Practical Prepping Blog

Preparations for a very uncertain future. . .

Taurus PT709 Slim Review and Photos

When I first saw the Taurus PT709 Slim, the small, angular and indeed very thin weapon with the oddly shaped trigger guard at a Miami gun show last weekend, I was immediately intrigued.   I had been looking for a small 9mm pistol for IWB (In the Waist Band) concealed carry for some time, but nothing had fit the bill.  I’m a pretty slim guy and found most small 9mm offerings to be too boxy or bulky (Glock or S&W, to name a few) or, when I found one I liked, namely, a Kahr PM9, the price was prohibitive.

So I asked the salesman if I could the PT709, heft its weight, check out the sights and see how it fit in my hand, after all, why not give this little beauty a try as the feedback I’ve heard about this gun had been extremely positive.  Long story short, I loved it and plopped down a decidedly un-Kahr-like $369 and took my new potential CCW (concealed carry weapon) home.  I say ‘potential’ because I will only decide to carry it as a defensive weapon if it proves to be absolutely reliable.  More on that later.

Facts and Specs

The PT709 is a single stack, 7+1 round 9mm semi-automatic pistol.  It is just over six inches long (6.24″),  four and a half inches high (4.52″), and an amazing one inch (1.04″) wide.  It has a steel slide with a polymer frame which add up to a diminutive nineteen ounces.  My 709 has a blued slide, but they can be had in stainless steel and titanium.  The grip is thin but with a good texture and offers a good, positive hold.  A small, but appreciated design feature is the way the trigger guard angles up just as it meets the grip.  That small amount of extra space offers a bit more room for the  three fingers of your shooting hand to grasp the weapon.  The frame has matching dimples on either side.  One perfectly fits the knuckle of the thumb of your shooting hand, and the other, further down the frame towards the front of the gun, offers an index position for your trigger finger when it is not on the trigger.  Also a nice design feature.

The PT709 is a striker-fired weapon with an interesting single-action/double action capability.  When a round is chambered, the trigger pull is always about 5-6 lbs in single action mode.  However, if a round fails to fire, the PT709 allows a second pull of the trigger in double-action mode (about 6-7lbs) without racking the slide.  It offers a true double-strike capability on a dud round without cycling the slide.  The PT709 has a nicely positioned thumb safety and a trigger safety like that of a Glock which allows for it to be safely carried with a round in the chamber.  It also has a firing pin block to prevent the weapon from firing unless the trigger safety has been pressed.  I like that safety redundancy in a CCW.

Besides the trigger safety there are other Glock-like features of the PT709 Slim, namely the way it’s disassembled.  Rather than removing a pin to free the slide, the 709 has a set of take-down latches on either side which free the slide.  A slide-lock release is just ahead of the thumb safety on the frame and the magazine release is nicely placed on the grip and easy to access.  A very usable set of fully adjustable 3-dot sights rounds out my description of the PT709.

“OK, fine.  It looks and feels great.  But how does it shoot?”

At The Range

After dis assembly and a thorough cleaning to remove all the grease on the slide, I packed  2 100 round boxes of Winchester ‘White Box’ 115gr FMJ 9mm and about 75 rounds of Winchester 147gr JHP ammo and headed to the closest target range to put the Taurus to the test.  I purchased an orange silhouette target, donned my hearing and eye protection and headed excitedly to my assigned lane.  A quick function check and two loaded magazines later I began to take the measure of my diminutive new weapon.  My first impression was that the recoil was a lot less than I had anticipated it would be.  Very controllable for so small a gun and very easy to get back on target.  Second, I absolutely love the trigger reset on this pistol.  After the weapon fires, a tiny release of the trigger recycles the action and the 709 is ready to fire a second shot, and a third, in very rapid yet controllable succession.  The Taurus shot low out of the box – a common complaint for owners of this model – but a few rounds of adjustment of the rear sight had the 709 Slim hitting point of aim at seven and fifteen yards.  It’s a darned accurate little gun.  Before I knew it, I had gone through the first box of 115gr FMJs without a single FTE, misfeed or any other issue at all.  And, unlike after shooting 100 rounds through other small 9mm pistols, my hand didn’t hurt.  Not one bit.  The PT709 was a joy to shoot.

The second box of 115s went just as smoothly and uneventfully, so I loaded the magazines with the 147gr JHPs.  The 709 Slim ate all 75 of them without a single problem.  Not bad at all for any gun during its ‘break-in’ period.  Not one problem in 275 rounds through a brand new gun.  Smiling, I left the range and headed home to give my new pistol a good cleaning and a find it a place in my safe.

Slim indeed!

Final Impressions

“Well, were you impressed?

Absolutely!  It fired with minimum recoil and maximum accuracy and did not fail to fire, cycle, or eject a spent casing.Not once.  And, it felt very comfortable in my hands; like it was made for them.

“Is it your concealed carry weapon yet?”

Well, it’s going to take one more trip to the range this weekend and a few hundred more rounds of trouble free shooting before I trust my life to it, BUT, I did take the liberty of ordering a Super Tuck Deluxe, CrossBreed Holster for it, so what does that tell you?

March 19, 2010 - Posted by | Firearms | , ,

25 Comments »

  1. That slim gun makes my Ruger 380 obsolete already. I have never seen anything that slim, with that much power.

    Comment by Bobby | April 9, 2010 | Reply

    • Yeah, it’s an amazing piece of engineering. I’ve got a Kel-Tec P3-AT (small .380 pistol) and this 9mm is only a hair wider. Very concealable and a much better fit in the hand. How do you like the Ruger?

      Comment by practicalprepper | April 9, 2010 | Reply

      • I love the Ruger. I know that a 9mm may be better, but I just love slipping it in my front pocket and leaving the house, forgetting it is there, because it is so light. I bought a small neoprene pocket holster for it. When I pull it out the holster stays in the pocket. No outline whatsoever. The holster also keeps the gun upright. It is a great gun for summertime. Tho only problem I have had is forgetting it is there. Sometimes I drop my change in the same pocket, and have to get the change back out to put it in my other pocket. Don’t want change in with the gun. Hard to sort out while not pulling out your gun in public.

        Comment by Bobby | April 9, 2010

      • Yes, I know what you mean. My Kel-Tec .380 sits in a DeSantis pocket holster and is barely visible in my pocket. I’m not putting down .380s by implying I’d rather have a 9mm. The truth is, it’s better have ANY gun for self defense, than NO gun. that’s for sure. The Taurus has a longer barrel and longer sight alignment distance which makes it inherently more accurate. I’ll be carrying both this summer – but probably not at the same time.

        Comment by practicalprepper | April 9, 2010

  2. I picked up a used one today.
    Took it to the range and loaded it up with White-Box Winchester FMJ.
    (1) it shot low. 3 clicks on the fully adjustable sight brought it into alignment.
    (2) A couple of times, it failed to load the second round, and I had to reset the magazine. I don’t know if I did not have it seated properly, or if it worked loose.
    (3) Also a couple of times, the striker hit the primer but the cartridge did not fire. I don’t know if that was a weird box of ammo, or if the striker was not hitting hard enough. The double-strike feature did not detonate the round. I removed the round and reloaded it, and it fired fine. Hmmm. Puzzling.
    I really like the gun, the size, the feel, and I am pretty sure I will learn to shoot it accurately. Previously was shooting a Glock 23 and it fits into my pocket ever-so much better.

    I removed those

    Comment by Jim | August 11, 2010 | Reply

    • Thanks for the comment, Jim. I experienced 2 of the three problems you noted. Mine fired low, too. Adjusting the sights and my placement of the front sight relative to the rear sight helped that problem. My 709 also experienced several FTFs (failure to fire), but only after I had put about 250 rounds through it. I sent it to Taurus for repair and got it back last week, put 100 rounds of MAGTECH (I think that’s what it was…) with out a problem. I’ll do a more thorough test soon.

      I’m like you, I want to like this gun and love its size for concealed carry, BUT I MUST be 100% dependable if I’m going to trust my life to it. So far, it’s been less than that, but the repair looks promising and I’ll keep testing it.

      Comment by practicalprepper | August 11, 2010 | Reply

  3. Just got back from target shooting in the country. I was having trouble sighting and adjusting the sights to hit the the center. It was shooting low and to the left. Even after adjusting the rear sights it was still shooting to the left. Can anyone give me any suggestions on how to remedy shooting to the left. I had two other people shoot it and same results. I can’t seem to adjust it any further. If I can’t get it any closer to the center, then I probably will sell it and buy a Glock 19. Any help would be appreciated.

    Comment by Marvin | October 7, 2010 | Reply

    • Are you talking about sighting in a Taurus PT709 Slim? Most folks who have problems sighting in the little Taurus have had difficulty with the pistol shooting low relative to the sights. Mine has the same problem, but I have learned to adjust for it. Do you think your shooting slightly to the left might be a trigger-control issue. Shooters often jerk triggers to the left or right and blame the inaccuracy on the gun. Now I am certainly NOt suggesting that you are such a person, I’m merely putting that idea ‘out there’. With a gun as small as the Slim, even small, off-center movements of the trigger can result in an off-center shot.

      Comment by practicalprepper | October 11, 2010 | Reply

  4. I bought a PT709 because I needed a CCW badly. Its very small, easy to disassemble and reassemble. The only problem for me has been the trigger. It has along pull, and its hard. With my other gun I can put most rounds in the bull area at 10M, but with the PT709, it was really difficult even at 8M. I have just fired 50 rounds, hopefully it should become a little soft after 500 or more. I have been hitting low and to the left, and was always blaming the sights. A little analysis told me it wasn’t the gun but the trigger which I have so far not mastered. Any suggestions? Thanks in advance :-)

    Comment by Nauman Afzal | August 11, 2011 | Reply

  5. Just purchases this gun today. Already spent 50 rounds. Did great. Shot a little low. Making adjustments and signing up for my ccw class. Fits nice in the small of my back, inside pants, very discreet. Unless someone touches me they would never know it was there. Thanks for the review. It was helpful to me in my purchase.

    Comment by Cassy Pennington | July 7, 2012 | Reply

    • You’re very welcome. I’ve got mine on me right now – it’s really perfect for CCW. Good Job on taking the class.

      Comment by practicalprepper | July 23, 2012 | Reply

  6. I bought a PT709 1 month ago.
    Very dissapointed with the poor workmanship thoughout.
    Burrs in the slide, slide wiggles in the frame????
    Mags will not eject properly
    Can barely load one mag it’s so out of spec (If there is a spec).
    Rear sight is so cheap and sets at an angle.
    It shoots fine, 200 rounds perfectly, but I can’t get past the lousy lack of workmanship.
    Traded it fo a Nano last week.
    Now the Nano is built well, it’s a quaility gun, shoots great too.
    I will never even look at another Taurus, my first and last impression is, they are crap!

    Comment by pat mccarty | September 16, 2012 | Reply

  7. Great review. This is my conceal carry weapon and I absolutely love it. I am currently hunting around for a better IWB holster other than the Uncle Mike’s I purchased at Academy; but this pistol is my first purchase and I really like the weight and feel of it. (BTW, I also like your choice of blog layout … see mine … lol) Thanks for the post and the info man, appreciate you! – TJ

    Comment by Rev TJ Conwell | September 26, 2012 | Reply

    • Thanks, TJ. I carry mine and shoot it at the range often. It’s always worked for me and is so slim that I don’t even know I’m wearing it sometimes. I love it too.

      Comment by practicalprepper | September 26, 2012 | Reply

  8. I bought a 9 slim in Dec. Has operated perfictly with about 300 rds thru it. I liked it so well my son bought one from Bass Pro Shops. Took it to the range and it was disasterous. It failed to fire about every third round. On the second or third try it would fire usually. Broke the gun down and found the fireing pin was binding in the plastic sleve it sets inside. Bass Pro Shops sent it back to Mfg for repair. I am sure it will be do fine when he gets it back. But I would think QC must have their head up and locked to let a new gun go out like that

    Comment by Jerry Cool | March 12, 2013 | Reply

    • Sounds familiar. I sent mine back to Taurus due to light strikes on the primer. When I got it back, it worked fine. Thanks for your comment.

      Comment by practicalprepper | June 7, 2013 | Reply

    • I got rid of mine, it sucked! bought a Nano it sucked almost as much.
      I now carry Glock 26, It works every single time and it’s way way more accurate than the crap I once owned.

      Comment by Patrick Mccarty | June 8, 2013 | Reply

      • I hear you. The problem with guns from manufacturers like Taurus is their inconsistency. Mine works, yours didn’t – that’s a problem. Glocks, on the other hand, seem to work well 99%+ of the time.

        Comment by practicalprepper | June 8, 2013

  9. I’m a small chick this was my first handgun bought I love mine for every day carry

    Comment by alesha | April 8, 2013 | Reply

  10. I bought my 709 2 months ago. First trip to the range I had multiple FTF’s. I was extremely disappointed to say the least. I sent it back to Taurus and just received it back after 7 weeks. The paper said the firing pin was broke so they replaced it. Went to range yesterday and still had approximately 10-15% FTF over about 150 rounds. I like the gun, and Taurus has a decent reputation from what i can tell. But if I’m going to trust it, I think I need better results and a lot fewer FTF. I’ll probably send it back as it seems most problems of this type eventually get fixed. I hope they can, because I really like the 709.

    Comment by David | April 22, 2013 | Reply

  11. My 709 fits neatly inside my waist with the versacarry clip i bought for a LC9 that i sold and i have been satisfied with it in every way. SA/DA double-strike feature reminds me of the PT945 in miniature. Would recommend it to anyone looking for a dependable CCW. I too forget its there sometimes, one thing ive never experienced before. And nice review.

    Comment by Kurtis Johnson | May 31, 2013 | Reply

  12. I’m glad that the reviewer has a pleasant experience with the slim
    When I first saw it and felt it in my hands I thought I have a winner
    All the known problems plagued me though . Now Taurus has been awaiting for parts the last 2.1/2 months. I hope someday I get it back in good condition

    Comment by James Shawn | October 28, 2013 | Reply

    • I’m no Taurus apologist. Sorry you, like several others, have had problems with your 709 Slim. Since my initial problems, it has been running like a champ.

      Comment by practicalprepper | March 2, 2014 | Reply

  13. Just bought and fire 100 rounds thru it with no issues. Was low and left out of the box but adjusted the sights and all 8/9/bull. I see many compare a gun like the 709 to a Glock or M&P full size. You can’t! Of course the Glock will feel different, look at the weight distribution. All small guns are less accurate the further from the target you are. Small conceal weapons are meant to protect at shorter distances and anyone in the field understands that when you are inside a structure, rarely if ever, will you be more than 30 feet from your intended target.

    Comment by Al | January 12, 2014 | Reply

    • Such comparisons are silly as the two guns are designed for different purposes. Thanks for your input.

      Comment by practicalprepper | March 2, 2014 | Reply


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Don's Racing Blog

Follow me as I participate in 4 different types of auto racing in 2014

Thoughtfully Prepping

My Scribblings about Prepping and Survivalism

DumpDC

It's Secession Or Slavery. Choose One. There Is No Third Choice.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 303 other followers

%d bloggers like this: