brand. Pick the gun that you like and are happy with both in feel and price. Have a nice day and a wonderful week.

briansp82593
February 6, 2007, 12:16 PM
milk master u obviously got the one that is "modern" plastic safety, trigger, mag base, and guide rod how is it working?

Milkmaster
February 6, 2007, 07:31 PM
My boy wanted something with a little more umff when he got tired of his 22 ruger MKII. My 92FS shoots easily, has never jammed or misfired, and is easy to clean. I use the cheapest ammo I can buy for it. Mine is USA made. I don't know if that makes any difference other than to me. I am pleased so far!

Would really like to try one of those CX4 Storm, but I cannot bring myself to spring for that much $$$

boerseun
February 6, 2007, 07:41 PM
Get the Taurus. It is a solid and reliable pistol. I like it more than the beretta - simply because I like sticking it to the man that tries to sell something based on name only.

Retro
February 6, 2007, 11:34 PM
I had a taurus, it was not accurate. I traded it in for a Beretta 92FS. All happy faces, after that... No regrets!

"Don't try to hit me, but hit me!"

"Don't get a M9 imitation, but get a M9!"

my 2 cent.

shark40sw
February 7, 2007, 05:17 AM
The most accurate 9mm I've ever shot was a friends stainless 92 that had had a custom trigger and overtravel screw. To say the least I was impressed. On the other side, and I do own more than one Taurus today, the Taurus version of the same had the hardest and worst trigger of any auto I've ever shot.
To be fair, I have only the one Taurus 92 experience to base my opinions on. It just turned me off of that model permanently. I don't care how fancy the gun is, or for that matter who makes it, if I can't shoot it, what's the point of having it? A rock would be just as usefull and a hell of a lot cheaper to buy. (no wait times either)

Taurus92 in KyleTX
February 8, 2007, 03:32 PM
How can I stay out of this thread with a name like mine?? :)

Taurus bought the BZL factory from Beretta, so you're essentially getting a Beretta when you buy the PT-92.

I've shot my brother-in-law's Beretta 92, and loved it. He had the Hogue finger groove grips, which were AWESOME, and I highly recommend them. Unfortunately, because of the frame mounted safety/decocker on my Taurus, they won't fit mine, and they don't make a comparable grip for the Taurus.

Pachmayer (sp?) makes "full signature" grips for the Taurus, but they aren't quite as good.

As far as pricing, don't pay more than $400 for a Taurus, in blue or stainless. I've seen the blue as low as $360, and the SS for $380 periodically at places like Cabela's and Academy. You just have to catch a sale.

The only think I don't like about my Taurus 92, besides the unavailability of Hogue finger groove grips, is the factory paint on the front sight-- it's worthless. Someday, I'll buy some sight paint, or something.

Other than that, I love my Taurus 92, and have had ZERO problems with it... except that I bought a PT-111 Millenium Pro recently, and seem to be more accurate with it. :cool:

If you enjoyed reading about "Beretta 92FS vs. Taurus 92B-17" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!