Taurus Millennium G2 slide rails???

NINEX19

New member
Having recently purchased a new Taurus Millennium G2 http://www.taurususa.com/product-details.cfm?id=872&category=Pistol&toggle=tp&breadcrumbseries=MP1 because of a deal I could not pass up ($200 OTD), I disassembled it to do its first cleaning. I was amazed (and a bit scared :eek: ) at the size of the rails the slide rides on. I did not measure them, but the entire slide is held onto the frame by no more than 1.5" of rail. I have never seen rails that short and am trying to figure how that slide stays on and true while in motion.

I have never been a Taurus semi-auto fan, but thought I would give it a try because of the price. Now I know how they can sell them so low. It appears like a lot of cut corners. The adjustable rear sight is garbage. It is not stable. Mine will consistently hit low left. However, I will say I seems to have held up well so far in my 150 round test. Feed ramp is steep and I did get about 8 failures to load in those 150. I am hoping a good polishing will help this issue. Quality of the polymer frame, slide and barrel are all very respectable. Trigger is very good in mine, but I am sure that can vary by gun. It fits my hand very well and is comfortable and even fun to shoot (though acquiring the target is a challenge).

Sorry this turned into more of a complete review, my main concern was the slide rails.
 
The adjustable rear sight is garbage. It is not stable. Mine will consistently hit low left.

99% of the time, low and left is shooter error and no the gun. Go to youtube and search for shooting low and left. I used to wonder why the sights were all low and left on my 5.
 
No, I don't have any Glock's and never have seen them. It surprised me, but it might be more common than I know. I am just comparing to ones I have seen like, Beretta, Sig, CZ.
 
I took a look at mine and compared it to the size of the slide rails on my CZ P-07. There is not much difference, to tell the truth. It seems to me that as long as there are rails in the front and back, it's not really that important how long they are. Having two points of contact on each side is what gives it stability, not the length of the individual points. Imagine you are going to lay a 6' long 2x4 perpendicularly across the top of a sawhorse. What would be more stable: a single sawhorse that is 6" wide, or two spaced out saw horses that are each 2" wide? The two points of contact wins hands down, even though there is actually less total surface area supporting the 2x4. Then, to build on that, using two 6" wide sawhorses isn't going to add much stability, if any, over what you get out of the two 2" sawhorses.
 
I understand point of contact. I have no experience with a p-07, but I do with CZ steel and alloy framed guns.

I should have stated in my first post that when the slide is moved off its "home" position by no more than an inch or so, I can move the entire slide right and left by @ 1/8". Any other handgun I have, the slide stays true forward and reverse without having side to side movement.
 
I should have stated in my first post that when the slide is moved off its "home" position by no more than an inch or so, I can move the entire slide right and left by @ 1/8". Any other handgun I have, the slide stays true forward and reverse without having side to side movement.

That is certainly different from mine. Mine has some "wiggle" in the slide, whether it is in or out of battery, but it is less than 1 mm of movement either way, and it doesn't really get more pronounced when the slide is moved back. From what I have seen and heard, that is pretty typical of this model, and it has not caused me any feeding or accuracy problems. The wiggle you describe is about 3-4 times what I see in mine, and I think I would find that disturbing, too. I'm not sure whether the extra lateral movement you are seeing would have anything to do with the 8 failures you reported, but it might be worth asking some of our more knowledgeable members. There's lot's of them around these parts.:)
 
Seems like I saw a review that discussed low and left impact with this pistol. After a few hundred rounds it impacted closer to point of aim. Don't know if it was the shooter getting a better feel for the gun, or the gun breaking in. Don't give up on it yet.

I need to pick one of these up myself.
 
Seems like I saw a review that discussed low and left impact with this pistol. After a few hundred rounds it impacted closer to point of aim. Don't know if it was the shooter getting a better feel for the gun, or the gun breaking in. Don't give up on it yet.

If a gun shoots low and left, but then eventually gets on target, that is likely a shooter issue, IMO. The shooter is adapting to the gun and learning how to shoot it properly. It is human nature to want to blame our shortcomings on something other than ourselves - my sights are off, my pool cue must be warped, the balance on my bowling ball must be off, etc. Is it sometimes an equipment problem? Sure, but the ubiquitous nature of low left shooting reported with a large variety of guns makes it hard to assume that it is the gun.
 
i have to begrudgingly disagree with the pt111 have unusually small slide guides. they measure .62 on the frnt and .72 on the rear. that's pretty beefy compared to other "glock" type pistols i have seen. i have a sd9ve that didnt seem to be more than a 1/4" on either tab.


the pt111 may not have the tightest lock-up out there, but seems on par with mostpolymer strikers, and shoots prefectly straight fr me. i can only assume your difficulty shooting the middle come from the sa/da striker trigger that takes some practice getting used to. it's def a strange trigger, but once you get it, you'll probably like it, i do after a few sessions. but i absolutely have to follow trhough with the trigger and only release back to reset, if i slap the trigger i am all over the place. the adjustable sights are perfect IMO. hope you take a liking to it, if not, it was cheap enough that you didn't blow your savings. happy shooting
 
Back
Top