Taurus 9mm semi-autos

[cookekdjr]

Hi folks. I have a Taurus 85 snubbie .38 in titanium. Love the gun, feels and shoots like quality.
I'm looking into a 9mm plinker. I like Taurus b/c of their warranty and my prior experience.
Have you owned/shot a Taurus centerfire (no pt22 stories, please) semi-auto, and what did you think of its performance? Mr. Camp wrote an excellent piece on their pt92 series, and I'd love to hear other's experiences as well.
Please tell me what your experience has been.
Thanks,

David

 

[Shooter973]

Taurus 9mm's

I have 3 of these fine handguns, and I don't even like 9mm. I have them because of the availability of cheap(free) 9mm brass. I reload for mine and they have been good reliable handguns in every respect. They do every thing that I think a good handgun should do. Mine have functioned and worked well for me. They are accurate as any other 9mm that I've tried. And they are a little cheaper to purchase. I like 'em and always keep my eyes open for another good used one. I bought all of mine used but they have been no problem handguns.

 

[phorvick]

My Taurus 92 is about a year old...not many rounds through it, but an excellent performer to date. A little too much play in the trigger for my best feeling, but fun to shoot...accurate...nice sights...etc.

 

[Cueball]

My Taurus 92 is probably close to 15yrs old and still shoots great after several bricks of ammo! It's still very accurate, never has a misfire or FTF, and it's fun to shoot besides. I'd suggest them as a great choice.

 

[Big Mike]

I had a Taurus 92 that had Zero problems over 10 years ago. I sold it to a buddy only because he wanted it more than I did. If I had to do it again, I would probably still have it. I have no experience with the other variety of Taurus 9mms. Mike

 

[SouthpawShootr]

I've had 3 Taurus centerfire semis. Still have 2. The one I got rid of, did not leave my possesion b/c of any failing. I believe the 92/99 and their .40 SW variants lead the pack as far as quality. I love my PT92 which is one of my keep no matter what guns. Workmanship was excellent on my PT92 (made in 1994) and my PT99 (made somewhere in the late '80s). They are among the most accurate 9mms I've owned.

 

[MillCreek]

I have a 9 mm Millennium Pro, manufactured in 2004. I have several hundred rounds through it so far, and have had no malfunctions whatsoever. I find it to be reasonably accurate, lightweight for the size and capacity and reliable. I like mine just fine.

 

[HSMITH]

I have a PT99. It runs 110%, is as accurate as you can expect a service type gun to be and just runs and runs. Did I mention it is reliable? I have never had a stoppage of any kind with it, it just runs and runs. I have it listed in the classifieds now, only becuase I need to pay for a custom gun coming in. The Taurus 92 and 99 series guns are DEAD SOLID.

As far as other Taurus autos go, well I just don't have enough experience with them to be sure. The little bit of experience I have with the PT1XX series guns isn't positive, but that could be just a couple less than perfect guns I was exposed to.

 

[MachIVshooter]

IMO, for about the same price (or a little less) the EAA witness/MRI Baby Eagle is a far superior firearm. The Baby eagle has a couple of features not found on the Witness for about $70 more (decock/safety and plygonally rifled barrel. I found the Taurus 92's to be rather crude Beretta knock-off's with mediocre accuracy and crappy triggers. I have a couple of friends that bought them and later wished they had bought the Baby Eagle (once they fired mine). Witness 9mm's go for ~$350, Baby Eagle 9mm is ~$420. Both are traditional double action and hold 15+1. Witness can be carried C&L.

http://www.magnumresearch.com/Baby_Eagle.asp

 

[Old Dog]

"Rather crude Beretta knock-offs with mediocre accuracy and crappy triggers?" Have you even looked at, or shot a Taurus PT-92 lately? My specimen, which was probably manufactured around 1992, has an excellent fit and finish, a decent trigger and has always been superbly accurate and has fed everything ... 100% reliability over thousands and thousands of rounds fired.

The last time I looked at the Taurus PT-92 (at a gun show yesterday, coincidentally), I was impressed with the improvements they've made (the stainless model looks great) with the improved cocking serrations and better trigger.

As it happens, I also own (and enjoy) 3 Beretta 92FS pistols (it's my duty issue as well). My Taurus is more accurate than two of the Berettas. By the way, the current Taurus PT-92 mags hold 17 rounds, and the PT-92 can also be carried cocked and locked.Having seen a number of Witness pistols and at least a couple Baby Eagles in action, shot with both these pistols, I'd take the Taurus PT-92 over both of them any day.

 

[SouthpawShootr]

I handled a new Witness Saturday. It was a 10mm and already spoken for, but the shop owner knew I like 10mms so she let me handle it. Nice gun. Trigger was no better and no worse than my PT92. I passed on the offer to order one, but told her I might get the sticky fingers if she brought in another which she said she would. They're nice guns but I wouldn't put them above my PT92.

 

[cookekdjr]

Wow! Thanks for your responses, folks!
-David

 

[MachIVshooter]

Have you even looked at, or shot a Taurus PT-92 lately?

Are you suggesting that I would slander a gun arbitrarily, with no experience?

Yes, I have handled and fired several. The Beretta is head and shoulders above the Taurus. I have a 92 FS Inox and I love it. I willl never own a PT92. The only thing the PT has going for it over the 92 FS is the accessory rail ( I don't like the 92 Vertec), but this is not enough reason for me. Taurus Revolvers are decent, but I stay away from their autos.

 

[Old Dog]

Are you suggesting that I would slander a gun arbitrarily, with no experience?

Nope, just asking the question, since your experience doesn't seem to go along with that of most folks when it comes to the PT-92. I have carried the Beretta 92FS for the past 11 or 12 years, in some pretty bad conditions, and I feel very comfortable with the platform and appreciate the design, the reliability and the accuracy. It should be enough of an endorsement that I've bought three of 'em, and will never give up my Inox 92FS. That said, there's no way -- in my experience -- that the 92FS is "head and shoulders" above the PT-92, nor is the PT-92 a "cheap Beretta knock-off." The PT-92 is a fine pistol in its own right, as many of us who know handguns appreciate. Additionally, the (recent production) Taurus PT-145 Millenium Pro is garnering some pretty doggone good reviews as well from some people who may rightly be considered experts ...

By the way, in your posts on another thread, I do concur with you on your remarks regarding the Smith & Wesson steel autoloaders; they are excellent pistols.

 

[45crittergitter]

I have a new 24/7 which I can highly recommend. The price is very attractive also.

 

[Dos]

Spoiled Nonsense

Quote:
Are you suggesting that I would slander a gun arbitrarily, with no experience?

Yes, I have handled and fired several. The Beretta is head and shoulders above the Taurus. I have a 92 FS Inox and I love it. I willl never own a PT92. The only thing the PT has going for it over the 92 FS is the accessory rail ( I don't like the 92 Vertec), but this is not enough reason for me. Taurus Revolvers are decent, but I stay away from their autos.

All you are doing in essence is whining "My Dad can beat up your Dad" Childish. Why not have some respect for others views and stop berating their preference of firearms? You can enjoy your Beretta without denouncing others preferences. Foolishness. The PT92 Taurus is one fine pistol, as is the Beretta.

 

[CAnnoneer]

I have shot Beretta (and like them a lot, especially 84 and 92FS) but not Taurus and thus cannot make a comparison based on range experience.

However, the fact that Taurus seems to be copying designs from Beretta, MRI, and others makes me question their ability to produce a worthwhile and unique design of their own to compete with the originals. To me, that relegates them to second-rate gunmakers, albeit they might be good manufacturers in their own right. I agree it is perceptional and am happy to change my mind when presented with conducive evidence.

 

[MrTuffPaws]

However, the fact that Taurus seems to be copying designs from Beretta, MRI, and others makes me question their ability to produce a worthwhile and unique design of their own to compete with the originals. To me, that relegates them to second-rate gunmakers, albeit they might be good manufacturers in their own right. I agree it is perceptional and am happy to change my mind when presented with conducive evidence.

If you actually have read the history of Taurus, you would find out that they are not making copies, but using the factory they acquired from Beretta, Beretta machines, and Beretta designs with a touch of their own to improve them. If anything, they are reproducing Berettas and not just crudely copying them.

 

[TooTaxed]

I've owned a PT-92 in SS for years...but haven't fired it much since I got a CZ-75B, which feels SO much better in my hand! Will probably trade the PT-92...

I'm curious about the new Taurus PT 24/7...I'll bet that's going to be a real winner for them. The Springfield XD also is a winner...

 

[Ky Larry]

I had a Taurus 92 about 10 years ago. It was a jam-o-matic P.O.S. Also, the rear sights fell off. This was my one and only Taurus. However, anyone can get a lemon. I would buy a Taurus if I found one I liked. One gun is not a large enough sample size to form an opinion.

 

[MachIVshooter]

All you are doing in essence is whining "My Dad can beat up your Dad" Childish. Why not have some respect for others views and stop berating their preference of firearms? You can enjoy your Beretta without denouncing others preferences. Foolishness. The PT92 Taurus is one fine pistol, as is the Beretta.

This thread was started to ask of other's experience and opinions on the PT-92, and that is exactly what it has provided, for better or worse. Leave moderating to the moderators.