Beretta 92fs vs Taurus pt92
Any insight on the pros and cons would be helpful
0
-
quote:Originally posted by Jerecole
Any insight on the pros and cons would be helpful
I'd take the Beretta any day. Takes any ammo, any mags, never any problems at all after thousands of rounds. And it's easier to find accessories like mags, lasers, sights. It's still my number one choice if the zombies attack, and it's perfect for new shooters. Some say the grip is big, but it fits me fine.0 -
It is the same gun, the Taurus is made on the Beretta machinery. I have the Taurus and it is fine. The Beretta has a better resale but I ain't ah-sellin'. The spare magazines I have from Beretta fit just fine. 0 -
You are just paying for the name with the Beretta. They are both fine nines. 0 -
The biggest difference is that the Taurus has a frame mounted safety, while the Beretta has a slide mounted safety. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Beeramid
The biggest difference is that the Taurus has a frame mounted safety, while the Beretta has a slide mounted safety.
I prefer the Taurus to the Beretta, because of this.
It can be carried cocked and locked, and the Beretta can't.
In performance and finish, it's a toss up.
Doug0 -
I had the Taurus a few yrs back never had a problem.Never owned the Beretta. 0 -
Unless the Beretta is stamped "Made in Italy" go Taurus. You can always put a Beretta match grade barrel in one and get the accuracy up more. I did that and added an adjustable rear sight from Brownells. Mine is now a tack driver for a basic gun. Never had a problem in 2k rounds. 0 -
Taurus doesn't have the frame cracking problem that has occured on the Berettas. I own several of each. I like the pt99 better than the pt92 because of the adjustable sights. I have a pt99 that I bought used about 12 years ago and have put around 35,000 rounds thru in IDPA and IPSC competion. I have had the rear sight break twice. Other than that and a couple of barrels, everything else is origonal. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by dano
Taurus is not a Beretta. I would never carry a Taurus for protection. Beretta is a world-class firearm and Taurus is not....for very good reasons.
[^]
There are many many troops who would disagree with you there. Also, do you not remember the issues with slides cracking and flying back into people's faces on the 92F?
The Taurus is made in the old Beretta Sao Paulo factory. It is not the same as the Beretta 92SB, which was standard when the factory changed hands, its better. Taurus did make a LOT of lemons pre 1995, but my FIVE Taurus guns have been 100%.0 -
quote:Originally posted by dano
Taurus is okay for plinking and target shooting. You'll never catch me with one on my hip traveling.
There's a good reason why no LE agency / dept. of any kind nationwide carrys them.
San Diego Police adopted the 24/7 in 2005 as chronicled in Tactical Response by Ayoob Massad in July 2005.
So you were saying?0 -
quote:Originally posted by dano
Taurus is okay for plinking and target shooting. You'll never catch me with one on my hip traveling.
There's a good reason why no LE agency / dept. of any kind nationwide carrys them.
IMO, even assuming that this is true, the only thing it means is that Taurus hasn't been aggressively marketing itself to police agencies in the USA (eg like Glock has by massively discounting its guns to cops).
AFAIK, no domestic American police agency carries CZ-make pistols either, but those are standard police and military issue in many parts of the world.
Conversely, lots of American police agencies have at one time or another outfitted their officers with crap (eg including the Smith Sigma, and others). So just because an American police force does pick a particular gun, that doesn't necessarily make the gun a great choice.
On Beretta 92 slide cracking, there is good reason to believe that that particular problem was secondary to long-term use of overpressure rounds in the guns in question. The problem has pretty much never been seen outside the US military, and has since been rectified. IMO, its a non-issue.
Personally, I've fired both the Beretta AND the Taurus, and I'm not particularly fond of either one, to tell the truth. My hands are NOT particularly small, but IMO, the grip is too fat, and the DA pull is too long and stiff. Given the parameters of a full sized, all metal DA service pistol in 9mm, I prefer the CZ-75.
But as to one vs the other. . .who cares?
As far as I can tell, they are more or less the same, except for the safety difference already described. Oh. . .the Taurus has nicer wood grips [;)]
The Taurus guns are literally built on older Beretta-provided machinery. Some (but not most) of the parts even interchange. And Taurus has been building this gun FOREVER; its not like this is a new clone. I've put more rounds though the Beretta than the Taurus, but in my (limited) experience, both ran 100%.
The Taurus will have less resale value, but conversely, that works in your FAVOR if you are buying a used one. The Beretta will have more resale value, but that works against you if you want a used one. (Funny how that works!).
In general, I'd expect better quality control from Beretta, but I think either company would make it right if you had a problem with your gun.0 -
Your correct its not the same gun, then again its not the same Taurus that was made 5 years ago. I own both of the 92 models, the only issues I have had with the Taurus is the rear sights and it has been replaced.
The Taurus is better engineered than the Beretta, more features and tighter action and less slop in the slide. As I said, I own both so this isn't being said because I have heard Uncle Roy's cousin's neightbor say otherwise.
And yes I have no problem in carrying this as a primary. Take one to the range, you'll be convinced.
About the 24/7, just purchased a 24/7 Pro DC, .40 cal. A double action striker pistol with a decocker. It can be carried with a round in the chamber off safey and decocked. Like I said, they are out engineering most manufacturers on the market today.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
12 comments