I would stay away from Taurus at all costs. Some guns they make function great, many dont. Either way, its not a gamble to take on a CCW. However, the Beretta would be my first choice. I really like the feel of berettas and think that they make a quality product for a good price. The glock wouldnt be a bad way to go either though, they arent my personal favorite due to ergonomics, the trigger pull, and the overall geometry and thin-ness of the grips, but you cant deny their merit as a reliable workhorse for a great price. Good luck in your search.

Originally Posted by cooper623

I would stay away from Taurus at all costs. Some guns they make function great, many dont. Either way, its not a gamble to take on a CCW. However, the Beretta would be my first choice. I really like the feel of berettas and think that they make a quality product for a good price. The glock wouldnt be a bad way to go either though, they arent my personal favorite due to ergonomics, the trigger pull, and the overall geometry and thin-ness of the grips, but you cant deny their merit as a reliable workhorse for a great price. Good luck in your search.

The Beretta 96D 5" is going for $425 - $440 and the Glock 22 is going for $395 stock. I have heard that Taurus is hit or miss, which is why I was asking about the three.

Sounds like your intent on getting a beauty over brains, I suggest seeing on how they feel and shoot for you, I personally will not consider a pistol if I pick it up and hate it. Some of my favorites's are step childs. I love my Taurus PT140 PRO, then again I like making In-Expensive guns shoot accurate, just my thing. Good luck.

Originally Posted by ozzy

Sounds like your intent on getting a beauty over brains, I suggest seeing on how they feel and shoot for you, I personally will not consider a pistol if I pick it up and hate it. Some of my favorites's are step childs. I love my Taurus PT140 PRO, then again I like making In-Expensive guns shoot accurate, just my thing. Good luck.

Well I like the PT24/7 OSS, but if it is unreliable than there is no sense in carrying it. I am looking for a carry gun. I am not really thrilled about the looks of the Beretta 96D or the Glocks, but reliability comes before looks. I am open to any other gun, the three I listed are the ones that are available to me right now.

I have a Taurus PT92 9MM ($400) on hold at a gun store, the PT92 is about the same as a Beretta 96D just less money. I didn't buy it because I wanted to research it a bit. There was also a Ruger SR40 ($435), and a FN FNP-9 ($395). The Taurus PT92 is steel gun and with a 9MM, the recoil shouldn't be bad at all.

Originally Posted by jrd929

Hey everyone, I am new to the forum and I am looking into getting a semi-auto carry gun. I have been carrying around a Ruger Super Blackhawk (a hand cannon, yeah, I know) but the weather is getting warmer and I need a different gun. I have 3 to choose from. 1) Beretta 96D, 2) Taurus PT24/7 OSS, or 3) Glock 22. I have a cap of $450 and the 3 I mentioned would be used. I like the looks of the 24/7 OSS but I don't know how reliable it is. I'd appreciate anyone's input. Jon

I own a tauris 24/7 pro c in stainles. I have found it to be a verry good gun. On top of beeing a good looking gun it os verry relible gun mine has never jamed.

Just one bit of advice, if the warming weather is a factor in choosing another firearm, a full-size auto may not be the best choice if concealment is a factor.

Skip the Taurus at this time. Out of the box, you will have less chance for disappointment with the Glock or the Beretta. Does Taurus make some good guns? Yes, but you can never be sure you're buying one of them.
Worth Considering:
CZ P07- low to mid $400s new.

Originally Posted by ironman7399

I own a tauris 24/7 pro c in stainles. I have found it to be a verry good gun. On top of beeing a good looking gun it os verry relible gun mine has never jamed.

I like the looks, but I asked the guy at the gun shop about their reliability and he said it is like getting a car, there is always a chance it is going to have issues. he said the warranty is with the gun which is useless if, God forbid, I ever need it and it doesn't do it's job. I'll consider buying one later because they are selling at a good price, but not right now.

Originally Posted by VAMarine

Just one bit of advice, if the warming weather is a factor in choosing another firearm, a full-size auto may not be the best choice if concealment is a factor.

I mostly Open Carry, a Constituional Carry Bill is making it's rounds through the NH legislature, so when that passes, I'll use that as an excuse to get another gun

Originally Posted by Overkill0084

Skip the Taurus at this time. Out of the box, you will have less chance for disappointment with the Glock or the Beretta. Does Taurus make some good guns? Yes, but you can never be sure you're buying one of them.
Worth Considering:
CZ P07- low to mid $400s new.

The Taurus PT92 is basically a Beretta. Taurus bought out the plant in Brazil I believe and I guess everything with it to make essentially a Beretta 92 with the Taurus name stamped on it. I have it on hold right now, I haven't put any money on it yet.

The Beretta and the Glock both have enviable records for reliability. Beretta won the Army contract because of a combination of reliability and cost.

Glock has been proven reliable over the last 25 years or so.

Just because Taurus bought the old tooling from Beretta does not mean that they will work to the same demanding QC standards that Beretta does.

QC is a top down manufacturing culture. If top management pays heed to QC and they impart that need right down the line to the final assembly people, then you have a good chance of getting a reliable product.

Unfortunately Taurus has not shown that culture in any of their other products so I find that simply buying the tooling is not a guarantee that the quality will be there.

In the late 80s Acura partnered with Sterling Motors in England. The Japanese made car had a wonderful reputation for quality (which I can attest to as I drove one for 268,000 miles and was still running well when I disposed of it), and the British car (which was supposed to be nearly identical) had a terrible reputation. Same tooling, different result.

Originally Posted by Packard

The Beretta and the Glock both have enviable records for reliability. Beretta won the Army contract because of a combination of reliability and cost.

Glock has been proven reliable over the last 25 years or so.

Just because Taurus bought the old tooling from Beretta does not mean that they will work to the same demanding QC standards that Beretta does.

QC is a top down manufacturing culture. If top management pays heed to QC and they impart that need right down the line to the final assembly people, then you have a good chance of getting a reliable product.

Unfortunately Taurus has not shown that culture in any of their other products so I find that simply buying the tooling is not a guarantee that the quality will be there.

In the late 80s Acura partnered with Sterling Motors in England. The Japanese made car had a wonderful reputation for quality (which I can attest to as I drove one for 268,000 miles and was still running well when I disposed of it), and the British car (which was supposed to be nearly identical) had a terrible reputation. Same tooling, different result.

Supposedly part of their contract deal with Beretta, they had to keep the same workforce, but people come and go. The only Berettas here are either in rough shape or brand new and pricey. I'll have to ask the shop about their return policy. I plan on putting 300 rounds or so through the gun almost immediately after buying whichever gun I choose as kind of a test on it's reliability. I would think that if I were to get a FTF or FTE or some other failure, it would come up during the 300 round test.

Originally Posted by jrd929

Supposedly part of their contract deal with Beretta, they had to keep the same workforce, but people come and go. The only Berettas here are either in rough shape or brand new and pricey. I'll have to ask the shop about their return policy. I plan on putting 300 rounds or so through the gun almost immediately after buying whichever gun I choose as kind of a test on it's reliability. I would think that if I were to get a FTF or FTE or some other failure, it would come up during the 300 round test.

Correct. But failure to eject is sometimes caused by the operator so if you have that failure ask an experienced shooter to try it out before giving up on it. It may only require more experience on your part to resolve that issue (or different ammo).

If I had known that point whan I had my Star PD I might have held onto it longer. I was a beginner and I was probably limp wristing back then (or maybe it was the reloads I was using). In any event I had ejection issues and I sold it (and it was a really nice weapon).

Originally Posted by Packard

Correct. But failure to eject is sometimes caused by the operator so if you have that failure ask an experienced shooter to try it out before giving up on it. It may only require more experience on your part to resolve that issue (or different ammo).

If I had known that point whan I had my Star PD I might have held onto it longer. I was a beginner and I was probably limp wristing back then (or maybe it was the reloads I was using). In any event I had ejection issues and I sold it (and it was a really nice weapon).

Yeah, I'm aware of limp wristing, if I discover a problem than I'll continue to carry around my Ruger Super Blackhawk until I find out whats wrong.

Well, you said 'reliable,' so that is the very definition of the Glock, in my opinion. I only own one, which I do like a lot, in 10mm, but my primary carry pistol is an XD45, which has the same reliability characteristics as a Glock, in my opinion. I elected to go with the XD because I wanted the grip safety. It is not a bother, and it makes carrying IWB without a holster a little bit more practical. The XD can also be bought for a little less money, and it has metal magazines, although I have never had a problem with the plastic ones that Glock uses.

The best thing about either of these two pistols (beyond their reliability and accuracy) is the fact that they can be drawn and fired without worrying about flipping a lever safety...the same way a double-action revolver would be used, but with more than double the ammo capacity. This is subjective, of course, and others will say that is one of their negative qualities. But, they are completely safe, in the hands of a competent shooter, and the simplicity of operation may be very important in a stressful situation.

My vote is for the Glock 22. As is frequently stated, Glocks don't look “good” but we don’t buy or carry guns based on the way they “look”. Out of all my handguns, I tend to shoot my Glocks the best. I carry my Glock22 with two spare mags every day.

Since you already own a Ruger, you might want to check out the SR series, full or compact in 9mm or .40, and their customer service is excellent ......

Beretta Nano....