Author Topic: Taurus PT 100 40s&w cal.  (Read 1321 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline BillW

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Posts: 3
Taurus PT 100 40s&w cal.
« on: July 20, 2003, 12:46:21 AM »
I was wanting some help does anyone had any experance with this gun any help would be great all I have heard is there not great guns thanks.
Bill W.

Offline v-man

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 316
  • Gender: Male
Taurus PT 100 40s&w cal.
« Reply #1 on: July 28, 2003, 05:01:15 PM »
I just noticed this week old question with no responses. I had one and it was a perfect size and weight and feel for a very concealable gun with plenty fo firepower BUT........ It had the worst trigger I have ever experienced and after  a few months I grew to hate it and sold it. If they ever fix the trigger to make it more shootable I would consider it a decent weapon.

Offline Mikey

  • GBO Supporter
  • Moderators
  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8734
Taurus PT100s
« Reply #2 on: July 29, 2003, 05:27:59 AM »
v-man:  I wonder if any of the aftermarket triggers/trigger work for the Berettas would work with the Taurus?  Mikey.

Offline v-man

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 316
  • Gender: Male
Taurus PT 100 40s&w cal.
« Reply #3 on: July 29, 2003, 01:54:09 PM »
I don't think so. That millenium is a pretty unique design with a long, rough, and heavy DAO trigger. Imagine a 15 lb Glock trigger that sticks and you've pretty much got the idea.

Offline ME

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Huh? what Millenium
« Reply #4 on: July 29, 2003, 05:23:10 PM »
V-man I dont think he is talking about a Millenium. The PT100 is a Berreta clone. Are we all talking about the same gun?
Imagine that

Offline broken arrow

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 94
pt-100
« Reply #5 on: August 01, 2003, 01:00:37 AM »
When I went through the academy I was carrying a Beretta 92F. The first day on the range I saw several people having problems with them, I became very distraught and was rapidly loosing confidence in my weapon. As it turns out, the guns were getting what the armorer called "burrs" on the firing pins and failing to ignite the primer. They were also Taurus PT-100's. These were catastrophic failures, the type that would leave you reaching for a backup weapon. If someone gave it to me for plinking, fine. I'd never trust my life to it. Taurus makes a fine revolver, They need to retool their entire line of autos if they really want to compete with Beretta, Sig, Glock, Smith, H&K and now Khar for the Le/Military market. Needless to add, the 92F served me without failure for many, many years. It would have been a great posterchild for how many SWAT schools, in service qualifications and abuse a Beretta could endure. It was replced with a department issued H&K USP .45. I hope it is as good as my trusty old Beretta.
"Cowards die many times before their death, The valiant never taste of death but once."

Offline His lordship.

  • Trade Count: (12)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1018
My Taurus collection, what is left of it and then some.
« Reply #6 on: August 01, 2003, 02:40:25 PM »
Until a few months ago I had 4 Taurus guns.  I had the 9 MM Model 92 and yes, the trigger is awfull!   :x .  It had a measured 7 lb pull, looong!   The pistol was reliable, rather poor accuracy, however, and when I bought it in 1997 the gun had a good reputation, they were not breaking apart (slide cracks) like the Beretta made ones were with the police and military.  When I bought a CZ-75 a few months ago and really experienced how a decent trigger is...I sold the Taurus 92 (same as model 100 but in 9 MM instead of 40 S & W).  

I also bought 3 of their revolvers, the small framed.22 cal. had improperly honed cylinders, would freeze up on certain ammo after discharging them, had to use a cleaning rod and small hammer to knock out the rounds, did some honing on it to smooth the cylinders, sold it anyways.  I wanted the large framed .22 but it had multiple defects, and the gun dealer was selling it like that! :shock:   The large frame .357 magnum that I bought in 97' had 3 cylinders slightly out of time, on a low mileage gun too!  Also a defect in the rifling, but it shot really well otherwise, sold it.  My short barreled .38 seems fine, accurate, still have it.  My sister bought a Taurus .357 magnum snubby in stainless back in 1996, tools marks on it, had the crane loosen out and jamb the gun until we figured out to turn the threaded assembly back in.

I have also heard that the metalurgy on their revolver's internal parts is soft.  Although the cylinder bolts on all of my Taurus revolvers seemed fine.

At the time, 1997, there was not much alternatives to choose from.  Smith and Wesson was evil, Glocks were/are spendy, Colts were too expensive, and Astras (Interarms) were real iffy, assuming you could buy one.  HK, Rugers, Sigs were also not alternatives, expensive, or I did not think much of Ruger then, etc.

Taurus needs to work on their quality control!  The only way I would buy another Taurus is the small concealable revolvers, check them really well before buying, and as these hide and conceal guns are not shot much anyways, they should last.  I know they have a nice warranty deal, but you have to send it in, and why is it that so many of their guns that I have used were so defective? :(

Offline v-man

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 316
  • Gender: Male
Taurus PT 100 40s&w cal.
« Reply #7 on: August 02, 2003, 12:06:32 AM »
Looks like I mis-read the model # so my input didn't help a bit. Sorry. At least it gave me a chance to talk trash about that little Millenium again.