Taurus 905 - 9mm Revolver


May 21, 2006, 12:37 AM
Just wondering if anyone has any personal experience with this (or any) 9mm small frame revolver. Mainly an auto guy.

I have 2 weapons in 9mm, and I want a little J frame revolver, so I'm seriously considering this guy.

ANY help or input would be greatly appreciated.

Here's a pic of the hammerless blued version.

Stainless w/ hammer.

If you enjoyed reading about "Taurus 905 - 9mm Revolver" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
May 21, 2006, 11:16 AM

I have fired the Taurus 905 before, 9mm with moon clips. I have not owned one, but had the opportunity to shoot my Uncle's 905. That little booger kicked like a mule on steroids! :what: I'm definitely not an expert, but I think maybe that the 9mm operates at such a high pressure that it makes the revolver kick much harder than it would with a .38 Spl +P. I don't have any experience shooting a revolver similar to the 905 in .357 Mag so I can't comment there. I only fired 10 rounds through this revolver, so take my experience as you will, but I really did not enjoy shooting the 905. It's not something I'd want to take to the range and shoot a hundred rounds through to "get aquainted" with that gun. Other's may have a better opinion of this gun, I'm sure they'll chime in. I may just be a sissy-man, but I'll stick to my .38 Spl +P's in a compact snub and my .357 Mag's in a service-sized revolver.


May 21, 2006, 01:58 PM
I had one for a while,i found the recoil to fall
between 38spl +P and 357 mag loaded with
midrange ammo.The major problem with it
was rough extaction with any decent +P's
i tried.I had contacted taurus about the use
of +P's in the 905 before buying one.Limited
use would be fine,when taurus was advised
of the problem i was told +P's shoud not be
use in that gun.It even stated in the manual
that +P's were ok in limited use.Taurus
seemed to think that there was not a
problem with the gun.I had a local gunsmith
polish the chambers but the problem was
still there.I sold it to a friend and likes it
as a range gun.

May 21, 2006, 03:31 PM
I've been tempted to get one several times but alot of people have complaints about the clips it comes with and last I heard there were no aftermarket clips being produced. Thats the only bad thing I've heard that might be worth looking for more info on. It still seems to me like 9mm would be a very very nice round for a snub.

May 21, 2006, 04:07 PM
I would strongly suggest not buying a 905. Mine will be on its 4th, that's right, 4th trip back to Taurus for light primer strikes. Since Taurus is unable to fix it I will be asking for a credit. If they won't give me a credit they can keep the revolver. I actually have some moral/ethical standards, and since the revolver is potentially dangerous to the shooter (frequent light primer strikes because of a defective part, namely the hammer), I don't want to trade this it in and let my 905 be someone else's problem.

I think Taurus is a good company, but they've had some problems with the 905. Taurus makes good revolvers, but if you get one of the lemons, their repair dept. is utterly worthless. The recoil is snappy, but not that bad. It is after all a lightweight revolver in a high pressure cartridge(9mm para).

May 22, 2006, 11:56 AM
I had one for a few months. I replaced the boot grips with Taurus rubber combat grips - easier to hang on to. It had a pretty snappy kick - almost as much as shooting mild .357 loads in a my similar size Taurus 605. The fired cases stuck in the cylinder - had to tap the ejector rod pretty hard with something to get them "broke loose". It wasn't a matter of the ammo - factory brass case, Blazer aluminum case, brass case light reloads - didn't matter - they all stuck. The "moon clips" are flimsy and a PITA. They are also expensive and Taurus is the only place to get them. They cost $9 + $4.75 shipping for a package of five.

I couldn't shoot the gun well - always low-left hits. I'm pretty sure it was me, rather than the gun, since the 605 gave me the same results.

I dealt with Taurus Customer Service a few times ordering grips and extra moon clips and I was totally unimpressed. I sold both the 905 and the 605 so I wouldn't have to deal with Taurus Customer Service if they ever broke. Too bad - Taurus has some pretty neat guns, but I've heard that quality control is a "hit or miss" proposition.

My opinion, for what it's worth, is that the 9mm is a good semi-auto round and I'll stick to shooting it in semi-autos. I like the 38 special in a snub revolver.

(And, yes, JLaw, you are a weenie.) :neener:

May 22, 2006, 06:39 PM
Perhaps I am in the minority on this issue, but I own two 905s, have shot both a good bit, and I like them much. In fact, I own close to 40 handguns of every description, most costing many, many times what I paid for my 905, but the snubby in my pocket most of the time is the Taurus.

Neither gun has demonstrated problems with sticking cases nor with problem light hits on the primers. But by the same token, I do not use +p ammo, nor ammo known for having hard primers (like PMC). And recoil is mild, at least from my perspective, but I have been shooting heavy-kicking revolvers for 30 years and that may account for my lack of sensitivity in that regard.

Both of my 905s have trigger pulls lighter and smoother than any Smith I own, and the accuracy of the guns is exceptional.

Are the guns perfect? No. I do not care much for the moon clips available for the guns. They are too flimsy for my tastes and, to my knowledge, there are no aftermarket sources other than the factory. At least in my opinion, if Taurus would deliver a better moon clip for the gun, it would be very close to perfection for the purposes to which I use it...it is my "in the pocket all the time" gun.

I often carry another gun, usually a Kimber 1911 also in 9mm, but I rarely ever go without the 905.

That, gentlemen, is my input on the subject.


Gary A
May 22, 2006, 08:40 PM
I've always been fond of the idea of a 9mm small-frame revolver. I had a 3 inch Smith and Wesson 940 and a Ruger 3 inch SP101 in 9mm. Briefly I had a Taurus. To address two of the points raised: The owner's manual for the Smith 940 also warned of "sticky" extraction, particularly with higher pressure rounds. It recommended changing ammo if that happened. It may not be just a Taurus problem. IMO, the Taurus "stellar" moon clips are anything but stellar. They would hold some brands of 9mm securely, but others would literally fall out of the clips. Both the Smith and Wesson and Ruger clips were far superior. Unfortunately, the Smith and Wesson moon clips won't fit over the Taurus ejector star and the SP101 has a slightly larger cylinder, so neither will work in the Taurus. I thought my little Taurus was pretty well built but didn't keep it long so its long-term durability and reliability are unknown to me. Kind of a nifty idea but in the long run, I think a small-frame .357 that can use either .38 or .357 suits me better. Still, if Ruger every re-issues the SP101 in 9mm, I would pick up another 3 incher. Also, years later, the guy who bought my S&W 940 loves it and wouldn't part with it.

May 22, 2006, 08:45 PM
Haven't had the Taurus...have a S&W 940 (2") and a Ruger 101 (3"); once had a Ruger SS as well.

Ballistics with 115's are much better than .38special+p+ 110's or 125's ...considerably less than full charge .357 in the same weights. Have to be a true-believer in velocity/JHP's over heavy lead hollow points/SWC's.

Shot a LOT of cheap surpluse ammo in the revolvers...even the horrid Egyptian 9mm surplus worked fine in these two. The factroy S&W mainspring is best left alone, avoid the spring kits and spend your money on getting the action smoothed...smooth counts more.

Is it "better" than a .357?...nope...it's easier to shoot and gives some advanatge over the .38special (normal or +p)..and it loads fast.

Are some less than wonderful moon clips from aftermarket makers...buy a few to torture test before ordering a bunch.

Find a prescription pill bottle just about right to hold two loaded moon clips...and t's a pretty normal looking object that doesn't rasise suspison.

On one range session (some years back..we were a bit velocity-happy back then) was testing a 90gr. JHP load using Blue Dot. Got 1403fps from a 2 3/4" Speed Six and 1412fps from a Browning HP. How can that be?

Revovlers only measure the rifled tube....semi-autos measure from crown to breech block. Measured the same way, the revolver launch pad is about the same length as the semi-auto. The cylinder gap is worth something, but barrel diameter, smoothness of bore, etc. evidently is worth more than whatever leaks out of the gap.

May 23, 2006, 06:20 PM
skeezix wrote:
"(And, yes, JLaw, you are a weenie.) "

Yup! And I'm not ashamed of it! :D

May 29, 2006, 11:27 PM
but I sold it due to the snappy recoil. Pachmayr grips were a lot better than the stock grips. I had no problems with stuck cases (but did not shoot any high pressure rounds). No light strikes or other function problems. The stellar clips did not appear to grip the cartridges firmly enough to retain the cartridges if dropped or handled roughly, but I did not test that.

It was a nice looking revolver. I think that with practice the recoil would be manageable. I sort of miss the gun, actually.


Doug S
May 29, 2006, 11:35 PM
I bought a Taurus 905 IB not long ago. It was unreliable. The cylinder would bind and seize up. It would function fine for a while, but you could sporadically feel the cylinder dragging. I've previously had Taurus revolvers with too tight of a gap between the barrel and the forcing cone, but this did not seem to be the problem with the 905. 4 out of 6 Taurus firearms that I've owned have had to be returned to the factory for a variety of repairs. I'm not a big Taurus fan after my 905 purchase. That said, I've purchased to Smith and Wesson 642's in the last year. Although both have functioned okay, both were pretty lousy in the fit and finish department.

May 31, 2006, 01:40 AM
I have a friend that owns a 905. I've shot it, and it seems OK, but I think a small .38 or .357 is a better system overall.

He has had some light strikes, which seem to be related to bent moon clips holding the rounds too far out of the chamber. When the hammer falls and the pin strikes the primer is simply pushes the round into the chamber rather than setting off the primer. He has also had sticky extraction problems with reloads, but not with factory ammo.

All in all, I'd skip it.

May 31, 2006, 01:50 AM
Moon clips are a PIA. I'm looking at trying the polymer ones just because steel sucks.

May 31, 2006, 02:10 AM
The moon clips are a PITA, but I haven't felt the same recoil issues that were talked about here. I had a harder time with the same sized .38 special revolvers than I did with my 9mm Taurus. Maybe it was just because I'm less of a recoil pansy now.

I like mine and enjoy the novelty of having a revolver in the cheap 9mm round. The primary reason I never owned a revolver before was because I don't want to pay the high prices for the revolver calibers.

May 31, 2006, 02:11 AM
Another reason to just go ahead with it is because it's inexpensive.

(Just had to get rid of my evil post count) :evil:

June 2, 2006, 09:02 AM
I am waiting for Taurus to produce a 905 with a shrouded hammer (like the 651). When they bring a shrouded hammer 905 out, I will buy it.

I currently own 5 or 6 Tauruses. Everything from a 454 Raging Bull, to a Total Titanium M85, plus a steel 617, and two steel M85s. Also a semi auto PT145.

No problems with any of them.

June 17, 2006, 11:32 AM
I just purchased a 905 blued hammerless. No sticky extraction issues, but then again I was firing standard velocity Winchester (white box) 115 grain FMJ.

After 201 rounds of the stuff, I found that the cylinder occasionally binded, but after opening the cylinder and slapping the rear of cartridge cases/moon clips hard, the binding generally went away.

The gun was accurate for the most part (I had a hard time picking up the front sight in the darkish range lane I was in) and the recoil was heavier than I expected. I tried some weak-hand only drills....I could only do ten rounds of that before I had to stop. The gun was slamming into the web of my hand in recoil a bit too much for comfort.

I think my Kahr PM9 or P45 (with 230 grain +P) feels more comfortable to shoot than this gun. But I'm ok with my purchase.

Brian Williams
June 17, 2006, 01:50 PM
Ithink that the chambers in a 9mm revolver are similar to a 22jet. You have to keep the chambers oil free.

June 19, 2006, 09:47 PM
I was jonesing the 9mm revo as a BUG for the longest time, till I actually hefted it. It struck me as a small, dense and heavy lump of steel, or possibly depleted uranium. Then again, I've been spoiled by carrying S&W unobtanium guns. ;)

June 20, 2006, 09:28 AM
Perhaps one day Smith will come out with its DAO version of the 9 mm revolver BUG in Scandium and with decent moon clips. And then you will see a fine pocket gun.... But until then, the Taurus 905 will stay in my pocket.


July 12, 2006, 01:21 AM
Took my "new to me" 905 to the range for the first time today. I had 1 Failure to fire per cylinder-full for the first 25 rounds. I then switched ammo and did a little better, with only 5 FTF out of the next 75 rounds. The cylinder wanted to bind up on me several times also. I blame that problem on the moon clips. The "springiness"of the moon clips tended to hold one or two rounds out away from the cylinder face. To overcome this, I had to firmly seat each round after dropping in the full moon clip. ( sort of takes away the anticipated thrill of a fast reload ). The dang little thing, when it went off, was accurate tho'...soo... very disappointing...

July 12, 2006, 09:35 AM

I had some failures to fire with PMC (which apparently has very hard primers), but none after switching ammo. Are your moonclips well-used? You may consider getting some new clips from the company and try it again with a variety of ammo. Good luck. Get the gun reliable and you will have a nice shooter and concealed-carry weapon.


July 12, 2006, 11:51 AM
I've got an SP-101 and can't bragg enough about it. It's been nothing but reliable and the clips are very well designed. I wish they'd make it again so I could have a three incher. The Taurus never made it to California and I've personally never seen a Smith, the Ruger took several years to find and then it was a very involved transaction with a THR member. I've had no extraction problems of any kind and the rounds literally fall out with all ammo I've used and I've had some high pressure stuff through it. The prize I'm looking for now is a 9mm Speed Six if anybody in California wants to get rid of one just let me know.

July 12, 2006, 03:51 PM
Are your moonclips well-used?

I'd say the gun and moon clips are virtually new. I Think the previous owner probably encountered the same problems and just dumped the gun.
The ammo I used has been totally reliable in all my semi-autos.
I really don't want to have to work too hard to get this gun reliable. I have a Taurus 851 that has been great ( and two 669's - so I'm not a Taurus basher ).
I don't want to use it for a "range only" gun but... I don't want to sell it & stick someone else with a dud. Oh well http://www.woofboard.com/forum/images/smilies/CrapHappensSign.bmp

July 12, 2006, 07:54 PM
I have a S&W 547 in 9mm that does not use moon clips. Very cool design.

July 12, 2006, 08:23 PM
I put one on layaway today. I'll let you know how it treats me.


July 13, 2006, 01:43 AM
I have a 905 that was less than satisfactory when I took it to the range. Recoil is stout, accuracy is so so, and the cylinder kept locking itself up for no clear reason. Several light strikes as well. The "stellar clips" are pitiful, don't hold cases tightly enough, and are far to easy to bend, resulting in light primer strikes and the cylinder binding. Its one of those guns that I would love to get rid of, but would feel guilty selling it to someone I know and the local shop won't give me anything in trade for. Perhaps I will give it to my younger brother as a gift with a full disclosure of its drawbacks.

I'd love to find a 9mm Sp101 though.

July 13, 2006, 01:44 AM
I might be interested in it, if the price is right.

July 13, 2006, 05:52 AM
Taurus has a lifetime warranty, send it back.

July 19, 2006, 02:14 AM
Taurus has a lifetime warranty, send it back.

I believe the issue is a design problem with the moon clips. So, unless Taurus is willing to re-design the clips, the problem may not go away...

July 19, 2006, 09:29 AM

Perhaps a design problem, but my non-expert evaluation is that they are simply too "flimsy" to do the job...paper thin and lacking in any strength or integrity. The shortcoming is most notable when comparing the Taurus 9mm moon clip with a www.moonclip.com .45 moon clip. Night and day difference. I wrote Taurus about the problem, but got no response. Which is obviously a response in and of itself.


July 19, 2006, 01:50 PM
Perhaps a design problem, but my non-expert evaluation is that they are simply too "flimsy" to do the job...paper thin and lacking in any strength or integrity
This is the EXACT design problem of which I speak!! WE are on the same page. This is why I believe sending it back to the factory would do no good. The gun itself is ok, and they would probably just replace the old moon clips with the same identical poorly designed moonclips!

July 19, 2006, 09:47 PM
Are there any other companies that make the taurus clips?

July 21, 2006, 10:15 PM
I recently bought a S&W Model 940 with a 3" barrel. The first 2 times I shot it I used WWB ammo and no moonclips. I had about 6 "fail to fire" in the first 100 rounds. I bought some moonclips from S&W and went back out with a box of Remington 115gr FMJ and the gun was perfect for those 50 shots.

July 22, 2006, 10:17 PM
Would the S+W moon clips work in the Taurus?

Gary A
July 23, 2006, 12:15 AM
I tried some S&W moonclips in a Taurus 905 and they wouldn't fit. There is enough difference in the star that the Smith clips wouldn't fit over the Taurus star. It was disappointing because I think the Taurus clips are awful.

July 23, 2006, 06:43 PM
Moonclips are just sheet metal. Cut some out. :) Though the S&W ones are pretty simple.

Loyalist Dave
July 24, 2006, 08:00 PM
A good friend carried his S&W 940 as a backup to his police issued 9mm Semi-auto. That way he was using department issued ammo, so if he had to use it, there'd be much less liability. He was "officially trained" years ago on revolvers by his department, so the fact that he had not been allowed to "qualify" with the 940 as they had switched to semis, but using department ammo, would make it very tough for them to find him completely at fault as they surely would if he used a .38 to defend himself. (It's not the People's Republic of Maryland for nothin'!)


Doug S
July 24, 2006, 09:02 PM
the cylinder kept locking itself up for no clear reason

I bought a Taurus 905 IB earlier in the year. It did exactly what you describe. It did not seem to be caused by the moon clips. I returned it to the dealer, actually traded it in on a S&W.

August 17, 2006, 10:18 PM
I gave up on my 905. The clips were picky about which ammo I used, and bended easily. Other than that it wasn't any better than my 642 for it's purpose. I traded it in on a KelTek SU-16C.


If you enjoyed reading about "Taurus 905 - 9mm Revolver" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!