Your favorite guns?

[Gunmaster45]

I figured swapping for an A1 grip safety spur would be a good idea, but I haven't gotten around to doing it yet. Just as long as it isn't a beavertail, those things suck.


Cool, 400th post.

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by Gunmaster45

Ever since I shot a Beretta 96 DAO, I've been very interested in Berettas. I hope I can get a 92FS with a non-alloy frame to own. The slides are incredibly smooth and it fits well in my hand. I've gotten better with handguns lately because I've been practicing a lot, so I shot pretty well with it too.

I'd consider the Taurus PT92 first. Berettas are excellent guns, but you're paying more for the name than anything else. The Taurus is usually $150-$200 cheaper, plus it has a better safety/decocker. It even looks prettier, IMO.

[Yournamehere]

I dig Berettas, and A Taurus is fine too, but I'd go for a Beretta simply because of aesthetics, it's wider commonality, and yes, the name. I agree that the Taurus safety/decocker system is superior to the slide mounted system though.

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by Yournamehere

I dig Berettas, and A Taurus is fine too, but I'd go for a Beretta simply because of aesthetics, it's wider commonality, and yes, the name. I agree that the Taurus safety/decocker system is superior to the slide mounted system though.

Aesthetics? I think the Taurus actually looks better. The slide-mounted safety on the Beretta, besides being unwieldy compared to frame-mounted, disrupts the smooth, flowing lines of the slide. I think the Taurus looks sleeker because it doesn't have this.

Also, the 92F is about to become a lot less common because Beretta is reducing production and moving to the M9A1 and 90-Two, both of which look way uglier.

IMO, the Taurus PT92 is a much better buy. One of these days, I'm probably going to buy myself another PT92, except nickel/stainless this time. And the one I buy won't have those f'ugly-ass tactical rails, either. I figure I need at least one "nickel-plated sissy pistol" in my handgun collection.

[jdun]

Taurus isn't known for QC and I refuse to by firearms that has integrated locks. You're better off with Berettas.

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by jdun

Taurus isn't known for QC and I refuse to by firearms that has integrated locks. You're better off with Berettas.

The locks are much more recent.

Also, I can say from experience that PT92s made since about the early/mid-90s are of almost the same build quality as Berettas.

[jdun]

I believe Taurus started putting integrated locks around 2000. The only thing that integrated lock do well is make the handgun less reliable.

[Nyles]

I don't know how things are in the US, but in Canada Taurus' customer support sucks. They're well-made guns, but if it breaks you're fucked.

[jdun]

Taurus isn't known for good customer service in the States.

[Gunmaster45]

I'd probably pick a Taurus myself since I believe in carrying firearms "Condition One" like a 1911, so I like that safety. The fact that it doubles as a decocker is very conveniant. The lock doesn't sound too good though... I wish the PT92 had stepping on the trigger guard curve though, sometimes I find myself resting my finger their. I don't know were that type of grip stands today, I only see people like Bruce Willis hold the guns like that now.

Speaking of customer service, my dad once had to send a Colt Anacando back to the factory to replace the barrel because the threads fit loose. To see if they would actually replace anything, he made a small, non-noticable notch on the barrel and frame. He got it back, no replacement. They just tightened the barrel until the threads were near stripped. As you can imagine, he avoids the snake guns. Shame though, I'd like a Colt Python.