| Image | Product | Price |
|---|---|---|
 | Check Price |
By Chris Dumm
The Taurus PT-92 AF is the railed, fixed-sight version of the Brazilian gunmaker’s longest-running bestseller. This big service pistol is the spitting image of the Beretta Model 92FS (with a few improvements) and sells for $100 to $150 less than the glamorous Italian’s price tag. Cheap is good, but only when it’s actually ‘good.’ To find out how good the PT-92 AF is, we tested it alongside the benchmark Beretta whose decades of military and police service set the bar very high for quality and reliability. The results may surprise you . . .
The Basics
When Taurus made the first PT-92, they didn’t copy or reverse-engineer the Beretta Model 92F as is sometimes believed. Instead, they bought Beretta’s entire Brazilian factory with its machinery, parts and plans. They even kept Beretta’s trained workers at their stations. Beretta’s and Taurus’ designs have evolved in divergent ways since 1980, and the two pistols now share very few parts in common. But they still share the same lineage and (almost) the same manual of arms.
If you’re not familiar with the basic design, it’s a full-size semiautomatic pistol with a hammer fired, double action/single action lockwork. It has an alloy frame and an open-topped steel slide, and its breech-locking mechanism uses a Walther-style tilting locking block instead of John Browning’s tilting breech design.
It’s a large handgun intended for military and police service, and for normal-sized humans it’s not a realistic choice for concealed carry. Trust me: as a normal-sized human I speak from experience.
Fit and Finish
As soon as I wiped off the gun oil that dripped from the PT-92 AF when I picked it up, I immediately noticed that it exhibited a superior level of fit and finish. Toolmarks are remarkable by their absence from a gun at this price point, and the steel and alloy finishes are deep and even. I found but one small blemish: the left-side safety lever isn’t a perfect visual fit with its mounting pin. Scroll down to the ‘Ergonomics’ section for a closeup: it’s a (single) cosmetic blemish, but not a functional one.
All of the PT-92 AF’s moving parts click neatly and quietly into their places, and all of its controls operate smoothly and positively. In all aspects of its fit and machining, the Taurus is every bit as good as the much costlier Beretta Model 92FS it’s patterned after. The Taurus’ metal finish is smooth and even, although the Beretta’s finish is just a little bit glossier. And I like the Taurus’ stainless-steel guide rod much better than the Beretta’s plastic rod.
The PT-92 AF looked and felt great right out of the box, and it continued to impress me even after several hundred rounds. Familiarity with the PT-92 did not breed contempt because it just got smoother and smoother yet it’s still as tight as the day it arrived.
Our test gun’s QC was one pin away from perfect, but the magazines don’t show anywhere near the same attention to detail. Taurus supplied six magazines with our test gun, and each of them had at least one problem. Notice the flat Beretta magazine on the left? Now look at the one on the right: the shinier Taurus mag’s witness holes are slightly dimpled and the big dent in the bottom of the magazine binds the follower when it’s almost loaded to capacity.
This makes it a real bee-otch to cram the 17th round into these allegedly 17-round magazines. Some of the magazines could hold 17 rounds (and only then with extreme force) while others rejected that last round no matter how hard I pushed. Just one of the six magazines was free from this otherwise-characteristic dent, and it was the only one that I could load up to 17 rounds right out of the box.
Unfortunately this wasn’t the only — or the worst — problem with the magazines. The biggest problem was this:
The followers tilted in the magazine bodies with surprising ease. This didn’t cause any feeding problems, but it likely caused the only meaningful reliability issue the PT-92 AF demonstrated: frequent failure to slide-lock. When a follower noses down this easily, it’s probably not pressing up hard enough to engage the slide catch. I tried this same finger-trick on the Beretta’s magazines, and the follower was much harder to tilt down.
Modern Beretta magazines (made by Mec-Gar) can be modified for use in the PT-92, and their followers engage the slide catch more positively than Taurus’ own magazines do. I didn’t undertake this project myself–and who wants to rely on jerry-rigged magazines anyway? I hope Taurus addresses these magazine issues, because the PT-92 AF is a great gun but it’s only as good as its magazines are.
Mec-Gar also sells magazines for the PT-92, and the newest $40 models hold 18 rounds and fit flush in the mag well. Meg-Gar magazines have an excellent reputation for quality and I use them in other pistols myself, but due to time and costs limitations, I didn’t have a chance to test one.
Trigger
The Walther P-38 was the first successful single-action/double-action automatic pistol. It began the long history of DA/SA service pistols (recently overtaken by striker-fired pistols in many armies) but it also started the habit of DA/SA service pistols having really shitty triggers. My wartime P-38 has an atrociously heavy trigger pull, and it’s not so much a firing control as a 20-pound manual safety which can only be disengaged by cocking the hammer. It really helps if you work out at the rock-climbing gym for a few months before you try to shoot it, and use lots of ice and Ibuprofen afterwards. Trigger-finger tendinitis sucks.
Why am I talking about the Walther P-38? Because the Beretta/Taurus design largely copies the ungainly P-38’s DA/SA trigger, slide-mounted safety/de-cocker, and tilting locking block mechanism. Berettas and their Taurian cousins have always been elegant-looking pistols, and their sleek good looks disguise this mechanical ancestry. Beretta dramatically improved the trigger pull (along with everything else about the P-38) for their M9 prototype, and the result was good enough for the U.S. military to buy millions of them.
The M9’s trigger was ‘good enough’ for our military, but the PT-92 AF’s trigger is damned good in anybody’s book. It’s a delightful surprise on a $450 pistol, and one of the best SA/DA triggers I’ve ever felt on a production pistol at any price. The double-action pull is long (0.7 inches) but at 9 pounds it’s also fairly light, and it only stacks a little bit just before the break. Our test gun’s trigger was both lighter and smoother than our benchmark Beretta’s trigger.
In single-action mode it delivers pure shooting bliss: it’s short, light (exactly five pounds) and crisp. Like the double-action pull, the Taurus’ single-action trigger was slightly better than the Beretta’s. There’s no grit, no creep and almost no overtravel, and the short 3mm reset lets you throw down double-taps like an AN-94.
This was a tricky thing to test because too many shooting ranges have idiotic ‘one shot per second’ rules. I had to disguise my double-taps from the rangemasters by waiting until other shooters unleashed covering fusillades of simultaneous gunfire.
Sights
Just like its Italian ancestors, the PT-92 AF has an integral front sight blade that’s part of the open-top slide. Our front sight blade had a dimple machined into its face, but the dimple was completely filled with schmutz when it arrived for testing. I didn’t know it was actually a white dot until I drilled out the crud with a sharpened Q-tip shaft. If you don’t need true night-sights it works fairly well, but it could be very difficult to replace with tritium or fiber-optic since it’s part of the slide.
The above photo shows how hard it can be to modify these integral sights: the Model 92FS on the right is customized for suppressor use, and lifting the sight axis above the top of the can required some serious mods.
The rear sight is a drift-adjustable notch with two tiny white dots that do absolutely nothing for visibility in dim light. We shot it from unlit covered shooting stations on heavily overcast and rainy days, and under these gloomy lighting conditions the dots simply vanished. The Taurus’ sights were difficult to pick out against any kind of dark target. Our test gun also shot slightly but consistently to the left with the ammo I was shooting; the rear sight needed to be drifted slightly right for perfect regulation.
If you don’t love the PT-92 AF’s rear sights, you don’t have to put up them forever. Aftermarket rear sights are available from several manufacturers and Beretta-style replacement sights will fit, but the Taurus’ rear dovetail is reported to be slightly smaller than it’s Italian cousin’s. This requires some gunsmith fitting work, and that ain’t cheap. Cheap bastards like me can always goop up the rear sight with some Tru-Glo sight paint, and I’d definitely do this if I owned this gun.
Taurus suggests an easier remedy for any sighting deficiencies the PT-92 AF might have: buy a Taurus PT-99 instead. It’s the same gun, but with higher-profile adjustable sights that let you avoid this whole headache. The price difference between the two models is negligible, and I’d probably go for the PT-99 myself.
I may not be nuts about the PT-92 AF’s sights, but as you’ll see later on they still let you wring some pretty good accuracy out of the pistol.
Maintenance
Field maintenance of the PT-92 AF is absurdly simple. After dropping the magazine and verifying that the gun is empty, simply push the takedown button on the right side of the frame.
With the button pressed, rotate the takedown lever counterclockwise from 3:00 to 6:00…
And pull the barrel/slide assembly forward and off the frame. These pictures show that I forgot to lower the hammer. This doesn’t interfere with the disassembly process, but you can damage the frame if you drop the hammer with the slide removed.
Once the barrel/slide is removed you can remove the recoil spring/guide rod and then remove the barrel for cleaning. The tilting block takes some jiggling to remove and re-install, but it didn’t get very dirty during our testing.
Ergonomics
There are two crucial words to remember when considering the PT-92 AF’s ergonomics: Size Matters. This sucker is big: not Yosemite Sam big, not even Desert Eagle big, but still big. It’s 8.5 inches long and 1.5 inches thick and weighs more than two pounds empty.
Carry ergonomics are great, as long as you don’t mind wearing your PT-92 AF in a chest rig, paddle or service holster. IWB carry (my personal fave, although I’m in a minority around here) is a nonstarter, and I speak from personal experience here. After I’d shot the heck out of the PT-92 AF and proven its reliability, I carried it in a Versacarry device for a few days.
How did that work out? Epic Comfort Fail; Borderline Concealment Fail.
The long barrel poked me painfully in the right gluteus maximus and the receiver ground into my hipbone while the full-size grip printed through most mild-weather cover garments. An OWB pancake holster would have been less painful (and might have concealed better) but trying to CCW a service pistol is like using a BMW M3 to haul firewood.
You’ll never really try to conceal a gun this size, but all that mass and gripping area does an excellent job of negating the less-than-fearsome recoil of the 9x19mm cartridge. Despite the Taurus’ fairly high bore axis, I didn’t even notice recoil or muzzle flip unless I was shooting one-handed, and even then it was very mild.
The shooting ergos are absolutely excellent, as long as you don’t have small hands. The trigger reach from the backstrap to the middle of the slack trigger measures nearly three inches, and the grip is 1.5 inches thick. Small-handed shooters might have a hard time reaching the trigger, much less pulling it properly. This is not the gun for them.
For my just-about-average hands, though, the PT-92 AF was haptic heaven. Hammer and slide bite simply don’t happen, and limp-wristing is nearly impossible because the gun is heavy enough that it provides its own recoil inertia. Unlike the Beretta Model 92F’s awkward slide-mounted controls, the Taurus PT family has always worn the vastly superior frame-mounted safety/de-cockers shown here. I’m not a card-carrying fan of manual safeties on any handguns, but Taurus does these so well that I think they add function and value to the gun. DA/SA pistols need de-cockers, and these ambidextrous levers are perfectly positioned so you can flick them up to ‘safe,’ down to ‘fire’ or farther down to de-cock the hammer with a quick and deliberate sweep of your thumb.
The safety never activated itself accidentally on my watch, which is one of our perennial complaints about manual safeties. The placement of the PT-92 AF’s safety/de-cocker makes it almost physically impossible to accidentally activate when you use a ‘high thumb’ grip, because your strong-hand thumb will sweep it off as you take your firing grip.
The magazine release isn’t ambidextrous, but left-handed shooters can reverse it without any tools other than a pointed stick. In fact, the only control that left-handed shooters won’t like is the slide release: the design of the gun’s trigger bar prevents it from being ambidextrous or reversible. The slide release is located perfectly for righties (well rearward from the 1911’s position) but it sucks for left-handers, and they’ll want to use the slingshot technique for their reloads.
And so will you, as it turns out, because of something else I’m just about to talk about…
Reliability
Touchy-feely is all well and good, but a gun is all for crap if you hear ‘click’ instead of ‘BANG!’ when you pull the trigger. This is especially true for a home defense or service pistol, whose business is much more serious than a 3-gun trophy, a trophy whitetail, or bragging rights at the brewpub.
As we usually try to do, I tested the PT-92 AF with a variety of ammunition, both factory and handloaded, both steel and brass-cased. After about 150 rounds of steel Tulammo, 100 rounds of handloads and 200 rounds of brass-cased factory ammo, the total breakdown of less-than-perfect functioning stands as follows:
- Zero failures to feed;
- Zero failures to eject;
- Zero failures to fire with brass-cased ammunition;
- 12+ failures to ignite with steel-cased Tulammo, which all fired properly on the second strike;
- 50% failure to lock the slide back on an empty magazine, regardless of which ammunition or magazine was used;
The PT-92 AF’s steel allergy was a uniquely personal bummer for me, since I’ve got a 9mm steel stockpile that would keep the survivors of The Walking Dead swimming in bullets for years. That doesn’t mean it’s a bummer for you or anybody else, however, because Tulammo is only minimally cheaper (three cents a round, Mr. Scrooge) than the cheapest brass-cased FMJs, and any flavor of 115-grain FMJ would be your last choice for self-defense ammo anyway.
Many excellent guns shoot Tulammo just fine, and many excellent guns hate it. Your opinion may differ, but I don’t consider ‘doesn’t like steel ammo’ to be a meaningful demerit for any pistol. I do consider it absolutely worth mentioning, since we pride ourselves on telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing –except puns, metaphors, similes and alliteration– but the unvarnished truth about guns.
The frequent failures to slide-lock are more troublesome, because they trick you into dropping the hammer on an empty magazine and they slow down your combat reloads slightly. As I said above, I blame the magazines.
So here’s the scoop: if you stick to brass-cased ammo your PT-92 AF will be perfectly and monotonously reliable, although the slide-lock issues will force you to adopt a slingshot technique when you reload. Maybe this is why they tell us to always use the slingshot technique after all, but I’ve just been too spoiled and lazy to pay attention.
We didn’t ‘test’ our benchmark Beretta for reliability, but it’s worth noting that it had zero failures of any kind during our limited shooting time with it.
Accuracy
The PT-92 AF repeatedly produced groups like this: under 3 inches at 25 yards from a padded rest, with dirt-cheap ammo. At the more realistic DGU range of 8 yards, my offhand groups averaged 1.6 inches with factory ammo and 1.9 inches with my cheap handloads. This is more than accurate enough for defensive use, service carry, or 3-gun competition.
I think I could have shot the Taurus even better if it had better sights to work with, but the PT-92 AF’s intrinsic accuracy has nothing to apologize for. Three-inch groups at 25-yard from a bench is better than many pistols can do from a Ransom Rest at that distance.
And for the record, the Taurus was slightly more accurate than the Beretta during our brief comparison.
Conclusion
The Taurus PT-92 AF has demonstrated itself to be well-made, comfortable, accurate and reliable. With a street price of $450, it’s also a very good value. I’ve enjoyed testing it much more than I’ve enjoyed testing other pistols with much fancier pedigrees and much higher price tags.
It’s a solid gun, even though it can’t be all guns to all people. Some shooters will want a heavier-hitting caliber than the 9×19, and to them I’d suggest the .40 caliber PT-100. Other shooters won’t have a need for any pistol of this size, and others simply won’t have big enough hands to shoot it comfortably.
There’s one area where this gun needs improvement: the magazines. Factory magazines should hold the number of rounds they say they’ll hold, and their followers should positively engage the slide lock when they run empty.
My earlier Taurus test of the .45 ACP 24/7 G2 introduced me to a promising new handgun with great handling but spotty reliability, and I confess that I came to this test with a bias: I really wanted the PT-92 AF to be good.
It is.
SPECIFICATIONS: Taurus PT-92 AF
Type: Short-recoil locked-breech semi-automatic pistol
Caliber: 9×19mm (also available in .40 S&W as the PT-100)
Action: Hammer-fired DA/SA with manual safety/de-cocker
Barrel Length: 5″
Magazine Capacity: 17+1 with factory magazines
Sights: 3-dot configuration with integral front and dovetail rear
Length: 8.5″
Width: 1.5″
Weight: 34 oz. empty.
Street Price: about $450
Where To Buy
RATINGS (out of five stars):
Accuracy * * * *
Three-inch groups at 25 yards are definitely better than average, and better than most of us can shoot offhand anyway.
Styling * * * *
The elegant and iconic looks of the Model 92F/M9 are even better with a frame-mounted safety.
Ergonomics * * * (carry) * * * * * (shooting)
Too zaftig for CCW, but its comfortable controls, excellent trigger and minimal recoil make it an absolute joy to shoot. Definitely try one out before purchasing, if you’ve got small hands.
Reliability * * * * 1/2
100% feeding, ejection and firing (with brass-cased ammo) through more than 450 rounds fired. It doesn’t like steel-cased ammo, but we don’t care. Deduct half a star for the failure to slide-lock.
Overall * * * *
A damned fine pistol and a great value. After comparing and shooting the Taurus and Beretta side-by-side, I would choose the Taurus first.
I’ve owned a PT-99 for over 20 years. It was my only 9mm for that time and it handled all my reloads and anything else I ever fed it. I initially purchased the Taurus due to it’s safety ergonomics matching my Colt 1911 and Ruger MK II, down to fire. I agree that the magazine quality is not that great. I have multiple mags stored in the exact same condition and the Taurus mags don’t have the finish I would expect. Having said all of this I only recently retired it due to not being able to upgrade the sights (the eyes are getting worse and looking at the pictures they still run those small dots)
It will make an excellent firearm for my son when the time comes.
I have owned Taurus PT 92 AF for about 6 months and have carried a PT-99 as my service weapon for 12 years and a Taurus .357 revolver as well the only complaint I have ever had was the Mag issue with the loading of 19 rounds into the high volume mag . Never had any issue with the slide lock on the 2 factory mags I have (maybe I just got lucky ) I would buy another Taurus PT92 AF as my service weapon as it HAS already Saved my life once
Hard primers on ammo are an argument in favor of double action pistols as opposed to striker fired pistols. It doesn’t happen often but when it does with a glock type gun you have to manually cycle the action to get your gun running again.
In every instance of a hard primer that I’ve experienced a second pull of the trigger on a double action pistols has caused it to go boom.
I’ve never used the Taurus but the Beretta is way over built for a 9mm. If I wanted a 9 that was well built and cheaper than a Beretta and double action I would get another Ruger p95. Well built and damn near indestructible.
You are spot on with your definition of reliability/ruggedness citing both the Taurus/Beretta 92 & Ruger P95 as quintessential examples to be sure. Happy Holidays.
Nice review. I’ve owned a 99-AFD since 1995. Bought it used and love it to death! Adjustable rear sights are the way to go, definitely! To this day, it’s my favorite shooter. I can consistently put 2 mags in a row in the ten ring at 20 yards. I can’t do that with any of my other (hand)guns (including 2 sigs).
Very good review.
I carried my M9 in a fobus paddle holster in tours in Iraq and Afghanistan and most people, when I was inside the wire, assumed I was unarmed. The pistol concealed extremely well beneath my blouse.
In the civilian world, I despise an untucked shirt, but if you have an untucked shirt then the 92FS or Taurus should hide nicely.
+1
I have carried my wife’s M-9 with an untucked shirt, vest or jacket and the pistol was fully concealed. My normal carry is a full size 1911 and it too is fully concealed. I think the firearms industry is pushing the idea that full sized and larger compact pistols are hard to conceal so they can sell you a sub compact. If you like small pistols by all means buy one but don’t fall for the line that big guns aren’t for concealed carry.
A quality IWB holster ala MTAC or Crossbreed and a real gunbelt like a Wilderness Instructor model and this pistol should conceal as well as my CZ75B. With the alloy frame, it’s probably lighter than the CZ to boot!
I don’t print while going about my MAFWG business.
Maybe its just me, but my Italian Beretta is just…prettier. Im sure they function just the same, but the taurus looks a little less refined and sleek. Maybe its the white lettering on the side. Im sure they both function exactly the same.
I never owned a Beretta but I have fired them and the Taurus 92 AF fires and handles the same however I was more accurate with my Taurus then the Beretta so it may be because it was not my weapon they are almost the same model but they fire different and being left handed right eye dominate it makes a difference to me
I have concealed my PT-99 under an untucked shirt in a Fobus holster. It is not ideal however. I have the two magazines I received from the factory with my gun and one off brand manufactured magazine and none of them has had the same failure to lock the slide back that you describe. However, I can release the slide if I slam the magazine home. Over the past few years I have found the 99 to be a great gun and I have put close to 1500 rounds through it including some IPSC style shooting events.
Yeah I always preferred the Taurus to the Beretta. If for no other reason than the frame mounted safety. My thumbs are a tiny bit on the stumpy side, so I don’t have to completely change my grip to safe a Taurus.
My older Beretta 92FS had some light strikes on Tula steel rounds, too, but my simple fix was to swap out the Beretta’s standard 20-lb. hammer spring with a stiffer 22-lb. spring (from Wolff Gunsprings. It was only like $4.95 a spring so I bought the 22-lb. and a 24-lb., but the 22-lb. is fine). It DOES increase noticeably the trigger pull in DA, but I haven’t measured the actual amount.
That nifty takedown system also makes it, if not likely, at least possible for a trained opponent to execute a surprise field-strip of the Taurus at CQB distances. Normally this would be a one-in-a-million… but perhaps may be practical if you’re a bad guy in a locale where local LEOs have standardized on Taurus/Beretta type pistols. I’ve seen it done hands-on (with snap caps loaded, of course) and it looked to me that it could be done very quickly and smoothly using a natural pincers grip on both sides of the slide from the front.
AG, I don’t always agree with you. But I have always enjoyed your comments. That’s why it pains me to tell you that I think you’ve watched 1 too many chop socky movies.
Taking your opponents gun apart while it’s pointed at you may be possible in theory, but like kicking the knife out of the bad guys hand and then knocking him out with 1 punch, it probably only happens in Hollywood.
Heh. Like I said, one-in-a-million. I offered this for discussion value, having seen it done in person. If it were purely a “OMGWTF I saw Jet Li do this in a Lethal Weapon movie” I’d label it as such. 😉
In case it wasn’t clear, for me this falls into the same category as esoteric martial arts techniques that are taught for the sake of completeness, with Sensei clearly stating that it’s (direct quote) “not something that is likely to ever get used as an applied technique”.
Besides, with all of the tinfoil-hattery that goes on around here, you’re going to call me out on this? Bwahahahaha….
It was a slow day. No hard feelings?
As I attended the police academy right after this movie came out I can say that it is possible to with the Beretta but not the Taurus. The difference is the mag lips actually ride in two channels in the bottom of the slide. if the mag is in the gun the slide will not come off. my instructor tried about 10 times to do it on my Taurus and could never do it but was able to on one of the other cadets Berettas.
Chop socky? 🙂
Sorry but it’s quite possible.. I’ve seen it done on a few different Beretta’s by a few that were trained to do so including my uncle (ex-GB w/over a decade in active combat)
As for on the Taurus.. I’ll test it on my own when I get a chance later 🙂
It only gets done to people who won’t squeeze the trigger when the guy reaches for the gun. I frustrated an instructor deeply when I refused to comply. We emptied/cleared the 92, he told me to cock it and point it at me and he would show us all how he could disable the pistol before I could fire. Every time he reached for it the “CLICK!” of the hammer falling was very loud and made him jump higher each time. Finally after 3 simulated CQB shootings, he finally stated that this demonstration had turned into a “how to be like Han Solo” class and confessed that it only works when the resolve to kill is low.
I own a Beretta and owned a PT99. Let me say from experience such is the stuff of parlor tricks.
Its the firearm equivalent to spinning a Balisong knife;fun to look at , but in real life it has no practical merit. Observe that in Lethal Weapon 4 the takedown lever on Mel Gibson’s Beretta was already in the “down” position. I can’t speak to any other PT92/Beretta 92 owners, but if you try that ninja stunt with my 92G you’ll receive a gut-full of 115gr +P Corbon before you can lay 1 finger on the frame.
Yep, 100% agree. I probably should have left in my final line (deleted before I hit “post comment”) about how there’s no way I’d ever try the technique in application, but I figured that went without saying.
That’s a bit absurd. They would have to simultaneously push on the detent and swing it down. If you allow someone to get close enough to you that they can do that you’re in bigger trouble than them disassembling your gun.
I love my PT92. Like you’ve described it hates TulAmmo, but Wolf and Brown Bear shoot just fine. TulAmmo just has overly hard primers. Mine has been flawless for over 20 years.
This myth has been disproven hundreds of times. Just because Jett li did it in leathal weapon doesn’t mean it can actually be done
Taurus has an aggressive new CEO who says he is dedicated to improving the company’s reputation with respect to quality. Supplying magazines with visible and functional defects isn’t the way to accomplish this goal. At a minimum, until they solve their magazine issues, they would be well advised to buy them from an outside supplier with a good reputation even if that means raising the price by a few dollars to break even.
With regard to second strike capability on hard primers, I believe Taurus already does offer a striker-fired 9 mm that only requires a second, albeit heavier, pull of the trigger rather than racking the slide.
The 24/7 G2 is offered in 9mm and .40, as well as .45 ACP. It has a unique trigger system (which I actually like a lot) that’s essentially a DA/SA striker-fired system.
It’s very unusual, in that the initial (double-action) pull is *lighter* than the final (single-action) pull. For safe carry, you can either decock it or activate the manual safety. As odd as it sounds, it’s got phenomenal ergonomics.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/06/chris-dumm/gun-review-taurus-247-g2-45-acp/
I have the Academy “special edition” PT101P in 40 SW with adjustable rear sights and 16 round factory magazines. Both gun and mags work perfectly and I’ve had no malfunctions with over 1000 rounds down range.
Chris, thank you so much for the excellent review of one of my absolute favorite pistols. I have my PT and my FS sitting side by side here on my desk and Taurus deserves a big pat on the back for making a pistol every bit as nice as its Italian cousin.
I’ve read this review of yours several times now because it’s fun reading such positive press about a Taurus gun.
Taurus: the next hyundai?
Damn, I should thoughta that.
I have carried my PT 99 concealed in several ways. Tuckable IWB with my shirt tucked in, IWB (non-tuckable) under a sports coat or suit coat or long jacket, and in a shoulder holster under a sweatshirt or jacket. It is a heavy concealed-carry but I have done it for full days. Most times, I use a 20rd Mec-Gar magazine.
Taurus has been a “Hyundai” for while.
They make good revolvers too, probably above “Hyundai”.
Is 9mm Lugar 124 grain Hydra-Shok JHP (P9HS1) considered +P or +P+ ammo? I just purchased a Taurus PT 92 AF. The manual states not to use +P or +P+ ammo in this gun, but I’m a first time owner of this type of gun and do not know if the ammo is considered to be either of the these.
When you purchase your ammo, just check the label on the box. Any brand that is “+P” or “+P+” will have that designation clearly printed on the label for the exact reason you are concerned; some guns shouldn’t use it. 🙂
I have yet to be convinced that this whole +P thing is anything more than a marketing tool to get us to buy more expensive ammo anyway. This is based on discussions I have had with several gunsmiths and range guys in my area. As always, YMMV 🙂
taurus are rated for +p ammo if saami compliant .sammi does not recognize any +p+ loads
Thanks for the outstanding review. I am the proud owner of both the PT92 and 99. I truely love shooting both but the adjustable site on the 99 lets it be a leg up on the 92. I hope to find rear night sights for both of them — someday. Until I find the replacement sights (at least for the PT92) – I will continue to shoot and staying inside the 8 at 20 yds.
I love the features the Taurus 92 AF have . It feeks great in My hand. Don’t like the 3 dot sights. I tend to shoot a little low with it. Still a great gun. Wayne D Boling
I’ve been knowing that the PT92/PT99 series of pistols were some fine shooting pistols since 1994, when I bought a PT92. I presently own a PT99 and also a Beretta M9 and while both fit my hand very well and digest just about any ammo I throw at them, I like the frame mounted safety of the PT99 much better. On the sights issue it is the other way: the Beretta has sights that are easier to see (dots are bigger and whiter). As for the magazines, the 17 round mags that came with my PT99 cycle just fine and I haven’t run into the problem you have with the slide staying open on the last shot. I also have a couple of older 15 round mags left from the PT92 and haven’t had any problems with them feeding my new PT99. As for the steel ammo issue; well I’ve never fired any of that stuff in any of my rifles or pistols. I reload my ammo and buying steel junk is counterproductive to building up an ammo supply. And I haven’t had a bit of problems with my Taurus or the Beretta with my reloads, using bullets from 88 grains to 147 grains in hollow points.
I’s been the proud an happy owner of a PT 92 AF for over 20 years now, which included 3 years in the military.
The magazine glitch is quite easily solved:
Load up 15, pump a round into the chamber, drop the mag, and include #16, or pop #16 in manually before the 15-round mag goes in.
Before I take to the range, I whip off the baseplate of the mag and give the magspring a good stretch, which immediately takes care of the slide lock issue. When not in use, the weapon is cleaned at least once a week, with the same drill.
This method is effective, keeps the magazine clean (because everyone cleans it when they strip it, right?) and prevents an unpleasant jam in the middle of the tactical range.
Truth be told, I cannot remember when last I have had a feed failure or slide lock not locking, and believe me when I say that this firearm has had a long hard-working career.
I own a pt-92af,bought it in 1986 never have had a problem with it after over 30,000 rounds fired,never been back to factory for anything.Will shoot anything I feed it,factory loads,my reloads,+P,it justs shoots.Even carried it when I was a Deputy Sheriff,I am confident that it would not have let me down.Only thing I changed was the factory wood grips,put some rubber grips on it.Very accurate,reliable to a T.Will never part with it.Keep your powder dry.Thank-You.
either
Both are good pistols but they are big.
Remember this A Pistol Is something That You use After you have lost the Ability to have your Hands on A good Rifle. SUA_SPONTA.
I have both of late. PT-101 (40 cal), and a PT-99 plus a newer Beretta 92 FS. I also had an original Taurus with the heel release just like the original Beretta. The heel release was sold to a guy in Phx that just had to have that gun and its 6 factory mags. The old heel release mags were much better manufactured. This is my 3rd PT-99 ’cause people kept buying mine from me. I carried a PT99 for the better part of 20 years and shot thousands of rounds have yet to wear one out. Older factory mags were high quality the newer ones are pretty lame. I use the Mec-Gar mags (have 8-10) they fit both Taurus pistols! This makes the 9mm mags a good sub for the .40 cal mags. I picked up the Beretta from a friend who needed some money. The pistol is well made and well finished but the plastic parts are a bit of a turn-off. That plastic trigger just pisses me off, all that money Beretta demands and you get plastic parts. I’m and engineer by trade and understand the reason for Polymer parts but still… give me a steel trigger in a steel gun.
I prefer the Taurus, fit and finish is a bit better and the trigger is much better. Replaced the wood grips with Pac’s and carry in nylon holster easy to conceal and carry on the motorcycle.
I understand Taurus has had some issues with quality and customer service as a former dealer I cannot say how bad this sounds. I sold hundreds of Taurus (and Rossi which they bought) pistols and only sent two back… Both were the result of the customer issues (one backed over his pistol case! the second fell down a hill and the pistol hit every boulder on the way down) . Both guns were repaired with no questions asked and the only cost was shipping to their repair center. The only manufacturer with better or equal is Ruger I hope Taurus gets their act back together.
I moved back to 1911 for carry normally in the past couple of years but still have several Taurus revolvers and semi-autos which I still shoot on a regular basis. Quality and price I’m sure introduced lots of folks to shooting because of Taurus so I hope they recover.
Specifically Tuarus 92 model. Don’t waste your money, they are manufactured to shoot way low! When sending a brand new one in for accuracy issues, they HAND FILED the front sight down by 1/2 it’s height. This left file marks on the front sight and made it look like some backwoods hillbilly altered the gun. They could have installed a higher rear sight to cure the shooting low problem.. Stupid stupid stupid. They never did address the sloppy lockup in battery that I also pointed out. Taurus=NEVER AGAIN!
Had one of the model 92’s 15-20 years ago when they were a hot commodity. Parts including the rear sight started falling off in short order. Put the parts back on and sold it. No more Taurus’s for me ever.
Loved the Review. It’s worth noting that older versions of this gun have difficulty with JHP rounds and are not suggested to fire +p or +P+. That being said any junky old ammo I use or any FMJ I shoot through it work wonderfully. Mines from 1993 (only 4 years younger than I am) and I’ve noticed that the clips (when loaded to capacity) have a difficulty feeding and ejecting the shorter JHP ammunition. Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated >.<!
Mecgar makes some very nice magazines (they are not clips) that can be had very reasonably. Also if you are in an area that is the BS 10 rnd limit you can use the .40cal mag (10 rnd officially) instead with 9mm and it will hold 13-14 and still be perfectly legal.
They are clips if the person talking about them want to call them by that name. It’s perfectly fine.
Sorry but no it is not “perfectly fine”.. I will not help perpetuate the use of wrong terminology for the object in question and neither should you. A magazine is NOT the same thing as a “clip”.. they are different to say the least and are NOT interchangeable.
To continue to say it’s “perfectly fine” is not only doing a disservice to everyone it also helps contribute to the misuse of terms by the anti’s..
Think of it the same as the common misuse of the term “assault rifle” which is intentionally misused by the anti’s.. and the more people help perpetuate that misuse the more the anti’s get away with calling an AR-15 something it is not.
It may seem like a small thing to you.. but it’s doing harm.. not good.
I ahve heard lots of statements about clips and magazines but no one has bothered to say what they think a magazine or clip is. So how and who defines them? I assume a clip is a pistol bullet holder and a magazine is used in a rifle. Too much griping and no defining.
“david says:
December 31, 2014 at 18:18
I ahve heard lots of statements about clips and magazines but no one has bothered to say what they think a magazine or clip is. So how and who defines them? I assume a clip is a pistol bullet holder and a magazine is used in a rifle. Too much griping and no defining.”
“A magazine is an ammunition storage and feeding device within or attached to a repeating firearm.” (aka “box magazine”)
vs
“A clip is a device that is used to store multiple rounds of ammunition together as a unit, ready for insertion into the magazine or cylinder of a firearm” (aka :stripper clip)
A perfect example of this is the old M1 Garand rifle.. which was infamous for the “ping” sound when it was out of ammo. (much tot he detriment of the soldiers using such initially until; they learned to use such against the enemy intentionally)
Ultimately though again.. improper use of terminology is as I said before harmful and WILL be used by the anti’s to attack and deceive.. and that is a bad thing hands down. Or would you rather be helping morons like feinstien??
No, you are wrong. It’s not perpetauting anything harmful. “Correcting” someone on magazine/clip is less than nothing of importance. You can change the subject and mention other off topic points but you really shouldn’t do it.
Sorry but no I’m not wrong.. it is correcting the term to the proper wording. the same as we educate our kids. Otherwise a truck becomes a car etc etc… or an “AR-15” = assault rifle. Accuracy within that terminology is important and if it is not accurate as the anti’s do it can and will be sued against us. So no offence but get a clue. It might seem like a small thing etc to you.. but in the BIG picture it matters.
Oh and I didn’t change the subject at all. I pointed out correlations to illustrate the point which you obviously failed miserably to grasp.
Yes, you are wrong but for probably a multituted of reasons you can’t or won’t admitt to it. Keep convincing yourself, though.
Funny.. you keep making such false claims and have yet to back it up with any actual FACTS unlike what i have done.. therefore you are either completely oblivious or are just acting as a TROLL.
No, not even close to trolling. I hear more and more different types of people using the word ‘clip” in describing an automatic. It doen’t matter but you want to be a know-it-all that is very annoying to most.
You probably think that an automobile is powered by a motor too, it’s not it is powered by an engine. Motors run on electricity, engines run on either steam or petroleum feul.
John “Trolltard” Anderson,
People like you lack the comprehension that words and terminology have power and can be used to communicate or deceive.
I’d never come across someone who, despite being wrong, persist in being argumentative and ignorant.
Regardless of what you might or might not know about guns, one would question that knowledge base or at least think that you are unteachable. Thus, you truly have nothing of value to add. Most normal people, when corrected, stand corrected or just leave. You don’t know better
Please stop irritating people on gun boards and loiter about HuffPost or WaPo or some other mindless libtard bastion of your choice.
You all can love your weapons,I will stay with my Beretta P92 FS,and my Judge by turus 410 + cal45 ,cal 38 turus pocket sise,my shot gun 410 and one special toy that I like in my collection 7mm with A scoup that give me 800 mts to play with and list but not last USA M1 and old as it comes never faild me do 6 rd mag insert from the top and inject after last Bullet is fired, 50 cal black powder black Hawk,1863 357 Ruger 6 shutter also 1863 357 mag Rifle is the wild Wild West .my next addition is the Bush Mastter with nigth vision laser all the accessory’s to be on the top of the game,every weapon is a work of Art I enjoy takeing them apart a see every component and put it back. We will talke soon.over and out. The Road Master Egle Fly.
Can we get a translation on that jibberish please?
I own a pt917,had slide lock issues,changed the magazine.problem solved
The gap on top of my new magazine(do not know the actual name or discription) is wider than that of the stock magazine.
Watch this before you purchase a Taurus. If there is a defect in their weapon, dont fix it, just threaten the consumer and let them get killed. No recall, no looking into product fix….
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYFdPrCRHvM
No doubt this gun was not drop safe bu this is exactly why I never carry a round chambered. I hope this incident did not scare this woman from carrying anymore as there are plenty of good drop safe guns and of course you can always carry unchambered.
She still carrys after almost dying from the wound. The issue for her is the weapon is supposed to be drop proof. and them not being willing to even research making the weapon drop proof.
Taurus manufactures hundreds of thousands guns every year and of that amount of guns you happened to get one of very few guns that have a defect. This is not at all a common incident, I had a pistol made by a different maker go full auto when I dropped the slide, and got it repaired and it never did it again. Mistakes are made during manufacture everyday, in all industries, not just guns.
This is why some of the Taurus semi-autos (the 24/7 and PT1** models, for example) have a G2 suffix (Generation 2) indicating that these models lack the issue(s) of the first generation – like failing the drop test. Guns like the PT111 Millenium G2 are totally without any of the faults of the prior iteration – the Millenium Pro – and have been rated the #1 best buy in a compact striker-fired pistol for four years running (beating out 4th Generation Glocks in the process. Taurus got it right in two while Glock needed twice as many revisions).
On another note, do you know how stupid it is to say “I had a Taurus XX years ago and it had lots of problems. I’ll never buy another Taurus?” Some of the best cars made to day came from companies that also had some of the worst in earlier years like Honda. Because of its self-destructing automatic, the 2003 Accord has been in the Top Five worst cars (cars with the most problems) since it was introduced, whereas the Accords made 10 to 14 years later have been rated in the Top Five list of “Best cars.”
Taurus has made quantum leaps in quality, reliability and performance since it factory took up permanent residence in Miami. For $215 and under, Taurus makes three of the best selling guns in America: TCP or PT738 (.380), PT709 (9mm) and PT740 (40S&W) just on the basis of price. People and gun reviewers would buy them at their MSRP if they were not available at prices well below that.
I’ve owned three pt s over the years and only had problems when I went to an aftermarket “match”barrel. I never had a fucntion or accuracy problem with any of them in ” as issued” form. stls.99 bought in ’99, a used 92 in ’04 and a stls.92 in ’05 (my everyday pistol). the quality has gone way up since the early days of being cheap copies.
You do realize they were never “cheap copies” don’t you?
They were a Beretta factory originally and were sold with the rights to the design and all of the original staff that worked there under Beretta stayed on producing the same product for years and then improving it.
HOW DO I GET A MANUAL FOR MY TAURUS PT92A
need manual for taurus pt92a
http://www.taurususa.com/contact.cfm
Call em 🙂
What kind of accuracy can you expect? I got mine looking brand new no wear. But locked on the bench with a firm grip gives a random 9″ group at 20 feet. the barrel moves back and forth a full 1.5 to 2mm . shimmed it and it still has a 6″ random scatter group at 20′ is the barrel supposed to flop around?
I wonder if this has the feature where if the weapon drops even with the safety on, it can go off and shoot you? It happened to a friend of mine and they settled out of court. Then they didn’t fix the issue. Won’t fix the issue. The settlement did not have a gag order so here it is : http://www.taurusgunaccident.com/
The fact that they know about it and will not fix it is disturbing at best. Think twice before supporting a company such as this with your purchases.
For the above issue you mentioned that was on a newer design and the flaw was fixed. If you think they are the only mfr to ever have any issue including like this you really need to do more research into the matter. No offence intended of course. But I’ve seen/dealt with more than one over the years and as for service I’ve yet to be disappointed with Taurus at all. I can’t say the same for some other companies though.
I got mine brand new as well and even though I’m not as good a shot as I used to be I can do under 3″ at 25′ with ease on the PT92. IMO I’s every bit as accurate as the Beretta version and personally I prefer it.
Also for those that do not know the Taurus factory was a Beretta factory that they sold when they lose the contract to supply firearms to the local police in Brazil. Hence why it is “the spitting image” and they have the rights to the original design. As for improvements indeed they have done so including KEEPING the frame mounted safety thankfully unlike the newer Beretta’s.
As for barrel “flopping around” it is a floating system.. but you could have a strange flaw. I suggest calling Taurus to discuss it with them. They have very good customer service and a lifetime warranty. If there is an issue or flaw let them know. I have no doubt they will be happy to fix things accordingly. 🙂
Excellent review of what I consider a very fine
weapon. I own a PT 101 p.I carry it daily, open carry.I have fired many rounds through this pistol. never a failure of any kind.I learned quite a bit from the comments that follow the review.My barrel also has very minimal movement but, but it appears normal to me.Thanks to all the reviewer as well as you guys that posted comments.
I might be purchasing one of these used. Its been a couple years since OP and wanted to know if / where upgraded magazines can be purchased? Can the sights be replaced with adjustable?
Hi MikePelto,
The rear sights can be replaced though the PT-99 etc variant have adjustable rear sights from the factory (otherwise in essence they are the same model).
The front sight cannot “easily” be changed (I’m sure it could be done by a professional gun smith but it would be tricky to say the least due to the inherent design)
As for magazines I prefer the Mecgar’s with nickle plating. Fairly inexpensive and damn good quality.
Also depending on where you are if you are like canuckistan where you are limited to 10rnd capacity you can use the .40 cal version instead in the 9mm and it will work nicely and hold 13-14 rnds and still be legal since the magazine design is legally a 10rnd of .40 cal. 🙂
Also the stock grips are crap IMO.. so I immediately put on a set of rubberized Hogue’s and they are sweet and inexpensive.
As for purchasing.. there should be no lack of online sources to get decent pricing. I’d send you were I got mine but sadly they closed their doors a while back. 🙁
Thanks for info Glenn!
Actually I went to the range and tried out the Sig 2022 and fell in love with it. I think for relatively the same price as a used Taurus – the Sig is a better value.
Im fairly new to the handgun world. Im 48yo and have shot competitively in both the small bore 50ft (using Anschutz 1903) and trap / skeet. So im thinking the 2022 would make a good ‘fun’ gun / home defense. What would you suggest if I wanted to get into serious target handguns?
Thanks again
I had written a longer response but the damn site screwed up and deleted it so I’ll make this one short:
#1 np for the info.. I’m happy to help
#2 a Taurus 92 can be had for less than a 2022 (I know.. I paid a good chunk less for mine brand new)
#3 Regarding the 2022 since I have not had any chance to try it personally i give you this link instead.. he knows his shit:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4EYUsB6wBc&feature=em-subs_digest
As for being new.. welcome! Though that world is far more restricted here in canuckistan 🙁
For serious target shooting I’m good.. but I’m not the right person to ask for specifics there.. they are generally way out of my budget and I’ve always done very well with 92’s 🙂
That said since you are new.. don’t even worry about “serious” for a while.. build your basics first to say the least and for home defense learn your chosen firearm inside and out blindfolded. It’s a cheap trick but very effective! You should be able to use all basic functions w/o your eyes and w/o needing to think it through. 🙂
Oh and side note.. I have always found the 92’s etc far earier and faster to field strip.. but that is probably just personal bias since w/more practice I’m sure ppl can be very proficient with others such as the steps needed for the 2022.
Glenn – again thanks for info! This is a very informative site.
Ive seen a few of Hickok45’s vids – and I can tell he’s pretty experienced – with in-depth videos. Thanks for link.
Im planning to go out and try the Taurus so ill def give it due diligence.
And I appreciate your advice on getting familiar with the gun first – youre absolutely right. I grew up in the midwest – so I had shotguns and rifles in my hands at a young age. Went to a military high school and started shooting competitively there (the 50ft smallbore) and did quite well – winning regional and state titles by the time I was 17.
But it was all with rifle shooting. Never pistols. So I need to start at ground zero and work my way up. I just hope I dont get frustrated with how different it is today then from 25 yrs ago. Back then, I could buy bricks of 22LR or any other ammo dirt cheap and plentiful. I get nothing but people telling me to find a different hobby – ‘youll never find ammo’ is there last sentence.
I live in California so its probably that much more difficult…but Im going to press forward.
np at all once again.. happy to help.
I’ve been around firearms since I was a kid and while I did not ‘compete’ overall (this is canuckistan) I was a damn good shot (not as much anymore.. getting old sucks dammit lol)
I’ve always been more of a handgun guy but I’m no stranger to rifles either. (shocked a friend a while back whom hauled out his AR to the range and tried to explain it’s use to me. I said I know.. he laughed and I sat down.. nailed a target 14 out of 15 rapid fire shots at 300m.. (6″ steel target) he tried with his own and only got 12.. the look on his face was priceless)
As for HS.. I was very small town.. but the local HS had a range in it’s basement for .22’s.. sadly due to the lunacy on this side of the border all of those were forcibly closed many yrs ago ~_~
Cali is almost as stupid for “gun control” as canuckistan
If you want to see just some of the evils of “gun control” here then check this out:
bulletin.rightsandfreedoms.org/download/
Get issues 116 and 117 read the two part article by Todd Brown.
As for ammo.. it’s much the same BS here.. but I can nab 9mm easily enough and 22lr for my wife’s new rifle 🙂
********* Taurus didn’t come up with the safety / decocker on the frame. They are simply using the old Beretta design (Beretta 92 1st series). I have no idea why Beretta no longer offers this design to those who want it, but they don’t. *********
No one ever said they did.. neither did Beretta for that matter. That part was actually first used on a Cold 1911 .45 as far as mass produced pistols.
As for why Beretta did not continue such.. it was due to some ninnies in the US Military wanting it on the slide actually and since that was such a huge $$$$ contract we all get screwed if we don’t like the slide mounted safety.
Suffice to say I’ve worked and trained with both. I by far prefer the frame mount to say the least.
Therefore even discounting the other improvements Taurus has done from the original design that alone makes it a winner IMO (not to mention no plastic guide rods etc etc as well and far better warranty)
Just found this older article, you forgot to mention one BIG advantage of the Taurus over the Beretta, especially for competition. You can carry the Taurus COCKED and locked, let it function just like a single action semi.
Actually better than a SA… since you in carrying that way never have to deal with the DA pull.
SA/DA pull dammit (since many SA’s have a much heavier pull but not all. I should have elaborated in the first place)
I am a huge fan of the Beretta 92 series. I own 6, including a 92sb, Inox, and my prized possession, Brigadier Elite. I have always wondered how Taurus compared, but never enough to actually buy one. A local gun shop has a two tone PT-92AF for $425. It caught my eye as I approached the gun case. The slide and levers are stainless. Everything else is black, including the barrel. This is one sexy gun! Thank you for the great article. It is great that you pointed out the negatives. Most gun writers gloss over this stuff because they are afraid they won’t get more free guns to test. After reading your article, I think I may soon own my first Taurus
Hi Walter,
Hands down grab it.. that is a good price.. almost the same as when I got mine.. only I got the much more rare (and now OOP) AFS version. As for comparison they are both excellent of course but as I’ve posted before I much prefer the frame safety.. and the Taurus uses steel fro the guide rod unlike the newer Berettas which use plastic.
Also Mecgar makes excellent mags for them both.. and the catch notch can be converted to work with both versions with relative ease.. there is more than one article on this very simple mod online 🙂 (Though I’m surprised Mecgar does not just make the special mod’d version by default instead of the 2 separate styles)
Also note.. if you are like me and live in an area with the moronic 10round mag limit etc.. use the .40 cal Mecgar instead and it’ll hold 14 rounds of 9mm nicely
Also of note.. conversion to .40 is a simple swap of the barrel for my Taurus since I already use .40 mags.. but of course keep an eye on which ammo is actually loaded
Have a Taurus PT-92 from 1986 , bought it new , it does not have a decocker but that’s okay I can make it safe without it , it shoots all day if I want it to , it shoots the steel cased stuff no problem , I put some Pachmayer grips on it in the 1990’s , it helps with the grip , it came with the slick wood grips , it is a very good gun have even carried it when I was a Deputy Sheriff , very accurate , I am a big guy and can hide it for ccw , haven’t ever had to send it back for work , more than I can say for some of the newer styles of handguns I have bought the Glock being the worst . Be prepared and ready . Keep your powder dry .
I have a comment above concerning the PT -92 , this is different , I sent my Taurus Model 80 I bought over 20 years ago , lately it has gone out of time , I called to check the repair status and was told they could not repair the firearm , but they could sell me an updated version for $200.00 , I told them to keep it and the paperweight too , I thought that when I bought the firearm that the lifetime warranty stated that if they couldn’t fix it they would replace it , well so much for the lifetime warranty , I will not buy another Taurus , and might sell the PT -92 , haven’t decided fully yet , this is just to let ya’ll know that maybe alot of us have been misinformed by Taurus . Be prepared and ready . Keep your powder dry .
Call them back.. ask for the supervisor and explain what you just posted. They will replace it with a newer one. I’ve dealt with a few cases similar to that and Taurus as a rule is excellent for this. (Unlike many others) You probably got a newbie before that needs better training.
Thanks , I will give them a call back . Hope it works. Be prepared and ready . Keep your powder dry .
np at all.. happy to help if I can 🙂
I mentioned your post to a friend as well btw that had an old Taurus revolver finally break.. and they replaced it with a brand new one due to the model being discontinued long before it failed… long enough that spare parts simply did not exist for it at their facility.
(My own Taurus’s are 92AFS’s.. no revolvers)
Well I do agree the taurus is better. After all it’s an improvement of the Berreta. Is that the real estimated price for it because that’s really cheap?
I think it’s a definite improvement over the original Beretta 92.. hence why I have them and not the Beretta.
As for pricing.. if you dig you can find a PT92 for under $500 easily brand new
examples:
http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/cPath/21_50_495/products_id/13586/Taurus+92SS-17+PT92+17%2B1+9mm+5%22
http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/cPath/21_50_495/products_id/83894/Taurus+110005916+100+40S+FS+5%22+Stainless
And there are many other places as well online. Just remember the factory grips suck.. so spend the $15 and get the Hogue rubberized ones! Infinitely better IMO
I have the Beretta and the Taurus and enjoy them both.
If you get the Taurus, sell the factory mags on eBay and buy Mec-Gar mags for it.
Hogue rubberized grip panels are also a nice upgrade.
Ebay does not allow sales of firearms or firearms parts.
Factory mags are ok from Taurus.. Mecgar’s are better though and can be had cheap. I have even suggested to some Taurus execs they contract to Mecgar for mags!
I’ve done the same for the grips.. Hogue’s are cheap and excellent quality.. Factory Taurus grips are crap IMO.. 1st thing I changed! Then again Beretta’s factory grips tend to be crap as well for that matter
Other points.. Taurus uses less plastic crap and has the superior safety IMO.. as well as the built in locking system for those whom need it… and it’s cheaper. Taurus wins that one from my pov at least and I’ve used both extensively.
the Taurus in no way compares to the berretta m9. I also bought a Taurus pt92 as my first gun after I got home from Iraq in 2008. I was so impressed with the m-9 I wanted one for myself. saving 200$ by goin Taurus was my only mistake. my Taurus had a major trigger group malfunction, after one shot the hammer would not lock to the rear and the trigger would not reset. I had to manually cock the hammer to have the trigger reset to fire the next shot this malfunction occurred 7-10 times with each 17 round magazine I fired. I sold my Taurus to a pawn shop and will not even touch a Taurus to this day.
“the Taurus in no way compares to the berretta m9”
On the contrary it’s superior in many ways. You had an odd one certainly but Taurus is excellent to deal with for warranty issues. I’ve put thousands of rounds through mine w/o ever having any malfunction at all.. same as many others I know. So the question would be why did you not contact Taurus about the issue? They certainly would have taken care of the problem quickly
(Also note failures have occurred with Beretta’s as well.. no one’s products are 100% infallible)
I was issued an M9 that was absolute crap. My PT92 is way more reliable.
Very good review, however, I did find one thing not factual. Mec-Gar currently nor have they ever made magazines for Beretta. The only thing they have in common is that they are both family owned Italian companies. Look closely at an authentic Beretta magazine. PB stands for Pietro Beretta, not Mec-Gar.
I suspect that was more in reference to the fact that MG does make mags that work in the Beretta same as they do for many others including my PT92 🙂
You’re a blow hard. Got nothing.
I’ve had good luck with the “Serpa” holsters with other handguns I’ve owned. So far though, I’ve been unable to find a Serpa for the 92AF and have been told that none exists. What “Serpa Type/Fobus Type” holster is available out there (from user experience)? Thanks.
My PT99 was made in 1986, was bought new then, and been in the family ever since. Out of all the pistols and revolvers I own, this one is by far my favorite. Only mods have been much like the others. Replaced the grips with the rubber Hogue grips, and since my eyes have been getting bad with short distances (hard to shoot with reading glasses on), I also added the drop in guide rod laser. Wow, what a difference! The laser isn’t cheap, but it makes that gun hard to beat as far as self defense. Plus I can see where I’m a shootin’! Accuracy is excellent! I have never had any failures of ANY type, and have shot just about every type of ammo in it and it eats it ALL.
Wouldn’t sell this gun for anything, and am thinking about adding a newer version to my collection so I can have access to the rail system.
My old 99 is coming up on being 30 yo, and shoots as good as a gun can perform! Took it out to my range yesterday to shoot some steel “speed style”, and I just have a blast every time I have that gun in my hand!
I must have a really good one and I hope the newer ones perform just like it….
Hello, I read your review before i bought my PT92SS-17 on October 30,2015. Over Thanksgiving I was shooting it at an indoor range when the dis assembly latch broke (not 100% sure but i believe when i fired the gun, the slide caught the lip on the latch and broke off the lip). I didn’t realize the pc was broke until i went to clean the gun and the lip was missing. I was able to get the release button down and cleaned the gun. Took the latch out and inspected it. Lifetime warranty…should be no problem… I will not go over every detail but the frustration level with getting this fixed has been overwhelming. 6 times on the phone (average wait time 27 minutes to get to speak to someone) They wouldn’t send me the part (20 second fix) but they would pay to ship it down to FL and repair the gun. They recd the a week ago Tuesday at 9:03am. Just got logged in to the repair shop today. CS says the estimated time is 6 weeks. Any other PT92 owners having problems with the gun???? I have fired roughly 600 rounds throught it. 1 FTE before this. nothing else seems to be wrong with the gun.
I read your review and it was such a good detailed review, I have the Beretta and the Taurus and enjoy them both.
I have the newest PT92 and although it’s a “big” weapon compared to my EDC (S&W M&P Shield) it is correspondingly more accurate at distance. Muzzle velocity is also a bit higher w the 5″ barrel vs the 3.5.. My weapon has had considerable work including nice VZ grips, Beretta D-spring, titanium nitride on the controls,adjustable sights (Trying to figure a way to modify a j-mount to add reflex type sight, smoothed up trigger and action and Beretta mags. Also wears the Viridian C3 laser and weapon light. I am shooting the new ARX type ammo. I love this weapon. Certainly if the Beretta works in the sand-box (Iraqistan) then the Taurus should too. So far In the good old U.S. of A> it’s been perfecto.
Today I fired 100 rounds apiece through my Taurus PT92 and my CZ 75 SP-01 tactical at equally distant targets. It was a draw, with equal clusterings, which says a lot for the much-maligned Taurus. Both of these handguns are tack drivers, with minimal recoil and muzzle flip. Day Glo paint on the Taurus sight dots makes a big difference, and after-market mags are recommended, but I love the Taurus and its sexy look.
Taurus PT-99AFS INACCURATE FLOPPY BARREL HORROR STORY
This story, it appears, is similar to others, who have inaccurate “floppy”
or loose barrels on their Taurus PT 92 or 99 pistols.
In the past I tended to discount the veracity of these stories, since I had
a very accurate black 1990 PT-99. I now understand the frustration of others with this inaccuracy problem and their disgust in dealing with Taurus.
A new beautiful Chromed PT-99AFS was given as a present in late 2012 as a home self-defense weapon. The gun was fired for familiarity at a 7 yard range then holstered and put away for protection. It functioned reliably.
Upon cleaning in 2016, it was realized that the gun barrel was sloppy. The front of the barrel could be pushed up and it would stay up or pushed down and it would stay down, a movement of .025″ at the front of the barrel.
Upon calling Taurus about repair under their lifetime warranty, I was told the gun must be shot to determine if it was inaccurate before sending in.
The gun was benchtested at 25 yards. The barrel was first pushed down, shot, and surprisingly the bullet landed high on the target. Next the barrel was pushed up, shot, and surprisingly vice-versa, the shot went lower, a c-c distance of 7.5″ from the first shot.
This simulates what could happen if the front of the barrel is either bumped up or down as it clears the holster.
This alternate pushing and shooting produced an upper and lower pattern.
After calling Taurus to tell them of the inaccuracy, they required an upfront payment of $50 for shipping pickup.
I told them that they needed to pay for the shipment since the gun is obviously factory faulty.
They refused.
Talking with different customer service personnel and finally the supervisor, they suggested that if it was determined to be a factory defect they would refund the $50.
The $50 was paid and the gun sent out on 11-17-2016. The gun was returned about 7 weeks later in January of 2017, with the note NO PROBLEM FOUND. Included was a test target shot at 15 yards which had a single 1 3/4″ c-c group. After, initiating a number of calls and waiting days for them to return each call and asking how they tested this gun, the supervisor said to send her a copy of the target packed with the gun, since they keep no information.
They would talk with the tester.
The Original complaint writeup and target copy was sent to the supervisor on 1-16-2017.
With no response for a week, I initiated another call. The supervisor
finally called back and said the tester tested accuracy the normal way by shooting a group and NOTHING IS WRONG with the gun. The tester told the supervisor that these gun barrels are supposed to be free floating and loose.
They IGNORED my writeup complaint sent with the gun.
I told her my black 1990 Taurus (which shoots 1 1/2″ c-c groups) and an inspected Beretta 92 both have tight barrels (later, another PT99 was checked tight).
I told her the tester did not test per the elaborate writeup sent with the gun or they would have had two different patterns 7.5″ apart which is unacceptable in a self-defense gun.
The supervisor finally offered to pay to have the gun sent back to test again.
After 7 weeks and the incompetence of NO PROBLEM found, gun barrels are supposed to be loose and free float, their accuracy tests which ignored the original complaint, and the various customer service reps inability to find out what size group at what distance was considered to be outside of the factory spec (later stated as 2″?? to 3″ @ 25 yards, but they tested at 15), I had no interest or confidence in sending it back to Taurus for another 7 weeks.
I told them to save their postal cost and labor, refund my $50 shipping fee, and I will get it fixed locally with somebody I trust.
They refused.
The gun was compared part for part with my accurate 1990 black PT99. Barrels and slides, as well as locking blocks were exchanged and parts mic’d. The black barrel was tight on the chrome frame and the chrome barrel loose on the black frame. The problem was the barrel bottom tabs (ears which ride in the frame grooves) were machined at least .003″ too thin compared to the tight black barrel.
1-27-17 Taurus was told that the factory faulty barrel tabs were now fixed, now tight, and the chrome PT99 AFS shoots excellently – REFUND my $50!
They refused.
Thanks for the story about a weapon that wasn’t the pt92…
LONG TERM FOLLOWUP? Years later, I put another off-the-shelf PT-92 T trough it’s accuracy paces at an indoor range in Denver.
Despite my eyesight, which hasn’t gotten any better in three years, my friends’ new Taurus performed even *better* than our TTAG test gun. From an improvised rest I averaged 2.5″ groups at 25 yards.
This is astonishing accuracy from a production pistol. How astonishing? Not many customized target 1911s will group this well, even when shot from a Ransom Rest.
The Taurus’ Beretta 92 design may not be the newest pattern out there, but this kind of accuracy and reliability is flat-out incredible.
This is a good detailed review about Taurus, I am going to buy it. Thank for your share!
I have 2 Taurus PT 92’s, #1 AFD #2 AFS the AFD is from the late 1990’s the AFS was made in 2017. I agree with most of your review, the AFD came to me as a used purchase in 2010, the AFS was a NIB. I also purchased a EFK Fire Dragon ported Match barrel that I had to fit (some are drop ins some are not) but the fitting was not a big problem. The Fire Dragon barrel is larger in diameter then the original which eliminates 80% of the gap between slide and barrel. I use the barrel on both weapons. I also purchased the latest gen locking blocks from Beretta (Beretta 3rd Generation Locking Block, 3rd Generation Locking Block Plunger and a Locking Block Pin), and the Wolf coil spring trigger assembly’s for the M9. The AFD came with Pachmayr Signature grips which I love so the AFS got them also. The AFD came with a stainless mag and yes the follower tips easily in the front but has never caused a feed problem. The AFS came with two black mag’s that look like mec-gar but have the Taurus name, the follower on these does not tip like the old stainless one. I machined a stainless ring for the AFD to get rid of barrel to slide slop and it helps some but the new style locking blocks made the most difference. Both weapons are good shooters but the AFD OEM barrel has the edge over the AFS OEM barrel with the EFK barrel the AFS wins. I also purchased from EFK their Frame Saver dual action spring kit which works great as recoil reducer. Both weapons were great weapons before the mods now I no longer even look at Beretta as a comparable weapon. Mec-Gar are the best mags on the market for the PT series. I’ve used orange florescent paint on the front sight ramp with the white dot intact helps acquisition for my old eyes. The only problem I’ve had was with the AFS, the screws were over tightened when assembled and the threads were stripped which I found out when replacing the grips. I did an online chat with a rep on their website and explained the problem they told me to send the weapon to them, I said that all I wanted was to order 3 of the larger grip inserts and I would fix it myself gave them the part numbers. I was told they were out of stock but would ship as soon as they received them. I waited for 2 months no parts, again I did a E-chat
gave them the number the first person gave me they checked and said I got lost in the shuffle, three days later I received the parts no charge with an apology for the delay. I am very happy with my Taurus 92’s.
PT92/PT99 series of pistols are good for shooting.I own a PT99 and it’s very good as I can carry that very easily.Can you suggest me anything that how can I maintain it?
Wouldn’t it be simpler to just use the same amount of time to push on the muzzle to force the gun out of battery and kick ’em in the whatsits?
I have a Taurus pt-92 model 1-920055D made Mar.1990. My factory box denotes it as a Laser-Aim Limited Edition, I purchased the gun second hand w/o laser but would like to return to original,or at least as close to,condition. Anyone have info on brand,type or style of laser it came with? Love the gun so much that when opportunity arose I just purchased a PT-99 of same era(300 serial numbers different)
I had an accidental discharge with the millinium g2 also and never ever wanted anything to do with any non revolver Taurus. That is until I was ultimately gifted the 92 by my father, and son let me tell you I will never part with this firearm until it’s pried from my cold dead hand.
https://shootarillusions.com/product/hornady-hp-xtp-9mm-124-grain-bullets/
https://shootarillusions.com/product/hornady-6-5-creedmoor-140-gr-eld-match-500-rounds/
Slim Fit Leather Jackets is an online store where we sell jackets for men and women with free shipping all over the world! Visit Our Site and Get Your Favorite Actors or Actresses Outfits now at the best prices.
Comments are closed.