Taurus PT92...Your Opinion on them

[orangeninja]

I was looking at TFL and noticed a slew of Tauri haters on the PT92 but for the world cannot figure out why. What are ya'lls experiences with them?

Secondly, are all the Taurus 92 with "tactical" rails now? I think that totally screws up the Italian suave of the pistol. I like the clean ones.

 

[Fiero]

Pray tell, how does a cheap copy pistol made in South America attain ANY Italian suave???? LOL


The copy won't even take Beretta Mags. That's reason enough to hate them.

 

[wardog]

It's a great pistol with a lifetime warranty and the safety on the frame where it belongs.

Cheap copy? I don't think so, but YMMV.

 

[rockstar.esq]

I agree about the tac rail ruining the suave profile of the gun. "Cheap copy" seems to be a bit out of line since Taurus has a lifetime warranty that extends beyond the original owner of the gun. More to the point, Berreta has bought out nearly all the "originals" there were. Taurus got U.S. Military approval for the pt92 which is more than I can say for the majority of the elitist 1911 manufacturers. I think you get a lot of gun for your money when you buy a Taurus.

 

[Shooter973]

Taurus PT92------ Opinion

I have a couple of these fine handguns and like them just fine for a 9mm..... They are a big handgun for such a small round but they are good handguns and have been reliable and as accurate as any other good quality hand gun. Getting good mags has never been a problem and when you consider that they cost about 50% less than the Berretas and do everything that the "Italian" ones do I think they are a good value and a good handgun. They have an excellent warranty and have never given me a minute of trouble in any way.

 

[denfoote]

I kept my Taurus. Sold the Beretta!!

 

[Fiero]

Alright guys. The "cheap" comment was made "tongue in cheek" in response to the "Italian Suave" observation.

I have not much anything against the Taurus, except for maybe the lack of magazine interchangability. I mean, if they are gonna copy the the thing, at least they could do that.

 

[Longbow]

In my opinion its....

....a good pistol, in fact, its better than the Beretta it tried to copy. The safety controls are located where its should be and its priced better. The only thing the Beretta got it beat is on the trigger pull. But with a little fluff and buff, it can be improved.

 

[buttrap]

Taurus actually makes a lot of guns and parts for the Italian company. They are the biggest maker of military guns out of the red china deal. you name it they make it,20mm aa gun or need a Baretta 9mm subgun? its made by Taurus.

 

[HSMITH]

Ditto denfoote.

Agree with Longbow too.

Great guns.

 

[outofbattery]

What makes a copy ? Is a SIG made in New Hampshire ( with Ruger made castings ) a copy of a SIG ? Are the US Armed Forces M9's copies because they aren't made in Gardone , Italia ? Is a Manhurin PPK's ? Tauri started out as Berettas for the Brazilian Army so it I don't think that it is accurate to call them a "copy" ; it's more like Darwin's finches , the Brazilian and Italian strains of the species have just divergently evolved from the same source .

I've never owned one , but have never had a problem in any of the ones I've sampled .

 

[phorvick]

I have had two...one was a 1989 vintage that was excellent. I recently sold it as I had acquired a new 2004 version. I had -0- problems with either of them. Very good value for the money. My son recently bought a Beretta 92...very nice gun. Actually, a beautiful gun. Was it $300 more gun than the Taurus? He thought so as he wanted the "name" and the resale. I wanted a similar looking gun that was cheaper to buy. We both got what we wanted.

I can recommend the 92 by Taurus without hesitation.

 

[ocabj]

I learned how to shoot on a Taurus PT99AF. It's the same thing as as the PT92 except it has adjustable rear sights, IIRC. My dad bought it back in the late 80s and he still has it. It's a good gun. It ain't junk. I ended up getting myself a Brigadier Inox in 2000. I like the tighter tolerances of the Beretta over the Taurus, but I can't fault the Taurus. It works.

 

[ObeOne]

Nay Sayer

I will be a naysayer. I have a PT-99. Only reason I have not gotten rid of it was that it was a birthday present. I have had numerous problems with it, and have gotten a lot of use out of that "Life Time Warranty". Amongst the problems, broken firing pin, sights, cored barrel, and drifting POI. I defiantly like the design better than the Berretta, but can't rely on it at all.
YMMV
Obe One

 

[cstreu1026]

I have had my PT92 since August. I bought it used though it didn't appear to have ever been fired. I had a some what negative opinion of Taurus before I bought it because it was a copy. That all changed when I picked one up. I have put about 1000 rounds through it now and the only problem I have had with it was the direct result of some cheap off-brand magazines I bought. I have since bought a 15 round Mec Gar and it works flawlessly in the gun. I wouldn't hesitate one bit about relying on it for defense and I will likely end up with another in the future.

 

[cratz2]

I've had zero problems and no 'breakages' on my PT99 with 18,000 rounds through though I've replaced parts.

My one complaint is even with adjustable sights, it still shoots low and to the left. Too big for me for carry but it has gone bang every time I've ever pulled the trigger.

I did buy my Taurus after owning a Beretta with improperly placed safety.

 

[Old Dog]

Must chime in here ... I've never understood the Taurus bashing -- especially since most of it seems to come from people who've never owned any Taurus products.

I've had a PT-92 AF-D since 1993. First 9mm I owned. It's consistently been more accurate than both my subsequently purchased Berettas 92s (one blue, one Inox), stone reliable, feeds everything and currently has about 10,000 rounds through it (at least). I've changed the recoil spring once.

I love my Berettas, but treasure the PT-92 and certainly (for this 1911-lover at least) Taurus got the safety location correct.

 

[Blueduck]

Had one for years, must have been purchased in 1986 or so, thousands of rounds no problems. It recently came back to me after an extended visit to a familiy member.

Having said that it seems the Berreta 92 FS I had during the Tauri's abscense (since gone ) was bit smoother overall. Also it may have just be me but it seem the Beretta had abit smaller grip at the frontstrap which made for abtter hold and Beretta slide was a tad thiner than the Taurus.

Anyone else notice this???

 

[Tecolote]

The early PT92s are excellent. Taurus was trying to get into the US market so they made a strong effort to market a quality product at a lower cost.

If anyone knows where I can find a new first gen PT92 please let me know.

 

[sorny]

I bought my PT-92 AFS about 2 years ago at a pawn shop. First pistol I've ever owned. Bought it at a pawn shop of all places for $275 or so, not too bad since it was about 98%. I did have a Kahr P-40 carry gun that I didn't like so I sold it and am back to carrying the 92, not a bad gun to carry, but it's a bit... "thick" when sitting in a car for a while or on hard surfaces (wood benches, etc). Great shooter though, passed my HCP class with it. I picked up some rubber grips for it and it kind of revived my love for this gun. Mine's not too new, but not too old either, it's got the decocker. Everyone that seems the gun tells me how light it is, considering the size of it. I didn't realize it until I picked up a couple of 1911's and other fullsizes and realizes that it really was pretty light.

I would recommend them in a heartbeat, just don't get the "Pimp" models that are black with gold accents and pearl grips

 

[locknload]

Re. Taurus Opinion

I don't own a PT92. But I DO have three Taurus products. One is a wheelgun, in .357mag six round chambering, & two semi-autos: one is the PT101SS in .40 caliber, the other was just acquired on Christmas eve. Another .40 caliber, the PT940SSPRL, which is my main CCW piece.

They are all fine firearms. I have not regretted buying any of them. The newest pistol, which is a medium framed semi, is just fine to shoot. I'm totally happy with my Tauruses.. As Forrest Gump so eloquently put it, "that's all I have to say about that!"

Stay safe & aim true.. Skipper from Tulsa....

 

[Nathanael_Greene]

My first autoloader was a PT-99.

I loved it when I got, and I still love it.

 

[Big Gay Al]

I've owned three Taurus pistols so far. Two were PT-92s, of which I still have one, and there was a PT-940. I sold the first PT92 when I fell on hard times and needed the money. The 2nd one I've had since 1992. It's a stainless PT-92AFS.

Both PT-92s are fine firearms, never had a hiccup out of either of them. When I took the CPL training course two Novembers ago, I used my PT-92 for the shooting part of it. In Michigan, most instructors use the NRA home defense course, which limits you to 5 rounds in a magazine. Not a good way to let the PT-92 shine, still, when we got to the rapid fire part of the shooting test, my weapon was empty before anyone elses'. And yes, all the shots hit the paper.

One of the other guys in the class commented to me, "You really know how to make that thing sing."

The PT-940 was a completely different experience. I picked it up used at a gun show. At first I had no complaints about it. Then one day I noticed that when firing it from a DA position (starting with the hammer down) sometimes, the hammer would not fall all the way. It would hang on the half cock notch. It was only from a DA pull that this seemed to happen, which I discovered by dry firing.

It made one trip to the local gunsmith (same place that I bought it from, they were the dealer at the gunshow that I bought it from) It STILL did this, so I traded it in on a Firestorm 1911 .45 ACP.

Right now, my PT-92 rotates with my Firestorm for my carry weapon. I like them both, and I like the firepower that 15+1 rounds of 9mm gives me. When I can find them, I'm going to get some of the new 17 round mags that Taurus now makes for the PT-92/99 series.

 

[mjb]

I had one once a few years ago. Paid $400 for it. It was a jam-o-matic.

I was happy the day I traded it.

 

[Old Dog]

I had one once a few years ago. Paid $400 for it. It was a jam-o-matic

Then again, perhaps there was a maintenance issue involved, or some simple gunsmithing required. As someone with a great deal of experience with pistols of the Beretta 92/Taurus PT-92 stripe, I believe that the design of these pistols is inherently reliable (I'm not saying they are the best thing going) -- but I've never seen a "jam-o-matic" Taurus/Beretta 92 that couldn't be made reliable with relative ease.