I've had a couple Taurus PT-92s for many, many years, and have built up a big stockpile of Taurus factory-made 17 round magazines for them.
The original PT-92 is a copy of the original frame safety/heel mag release Beretta 92, that was built under contract, by Beretta, for the Brazilian military, at a factory that Beretta set up in Brazil. When the contract ended, Taurus bought the entire factory. This is why PT-92s have a frame safety. Taurus didn't "move the safety from the slide to the frame;" more accurately, the PT-92 retains it from that very original Beretta. But I digress...
For whatever reason, Taurus still machines their magazines with that original lower cut, along with their later, conventionally-located mag release cut.
Beretta and Taurus 92-series pistol development diverged; they both relocated the mag release from heel to the conventional "behind the trigger" location in different ways. This is why modern PT-92 and modern M9/92FS mags are kind-sorta close, but do not interchange.
Taurus mags are still made with both upper and lower release cuts, and work with the first generation PT-92, later PT-92s, the first generation Beretta 92, and the Beretta 92S.
I have owned PT-92s, a Beretta 92S, and now have that very first gen 1979 Beretta 92 with the frame safety. I personally attest that modern Taurus PT-92 mags work well in all of them.
Quoted:
Just my own personal opinion but I wouldn't use any Taurus magazine, whether it fits or doesn't. Hope this helps.
View Quote
@emmetf I understand. Your concerns are valid. Although I have not had any issues using Taurus PT-92 mags in my 1979 Beretta 92 and Beretta 92S, I admit that the follower is a potential weak point. I think it is more susceptible to tilting & jamming, compared to my early Beretta mags, much like early AR-15 mags were. As such, all of my AR-15 mags have Magpul anti-tilt followers, and I think Beretta followers are superior to Taurus. But, practically... in many several thousands of fired rounds, I haven't had any issue.