Can someone explain Taurus?

[McNutt]

Taurus seems to make total copies of established guns. Do they get licenses to do this or is there nothing the other companies can do? A good example is the Beretta 92, which Taurus seemed to copy as the Taurus 92. How are they doing this?

I've always wanted a Beretta 92. I don't know why either. I shot one once and wasn't terribly imperssed with it. I have a CZ-75 that I like better and it's basically the same feel. But I still think I'm going to get a 92 one day. How does the Beretta model compare to the Taurus?

 

[lbmii]

I read some where (for what thats worth) that Taurus got its' start by moving all of the machinery to Brazil that was at an old US facory that was used to make 38 special S&W revolvers for WWII.

They seem to wait for patents to expire then they make copies. Of course there are many others that do the same. Look at all the .45 1911, AR15, FN-FAL, Colt Single Action and Winchester lever action look a likes.

Just think when the Glock patents expire. I think it's pretty soon.

 

[hillbilly]

Taurus guns superficially resemble other guns, but some of the parts will not interchange exactly.

On the old designs, like the double action revolvers, you don't have to worry about patent infringement since the patents on many of those guns have been expired longer than most of us have been alive.

But on the newer models, Taurus makes enough internal changes so that the guns are not exact copies, and certain parts will not change, thus making it a different gun that really looks a lot like another design.

 

[George Hill]

Beretta was making guns there in Brazil on Beretta's on machinery.
When they stopped production they decided to just sell it all instead if bringing the stuff back to italy. Taurus Forge purchesed the whole lot and moved in and started production again with Beretta's blessings. Lots of the same employees too. Early Taurus 92 clones could be said to be real Berettas. Then they started to make some design changes. To this day these guns are still and have always been excellent handguns... but Beretta does have an edge on the fluff and buff finish work.
Taurus is the one that finally put the .45ACP into the 92 mold... and moved the safety to the frame where it should be. These are two things that Berettas is slow to adopt.
The taurus revolvers are all excellent too.

THe only taurus guns I am cautious of are the plastic autos.

Taurus is also one of the few gun makers that back up their products 100% with a lifetime warranty. They also have the attitude that they really want you to be happy with them. They will bend over backwards to make you so. The only other gun company that I get that vibe from is Springfield.

 

[shooter58]

I believe you have been properly answered concerning the model 92. Now maybe I can answer the revolver question.
Both Taurus and Smith & Wesson were once owned by the Bangor Punta Corp. (I believe this was back in the 70's or 80's). At that time I remember reading that Smith & Wesson would send some of their engineers down to Brazil to assist Taurus with various design problems on their revolvers. It was mainly during this time that Taurus revolvers came to so closely resemble S & W revolvers. I remember when Taurus made a big deal out of announcing that they had changed their trigger group to no longer be like Smith & Wesson's.
When you are starting out to improve your product, it's not a bad idea to copy the best.

 

[McNutt]

Thanks, guys. I remember hearing that Taurus was a cheap knockoff when I was much younger and I didn't want to hold on that that belief if it was just something I heard from somebody who never owned one. I appreciate you guys setting me straight.

 

[Tamara]

George Hill,

Taurus is the one that finally put the .45ACP into the 92 mold... and moved the safety to the frame where it should be.

Actually, the safety on Taurus 92s has always been on the frame, because that's where the safety on the old "pre-S" Beretta 92s was. It was the "S" version that introduced the slide-mounted dingus.

Interestingly, Beretta has never really ceased production of the frame-mounted safety version, but they did stop importing them to the US after the introduction of the "S" model, the reason being that the dominant LE autochucker in the US at the time was the S&W family, and Beretta wanted a piece of those contracts, so a similarity of operation was seen as a selling point.

 

[George Hill]

Really?
The only 92's I've ever seen with a frame mounted safety has been the Billenium guns... but that does make some sense considering the Cheetah which is supposed to be like a small 92 has the lever on the frame.

Thank heavens Beretta didn't follow S&W's grip shape too. *shudder*

 

[RJ357]

The Beretta 92F had the "problem" of the slide flying off the rear of the gun in the event that it broke. The 92FS guns had an enlarged head on the hammer pin. The pin head extended up into a slot was cut in the slide. The end of the slot limited any movement of the slide beyond it's normal travel rearward.
Both the F and FS had slide mounted safeties.

 

[shep854]

Beretta won the Brazilian Army pistol contract in the 1970s with the Model 92. They established a plant in Brazil to make the pistols, and when the contract was filled, it was sold to Taurus.

The Taurus 92 is a direct clone of the original Beretta 92, except that the Beretta did not have an ambi safety, and (I believe) had the mag release in the lower rear corner of the left grip panel, as in the old 971/Brigadier.

Beretta went to the slide safety/decocker in order to compete as the 1911 replacement for the US military.

While I'm unhappy to hear reports of poor customer service by Taurus, the PT92 is a very good gun. The one I own is a fine shooter.

 

[Josey]

Taurus are fine handguns. They make some good rifles also. The only revolvers I don't trust 100% are their early models with striations machined into the cylinder flutes. I am agog about their Gaucho single action introduction. A rumour is that they are producing a bargain Colt Lightning pump rifle clone. I haven't seen one yet. High hopes, high hopes.

 

[orangeninja]

I thought that when Beretta left Brazil, that Taurus gained the rights to produce a handgun identical to Beretta, however Beretta introduced the slide mounted safety to compete for military and LEO contracts. Under patent law, Taurus was not allowed to duplicate the safety and so made a safety on the frame instead.

Just what I've researched. I owned a very old Taurus 92 that was identical in every way to the Beretta 92.....so I did a little homework, maybe I'm wrong.

 

[Highland Ranger]

Taurus is also one of the few gun makers that back up their products 100% with a lifetime warranty.

Don't think this is true - we had a warranty summary thread here somewhere, can't find it, but as I recall many if not most of the major manufacturers have a lifetime warranty.

Re Taurus - never a fan, their involvement in the NJ Smartgun debacle assured that I won't be buying one anytime soon.

 

[c_yeager]

Re Taurus - never a fan, their involvement in the NJ Smartgun debacle assured that I won't be buying one anytime soon.

What do you buy instead?

 

[carpettbaggerr]

Watch out Ranger -- He's gonna jump you!

 

[Croyance]

George Hill, Beretta has competition guns on the 92 frame that also have frame-mounter safeties. Before the Billenium it was the only way to get a frame mounted safety. IIRC, they cost more than the Billenium
If you look at that book Beretta put out about themselves, they have great pictures showing the original 92. I found a copy at Barnes and Nobles, so you may be able to get a peek.

 

[Majic]

Don't think this is true - we had a warranty summary thread here somewhere, can't find it, but as I recall many if not most of the major manufacturers have a lifetime warranty.

The other manufactors only warranted the original owner of the handgun. Taurus led the way with warranting the handgun no matter who owned it.

 

[BluesBear]

The original Taurus 92 models had manufactured under license from Beretta or words to that effect stamped on them.

Rossi was making copies of S&W revolvers in the 1960's. So was Llama.
I saw my first Taurus revolver in the mid 1970s and they were rather crude so put it nicely. But even then they stood behind their product and would repair them no questions asked.

The 1911 and the SAA were being copied in the 1950s.

Patents and copyrights expire and when they do it's all fair game.
Now Trademarks and Servicemarks. Those are different. Those are forever if maintained.

 

[Highland Ranger]

What do you buy instead?

I'm not playing. Enough already said here on the subject.

 

[peashooter]

If you pull off the grip panels on a Beretta 92, you will see a plug where the frame mounted safety would have been. I suppose, if you were so inclined you could install one.
I have a Taurus revolver and had a PT-111. Their customer service is spotty at best. I have always found them to be friendly, just slow to fill an order.
Most recently, I sent a broken slide stop for my formerly owned PT-111. I sent the broken part with a letter stating the problem and how it happened, ok and a suggestion for improvement. Well, that was in late April, nearly two months have passed and not a word.
On the other hand I have received parts from them in less than a week. What's up with that??
Oh, I sold the PT-111 because the slide stop had broke twice in less than a year. I had a spare stop, installed it, sold the PT-111 and bought a Kahr. End of problem.:banghead:

 

[TechBrute]

I CCW'd a Model 85 back when Texas first passed the carry law. It has approximately 2000 rounds through it and is on loan to my mother, who uses it to sleep more soundly at night. Yes, I trust my mother to that gun.

 

[George Hill]

Even if you could drop in frame safety parts, I think you would have to use a different slide too.
With the costs of these things... even if you could do it... why not just buy a new Taurus and have the action and trigger reworked by an artisan gunsmith?
Probably save you some money too.

 

[denfoote]

I agree with George's warning on the Plastic Tauri.
That said, I have had both the Taurus and Beretta 92. I traded the Beretta off and still have the Taurus!! The frame mounted safety was the keeping point for me!!!
I also have a couple of their revolvers that are, for the most part, decent!! Not as decent as my Smith N-frame, though!!

 

[WonderNine]

THe only taurus guns I am cautious of are the plastic autos.

Aside from that I'm also cautious of their revolvers and their Beretta 21 clone (the PT-22).

In other words all of the Taurus guns I've owned were crap.

I've had bad experiences with everything Taurus...

I'm really tempted by their new 9mm revolver, but I don't wanna be fooled again.

I like the fact that they are an innovative company aside from all the clones they make and didn't mind supporting them either at the time.

 

[BluesBear]

I simply love mine. Unported .44 Special.

850 rounds so far and it had been fired before I bought it.
Shoots like a dream and it's just as tight as new.

It LOVES the Miwall 240gr SWC.
It also likes Winchester Cowboy ammo.
It's the back-up for my HD shotgun.