Is it worth the gamble (Taurus PT22 and PT25 for cheap).

[chaim]

Hmm, a local shop has just recently started stocking Taurus PT22s and PT25s. I know these are some of the guns that gave Taurus a bad rep for quality (which Taurus generally doesn't deserve). There are some good ones out there, but these are one heck of a crap shoot.

Also, they really are big for the chambering. Small autos in .22 and .25 are really meant as pocket guns. Well, in weight they aren't bad, but in size they seemed significantly larger than the NAA Guardian in .32acp sitting right next to them. Still, they are light, and they are fairly small, so I guess they'd work ok as a pocket gun.

Well, I am considering gambling on them anyway. These are brand new guns and the dealer is only asking $189. What do you guys think, at $189 is it worth the gamble. If I got a good one that is a great bargain for a working gun. If I get a bad one I'm not out very much money (less than $200 if I hold onto it, probably $100 or less if I sell it). Also, Taurus does have the lifetime warranty so even if I get a bad one it may be fixable, and for only $189 for a gun that I'm not expecting much out of it may be worth the headaches to get it working.

If you are thinking that the price doesn't sound like much of a bargain, remember this is MD. We pay $550 for SA Mil-specs, $450 for Charles Daly 1911s, $420-460 for a CZ 75B, etc.

Edited to add:

Oh, gee the question...

Is this a reasonable gamble based on the price?

Also, which chambering should I go with? I know .22lr is questionable in an auto but .25acp is even more underpowered than .22lr. I would test this thing out for quite some time before I'd trust it as a backup (heck, I don't even live in a carry state right now). Also, it is true of .22 more than any other- there is .22 and there is .22, good ammo is good, but there is a lot of stuff that is terrible, I'd stick with quality ammo such as CCI. Either way I'd know if this particular example was any good and if my gun and ammo combo would work long before I'd be relying on it. Given that, would you still stick with the .25acp or would the .22lr be worth trying?

I look forward to your responses.

 

[PlayTheAces]

I'm not a big Taurus fan, but I picked up a PT22 on a whim some years back. Not a bad little gun for the money. I haven't shot more than a few hundred rounds through it, but it functions just fine and I haven't had any jams or other issues with it. If I recall it comes with a lifetime warranty.

I've never tried to do any serious shooting for accuracy with it, as I don't really consider it a target gun. But, last time I took it to the range, I played with it on a 15 yard metal plate range. I was really surprised how accurate it was. Hit the plates pretty consistently.

 

[Badger Arms]

Picked one up about 5 years back. Took 4 types of ammo to the range, none of them functioned... NONE! Sent it to Taurus who 'repaired' it and I then subsequently sold it. CRAP... not worth the gamble.

 

[nemesis]

You'd bet your life on a .22????

 

[Mike Irwin]

I've had one for over 5 years now. Zeroing in on 3,000 rounds of Winchester Wildcat with ZERO failures to feed, fire, or eject.

Had some problems with CCI Blazer not firing on the first strike, but that was likely due to harder case metal.

Accurate at close range, easy to fire, and absolutely disappears in a pocket holster.

A lot of people say how unreliable the .22 LR cartridge is for feed in a semi-auto, but once again, I can only say that I've got almost 3,000 rounds down range with no feeding problems.

 

[wintermute76]

I have a Beretta 21A Inox (stainless), the model the PT22 seems to be based from. When I was looking at them, the Beretta is a bit smaller with better fit and finish from what I could tell.

I ended up with the beretta, I think it was $60 more. I had a couple of misfeeds in the first 150 or so rounds, haven't had a problem since, upwards of 700 rounds now. If the Taurus can function the same it'd be a good little gun.

A .22 in the pocket is better than nothing at all, tho I usually carry a .45 Kimber Pro Carry HD II or my Para 18.9

 

[WonderNine]

I've had one for over 5 years now. Zeroing in on 3,000 rounds of Winchester Wildcat with ZERO failures to feed, fire, or eject.

Unfortunately that and Coast to Coast (not made in a long damn time) is the only ammo that the PT-22 will run near 100% with in my experience. Everything else? Forget about it.

Stingers? No. Yellow Jackets? No. Federal Lighting? No. Aguila? No. Any type of 500-550 round value packs in existence? hahaha No. Armscor? No. Winchester Super-X 37gr.? No. ect., ect...

And the sights are (if I may borrow a term from a thread the other week) "flamingly gay" as at about 5 yards the round hits about one foot above where you're aiming.

And it was the worst .22 for not firing on the first strike I've ever seen.

It had a slamfire once in awhile as well. Two rounds would go off per trigger pull. Didn't happen super often, but happened on occasion.


Yes, I also had a crappy Taurus titanium revolver.

 

[Mike Irwin]

"And the sights are (if I may borrow a term from a thread the other week) "flamingly gay" as at about 5 yards the round hits about one foot above where you're aiming."

Not with my gun.

About 2" above point of aim, about 1 to 2" left of point of aim.

Haven't gotten to the range to try the Federal .22 ammo I just got in it, but I suspect that it will perform well.

 

[WonderNine]

CCI minimag would very commonly fail to chamber many times.

It just didn't really like any hollowpoints though, they would always hang up on the feedramp.

The Coast to Coast (ancient crap that's hard to find) were 100% though. The Wildcats were about 98%.

 

[Slow]

Yes and No .... sounds like a politician.... I own a PT22 and have sent it back once for a broken firing pin and reblueing. If I fire less than 100 rounds between cleanings (heavy day at the range with it) it functions fine with a variety of ammo. In my opinion it makes a good BUG (not primary unless no other choice ... rule #1 have a gun). I have also shot a Beretta 21A considerably and prefer it even though it doesn't have the extended magazine ... However, the Beretta's trigger is DA/SA and is much smoother but it only functions consistently with CCI Stingers, Velociters,Mini Mags. It will not cycle (FTE) lesser $$ rounds. That's been my experience.

 

[MrFreeze]

How bout a KT P32, P11, or a Kahr PM9? They are a bit bigger, yes...the P32, not by much.

Travis

 

[cornbread2]

Broken slides are common on these guns that are shot a lot.

Broken firing pins are common on the .22.

These are the problems you are likely to face if you shoot a lot.

If you need a gun to carry a lot but shoot little they useally work and the .25 is always more reliable.

 

[chaim]

How bout a KT P32, P11, or a Kahr PM9?

Because I live in MD. The Kel-tecs haven't been legal to bring into the state for nearly two years (they don't supply fired shell casings from the factory) and the Kahrs have been illegal to bring in since January (no built-in locks). There are some Kahrs still around, but not the PM9. Heck, even if they were around I'm asking about a gun that is under $200 and you suggest a gun that went for over $600 when they were available here... How is that even close to a reasonable suggestion?:banghead:

 

[Baron Holbach4]

Chaim, I'm assuming the Maryland dealer
is stocking the .22 and .25 Taurus pocket pistols because
these guns are compliant with the nefarious Maryland
internal lock law. The law's effect has seriously depleted
Maryland dealers' handgun inventories. Hence, the introduction
of the .22 and .25 Taurus pistols is to fill a gap in these
depleted inventories.

 

[Mike Irwin]

I've yet to hear about a broken slide on a Taurus 22 or 25, but I could see it.

Again, though, I have nearly 3K rounds through mine and it's working great.


"the .25 is always more reliable..."

I love how this keeps cropping up. It's almost it's own urban legend anymore. At one time this may have been true, but given today's manufacturing capabilities I SERIOUSLY doubt... no, I do doubt that the .25s are any more or less reliable than the .22s when chambered in similar guns.

Finally, no one has mentioned the final nail in the .25s coffin, as far as I'm concerned...

Ammo prices that are anywhere from 5 to 25 times GREATER than the price for a box of 22s.

 

[chaim]

"the .25 is always more reliable..."

I love how this keeps cropping up. It's almost it's own urban legend anymore. At one time this may have been true, but given today's manufacturing capabilities I SERIOUSLY doubt... no, I do doubt that the .25s are any more or less reliable than the .22s when chambered in similar guns.

Finally, no one has mentioned the final nail in the .25s coffin, as far as I'm concerned...

Ammo prices that are anywhere from 5 to 25 times GREATER than the price for a box of 22s.

Yeah, Mike, I still haven't decided if I'll buy one of these, spend a little more on something else, or just wait for now, but I have decided on the caliber if I buy.

Sure, cheap rimfires still have trouble with duds from time to time, but I've yet to have a CCI Mini-mag or round of similar quality fail me. While, .22 semi-autos (pistols and rifles) tend to be ammo sensitive, they tend to be fine once you find the ammo that works with them (and as I said, I don't currently live in a carry state so I'll have plenty of time to find the right ammo).

Cost is a factor. Good .22lr ammo is still fairly cheap. Usually little more than $2-3/50. Defensive .25acp, heck, any .25acp is more than 9mm or .38spl.

.22lr is significantly more powerful.

And last, I have several .22lr guns already (2 rifles, and one handgun). Sure, anyone who has paid any attention to my purchases knows that caliber consolidation isn't really one of my top priorities, but why add a new caliber when one I already use (and tend to stock up on) will work as well or better than the new one?

 

[WonderNine]

How about a Beretta Tomcat? Kinda fat and not very light, but basically the same size as the PT-22 in a more effective caliber. They must have those there, Beretta is in Maryland.

 

[Mike Irwin]

"Cheap rimfires have problems with duds..."

I'm assuming you mean cheap ammo...

Over the years I've fired some TRUE crap for .22 rounds.

The simple truth?

I've had more dud centerfire rounds by Remington, the yellow and green box stuff, than I have dud .22 rounds.

 

[Tropical Z]

.22lr-YES
.25acp-NO!

 

[WonderNine]

Never had any duds with Remington green box centerfire or any other centerfire. Have had many true duds with .22's. By duds I mean ammo that would not go off how many times it was struck.

 

[Mike Irwin]

Yep, my definition of a dud, as well.

 

[chaim]

How about a Beretta Tomcat? Kinda fat and not very light, but basically the same size as the PT-22 in a more effective caliber. They must have those there, Beretta is in Maryland.

Well, they don't put in the built-in locks so they are not MD legal. I'm not sure the factory supplies a shell casing either. I do know of one dealer that still had one about a month ago. I don't know if they still have it, but if they do it is about double the price of the Taurus' (the Taurus PT22s were $189, the Tomcat was around $370). If I'm going to go to that range and get a .32 I think I'd go with the NAA instead of the Beretta, it seems a tad smaller and it just seemed like a better made gun to me when handling them.

"Cheap rimfires have problems with duds..."

I'm assuming you mean cheap ammo...

Yup, exactly what I meant. Cheap rimfire ammo... I've had problems with pretty much all of the 500 round bricks and some cheaper 50 round boxes, I've never had trouble with the good stuff.

 

[Shweboner]

I've had more dud centerfire rounds by Remington, the yellow and green box stuff, than I have dud .22 rounds.

Thats the truth, I wont even look at that stuff anymore. 3 out of the 5 boxes I've got have had problems... '

the first was a box of 20 8mm Mauser shells, 1 ftf, and 2 split cases... (never had any trouble in 1k of old turk stuff)

Ive had ftfs in .38spl, 357mag, 9mm, and 22lr

I turn and run from the stuff.


~Brian

 

[cornbread2]

A .25 is always more reliable because it is a centerfire round designed to be used in an auto pistol.

There is no such thing as a 100% reliable .22 auto when using some types of ammo and no one with any brains at all would carry a .22 auto loaded with Remington bulk pack ammo.

Most all rimfire shooters or at least the ones with average intelligence knows that Remington .22 ammo is possibly the worst US made ammo you can buy.

 

[NeatO]

Taurus Pt 22

I own a relatively new PT 22 and signed on just to share my experience because I have seen so many show discontent with this weapon. I have the nickle finish with rosewood grips. I really like the looks, feel and stability of this little gun. As with "all" automatics, the secret is cleanliness and good oiling. The owners manual clearly states "Taurus pistols were designed to use cartridges loaded to the limits shown below." The limits shown for the .22LR are 40 GR Bullet Weight with a Muzzle Velozity of 1280. For the .25 ACP Bullet Weight is 50 GR and the Muzzle velocity is 760. The book also states "NOT" to use any high velocity ammunition.

I have shoved around 300 rounds of 38 GR (three different manufactures) through mine with no issues. Not one. I cannot find any 40 GR shells at this time. Being new, the weapon was stiff coming out of the box, but I have kept cleaning, oiling and firing. First thing I did was oil it up real good and started shooting. It's amazingly accurate and feels good in the hand.

I know many would, and do criticize a small 22 mouse gun, but I doubt that anyone would want to get hit by one. My CCW is a S&W model 60, and love this gun, but I picked the Taurus PT 22 up for those times that I cannot carry the model 60. I plan to run several more rounds through the PT 22 to limber it up more, but feel very comfortable trusting my life to it. I plan to find a very nice leather holster for it, and to carry it when needed.

Would I buy another one? Yes.