Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!sdd.hp.com!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!boingo.med.jhu.edu!haven.umd.edu!mimsy!ohsu.EDU
From: kozowski@ohsu.EDU (Eric Kozowski)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Is the Taurus 92 as good as the Beretta 92???
Message-ID: <35262@mimsy.umd.edu>
Date: 5 Jun 91 14:29:08 GMT
Sender: magnum@mimsy.umd.edu
Organization: Oregon Health Sciences University
Lines: 26
Approved: gun-control@cs.umd.edu

In article <35226@mimsy.umd.edu> abvax!iccgcc.decnet.ab.com!law@uunet.UU.NET ( 23318,  LAW, ROBERT) writes:
#
#I like the look and feel of the Beretta Model 92, but I wanna barf when I see
#the going price of this gem. I have heard that the Taurus 92 is an identical
#clone of the Beretta and just as well made. Could someone please respond back
#whether the Taurus 92 is as good as the Beretta??
#

IHMO The Beretta is a piece of junk.  After having put approximately 500
rounds through one and seeing many of the military reports and talking
to other armorers (I'm an armorer in the USMC reserve) I've come to the
conclusion that the Beretta 92 is a dog.  I personally know of two guns
that the slide seperated from the frame (while it was being fired and in
a rearward direction) and have heard of three more.  The two that I know
of the pistols had < 3000 rounds put through them. 

Please hold your flames.  This is my opinion and all statements above
are factual.



-- 
Eric Kozowski         
kozowski@ohsu.edu
Networks & Computing Dept.
Oregon Health Sciences University