Taurus PT-92

Discussion in 'Semi-Auto Handguns' started by nikotromus11, Sep 19, 2009.

  1. nikotromus11

    nikotromus11 New Member

    30
    0
    0
    I *love* the looks of a the Taurus PT-92's. I also love the 17 round capacity mags. I've heard they are not the best handguns performance wise. Anyone have any advice one this gun? Is it a buy or no buy?
     
  2. Txhillbilly

    Txhillbilly Active Member

    4,435
    28
    38
    I had a PT-92 back in the 1980's and it was a great gun,I don't know if they are built as good now as they were back then. I know several people that really like their Sig's and Springfield XD 9mm. You might check them out also.
     

  3. Shihan

    Shihan Active Member Lifetime Supporter

    8,590
    2
    38
    Just get the Beretta and get the real thing. Just got one myself and love it going to shoot it some more tomorrow.
     
  4. hogger129

    hogger129 New Member

    259
    0
    0
    I was looking at a PT92 at the ma & pop shop in town. One thing I can tell you is that they are comfortable, but the one I held also had rubber grip on it. It's basically the same thing as a Beretta 92FS. Only Beretta is the original and is of higher quality. I'd put my faith in the Beretta and put my worries to rest. Taurus are good. Beretta is the real thing. Still... I'd take my time, look around, make sure that's what YOU want. Remember, if you don't get what you want, what you like, and what you need, you will always be shooting someone else's gun. The plus side to the Taurus is that it costs less than the Beretta. If money is not a problem for you, another 9mm I would check out is the USP. In fact the entire HK line are high-end firearms that go right up there with Nighthawks, and other high-end pistols. Extremely accurate, very tough guns, right out of the box. But that type of quality comes at a high price. XD also comes highly recommended. I don't think XD are very expensive. From what I hear, XD are good guns out of the box. Remember, choose what YOU want. Good luck.
     
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2009
  5. NGIB

    NGIB New Member

    7,143
    1
    0
    I've actually owned and shot every pistol mentioned in this thread so I can speak a bit from actual experience. While I'm not a fan of Taurus poly pistols at all, the PT92 series are very good guns. I've owned a number of Beretta 92s and I did not find them truly superior to the Taurus at all - in fact I like the frame mounted safety better. Of the 2 PT92s I owned, one was from the late 80s and one was a new build and both were well made and reliable.

    As far as the HK USP being the equal of a Nightwawk - not in a billion years. The USP is a well engineered and very accurate gun but it's seriously over priced for what you get. I've owned 3 and I did not find them really better than any of the other poly guns like XDs and M&Ps - just way more expensive.

    Bottom line, go to a range that rents a variety and shoot as many as possible to find what works for you...
     
  6. SGT-MILLER

    SGT-MILLER New Member

    2,350
    0
    0
    The Taurus PT-92 is what the Beretta should be. The biggest selling point for me is always going to be the frame mounted safety. My mother owned a PT-92 for years, and I shot it alot. My brother and I put over 10 thousand rounds through that weapon, and we never experienced any notable malfunctions.

    The PT-92 is Taurus's flagship weapon, and rightly so. If you are dead set in that design, stay away from Beretta, and stick with Taurus. Beretta is overpriced for what they offer, in my opinion (I can't stand paying for a brand name).

    I encourage you to try other platforms out there, though. There are better/more versatile designs, then the current PT-92/Beretta 92 platforms.
     
  7. Dillinger

    Dillinger New Member

    23,972
    1
    0
    Owning both firearms, and have for awhile now, I have to disagree with you and stamp that post as First Class BS.

    H&K makes a good pistol. They put engineering into what they do. But, they have failed on SEVERAL models and their USP line isn't their best pistol to date. HK is a company that produces firearms in a production format.

    Nighthawk, on the other hand, is a group of 11 pistolsmiths from the big production houses in the US that got together and opened a CUSTOM firearm production facility. Their firearms are hand fitted. Their firearms are built, and tested, by the same people. Their firearms have ownership from cradle to grave.

    There is a HUGE difference between the two companies and to claim otherwise shows a clear lack of understanding of firearms in general and these products specifically.

    JD
     
  8. nikotromus11

    nikotromus11 New Member

    30
    0
    0
    Im lost in the context here. Is H&K the maker of Taurus and Nighthawk the maker of Berrettas?
     
  9. falseharmonix

    falseharmonix New Member

    1,728
    0
    0
    No.

    Taurus



    H&K



    Nighthawk



    Beretta
     
  10. nikotromus11

    nikotromus11 New Member

    30
    0
    0
    Yikes. Nighthawk T3 stainless MSRP is $2,899.95. I'm sure its an awesome firearm, but completely out of my price range. Maybe when I'm old and had it with life and have plenty of money to burn before a terminal illness sets in. =)
     
  11. hogger129

    hogger129 New Member

    259
    0
    0
    H&K makes the USP. Taurus makes the PT92. Nighthawk makes custom 1911's. Beretta makes the 92FS and M9.
     
  12. hogger129

    hogger129 New Member

    259
    0
    0
    Well exactly. USP is a great gun and I feel it's a better deal than a Nighthawk. I guess I made a mistake saying that the HK is just as good as a Nighthawk, but really, who pays near $3,000 for a pistol? I guess you get what you pay for, but I think a USP is definitely a great pistol at a better price. I mean what does a USP cost? I haven't seen them for any more than $1,000. I suppose it depends too. The Tactical version is a little more. MK23 is around $2,000 where I have been able to find it. How about an MK23 USP compared to a Nighthawk?

    I guess I'd say a USP is more practical than a Nighthawk. In terms of if you can hit your target, I say it's just as good and I don't think most people will pay $3,000 as opposed to $1,000.
     
  13. NGIB

    NGIB New Member

    7,143
    1
    0
    Obviously JD thinks a Nighthawk is worth the cost along with the other folks on this forum that have one (or more). Your whole post revolves around the price of the gun - which is just one factor. A Hi-Point will sling lead downrange and quite accurately - this must make it the "best" gun available using your criteria.

    I'll use the same car analogy I've used before - a Kia and a BMW will both get you from point A to point B, the Kia is way cheaper, do folks that buy a BMW waste their money?

    Actually owning and shooting the handguns discussed provides a bit of credibility for your opinions - anything else is just empty speculation. Unless I've owned it and spent some time with a gun in question - I just stay out of the advice business. Just having shot one, a range gun for example, isn't the same as owning - range guns are often poorly maintained and rarely cleaned...
     
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2009
  14. Stangman

    Stangman New Member

    13
    0
    0
    Pt-92

    I have owned a taurus pt92 in the past. It was brand new and I put about 2000 rnds through it. It was a fantastic pistol! It ate any ammo I tried and did it with amazing accuracy! Frame mounted safety was what I liked about it and you also can't complain bout 17+1 either. I would recommend this pistol. ;)