I hope that everyone will pardon me in advance if I wind up waxing eloquent here, but I'm extremely excited to announce that at long last, I have obtained a Taurus PT92 AFS!

I grew up watching motion pictures and playing videogames featuring 92 Pattern Pistols, most of which were the classic Beretta 92 in some configuration or another, typically the 92F or FS model, but in some cases it was a Taurus PT92. In fact, when I thought of a pistol as a boy, the image which typically came to mind was either a Colt 1911, Walther PPK, or Beretta 92FS, as those were the pistols which I most commonly saw on television.

So long before I ever knew the Beretta 92 by name, it's iconic appearance had left an impression upon me, serving as a quintessential example of a semiautomatic pistol within my cognition. I was always impressed by the style of the gun as well as it's size, and it very nearly became my very first firearms purchase, but ultimately I chose a Walther PPK/S for that role since it was smaller and I wanted something that would be easier to carry.

Nevertheless, I had always planned to purchase one later on, but it always got placed on the backburner in favor of something more necessary.

My first introduction to the Taurus PT92 came in 2017 while I was shopping around online. I immediately took to it not only because it was cheaper in price than the Beretta, but also because the frame mounted safety seemed more natural to me. Of course, I was always somewhat put off by those who would assert that Taurus brand firearms were junk and that a Beretta was the superior choice. In addition, the Beretta 92 was obviously the more iconic of the two, appearing in far more films/games than the Taurus, so in a silly sort of way, I had repeatedly struggled with the fact that the PT92 wasn't a "real" 92 Pistol like the Beretta.

Fast forward to this year, when after years of procrastination, financial setbacks, and distractions had at last faded away, leaving me to decide that it was finally the time to get the gun.

Initially, I was looking at Berettas, but was surprised at how much prices had increased over the years. Back in 2017, a brand new Beretta 92FS would cost you $500, and the market was awash with Police Trade-ins priced around $300, sometimes even less for the .40cal Beretta 96, but now a new Beretta 92FS will run you $700+, used models cost $550+, and Beretta 96s are unobtainium, despite the fact that they're supposedly still in production.

So I took a look at Taurus PT92s, which surprisingly haven't increased nearly as much. Back in 2017, a brand new Taurus PT92 AF would run you about $350-$400, and now they're $430-$500. Used prices were around $200, but now they're only marginally less than a new one, so it's honestly not worth it, IMO.

Nevertheless, I kept going back and forth between Beretta and Taurus, unable to decide which way to go. Ultimately, the Taurus won out because I got an extremely good deal on the PT92 AFS online. I had also learned that the Stainless Steel PT92 (Specifically, the AFS Model) was no longer being imported into the USA, which forced my hand because I hate Taurus' cheapo matte black oxide finish. If I want a Beretta 92 as well later on, then they'll still be around, and there may even been some future deals to be had on surplus M9s.

Anyway, I just picked up my new PT92 AFS today, and I'm happy to say that I have absolutely no regrets whatsoever.



When I went out to pick it up the sky was darkened by clouds and the rain was pouring down by the time that I arrived at my LGS, which could have easily been mistaken as an omen of things to come. However, the moment that I opened the box, took her out, held her in my hands and looked her over, I knew that I had made the right decision.

She's slick and smooth all over, from the finish right down to the action. No sharp edges, no grit, just smoothness. The slide cycling, DA Trigger, SA Trigger, are so smooth it's startling. I've always hated it when people use expressions such as "like butter" or "like glass" to describe such things, so I'm going to simultaneously take the road less traveled while using a better analogy by describing the both the smoothness as well as the appearance as being "like ice". It's shiny and smooth, just like ice.



No exaggeration. As soon as I had walked out of the store, the clouds had parted, the rain had stopped, and the sky was bright. I took her home, broke her down for cleaning, and was all the more impressed. The inside of the gun was practically the same as it was on the outside. I mean, obviously they didn't polish up the inside of the slide/frame as they did on the outside, but there were no visible toolmarks and everything was smooth. This surprised me because my Taurus Judge Magnum was very ruff on the inside when I got it, with sharp edges, grind marks, and tool marks all over the inside of the grip frame, not to mention some rather crude machining on the ejector star, but the PT92 is as clean as a whistle. What's more, there was very little packing grease, whereas the Judge had been literally dripping with the stuff, so evidently over the past six years since I purchased my Taurus Judge Magnum, Taurus has really stepped up there game when it comes to fit/finish. 

In fact, the only thing close to a cosmetic defect is that it appears whoever applied the red paint for the safety got a few tiny flecks on the slide above it as well.

Alas, although I had planned on taking additional pictures of the pistol while it was field stripped so that you could see the inside of it, it had already gotten overcast yet again by that point, so for now, you'll just have to take my word for it.

Rest assured, there will be more pictures and threads to come on my PT92, as I have some exciting things planned for it in the future, so you will get to see it in greater detail and under better lighting conditions eventually.

Attached Images

	IMG_20230323_145829836_HDR~2.jpg (69.8 KB, 201 views)
	IMG_20230323_150005054.jpg (106.9 KB, 203 views)

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

While you're at it wipe the drool off of it!!!!!!!!!

Everyone loves a happy camper.

__________________
Come and take it!!

I hope your new PT92AFS proves to be as good a shooter and as problem free as my PT99AF has been. I bought my PT99AF (pre-decocker) in 1989 and in the following couple years I loaded and ran in excess of 10,000 rounds per year through it, to the point it became an extension of my hand/arm. The only improvement I made was to disassemble the pistol down to get the hammer and strut out and then rounded the edges of the stamped metal strut and polished the strut. That single job smoothed out the trigger pull even more.
Easily the best pistols that Taurus has ever turned out.
Good luck and enjoy.

The Beretta really isn’t so large.

This photo always manages to irk a certain forum member. I am unsure why.

Attached Images

40EF946B-8B6B-45D5-83F4-A40FFC8CEA0A.jpg (85.0 KB, 88 views)

Bought a used PT92 in the early '90s. Put thousands of rounds thru it without a hiccup. I never could shoot mine well but other people shot it very well, so it must have been me. Congrats on scratching that long, long itch.

__________________
The best I can with what I got

Oh, another thing which I had previously neglected to mention that also pleasantly surprised me...

All of the slide markings are actually engraved, not laser etched. Meanwhile, all of the markings on my Taurus Judge Magnum are laser etched.

I mean large in comparison to many other firearms. Obviously there are bigger, thicker guns out there. For example, my H&K USP45 Elite is massive by comparison.
Also, the size isn't a negative, hence why I referred to it as impressive. It looks more substantial than a lot of other guns and feels like it as well.

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

We had an officer who carried a PT92 in a clam shell holster. Despite the relentless ribbing, he could sure shoot it.

__________________
213th FBINA

Congratulations on fulfilling your dream... almost always a good thing... I picked up a PT99 AF in the early 1990's... while at my college roommates wedding..it was my first new CF pistol... shot IPSC & bowling pins with my late father. I have put so many rounds thru it 10K? 20K? probably more... only thing I have done is put in a wolf recoil spring (recommended) and a set of Pachmayr grips... I like mine so much I bought one for a best friend.. we met in first grade and he wanted a handgun... took him shooting and he picked the Taurus PT99 as his favorite.. they are superior to the Beretta in my mind... (had one, got rid of it)... only hint beyond the wolf springs would be use Taurus or MecGar magazines only.. the rest are a waste...
looking forward to the range report...

Attached Images

20160121_175615.jpg (106.2 KB, 25 views)

I've had a Beretta 92F for more than thirty years. I've always thought of it as a comparatively huge pistol. It also seems pretty heavy with a full magazine. Those aren't necessarily drawbacks. They maybe the reason these guns are so easy to shoot well.

May not be a Taurus, but the Beretta is very reliable and accurate, even with cast bullets. It feeds virtually anything, even .38 Special cast semi-wadcutter bullets for which it was never designed. Regardless, I've never been much of a 9mm follower.

My dad died 31 years ago and I was afraid my brother ( his wife) and I might have difficulties dividing stuff up. There were no problems at all. If dad had 3 of something, I gave my brother 2 and I kept 1. There were also no things my wife and his wife argued over. His wife wanted me to pay them half of retail for the Park Avenue I had sold him a few months earlier. I told her I was paying them half of what I sold it to him for and no more. That shut her up.

I was so pleased, I went into the F.J. Vollmer store and bought a new Taurus 9mm for my brother. I gave it to him and told him if was to reward his behavior. He still has it and it is still working fine.

I think you bought a fine firearm.

If it was good enough for Chuck...

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA

Will Beretta 92 magazines work in your Taurus?

Randy

I’m not usually inclined to put a lot of “upgrades” into a forearm, in fact I generally poke fun at the younger generation that seem to regard any firearm they purchase as just a host to add on a whole bunch of third party after market parts that are promoted as “upgrades”.

It’s probably not their fault as they were just unfortunate to grow up and come of age after quality and craftsman ship went out of the gun making industry.

I am also a long term 1911 fan who suffered through the transition from both the M16A1 and the 1911 to the M9 and M16A2, and hated them both.

The M16A2 was over weight, and overly bulky with the larger hand guards and increased length of pull (a really bad move in an era where everyone wore body armor that actually requires a shorter length of pull) and thus lacked the handling and balance of the M16A1. It also used an absurdly fast barrel twist that was required for M856 tracer rounds, but was faster than the 1-9” twist that was optimum for the M855 that everyone actually used in it. The finger adjustable long range sight was nice on a KD range, but didn’t offer a real advantage at 25-350m real world combat distances.

The end result of course was the M4, which was an attempt to regain the handling and mobility of the M16A1, although no one will ever officially admit that. And of course that goal is degraded when troops start hanging more tactical **** on it then they actually need for a specific mission.


The M adoption was even worse as they switched from a pistol with a grip that fit every one, to a pistol that was larger than necessary for the 9mm round, and that had a grip diameter and trigger reach that meant it didn’t fit a lot of troops very well. Nearly everyone could qualify with it, but many just could not shoot it well, or retain it as well as a 1911.

The main thing it brought to the table was an open top slide design and a locking system dating back to the P.38 that is relentlessly reliable. Unless of course a contracting officer screws up and procures rough parkerized checkmate mags for it that are not compatible with a desert environment while the military was engaged in two land wars in desert environments. Never underestimate the ability of a bureaucracy to screw something up.

—-

In any case, I put a fair amount of money and effort into this Beretta Compact L, because of Beretta’s reliability with almost anything you feed it.

A lot of money and effort was required because of that long trigger reach and a couple other design flaws.

I installed a short reach trigger kit along with ultra thin grips to address the grip and excessive trigger reach issues. I also installed a short reset trigger bar to address the overly long trigger reset distance. I added a low profile decking lever to eliminate the potential for inadvertent activation of the safety, without resorting the the G kit, and more importantly to eliminate the ambidextrous safety lever, which I have found to be problematic on nearly every IWB concealed carry pistol I’ve ever had with one.

I also added a lighter weight hammer spring to improve the otherwise overly heavy DA trigger pull, as well as a heavier hammer to maintain reliable primer strikes with the lighter hammer spring.



The end result is a Compact Beretta that still isn’t all that compact compared to most other compact pistols with similar or greater magazine capacity like this CZ 75D PCR Compact:



But to be fair the ultra thin grips and short reach trigger give it grip characteristics nearly identical to the CZ 75 and the single stack 9 round

Beretta 92 Compact M.






——-


I agree that the greater mass of the pistol contributes to the ability of people to shoot it well, provided it fits their hand, and if you get much smaller than the CZ 75 PCR Compact, shooting at speed starts to suffer.

BB57-

You bring up several good points...regarding "upgrades"; often alleged upgrades are changes only, not improvements and they can easily be "downgrades" in practice. However, they are current which automatically equates to "upgrades" for that crowd.

Yes, many are unfortunate to have come into to the gun world after the demise of high quality and craftsmanship as they have nothing to compare their basic "tool quality" striker guns with. However, the tool quality guns are generally reliable and work well.

The P38 "relentlessly reliable"? A good description, but it has other attributes, too. While not an admirer of the 9mm cartridge or many of pistols for which the cartridge has been chambered, I've found the P38 to be an excellent pistol. Some complain of an ostensibly heavy double-action trigger pull, but I suspect most of the complainers never used the feature enough to really get used to it.

Unfortunately no. The Taurus PT92 was based on blueprints of the original Beretta 92 with a heel magazine release, and at the point that Taurus purchased the Beretta Factory in Brazil, Beretta was still manufacturing the second generation 92S Model which also had a heel mag release, so when Taurus' modified the design to include a more conventional American mag release located behind the trigger guard, it was their own unique design.

As a result, the mag release relief cuts on a Taurus PT92 AF Magazine are in a slightly different location than on Beretta 92F Magazines, so they're not interchangeable without modifications.
However, some aftermarket magazines for 92 Series pistols are designed to work in both Beretta and Taurus 92s.

I think that more people are into "upgrades" more for recreational purposes than a dedicated attempt to enhance or otherwise improve upon the performance/reliability of a firearm, they're just too shy to admit it so they put on a farçe that it's all super serious and done for the sake of combat effectiveness.

I have plans to upgrade my PT92, but strictly for the sake of recreation, since I have no intention of using it for self-defense, as I have many other firearms better suited for that role.
Nothing too crazy or expensive either, I'm mostly just going to drop in a Beretta 3rd Gen Locking Block (a $30 part) then dress it up with some nice custom wood grips.

The only self-defense handgun I ever upgraded was my M&P40 Shield, and only because it's a Performance Center model with a ported barrel which I didn't care for and couldn't safely shoot my supply of Blazer Brass ammo out of, so I got an aftermarket threaded barrel for it, then purchased a cheap KVP Linear Compensator just for fun at the range.

Last but not least, while modern firearms certainly aren't as pretty or stylish as older guns, I don't believe that they're made to such low quality standards that it impedes function, much less requires the end user to upgrade them in order to make them function reliably.

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

So, I had some nice lighting coming through my bedroom window today, so I decided to go ahead and take some more pics of the PT92, which nevertheless proved to be something of a struggle because the gun is just so shiny and reflective that it was hard to get any clear shots without glare that would prevent the lens from focusing or result in an unwanted face reveal.




This first shot really shows just how shiny and lustrous the finish on the outside of the frame is, not to mention how rounded off all the edges are, complete with a look into the magazine well which showcases the contrast between the mirror polish on the outside and the duller finish on the inside.




Here's an upright shot which better shows off some of the slide markings. As I stated previously, they are actually engraved into the slide rather than laser-etched. The SN has more crude marking which appear to be stamped in with some form of punch.

On a side note, when I attempted to activate the Lifetime Warranty yesterday, the website wouldn't recognize the SN, dunno what that's about.




Last but not least is a look down the sights. While taking this picture, I noticed for the first time a flaw in the machining in the form of some small yet deep gouges in the metal at the top of the hammer recess just beneath the rear sights. Personally, I'm not sore over it, but I'm sure that there are those would feel that such a flaw warrants the extra $275-$300 that a Beretta 92FS Inox would have cost me.

Attached Images

	Shiny_Taurus_PT92.jpg (101.9 KB, 84 views)
	Taurus_PT92_Side.jpg (118.4 KB, 244 views)
	Taurus_PT92_Sight_Picture.jpg (33.8 KB, 239 views)

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

Sorry to see the machining issues, but hope it serves you well - PT92 AF from 1990 says hello.

Attached Images

IMG_1180.jpg (38.4 KB, 7 views)

I think that’s a huge part of the appeal for the 10/22 and the AR-15. It’s partly a desire for a “semi custom” rifle, and partly just a variation on an “adult Lego set”.

I didn't even notice them until I looked down the sights on a sunny day, they didn't stand out before, I had overlooked them under the fluorescent lights in my LGS, not to mention the dim light in my room on the overcast day that I brought it home.

It's not a huge deal, but it's worth mentioning, especially because the rest of the pistol is remarkably flawless, without so much as a sharp corner anywhere on it.

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.