Taurus PT92 versus 99 sight accuracy question

[andy29075]

Hello all,
I am considering purchasing a Taurus PT92, but I am concerned about the accuracy of the fixed sights on it, especially since the muzzle end of the barrel has a little bit of wiggle room within the slide (or at least the one I played with the other day did)... As a result, I'm also considering buying the adjustable sight PT99 instead. However, I've also read some posts here that have said the PT99's sights had to be set WAY left to correct the POI. Does anyone have any experience with very accurate from-the-factory PT92 sights -or- horrible PT99 sights? I'm trying to justify the price difference to myself... Thanks in advance for your advice,
-Andy J

 

[M2 Carbine]

I've got the 99.
No sight problems.
When I got it I had to go a couple clicks on the rear sight but it still looks centered.

As a rule I'll take an adjustable sight over a fixed one in most cases.

For instance, I have 4 S&W J frames. Two are dead on and two shoot several inches off.

The same with many of the guns that I several copies of.

A gun that doesn't shoot point of aim is aggravating.

 

[redneck]

I have a PT 92. I'd get the 99 if it was available without too much hassle. Couldn't find one here when I was buying.
Anyhow I haven't shot the 92 a lot and I'm not real experienced with handguns yet so take this for what its worth. My 92 seems to be pretty well adjusted with the UMC 115gr FMJ I've put through it. Shooting American Eagle (124 gr? can't remember for sure) it was really low. Center hold wasn't even enough to compensate, and I prefer a 6 o'clock. Could be my technique, but the problem seemed to go away by switching ammo.

 

[HSMITH]

Windage in a well made gun isn't going to be a concern. Elevation is, and the 99 makes up for the difference in POI nicely. I sold a 92 and kept a 99, whatever ammo is on sale or whatever bullet weight I can buy cheaply to reload will shoot to POA with a few clicks...

 

[rde]

Ya'll actually use the sights? What is up with that? Just kidding. The fixed sights on my Taurus 92 AFS (with accessory rail) are dead on for me with 115 grain ammo. Haven't tried any other 9mm bullet weights out of this one yet. My Beretta 92FS with fixed sights is also dead on and remains dead on with all ammo weights so I wouldn't think that there would be much difference. Though I will have to verify.

 

[madmike38]

if you plan to to shoot at the range,get the adjustable sights. if you plan to carry as a defense weapon, get fixed sights and learn to shoot it.decent gun for the money,

 

[DAVE RICHARDS]

My PT92ARS is dead nuts on at 15 yards. Must say I debated for a long time on rather to buy the gun or not. My luck with Taurus has been so-so. A couple of good ones, a couple not so good. The 92 has been a gem. I like it better than the Beretta 92. The 99 has been known for having some problems with the adjustable sights working loose. PSI makes an adjustale rear for the 92 for about $60.00 that works great. i'd get the 92 and if it doesn't shoot to aim just put the PSI sights on it. They are very high quality sights and better than the 99's anyways.

 

[TimboKhan]

Tell you what, alot of guys will tell you how terrible Taurus is as a gun manufacturer, but I have had nothing but good experiences with all of my Taurus pistols! I have an older PT99, and man, that thing shoots like a champ! I have shot both versions, and personally, I like the idea of being able to adjust my sights, so I like the 99 a tick better than the 92. Now, that said, I only bought my 99 because I got a good deal on it: Had I looked at it new, I probably would have passed, as I normally like my sights real big and easy to see, and these are on the smallish side. However, like I said, I was honestly amazed at how well the thing shot. I would even go so far as to say that aside from my MkII, my 99 is the most accurate gun I own.

 

[DAVE RICHARDS]

TimboKahn,
my Taurus experience. A PT111 that worked perfect each and every time. An early (before the Mil Pro) PT145 that cracked the frame every 200-250 rounds. Also shredded off it's manual safety. A well known problem in the early PT145's. A PT945 that would not go through a whole magazine without a jam. An 85CH revolver that is a jewel. The PT92/99 has always been the best of the best of the Taurus line. Mines been perfect. I like it better than a 92FS Beretta. So I'm not saing the Taurus guns are terrible. Some I have owned have been great. Others not so great. Although they are much more expensive my Sigs for example have all worked each time and everytime out of the box. The Mil Pro in fact was a redesign of the Millenium series because of design flaws. So if the company redesigns a gun that is a very strong indication something is wrong with it.
So as a mater of fact Taurus has been hit or miss for me. Not terrible. But when I buy a gun I expect it to work. The Taurus guns I have owned have about been 50-50 as far as working. Not a good record., And yes I've had some expensive guns not work out of the box. In fact the Kimber's I owned were 100% not work out of the box. But 50-50 is still not a good average for something you might need to defend your life. Fact in my expeience. Not opinion.

 

[ktd]

I have both the 92 and 99. As far as barrel wiggle, most guns have some, it depends on how consistenly the thing goes back into battery. The Beretta style pistols usually are pretty accurate in my experience, I am guessing cuz their barrels goes straight back and does not have to tilt.

I also agree the 92/99 is the best thing they make, and have had no problems with the 92's sight regulation from the factory, though there is not much front sight to file down if you do need to adjust it.

The 99 worked great the first 5000 rounds, then I broke the rear sight blade (which I have also seen broken on Smiths, which is a similar style). I just put the red dot sight back on it and have not bothered with fixing it as I have other guns for service use.

I would agree with the other guy, 99 if you are just target shooting, and 92 if you are gonna carry a lot. That rule applies pretty good in general, the older I get, the more I like fixed sights.

 

[TimboKhan]

Dave,

Well, I appreciate that you point out that your Millenium was one of the earlier guns: Problem has been fixed. The thing that bugs me is that a lot of guys will say that Tauruses suck after one bad experience, or even worse, just off of heresy. I have a PT99, a 24/7 and a 85, and I have been exceptionally pleased with all of them. In fact, I could have purchased pretty much any 9mm I wanted when I bought my 24/7. I chose it because it was comfortable and I liked the sights, and the fact that it was about 150.00 cheaper than the next candidate. I have been happy with it. I am sorry that your experience has been less than great, but for me, I will stick to Taurus and Ruger for my handgun choices.

 

[Moonclip]

My PT92 shoots a bit left to POA but I have not drifted it yet and it is fairly accurate, my real Beretta 92FS, now since sold, was only a shade more accurate if at all. If the shooter does his part and can manage the somewhat rough trigger, my PT92 does quite well.

 

[andy29075]

Aftermarket adjustable sights?

Does anyone have any experience with aftermarket adjustable sights for the PT92 like the one here:

http://www.precisionsights.com/tpu.html

Thanks!
-Andy

 

[Cueball]

Tell you what, alot of guys will tell you how terrible Taurus is as a gun manufacturer, but I have had nothing but good experiences with all of my Taurus pistols! I have an older PT99, and man, that thing shoots like a champ!...
... my 99 is the most accurate gun I own.

I would have to agree completely. My PT99 has been flawless for 15+yrs and many 1,000's of rds of ammo thru it. And the sights have always been dead on for me.

 

[ranger351w]

pt92 sight?

I have a pt92 taurus and it is shooting quit a bit low. about 3" at 15 yards. Is there something I can do or should I just by adjustable sight ? I want to do some IDPA. I really like the weapon as it is a blast to shoot and have not had a ftf or anything in several hundred rounds.
I am leaning toward adjustable sights. Hate to file front post down.

 

[andy29075]

I wouldn't take a file to that front sight, for the sole reason being that (assuming it's like my fixed sight stainless PT92) the front sight has a dot cut in it (to line up with the dots on the rear sights), and even though the top of the sight might get lowered, the dot's position won't change. Plus, you might even cut into the dot. You'll essentially have two different sight pictures competing for your attention: the dot pattern and the top of the sight blades.

Although I think this makes it somewhat ugly, you might want to try the aftermarket sights:

http://www.hobbygunsmith.com/Archives/Mar04/AutoShooter.htm

For IDPA, it seems to be a better solution IMHO... Now, if you do put aftermarket sights on your PT92, then you have to promise to report back on it here, and include some pictures too, ok?!
-Andy J

p.s. One more thing worth noting is that the lockup area at the breech of the barrel can affect the barrel to sight relative positions. I sent my PT92 back for warranty service because the barrel was slightly closer to one side of the opening at the front of the slide (muzzle area under the front sight) than the other. The factory gunsmith's remedy was to shave off a tiny amount of material from the breech end of the barrel, just below the chamber opening and off to one side, so when the action locks up, the barrel's breech face locked up in proper alignment with the slide. That might have made no sense to anyone reading it, so I should probably post a pic to explain it... give me a few minutes... I mention all this because you *may* be able to get a similar fix, though I think it might not work for the direction you're wanting the barrel to move.

 

[ICIK]

My PT99 sights were dead on from the factory. It's one of the most accurate guns I currently own.

 

[ranger351w]

I will just shoot it more, will try different reloads and think I may be able to help it that way. Boy I hate that I will have to shoot more,Damn.

Mike

 

[Moonclip]

I also HATE fixed sight guns that don't shoot to POA for me and have in some cases sold them off. My PT92 is pretty dead on though. For some reason I never see adj sight Taurus 9mms or .40's locally. I really want a Taurus PT100 but I'd rather find the adj sight PT101.

 

[rbernie]

I prefer fixed sight guns for any use other than range practice. I have a number of PT92s (along with a few PT99s) and the 92's are all spot-on at 7yards with all of the 115gr fodder I've tried.

 

[m47dragon]

Is there a sight drifting/windage adjustment tool for the Taurus 92 (like the Glock has) or is there a different method?

 

[andy29075]

You can go with a leather-padded vise and a carefully-chosen brass or nylon (depending on the stubbornness of the sight) drift punch like I did once. I'm not sure if a Beretta 92 fixture would work, but there are some 'universal' sight pushers on the market of varying qualities.

 

[m2steven]

I've said this before, but my PT 92AFS is boringly accurate. It's about the all around best pistol I have. It's so easy to point and shoot that for me, really aiming it not needed. I point it and apparently my hands know where the barrel of this thing needs to be pointed. It's a perfectly weighted piece and shoots great.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

There is no difference in accuracy between fixed and adjustable sights, all other things being equal. Adjustables only help to more precisely zero your point of impact.

 

[ranger351w]

I have a pt92 and a PT1911. Both shoot great and very good weapons. That said the 92 has gone through 2 locking blocks which with a phone call were replaced free of charge. Not a big issue but I hear it also happens to the Beretta from time to time.