Why would you go from a PT92 to an M9? I fired both side by side and could not see or feel the difference.

Also, new 92FS's can be had for the upper 5's...your new PT plus $200 does not sound like that great of a deal...

I carried an M9 for a year in Afghanistan, along with a few hundred of our other guys. It worked fine. We had one breakage while we were there. One M9 had the spring for the takedown lever break. It didn't disable the pistol, it just couldn't be field-stripped.

The M9 is super reliable as long as good mags are used. The low-bidder Check-Mate mags some of us were issued overseas sucked, but OEM mags are great.

Downsides of the M9 are mainly the same as for the Taurus copy: lousy crunchenticker trigger, smallish sights, huge grip. The M9 also has a backwards safety.

I was just having a few concerns with the slide fit on my Taurus but I may just be anal. Hopefully it is being fixed as we speak. I may just be feeling a slight bit of buyer remorce. I figured they couldn't be much different just based on looks but I have never shot an M9. I'm leaning towards putting money into small modifications of my PT92 and just shoot the $hit out of it.

Hmmm can't say much in regards to the Taurus, haven't gotten to shoot it.

The M9 though, I have shot and do own one. Absolutely love it. Some say the grip is too big, I find it rather comfortable myself. Field stripping is a breeze with it, and most importantly to me, it eats any ammo I run through it without issue.

I have a Beretta 92FS, basically the same weapon and it is a super handgun, accurate as all get out and reliable to a fault, never had a glitch with well over 6K rounds through it, mostly european ball ammo that I got at a deal. Mine came with two spare OEM mags and I have since purchased three 17 round mags and 8 OEM used mags that work flawlessly, plus three parkerized GI mags, no hangups on any of them. I carry CCW a Beretta 96 FS and it has never had a hiccup as well. I am a fairly large guy and the grip size is a plus for me. The grip angle and size allow a natural "point-to point of aim" relationship in my hand with my wrist muscle memory. My first DA shot in every qualification round is dead on in the center of the 5X ring, second shot is around 1 1/2" to 2" from that one. The handguns are great. Their e-store and customer service leaves a lot to be desired from recent experience.

Yeah, I have BIG hands and the gun is a perfect fit for me...

No offense to anyone, but I am still trying to find the reason that the 92FS is $200 more than the Taurus??

The PT also has the frame mounted safety and allows for the "cocked and locked" position..

I'll have to agree, I don't see the extra $200.00 for a used M-9. Of course, how used is the question here. Fit, finish, and performance sold me on Beretta, with the change out to a "D" spring, the double action is managable. Never had an issue with it. Slide mounted safety/decocker has not been an issue either. Carry mine with one in the pipe and safety off. Just as safe as a DA revolver. Seems the source has a margin to maintain and they consider the M-9 an upgrade for you, especially with the issues you are having. Rent and shoot the M-9 and see if you do any better with it. The laser grip adds a dimension to the cost as well. I know I paid $300.00 plus for my LaserMax guiderod laser sight and it has been worth every cent. The final decision is yours, shoot it and see if it's worth it to you.

The Berettas I've examined seemed of generally higher quality than the Tauri, so I expect that accounts for the price difference. Doesn't really matter in a range/plinking gun, but I'd take the Beretta for defense.

I always though the Taurus PT looked cheapo, especially their chrome looking finish. They might be just fine but I'd rather own a piece of a legend. I'm on day 1 of 10 of my waiting period.