You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Beretta or Taurus
- Thread starter Kratos47
- Start date
When I first saw this I was going to say forget the Taurus since quality is spotty and it costs a lot to send it in for warranty servicing. When I saw 9mm I recalled their version of the Beretta 92 is the best of their autos and is less likely to have issues than other Taurus'. Still, I'd say go Beretta. Better company. Less problem guns.
I own a Taurus but not a Beretta.
I own a Taurus but not a Beretta.
The Beretta is a better quality gun, but I just preferred the frame mounted safety and the lower cost of the Taurus 92. It was the best shooter I have owned to date and I regret trading it away. May have to get another. I can't speak for the other models but the Taurus 92 is a good pistol.
Rangerrich99
New member
First things first: As others have already said, shoot both, and maybe a few other weapons before choosing. How it feels in your hand is of primary concern before buying a gun.
That said, I have owned three Berettas, and never owned a Taurus. I have fired a Taurus PT92 vs. my Beretta 92, and functionally, they are nearly identical. In fact, had I closed my eyes and someone had handed me either weapon, I know I wouldn't have been able to tell the difference, in weight, grip, accuracy, whatever.
I thought the trigger was slightly better in the Beretta (less gritty), but otherwise they were comparable.
The two main differences between these guns IMO, are as follows:
The Beretta will consistently have a higher re-sale value. This is not an opinion; it's a fact.
Beretta has pretty good customer service. I have never owned a Taurus, but I have three friends that own them, and they all have recounted stories of difficulties with Taurus as to customer service. Of course, that's a very small sample size, but when several friends tell me they had problems with a company I tend to steer away.
Hope that helps.
That said, I have owned three Berettas, and never owned a Taurus. I have fired a Taurus PT92 vs. my Beretta 92, and functionally, they are nearly identical. In fact, had I closed my eyes and someone had handed me either weapon, I know I wouldn't have been able to tell the difference, in weight, grip, accuracy, whatever.
I thought the trigger was slightly better in the Beretta (less gritty), but otherwise they were comparable.
The two main differences between these guns IMO, are as follows:
The Beretta will consistently have a higher re-sale value. This is not an opinion; it's a fact.
Beretta has pretty good customer service. I have never owned a Taurus, but I have three friends that own them, and they all have recounted stories of difficulties with Taurus as to customer service. Of course, that's a very small sample size, but when several friends tell me they had problems with a company I tend to steer away.
Hope that helps.
Beretta has their share of problems too as do all gun makers!
How about some examples and what the problems were/are. Problems with slides are old and cured. There are a lot more accessories available for the Beretta verses the Taurus.
LockedBreech
New member
Beretta, not even close.
Often the 92FS versus PT92 discussion gets mired in the location of the safety/decocker, but the quality control and fit and finish of Beretta firearms is significantly superior to Taurus. You will not miss the saved $150-200 five years from now, but you'll most likely always wish you had bought the genuine article.
Also, Beretta is currently producing a run of the 92G, where the manual safety acts as a decocker only.
The PT92 may well be the best Taurus. Sorry if I ruffle any feathers, but I think the worst Beretta is still preferable to the best Taurus. And the 92 is the best Beretta. Taurus is often described as having "rounded a corner" in quality in recent years, but I shot a 2013 Taurus .45 and was not impressed.
I don't want to come across as unbiased, so I will disclose that my family owned multiple Taurus firearms and every single one was unreliable or broke. I do not buy the brand under any circumstances, so there is definitely a bias in my view. I believe, however, that it is a justified bias.
EDIT: Did not realize OP had chosen the Beretta.
OP, in September 2013 I bought a 92FS for $535. I thought that was a fair price. You should be able to find one in the $520-570 range. Don't pay more.
Often the 92FS versus PT92 discussion gets mired in the location of the safety/decocker, but the quality control and fit and finish of Beretta firearms is significantly superior to Taurus. You will not miss the saved $150-200 five years from now, but you'll most likely always wish you had bought the genuine article.
Also, Beretta is currently producing a run of the 92G, where the manual safety acts as a decocker only.
The PT92 may well be the best Taurus. Sorry if I ruffle any feathers, but I think the worst Beretta is still preferable to the best Taurus. And the 92 is the best Beretta. Taurus is often described as having "rounded a corner" in quality in recent years, but I shot a 2013 Taurus .45 and was not impressed.
I don't want to come across as unbiased, so I will disclose that my family owned multiple Taurus firearms and every single one was unreliable or broke. I do not buy the brand under any circumstances, so there is definitely a bias in my view. I believe, however, that it is a justified bias.
EDIT: Did not realize OP had chosen the Beretta.
OP, in September 2013 I bought a 92FS for $535. I thought that was a fair price. You should be able to find one in the $520-570 range. Don't pay more.
recently went to my friends and shot his and I like Beretta more than taurus both shoot about the same. Beretta has better recoil now just need to know 2 things. 1. Price for it 2. Are him dealers willing to go down a little bit like maybe $50-100 off the price this will be my first firearm purchasing.