taurs model pt 100-b .40cal

[skimmerhead]

has any one had any experence with these type of pistols? any pros or cons ?

skimmerhead

[versifier]

I won't own a Taurus product, nor would I trust my life or the lives of those I love to one under any circumstances. I have heard them described as "the Zebco of Firearms". I think that is a pretty good description. Nuff said. Others are welcome to their opinions, it's a free country (or at least it used to be before the last election).

[cratergrease]

Years ago I was a dedicated subcriber to Gun Test Magazine, They didn,t take any money from manufatures so they could keed their opinions un-biased
I also have owned a few Taurus pistols in the past. Barreta helped them set up their auto line and most people couldn't tell the differance at first glance between a pt99 and a Baretta 92. The diferences were also minimal between theirs and Smith & Wesson revolvers The only real differences were in the rear sights , and Taurus used transfer bar systems for their firing pins, ( the Taurus's were safer in that aspect) As for the pt 100 series I really don't have alot of knowlage, but they appear to be well made , barrels lock up tight, and they fit my hand well. Taurus also has a life time warrenty. In a life threatening situation , If I a choice between a rock, stick Taurus, S&W, or Barreta, I wouldn't hesitate to pick up the Taurus!

[skimmerhead]

i agree with you cratergrease. the pt 100 is nearly identical to the pt 92 or 99 only diff. is agustable rear sights. i own a taurus pt-1911-45acp and love it, it'll shoot any thing i feed it.now i own a taurus pt 99 with agustable rear sights in 9mm same with 1911. now i want to get the .40cal same as the 92. there all based on the berretta which has proven itself. i came across 2500rds of .40 brass i hate to see brass laying around so i'll buy a gun to use it up. Thanks for your in put, hope others do the same
it's allways good to look at other points of view and opions.

skimmerhead

[kg42]

Target wise I would stay away from Beretta 92's and clones; I've had poor results with the few I tried.

[runfiverun]

i tried a taurus whatever it was 92 99 sumthin and as i shot it it kept getting lower and more right when shooting steel plates i had to keep moving up and left.
by the second mag i was a foot left and 18" high,helped my focus but my times were off the chart the guy's finally set up a sundial as a joke.
i actually ended up with better times with my usfa rodeo reloading 6 shots one at a time because i could shoot it faster.
other than that it fed everything and made a bang as fast as i wanted to empty cases.

[Pistolero]

When the Brazilians started their gun making, they Bought Beretta in Brazil out. The only difference is that they had to redo the magazine catch so the Taurus mags and Beretta mags. were not interchangeable. I had a Taurus PT92 (old style) aluminum frame with stainless slide that I finally got from an old friend, great pistol.
Except for the magazines - Beretta stuff fit it, ie; grips, triggers, a new hammer and internal springs. It shot like a dream and looked great. It was 9X19MM, I'd really like one in .357SIG.

[mvp25560]

I own several Taurus pistols 24/7 in 40SW, 1911, PT99 I personly think these are very good guns and very reasonably price and very acturate. I have been thing about getting a PT 100 or PT 101 in 40SW. I have serval other top name pistols but I sure love the Taurus brand greatly.
I reload all my bullets with lead from 9mm, 40SW and 45ACP.

[_MIg_]

i got a new pt92 and i hate the thing . I realy have to find the time to send it back. All my shots are low the barrel seems to me like is pointing low. I also have a CZ75B and it shoots wonderfull. I will probly get another CZ to replace the pt92, If the wife doesnt find out hehehe.

[versifier]

Let us know how you make out with their customer service. A lifetime warranty is useless unless backed up by the company, and my past dealings with them have been...not particularly confidence inspiring. I have watched three of them self destruct at our club over the years (all firing factory ammo) and was hit by pieces of a Taurus revolver that came apart at the next shooting station. I know all three owners, and none of the guns had been abused, all were bought new, original owners. One took two years for Taurus to make right, a second one eight months, and the third one the owner just threw into the pond after hearing what the others had gone through. I stand by my original statement. They make great paperweights, and might even be acceptable if they're going to spend their lives in a nightstand and not be shot regularly. I do know one owner of an early 92 clone that has put over 10,000 rounds through his without a hiccup, but even he won't carry it after what happened at the club. Having worked on pistols and revolvers for the past thirty some-odd years, there is just no comparison quality wise between older (pre-lock) S&W's and their cheap imitations. FWIW, I won't own a new S&W either, so I guess that make me an equal opportunity grump.