Thinking of adding an adjustable rear sight to my Taurus PT92S

Several years ago, a friend of my brother was cleaning out guns from his collection.  In addition to my High Standard, I bought a Taurus PT92S from him, as it was a very inexpensive way to get something that shoots 9mm, and the more I held it, the more I wanted it.  The price was pretty low, so I said what the heck, and brought it home.  It wasn't anything to be serious about.  It did not come with adjustable rear sights, although Taurus did make a version that included them.  I've shot it a few times - it shoots low and the the left.  It's pretty nice in many ways though - so simple to work on.  So I bought a set of Hogue Grips to dress it up, and every so often I'd take it to the range.

9mm is so inexpensive to shoot, I thought it would be a gun to just take to the range and enjoy shooting, when not being "serious".  I did find out that adjustable rear sights had been available, but none could be found.  Then I found this video on a newer version of the PT92S:
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apNtPrbR2bI&t=910s
(I left him a message - the way he lowers his head, his glasses give him no eye protection, and the only shot that he didn't blink for was the first.)
(My gun has no magazine issues, other than that I only have one of them, and also no lock.)

That video got me wondering about the gun, so I did a little searching and found that adjustable rear sights are available again:
   http://www.lpasights.com/en/products/tpu29ts07/

In fact, Brownell's has them:
   https://www.brownells.com/handgun-parts/sights/rear-sights/taurus-pt92-58-100-adj-rear-sight-sku100016367-73512-155632.aspx

Two reasons for posting this thread:
First, has anyone here used a PT92 and installed these sights, and
Second, is it any good at shooting Bullseye, which it certainly was not made for?

It's about as good or better than a Beretta!  Shot a buddies and between the two stock guns, the Taurus was more accurate and had a better trigger.

I put that same sight on my Beretta 92FS and it moved the point of impact right in the bullseye.  You probably could use it for bullseye, but the trigger is more important. I changed out my hammer, hammer spring, trigger spring and trigger (from plastic to metal) and lowered my pull to about 4.5 lbs. from over 7 lbs. I could lower it more if I go to a lesser hammer spring, but then I could cause light strikes. If I use 147 gr. ammo, I might consider it for match shooting.

https://imgur.com/PhAmznv

https://imgur.com/9MFPvgF

PS: look on eBay or Beretta.com. I got mine for $50.00

Interesting, it fits the gun like it was made for it.  Thanks.  As to modifications, I haven't thought very far ahead.  The sight would be a good start.

147 gr ammo?   Maybe I'm confused, but I think the ammo I used to buy was 115?  If you're not loading your own, what ammo do you buy for it?

Many differences between yours, and my Taurus:

Basically, the same gun. 147 gr. are subsonic and keep recoil down. I buy them from Freedom Munitions. The also have 135 gr. that are subsonic and shoot quite well. I find the 115 gr. have too much recoil and are not accurate enough for shooting bullseye. The sights should fit, but call Taurus and ask about their dove tail. LPA should be able to tell you about the rear sight.

mustachio wrote:Basically, the same gun. 147 gr. are subsonic and keep recoil down. I buy them from Freedom Munitions......

This?  https://www.freedommunitions.com/9mm-luger-147-gr-rn-new.html

The silly video I posted earlier had the guy saying there was practically no recoil, but he was blinking and flinching after the first shot.  When I shot mine, I thought it had quite a bit of recoil, more than I expected.  I think you may have solved that problem, along with making it more accurate.

I would use these, 9MM LUGER 147 GR HP REMAN. from Freedom Munitions.
They are very accurate and fairly priced. I think they are about 980 fps. and 115 gr are about 1150 fps. 
I also use the 147 gr with my 9mm suppressor and they are very quiet.

'mustachio' thanks for doing my homework for me!

Question, why wouldn't I get the RN bullets?

https://www.freedommunitions.com/9mm-luger-147-gr-rn-reman.html

mikemyers wrote:'mustachio' thanks for doing my homework for me!

Question, why wouldn't I get the RN bullets?

https://www.freedommunitions.com/9mm-luger-147-gr-rn-reman.html

I have tried both. They advertise that the HP are more accurate and I have found that to be true.
They are not for self defense, but seem to be more aerodynamic in their construction. Round nose to HP cost difference is about $1.00. 
If accuracy is your goal, the dollar should not be much to eat.
You could use the new manufacture HP, but they just cost more.

Hmm, I'm surprised by that, but sure, if the HP shoots better, I'll get them instead, and I'll pass on the new ones, and go for reloaded.  I can't do anything about a lot of things until I get home in about ten days.  I've got a big list of what to do when I'm back, and this is on my list.  Thanks!

mikemyers wrote:Two reasons for posting this thread:
First, has anyone here used a PT92 and installed these sights, and
Second, is it any good at shooting Bullseye, which it certainly was not made for?

This is the "low profile" LPA sight, I have a very similar one on a CZ75. It's not ideal for bullseye IMO, because of the thin vertical profile. It gives a quite small sight picture.

OTOH, it's an excellent sight and holds its setting extremely well. Note the center setscrew to hold the dovetail. It also doesn't catch on things and get yanked around due to its rounded corners.

I'd suggest trying it. If you don't score well, it's easy to swap out.

Don’t want to side track this but I’ve been eyeballing a beretta and would consider a Taurus. Do they really shoot as good as the beretta?

Would a lot of work need to be done to make a Taurus match ready?  Is it Cmp legal?

Taurus PT92 is on the approved list, with that said...  Beretta is coming out with a 92X with a stainless steel frame, it's not on the approved list but imagine it will be given time.

I'd skip the adjustable rear sight due to the incredibly shallow notch and go with a Beretta "D" spring instead.

https://www.brownells.com/handgun-parts/trigger-group-parts/hammer-parts/hammer-springs/hammer-spring-d-version-prod27930.aspx

The fact that you are shooting low and left makes me a bit suspicious, as I shoot Beretta 90 series pistols regularly, and found the PT-92 to have one of the heaviest triggers I have tried. Lightening up the trigger a bit may solve the issue.

DA/SA wrote:I'd skip the adjustable rear sight due to the incredibly shallow notch and go with a Beretta "D" spring instead.

https://www.brownells.com/handgun-parts/trigger-group-parts/hammer-parts/hammer-springs/hammer-spring-d-version-prod27930.aspx

The fact that you are shooting low and left makes me a bit suspicious, as I shoot Beretta 90 series pistols regularly, and found the PT-92 to have one of the heaviest triggers I have tried. Lightening up the trigger a bit may solve the issue.

Sure, I can try that first.  Compared to my other guns, the Taurus has the worst trigger of anything I've been shooting - I should measure the trigger pull when I get home.  If the spring you suggest would improve that, I should make that change before doing anything else.

About Baretta vs. Taurus, logically it seems like the Baretta should be "better", but while I've read a lot of people saying the Taurus is best, I haven't found people saying the opposite.  Lots of people seem to feel the frame mounted safety on the Taurus is preferable to the slide mounted safety on the Baretta.

As to shooting low and left, I'll get my real answer if I actually buy the shooting rest.  I can try it again on sandbags.

As to recoil, while it can't have too much as it's such a smaller round, I find it annoying.  If the heavier, sub-sonic bullets (147 vs. 115 grain) improve that, great.

What I'd like to have, is a S&W Model 952.  What I probably ought to get, is a 9mm 1911.  Realistically speaking, I shouldn't do any of this, and just concentrate on my 22, 38, and 45.

mikemyers wrote:

What I'd like to have, is a S&W Model 952.  What I probably ought to get, is a 9mm 1911.  Realistically speaking, I shouldn't do any of this, and just concentrate on my 22, 38, and 45.

Where’s the fun in that?

Shhhhh.....

'mustachio' - and anyone else....

I accept that the HP rounds work better than the RN, but when I think about it, that seems wrong.  You've proved it by your personal experience.

https://www.freedommunitions.com/ammunition/pistol/9mm/9mm-luger-147-gr-hp-reman.html

First question - is there some logic why the "streamlined" round is worse than the one with the big hole in the tip?

Second question - is this the round of choice for any 9mm gun being used for target shooting?  (I'm just saying target shooting, as I'm not sure how good this gun is for Bullseye.)  Is this what most people here in this forum use?

As found on the Freedom Munitions page: OVERVIEW
Freedom Munitions hollow point pistol ammunition is loaded with the X-Treme Bullets plated hollow point. This bullet excels for sport shooting and provides excellent accuracy in an affordable price. The X-Treme hollow point is the exact same bullet used by some of the top shooters in 3 Gun, USPSA, IPSC and IDPA, This bullet is not however ideal for home defense or law enforcement purposes.



I have shot both the FMJ and the HP and my personal experience is the HP are a "tad" more accurate. They travel at 925 fps and cause less recoil. Maybe getting back on target faster contributes to the accuracy...whether you want the HP or not, I would certainly go for the 147 gr. bullet. It is even accurate in my suppressed AR9 with a 10.5" barrel. Keep in mind that it is NOT a defensive HP, but rather a smaller HP that may contribute to better stability. I have recommended this to other shooters at our club and they found it to be more controllable and now buy it for our bullseye matches. One guy shoots it in his Springfield 1911 in 9mm.

mustachio wrote:.........whether you want the HP or not, I would certainly go for the 147 gr. bullet.......

No more doubt in my mind, other than how many to order.  I'll get the HP 147 gr. reloads.
I'll also order the spring, and am debating about the rear sight.

I think you also mentioned installing the lighter spring - how far "into" the gun is the spring?  Is it relatively simple to replace?
I guess I should look for a manual for working on the Taurus.

Added later:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rLitVzLUgA
Not sure I want to deal with this....

Just deal with this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItIVFNj15mE

And buy this in case Taurus uses a roll pin.

https://www.brownells.com/handgun-parts/frame-parts/frame-hardware/lanyard-loops/lanyard-loop-pin-90-series-prod28359.aspx

MUCH simpler to do it that way - effortless.

You all have most likely cured the three things I most liked about this gun, the "recoil", the trigger pull, and the sighting.  What's left is just to confirm that the sight (if needed) fits the Taurus. 

In another week I'll be on my way home, and can then get into all these projects.

Thanks!!

I'd be happy to help  you when you get home. Let me know.
I would order at least 250 (5 boxes) of the 147 gr. Don't buy too much in case you don't like them.

About the accuracy claims of JHP over JRN. In my personal experience I have found this to be true. Except for one exception. The JHP bullets all appear to have a better base (due to jacketing process) then their RN counter part. The one exception is Hornady's 147 gr RNBT. The boat tail is a great base for the 147gr bullet and yields superb accuracy. I have had feeding problems with several of my 9's with HP bullets but zero problems with the RN. Just a thought and a partial explanation of why most HP are more accurate.

Len