Ruger P-97 or Taurus PT-945?

J

jheitertusa

New member
Which one should I buy? :)

Due to price, caliber, features, etc., I have narrowed it down to these two (both in stainless.) Which would you buy if you had to pick between the two?

:)
 
I have the P-97 and really like it. Tough, accurate, easy to takedown, and it won't break the bank. I have been looking at the Taurus semi's in 9mm just for cheap plinking, but as of yet I don't own a Taurus.

You won't be dissapointed with the Ruger, and I will let others who know better than I comment on the Taurus.
 
Tough choice. Both are high quality, inexpensive guns. Both also have many detractors, most of whom have never owned one and many who have never shot one (the old, "if it is cheaper than my gun it is crap" crowd). Get the one that feels best to you and that best fits your hand.

The Ruger autos tend to have a very good reputation. They are very durable, reliable and inexpensive. The 9mms have average accuracy, the .45s (like the P97) are often more accurate than guns that cost twice as much.

I used to have a P89 (9mm) and a buddy had a P90 (.45). They were both great guns. Highly reliable- I had probably 2000-3000 rounds through mine and never had a problem, my buddy's gun was about 2 years old and he never had any real trouble. Very durable, you can run over your P97 with a truck and the gun will be fine (actually, Ayoob did this with a Jeep Grand Cherokee). The P89 was decently accurate, my buddy's P90 was great.

Taurus makes many good guns. The polymer framed guns have had problems and in the (distant) past they used to be a low end manufacturer so you may hear some negatives. However, the steel framed autos (like the PT945) are very high qualilty and their current revolvers are among the best out there.

I haven't owned a Taurus auto yet (I will be buying the 9mm version of the PT945, the PT911, soon) but I know someone who has a PT92 (a guy that works at one of the ranges I frequent). He tells me it is better than his Beretta. Talking to owners of Taurus steel framed autos I've heard nothing but good things and on the internet I've mostly heard good things.

I have owned two Taurus revolvers. I used to have a Taurus 82 (a 4" .38spl) that I bought used. It was probably about 10 years old when I got it. It was a good gun for me but I replaced it to help finance a .357. Just this week I picked up my second, a Taurus 605 (a 2" small framed .357 snub). So far it seems like a good gun.

So from reputation, some personal experience and experience from people I trust I would say that you won't go wrong with either gun. Get the one you like the best.
 
I have a Ruger P512, P89, and a KP97DC. I love them all! I have not had a single problem with any three of them.(They all have WELL over 500 rounds through them... especially the P512 ;) ) The P97 is my favorite for feel, pointability and looks... yes I LIKE the way this RUGER looks! :D

Sorry, no experience with Taurus...


Good luck!
 
Well since NINE chimed in with an opinion on the Ruger & was neutral on the Taurus since he doesn't own one, let me do a visa-versa:

I currently own a TAURUS PT940, which is the slightly smaller, .40S&W version of the PT945.

To be quick - a great pistol, IMO. It's accurate, reliable, reasonably light weight (due to the alloy frame), and the multi function safety that allows hammer down/safety off, hammer down/safety on, & hammer cocked/safety on (cocked & locked) operation modes is great. The gun spends most nights on my night stand with the hammer down, when I do carry it the hammer is back - 1911 style.

While I have & do own Rugers - Mini-14, Super Blackhawk, Single Six & Mark II Target - I've never owned one of their DA autos so I can't comment either way.
 
Tough choice...I'm a fan of both manufacturer's revolvers but have limited experience w/ their autos...that said, I'd jump into the mix w/ a vote for Taurus because IMHO, they look better and feel better in my hands.
 
I would have to agree pretty tough choice...both are good guns.
I have shot a couple of the Rugers..94/95 etc I have shot the Taurus PT 911/940/945...I think you are better off with the Taurus. I am not in favor of the "underdog", I like the guns better. The safety is pretty impressive and very functional.
The Taurus feels better in my hands than the Ruger , so I shoot them better. I shoot a PT945 of a friends every now and then, it
never fails to impress me.
Shoot well
 
Ive owned the PT-945, not a bad gun but nothing I would use to stay alive. I bought it when it first came out in 96, im sure they have done some revisions of it to improve on its quality. I ended up selling mine so I could buy another firearm. At the time it seemed like the right choice but no I sorta miss it.

The 97 to me is a higher quality, more reliable gun and cheaper.

I would go with the P-97.
 
jheitertusa,

Unfortuneately, I'm not familiar with the PT-945 (there's just too many choices). however I am familiar with the P97. Ordered one as soon as they became available. Solid and accurate handgun. Low maintenance and easy to clean. Don't think you could go wrong with one.

--
Mike
 
Haven't fired a Taurus, so I can't really coment on it. Couple of shooters at the range I visit have Taurus autos, and really like them. My preference is the Ruger KP90..alloy frame, matte finsh SS uppers, comes with "White Dot" sights. The only thing I added is the Hogue grips. So, it comes down to what you feel comfortable using. You might check with your local range(s), some have "rental hardware" so you can try before you buy.
 
Which one.

I now own a pt 945 in stainless.The gun is accurate and fun to shoot.If it breaks they will fix it.I put rosewood grips on mine and It looks good.I load my own ammo for this gun .It likes them all.I dont own a ruger so I cant comment on them.I have one taurus 9 mm that I have owned for 12yrs. swab
 
I have had experience with both pistols. They're both about equal in size, although the Taurus is a tad bit heavier. I used to own a Ruger KP97DC, and a good friend had a Taurus PT945. I almost traded him for it because he liked the way the Ruger felt in his hand and I liked the way the Taurus felt in my hand. The only reason I didn't trade him was because the blue finish wore off a bit too much for my taste. I liked both guns, but if I had to start over again and buy either one, I'd buy the Taurus. But I'd get in a stainless pistol. Don't ever buy a anything Taurus makes that is blue. Always get stainless! The stainless finish on the Taurus PT945 is slightly finer than the Ruger KP97. The Taurus had a safety, a decock lever, and it now comes with the Taurus Security System. The Ruger only had a decock lever. The Ruger is very rugged and reliable, but the Taurus was considerably more accurate. It was for me, anyway, because it did feel better in my hand. Both pistols have 8 round magazines. Ruger gives you two magazines. Taurus International is cheap and only gives you one magazine with your purchase. But extra magazines aren't that expensive (about $25). You can now get the Taurus PT945 with night sights. The standard stainless PT945 with fixed sights should cost about $450. They can cost up to $500 if you get pearl grips or night sights. A stainless KP97D should cost you only $375. Blue steel P97 runs about $350.

I believe a truer comparison to the Taurus PT945 would be the Ruger P90. A stainless KP90 runs about $425, and the blue P90 runs about $400. You can get either the safety version or decock version of the P90. The P90's magazine also holds 8 rounds. Altough it's slightly larger, the P90 might be my choice over the Taurus PT945 and the Ruger P97, but I'd have to hold it side-by-side with the Taurus to be sure.
 
I had a P97 for a couple years, most of which it spent in the safe. The gun was fairly accurate, but was very sloppy in the fit dept.

I also have a PT945 in stainless with night sights. I like this gun very much, it has never malfunctioned once and is also pretty accurate. It is my nightstand gun.

I must say I like Ruger wheelguns a great deal, both SA and SA/DA. My vote for the semi-auto has to go with Taurus.
 
Which one should I buy?

Due to price, caliber, features, etc., I have narrowed it down to these two (both in stainless.) Which would you buy if you had to pick between the two?
Click to expand...

Save a little longer, get a GLOCK/HK/Sig. Taurus(as I've read) have some quality control issues. I like their revolvers, but their Semi's, I just don't think I'd trust one. Ruger, well, if you're going to carry it, think long and hard. Most comments I've read about them are positive, mine was not, neither was my experience with Ruger Customer Support. I guess every company has a bad one get thru, hopefully, the problems have been corrected.

Be safe
IGF
 
The following is based on my observation of what my student's experiences are with the semiautos of the two manufacturers you named.

If you want the gun to function and last, buy the Ruger. If you want to take advantage of the lifetime repair policy of Taurus, buy one of theirs.

Obviously, YMMV!
 
Well, I just posted my reasonably negative experiences with the PT945 over on pistolsmith.com pistolsmith.com but if I were considering a 45 in a steel framed non-1911 design, I would surely go with the CZ designs in .45. The PT945 has rubbed be in a very wrong way and the Rugers seem very clunky but very solid as well.

Between the two listed, if I had to get one or the other, I would get the Ruger.
 
cratz2

From looking at your other thread it seems you had a negative experience with the 145, not the 945. Just because a company may put out a lemon once in a while, you discredit the whole line.

I have had bad examples of handguns from several major companies, but I don't discount the entire brand from just one lemon.
 
jheitertusa My advice would be to shoot both before buying if you havent already. I had a PT945 and loved the gun. My only gripes about it were I couldnt find an adjustable rear sight for it and it hammer bit the hell out of me. I have big hammy hands and it would bite the web of my hand every time I shot it. Now to be fair I never changed the grips on it and that might have solved the problem. YMMV

It was accurate, factory mags were available and cheap. Shot 230 grain ball and hollowpoints 200 grain semi-wad cutters and I carried 165 grain Cor-Bons that shot to point of aim for me. I have not shot the Rugers but have an uncle and a cousin who carry them CCW and swear by them.

Let us know what you choose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top