taurus pt92 or beretta 92fs?

[survivor24490]

ive been debating with myself on which one i would lik more the taurus pt92 or the beretta 92fs i already have three taurus handguns.taurus pt145 millineum pro .45acp,pt940 .40s&w,and a old taurus revolver in .357mag.each have seved me verry well but im not sure which of the two would be best.can anyone help me?

[Apocalypse Now]

I personally would not buy either , they are both heavy, not extremely accurate, and not good for conceal carry, do to their large size. But if you are dead set on getting 1 ,spend the extra $ for the Beretta, I had a taurus 92 ,and it shot way low and to the left, and the trigger sucked as well.I took it to a gun show and sold it for $300 just to get rid of it.. I also have a beretta 96D(.40 cal) you can feel the difference in quality when you hold the 2 guns side by side . I think I payed $425 for the taurus and the Beretta was on sale for $500. I don't like the long trigger pull of either of the two guns,maybe it won't bother you. The Beretta cost more but it will hold it's value better.

[Grinnan Barrett]

Baretta. I have had both. i stillshoot SIG.

[Cryptophylaxis]

I have the PT99 which is just about the same pistol. I wish it was a Berreta because the mags are cheaper and can fit in a Kel Tec Sub-2000 as well as a CX4 storm.

Other than that with all things being equal I wouldn't care either way. It was already mentioned but I'll say it again, the large frame size of either pistol makes it terrible for CC. If your going to lug around a pistol that large it may as well be a 1911 or similar.

[Cryptkeeper]

my t92 hits about 3" low at 25yrds, but it lines up straight. so if i aim for the bottom of the throat, ill hit them in the heart (lol), they are pretty much the same in case you didnt know here is the, link http://www.taurususa.com/products/pr...ategory=Pistol

[danpauselius]

I have never shot the Taurus version but I do own a Beretta 92FS. From what I understand, Beretta sold its entire brazillian plant, where they were manufacturing 92's, to Taurus. So, assuming Taurus hasn't screwed around with stuff too much, the gun should be nearly identical as it's made on the same machines as the 92's used to be.

As far as carry, the 92 is not a great choice. It tends to jab me in the side all day as it is a rather large carry gun. I've heard they make a compact model, that may be better suited to carry.

My personal opinion is that taurus doesn't make a "great" product. They do make a "good" product but if I'm gonna spend money anyway, why not be sure. IMHO, go with the Beretta.

[Paulycracker]

Both are good, but I don't like copies of anyone else unless they have something better on em by far. My M9 never jammed on me while in service. Not once. Still, I'd rather carry something that is going to leave a bigger hole even if it isn't quite so deep. And that's my 1911.

[cmm71446]

i had a stainless pt92 with rail.it had 1500 rounds through it without a jam.i also like the taurus frame mounted safety better.

[thess02]

I have owned and shot a PT92 since 1989. It never has jammed...not once. If the rounds fit in the magazine and go boom when the trigger is pulled...the pistol works. I prefer the PT92 frame mounted safety versus the M9's slide mounted safety...just more natural and and similar to my Star PD and Gold Cup .45s. With 115 grain ammo, the PT92 does shoot a bit low however, with 124 or 125 grain loads it shoots about dead on. My PT92 is bone stock and I can hit 1 gallon paint cans at 100 yards offhand all day long. The PT92s are large frame pistols and never meant for concealed carry but for a homeowner weapon is very good. Absolute reliability in a semi-auto pistol is for me the most important feature in a self defense pistol. By the way, M9s have experince slide failures (cracks)...the PT92s have never had that issue as far as I know.

[Freshgrease]

I would go with the Beretta. I love my Taurus PT1911, but I've shot many other Tauruses and hated them.

[bigdog02]

I am planning on starting to shoot IDPA and am torn between these 2 pistols as well.
Currently my main CW is a S&W Sigma, but I have a feeling I would have problems at distance with it in an IDPA event, so I am really looking hard at the taurus and beretta.

[firehiker]

Mt friend had the Beretta and I have the Taurus. After a day of shooting, he really wanted to trade. Now, his was older and seemed a bit "looser", so maybe that was it. Anyway, it was the first gun I ever bought, the day after my 21st birthday. My understanding about the only difference is there are two tiny pieces that are stamped rather than milled, but supposedly it's not an issue. Only had two stovepipes when I was using some REALLY OLD rounds. I dumped the crap and reloaded with a new box and it worked just fine. I will agree with the popular consensus that they are just too big to carry...my Crimmus wishlist includes any number of the larger caliber SIG or Glock.

[boonhogganbeck]

Have any of you tried the Taurus 24/7 Pro?

[Mr.wannalearn]

My mate has a T92, and I had a B92fs, when we used them together at the range for the first time, my 92fs got an average of 2cm to the right at 31 yards, whereas the T92 hit low by 5cm at the same range. Not to mention the fact that his firearm jammed constantly due to poor workmanship. The majority of the parts inside of his T92 needed to be filed down, which I was left to do for roughly 2 hours because he had only starting that day.
So I'd suggest you go with the Beretta 92fs, IMO better quality, a wide range of modifications and aftermarket parts, cheaper magazines (where I was living at least).
Though if weight is a problem, try a Beretta PX4 Storm, it is made to have less weight than the 92fs.

[blue123]

if you must have ether or, go with the barretta and never look back.........

[RevPaul]

Either way you choose, buy extra extractors.
They break period.
You can find M-9 extractors on gunbroker.com from $10.00 too $20.00 each.
Another thing too look for, is the frame cuts.
There are three variations, or upgrades if you will on the berretta.
You want the third generation frame.
The earlier designs had issues with frames getting hair line cracks in them after 5-10 thousand rds put through them.
The Taurus does not have the upgraded frames.

[skifast]

I have a 40 S&W 24/7 Pro Compact. I like it.

Originally Posted by boonhogganbeck

Have any of you tried the Taurus 24/7 Pro?

[skifast]

Taurus v. Beratta, for the same price go with the Beratta. If the Beratta is more expensive, I would go with the Taurus. I had a Taurus 92, and the only problem I had with it was the trigger. The trigger had a little hitch in it. Not a big deal. Taurus also have a lifetime warranty.

[Mr.wannalearn]

Originally Posted by skifast

Taurus also have a lifetime warranty.

Lol, that's because they expect their guns not to last an entire lifetime.
Here's a thought, have you thought of a Sig pistol? I have a Sig p232, I've found it excellent as a concealed-carry weapon, while my P239 SAS was a pretty good purchase as well, though after 5000 rounds it did start to lose it's accuracy a bit. Nothing a good servicing couldn't fix.

[Wendigo244]

Hmmmmm Sig... The whole family is great...
But Beretta if I had to pick...

http://www.hkpro.com/usp.htm

http://www.sigsauer.com/Products/Sho...7&productid=90

But here are two KIKass pistols I would seriously consider,