1992 pt92 af not good for +p+?

[94lt1]

I asked Taurus if this particular gun could (in their opinion) be used with +p or +p+. They said that they don't recommend using either of them in anything 1995 or older.. in 96 they started having certain models that are +p approved..

So your thoughts? Just use hydro shoks? Get a newer pt92? Been eyeballing a SS pt92 at academy..

Or are they being overly cautious? Thanx for the input..

I don't mean for constant feeding... just for carry.. and defense. For the range I use Winchester 115 grain target rounds.

[Mknight]

Well first things first you can never have to many 92's.
As far as ammo for that particular firearm don't use anything to generates more pressure than it can handle, essentially if the round generates more foot pounds than what is recommended. The whole +p thing can at times mean different things to different manufacturers.

[94lt1]

Yeah last thing I want is to do something stupid and get hurt or hurt somebody from using the wrong ammo.

It really makes me wonder though, because I've looked at several different threads here and many people say that +P's are OK.. but I suppose if Taurus says otherwise... I should listen to them.

[94lt1]

So now I'm looking at hydro shock.. hopefully that'll be OK. Other thoughts?

[jwc007]

If venturing into the +P realm, I recommend running a 15 lb Extra Power Wolff Recoil Spring, which is what I run. Standard ammunition will still run in it, but anything loaded mild might be problematic.

Stock recoil spring is only rated at 13 lbs and balanced to work with a broad range of ammunition, sometimes into the very mild side.

+P+ is best avoided as it rarely lives up to it's hype and won't make much of a difference over +P.

Currently, I favor the CCI Gold Dot 124 grn +P JHP, but there are other good choices to be had.

Also consider:
Remington 124 grn +P Gold Sabre JHP
Federal 124 grn +P HST JHP
Remington 147 grn Gold Sabre JHP

Plenty of others. Look on Youtube for some 9mm Ballistics testing if you can.

[drummin_man627]

+P+ is not recognized by S.A.A.M.I., so I have read. I sure wouldn't put my PT-92 or PT-908 through that kind of misuse. I do use Speer G.D. 124 gr +P for my S.D. load though, but sparingly. ( Even though they are +P rated, they are right at NATO and Taurus specs.) My 9mm range ammo is generally a 124 gr standard pressure round.

[JR]

Over the years, my non-decocker PT92 has digested thousands of +P and +P+ ammunition, to include the fabled Israeli +P++ sub-gun ammo. I change recoil springs every 3000 rounds when using it, every 5000 rounds with standard loads. I'm still on my first locking block.

None of these loads will cause catastrophic failure, as they aren't proof loads, which the guns are tested with. They will, however, accelerate wear on the guns.

[leejack]

Neither +P or +P+ are needed.

[JR]

Not exactly true. Most, if not all FBI Protocol 9mm ammo is +P rated.

[olfarhors]

I asked Taurus if this particular gun could (in their opinion) be used with +p or +p+. They said that they don't recommend using either of them in anything 1995 or older.. in 96 they started having certain models that are +p approved..

Interesting response from Taurus actually?
seeing as to my knowledge that 9 MM +P+ ammunition does not fall within accepted SAAMI standards for pressure in that caliber.
can't imagine what you would need that power for in a 9 mm?
they do make some really nice 9MM +P+ rounds however they are labeled as 357 Sig and 10 MM.
more power needed, more gun needed!