Taurus 92 compared to Beretta

Ideally I'd probably most prefer an early Beretta with the frame safety. I just prefer carrying in condition one and I always have.

That said, I don't think there's anything wrong with the PT92, and for the prices nowadays if I had a choice, I'd go with the PT92 without hesitation.

If I were to carry a Beretta 92 with the slide safety, I'd probably carry it decocked with the safety off in DA/SA mode.

I really like the Taurus decocker/safety. It allows you to carry it cocked in single action mode with the safety on. That's how I prefer to carry my CZ75. It also sweeps down to deactivate the safety, which is my preference. I consider it an improvement of the slide mounted Beretta safety.

I've shot a friend's Taurus 92 in .40 and liked it very much. It was reasonably accurate and the recoil was so light it felt like a 9mm. I imagine the 9mm feels more like a .380. It is also very reliable. I plan on buying a 9mm T92 in the near future.

I bought a beretta. My buddy bought a taurus. My buddy wishes he had a beretta. I'm happy with my beretta. The taurus just feels cheap in your hands. When it come down to it would you rather own a car made in Italy or a random third world country? I think the same thing comes to mind with handguns.

jonn5335 said:

I bought a beretta. My buddy bought a taurus. My buddy wishes he had a beretta. I'm happy with my beretta. The taurus just feels cheap in your hands. When it come down to it would you rather own a car made in Italy or a random third world country? I think the same thing comes to mind with handguns.

Click to expand...

Can't go wrong either way but I suggest you read up on the history behind the Taurus version (PT-92) as unanimous consent is that it is not some gun made in a "random third world country." You can argue the merits of the frame mounted vs. slide safety/decocker etc. and just be brand loyal, but you will find that no one (that I have ever heard at least) refers to the PT-92 as "cheap." Just my two cents...

-Cheers

Hunter 35 said:

in the market for a new gun and was thinking about the Taurus 92 or 99. I know that Taurus is often talked about as junk but because the 92s are copies of the Beretta I thought they might be an exception to the rule.

Click to expand...

Superior parts, superior fit & finish, superior customer service, and the Beretta 92FS is exactly the same pistol as we issue our service men & women.

Taurus manufactures a clone, their customer service is likely the worst in the industry.

David_E said:

I suppose it depends what you're used to. They have a long reset (about 1/2") followed by a long take up (about 1/4"). Compared to a Glock or PPQ or 1911, it's needlessly long. My personal 92 has been fitted with an over-travel stop, handily minimizing these shortcomings.

Click to expand...

Perception is obviously everything, and my perception of a mm was off. The actual distance as measured at the bottom of the trigger was 3/8" with an 1/8" of pickup before shooting again. My XD45 Tactical is 1/2" with a 1/4" take up. The XD is a pretty popular service handgun and the Beretta's is much shorter. So obviously it feels much much shorter. The M92A1 does fit in my hand much better than the XD did, but I added the Hogue Handall to the XD and the Hogue grips for the M92A1 and they both fit well. I do prefer the M92A1's reset and action smoothness to the XD, but I don't have a holster for the M92A1 and I do for the XD. I don't see that as needlessly long. The reset on my buddy's Glock 23 wasn't any shorter than my XD was.

The 1911 has, arguably, the best trigger of any firearm in the world, so comparing the M92A1 to a 1911 is like comparing a Lambo to a V6 1990's Mustang.

I am unabashedly anti-Taurus. They sold me a lemon a while back in the form of a PT945 and I've vowed never to own another one.

The safety debate--I carried a Beretta 96 for 2 years and I too hated the slide mounted safety. Who in their right mind would put that thing THERE? <g> I solved the problem by carrying it on Fire, DAO. Not ideal, but the pistol was fearfully accurate and wonderfully soft shooting so I stuck with it. I shifted to a USP40 later and never looked back. No Compromise, baby! LOL

Feanor said:

Superior parts...

Click to expand...

How so?

-Cheers

Hunter 35 said:

Thanks for the info. I have the Taurus Raging Judge Ultra Lite, but have never owned a Taurus auto... I appreciate your quick replies

Mike

Click to expand...

Ive got a taurus pt 1911. You can put wilson combat parts on it or leave it stock. No issues with it ever. My buddy owns a kimber he was pissed cuz he had a few.ftf at the range last time while the 1911 taurus was hammering nails. In the 90's i wouldnt have touched a taurus that isnt the case today. Their president used to be president at colt and alot of their revolvers and 1911s are made on old colt dies they bought from colt. I have my eye on a taurus pt 740 slim as kind of a pocket pistol for summer carry.

Sent with Droid Incredible using Tapatalk.

The unaltered 92 and XD both have an unacceptably long reset and take-up. One thing about an unaltered Glock is, when it resets, there is no take-up; you're ready to fire from there.

Happily, it doesn't take much to fix the triggers on Glocks, XD's and M&P's. The Beretta can be improved, of course. Not as much, but enough to matter.

Outside if the 1911, the best reset I've found on the poly guns from the box is the Walther PPQ and the near clone by Magnum Research.

I recall that when the Army went to Beretta they had frames break. Eventually they shipped the guns with 2 slides.

During the same period Taurus was ramping up the power with the 41AE with no slide issues.

Makes one think about which one is the better gun

I've used both 92's extensively (former 45-Bravo, Small Arms Repair MOS in the army). I prefer the Taurus PT-92, because I feel like it is an improved design. The safety position and action just works better. having said that, if you train with the Beretta you get used to the safety, it's just not as natural. I have several thousand rounds through one of my PT-92s, and can count on one (maybe two) the FTF's. Most, if not all, with budget ammo.

I think it is a ineffective argument that flipping the the safety on by accident is a danger during a defensive situation. If you have a problem hitting random buttons you are probably going to be thwarted by magazine releases and slide locks and/or any other buttons you go around accidentally pushing during the normal operation of your weapon. In that case, you should probably go with a glock. They are designed for those types of users in mind. Either way, you are going to have problems operating a handgun.

Anyone who thinks the Taurus is a better gun is dumb.

There, I said it.

Now back to your originally scheduled delusional lives..

Guillermo said:

I recall that when the Army went to Beretta they had frames break. Eventually they shipped the guns with 2 slides.

Click to expand...

The frames didn't break, the slides did. This was due to using proof loads (apparently a LOT of them) until a handful of slides separated. Beretta attended to the issue and no further problems occurred.

This prompted a ridiculous parts replacement schedule, tho.

tx_pistolero said:

I think it is a ineffective argument that flipping the the safety on by accident is a danger during a defensive situation. If you have a problem hitting random buttons you are probably going to be thwarted by magazine releases and slide locks and/or any other buttons you go around accidentally pushing during the normal operation of your weapon. In that case, you should probably go with a glock. They are designed for those types of users in mind. Either way, you are going to have problems operating a handgun.

Click to expand...

Ah, how utterly pompous this is.

Either you don't understand the problem, or have insufficient experience that shows it can be a problem for some shooters, primarily 1911 shooters that keep their thumb atop the frame mounted safety.

If you refer to activating the slide mounted safety while clearing a jam, it can easily be activated in that process.

You'd only have to get off your couch and teach or attend one shooting class to observe any of this for yourself.

The frames didn't break, the slides did.

Click to expand...

You are correct. I mistyped.

Ah, how utterly pompous this is.

Either you don't understand the problem, or have insufficient experience that shows it can be a problem for some shooters, primarily 1911 shooters that keep their thumb atop the frame mounted safety.

If you refer to activating the slide mounted safety while clearing a jam, it can easily be activated in that process.

You'd only have to get off your couch and teach or attend one shooting class to observe any of this for yourself.

Click to expand...

Talk about pompous. You should re-read what you just wrote. I think you are jumping conclusions in several areas. Not everyone in the world is coming from a 1911. In fact, I have a feeling that these days, 1911 users are on a whole, experienced/advanced users and would little reason to be moving sideways to a completely different platform that is not much farther advanced technology wise than the 1911.

Besides:

Your quote" If you refer to activating the slide mounted safety while clearing a jam, it can easily be activated in that process." highlights the fact that the safety on a PT92 is NOT on the slide, which is why it is exactly what makes it a BETTER DESIGN.

MidwestRookie said:

Anyone who thinks the Taurus is a better gun is dumb.

There, I said it.

Now back to your originally scheduled delusional lives..

Click to expand...

Mods--I would like to FLAG this mesage as offensive and troll-like totally unbecoming of this board.

-MW

sorry Taurus fanboy...it is what it is.

stolen design, inferior product. just gonna have to live with it..

MidwestRookie said:

sorry Taurus fanboy...it is what it is.

stolen design, inferior product. just gonna have to live with it..

Click to expand...

Up until rookie, it was an intelligent conversation.

I could care less if one prefers a S&W, Taurus, Beretta but I HATE internet beer goggles whereby rookie-like 'Goliath's' think they can insult fellow posters by calling them "dumb" simply because they have a countering opinion.

I reiterate that the mods admonish rookie for his sophomoric and demeaning tone.

-Cheers

You're demeaning.

I can't help that there's no tone on internet text..

Don't get all upset over 1's and 0's converted into shapes on a computer screen. Maybe I was joking..

Maybe I like that all versions of the 92 are popular and feel like some testosterone was needed to liven the conversation? Huh, tough guy? What now?

at least one of these things is true

JTQ said:

3KillerBs, while everybody's hands are different, I'm inclined to agree with DavidE, that a 1911 would most likely be easier for the small handed to use than the Beretta 92.

...
I will grant you that locking the slide back on an empty gun does require some effort. An empty mag makes it very easy.

Click to expand...

*shrug*

As I said, I had no difficulty at all shooting that borrowed Colt (it was the compact Kimber that hurt my thumb joint). And I can rack the slide on every gun I've attempted (the tiniest .380s feel the most difficult, perhaps because there is less to get ahold of?). I simply could not manage to reach the slide release lever while holding the slide and the grip because none of my fingers were long enough.

If I were in a position where I ABSOLUTELY HAD TO to lock the slide back on a gun of that model I could do it by laying the gun on a firm, non-slip surface, pulling the slide back, pinning the grip down under my wrist, and using my now-freed-hand to operate the lever.

But that would be a ridiculous thing to do to someone's favorite target gun when I had an option. And, being at a match, the magazine had to be dropped and the slide locked back to show clear when the range was cold. Solution, let the owner do it. No big deal.

I'm somewhat tempted to go to the gun shop for a dry-fire and photo session with a 92.

Speaking of dry-fire..I admit that a 92 trigger isn't adequate without a D spring...I see no reason in leaving the trigger stock when a $5 spring can make it so much nicer. Others will obviously feel it's OK, but I don't like the feeling of the stock pull knowing what it can be with a new mainspring.

I wonder if the D spring can be installed in a Taurus?

yes,you can install the "D" spring on the taurus pt92 series,all of them.









something i'd like to point out that i mentioned on my previous post for those of you trying to get a better grip on any of these. many beretta 90 series have a factory mod that was implemented some time ago. it's a tiny mod but it might make a difference for you,..or it might not at all.

right below the beaver-tail,the radius has been cut slightly deeper. this allows you to "dig in" a little more and possibly even allows for a little better trigger control. it's kind of the same difference between the CZ based tanfoglio pistols(and those based on the tanfo) and the CZ pistols. the tanfo having a deeper radius,although the difference is a bit more pronounced on the tanfo than the beretta.

not all berettas have this,even NIB,so you have to know what i mean and get the right one.

the difference is just slight but i can actually feel it and it allows me slighty better trigger control. i don't have small hands by the way but i do prefer using a specific trigger technique i've developed over the years(even in DA mode) and that slightly deeper radius actually helps. for those of you that it's not about trigger technique but rather about having small hands,it might help a little.

none of the taurus pt92 series have this.

I've got a PT-92C the oldest version AKAIK... frame mounted safety, no decocker. Don't plan on carrying it but love it for the range & shooting pins & plates.