[Nightcrawler]

Okay, one of the guns I'm planning on purchasing this year is a S&W 640. It's a five shot .357 J-Frame with an internal hammer. I'm going to use it for pocket carry, probably shelving my 642.

Anyway, is there any reason I shouldn't buy the Taurus equivalent and save a hundred bucks? I examined a Taurus .38 in FMBG many times, and I'll be damned if it doesn't have a better trigger than my 642.

So is there any practical reason to get the 640 over the Taurus?

[coelacanth]

Lots of reviews around for Taurus revolvers - whatever you buy just make sure you're informed. I've never owned one but they seem to be well made. Several million Brazilians seem to think highly of them (grin). With the number of good used S&W revolvers on the market right now that might be the way to go if you prefer them. Good luck and good hunting, bro.

[Don Lu]

As long as it passes the revolver checkout pasted at the top of the forum, you will be good to go. Taurus makes fine guns.

[ATW525]

I have a Taurus 650... which is basically the equivalent model to the Smith 640. Mines been an excellent little pocket gun and I have nothing bad to say about it at all. I second Don Lu's suggestion of doing the revolver check out before taking one home, since it's always better to be safe than sorry when dealing with any manufacturer's firearms.

[fiVe]

NC,

Putting the .357 vs .38+p debate aside, why do you want to "retire" your 642? For pocket carry, that extra ½ pound might (just might) make a difference. For IWB/OWB, it probably won't matter.

For what it's worth: I would have no problem with the Taurus.

Not trying to be nosy or confrontational, just curious. (Hey, you know we always want to get into your head.) :p :p

[Nightcrawler]

I don't think the weight will bother me. It's eight ounces, after all. A wad of change in your pocket can weigh more than that. Besides, my .44 is part of my carry routine, and that hog weighs like three pounds. :D

I'm not going to belt carry a snubby, though. If you're going to use a belt holster, why not carry something larger, with better sights? See what I'm saying? I need something for the summatyme when I'm just wearing a T-Shirt and jeans. (As an aside, a good gunbelt helps with pocket carry, too. Keeps your pants up.)

The 642 will become the 'fridge gun. (Don't ask, inside joke. :) )

[waynedm]

Most of those Tauruses aren't rated for +p if that matters to you. You couldn't give me a Taurus. I prefer but Rugers out of all of them though.

[Marshall]

For what it's worth, I have the 640's brother, the Model 60 in .357 Mag. I think it's too heavy for pocket carry. Not that it can't be done, I have and do sometimes. But the 642 is a much better pocket carry gun. Eight ounces doesn't sound like much, but in a pocket, it makes a difference. I carry in a IWB holster instead, I don't even know it's there most of the time. It also leaves my pockets available for other things.

[DawgFvr]

I agree with nightcrawler...the snubby is a pocket weapon used for close up and personal defense...otherwise, why not get a bigger barreled revolver for side carry? I took out my 642 yesterday and shot at 25 feet. I used a rifle target...what the hey, its about the size of a human's mid-section. I had a very difficult time hitting, let alone grouping on that target with slow, aimed fire with the S&W 642. My two autos, PT145 in .45 ACP and even my tiny P38T in .380 tore up the target's 10 ring...much more accurate! I for one, need beau coup practice with that snubby...or...expect accurate hits at 12 feet or less. I like the revolver...but definitely need a bigger piece if I plan on carrying on my hip.

[xring]

I don't know. The Taurus seem to have a nice fit and finish with out doubt. Per my Gunsmith - that's where they spend the $ - on presentation. Open it up and the cost savings are evident.

[Nightcrawler]

I had a very difficult time hitting, let alone grouping on that target with slow, aimed fire with the S&W 642.

Practice more. I'm getting pretty good with mine, but a snub revolver is a uniquely challenging weapon to master. Shoot it twice as much as you do your other guns, especially if you're mainly an auto guy and don't use revolvers much.

Be patient and give it some time. You'll get a feel for it after awhile.

[plexreticle]

I prefer any Taurus over current S&W's personally.

I think most people if they took the Pepsi challenge between Taurus vs. S&W they would agree.

[ugaarguy]

I don't know. The Taurus seem to have a nice fit and finish with out doubt. Per my Gunsmith - that's where they spend the $ - on presentation. Open it up and the cost savings are evident.
Compared with the old pinned bbl guns new MIM parts S&Ws are full of cost cutting measures and the finish is undoubetly lacking. I'm not convinced the current S&Ws are that much, if it all, better than the current Tauruses (Tauri?). If you can't find a used pre-MIM 640 (if they even exist) I'd save the money and get the Taurus.

Most of those Tauruses aren't rated for +p if that matters to you. You couldn't give me a Taurus.
First, Nightcrawler is talking about replacing his 38+P S&W 642 with a .357 Mag 640 or equivalent - as in also 357 Mag - from Taurus. Second, every 38 special revolver on Taurus website is +P rated.
I prefer but Rugers out of all of them though.
I really like my SP101, but it's not the same size class of pocket gun a J-Frame or Taurus equivalent is.

[Texfire]

I had a very difficult time hitting, let alone grouping on that target with slow, aimed fire with the S&W 42.
Practice more. I'm getting pretty good with mine, but a snub revolver is a uniquely challenging weapon to master. Shoot it twice as much as you do your other guns, especially if you're mainly an auto guy and don't use revolvers much.

Be patient and give it some time. You'll get a feel for it after awhile.

I agree that practice and trigger control are the secrets to shooting a snubby accurately. But for assistance with the very short sight distance, I suggest getting a set of Crimson Trace lasergrips. I have a pair of the overmolded ones on my 642 and it made a huge difference, shrinking my groups by over half right away. I still practice with the sights, anything electronic can fail after all, but they allow me to focus more on a smooth trigger pull than aiming with the awful sights that come on a 642. Also for situations where I wouldn't be able to raise the gun to look through the sights, the laser gives sighting information. Why S&W didn't go with a contrasting color sight or colored blade insert is beyond me. That matte gray sight just melts into the gun in low light environments. I've considered getting red nail polish and painting that front sight.

As to the original question I haven't ever shot a Taurus snubby in .38 or .357, so I can't really give it a thumbs up or down. I did briefly own a Taurus snubby in 9mm, but ended up trading it in on another gun. The moonclips Taurus used with it were a little flimsy and led to malfunctions. I do have two Taurus Gauchos, and even though they both had final assembly QC problems that required the shop to send them back to the factory, they have been reliable and accurate since coming back.

Tex

[Nightcrawler]

The only downside to the lasergrips is how big they are. They might interefere with pocket carry, depending on the holster and your pants.

[1BLINDREF]

Nightcrawler-

I did opposite of what you are doing. I had the M640 first and shelved it for a M642. 8 oz makes a huge difference when it comes to pocket carry. .357 loads are pretty punishing to shoot through the 640 - even at 23 oz. I shoot my 642 much more accurately then the 640 with .357. The muzzle flash out of the 640 w/.357s is like the 4th of July :what: :eek: :cool: . It usually gets the attention of the others a the range - "*** IS THAT"
I would buy the 640 - try to find one w/o the lock and keep them both. The 640 rides under my thigh when I'm driving through prime car jacking areas, .357 will punch through the car door with no problems.

http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t307/dexternikki/IMG_2235.jpg

[Nightcrawler]

try to find one w/o the lock and keep them both.

I appreciate your input, but I'm totally not caring about the lock. I have a tube of some wonderful stuff called Blue Loc-Tite that I can (and do) use if I worry about the lock.

In any case, there is no decent selection of used S&W around here.

[Old Fuff]

So is there any practical reason to get the 640 over the Taurus?

No, not from my point of view. I have used both, and both are satisfactory, but the Taurus will do everything that the S&W will, and they generally cost less.

On the other hand I see no good reason for a pocket gun of any make in .357 Magnum. Since I have no intention of using the Magnum cartridge in this application I don't spend the extra money for a Magnum.

All current Taurus revolvers in .38 Special are certified for use with Plus-P ammunition - if that's your cup of tea. :scrutiny:

[Nightcrawler]

Recoil sensitive? Why the dislike of .357s, or even +P .38s?


EDIT: It's interesting to see how far Taurus has come. A couple years ago, very few people on this very board would recommend a Taurus over a S&W. Taurus' reputation has improved a lot, I think, since they've been putting more effort into QC.

EDIT EDIT: My asking about recoil sensitivity is NOT a dig. A lot of people simply don't like it, for reasons ranging from preference to medical (arthritis, joint problems, etc.).

I've not had a problem with it so far. My .44 is fun, 'cept when it made my hand bleed. My 642 with +P is snappy, but not bad. Rapid fire is still possible, but it's a strictly short-ranged proposition at this point. My Colt Gov't Model recoils so gently by comparison that it's almost like cheating...

[fiVe]

The only downside to the lasergrips is how big they are.

They are getting smaller. Look at this. (http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=3194034&postcount=1950) We are having an excellent laser grip discussion over in The 642 Club.

R/fiVe

[Nightcrawler]

http://forums.crimsontrace.com/pictures/LG-105sm.JPG

HOLY CRAP! They've really miniaturized those things, haven't they? :eek:

[iostorm]

I'm a huge Taurus fan, I have 5 and heve never had any trouble with any of them, actually I prefer them to my other brands.

[chipp]

Every time I think of buying a taurus. I remind myself thet 6 monthes later
the xtra 100 or 2 won't seam like so much. Personally I will be sorry.
I'm sure tauras makes fine revolvers but not for me.
Maybe someday.

[waynedm]

I think we could all agree that the cost of the gun itself isn't the expensive part of shooting, it's the ammo and range and targets. An extra hundred or so isn't a big deal in the grand scheme. S&W customer service (if you even need it on one of their revolvers) is going to be folds better than Taurus's.

[JERRY]

since S&W has gone to the MIM parts AND the built in disabling devise some folks call "the lock", i see the guns(revolvers) as no better than a taurus now....either S&W has slipped or Taurus has climbed up...

where s&w still shines is their customer service if and when there is a problem with the gun.


i personally wont buy a new s&w with "the lock", i could live with many things, but an unneeded things that can jam up a gun when i need it to fire is not one of them....same for the taurus wheelys, wont buy ne of them either....

you can still find well cared for S&W wheelys that do not have the built in non optional internal disbaling devise, for a reasonable price....hows this grab ya?
http://gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=67990078

[rolltide]

I once owned a 4" Taurus 357 back in the 90's that consistently shot smaller groups than my bro. in law's Ruger gp100, which was a fine gun in its own right. I would say the Taurus was as good a shooter as my S&W 686, but the trigger wasn't quite as smooth and the fit and finish (back then) was not nearly as nice as the S&W. Taurus has really improved their fit and finish since then, but I hear their service dept. really stinks if you have to return a gun under their "lifetime" warranty.

Roll Tide

[Bandit522]

S&W has slipped and Taurus has climbed up...

[Correia]

Guys, some of you must have missed when the thread originator said:

I'm totally not caring about the lock.

Could we please, pretty pretty please, for the love of John Moses Browning and all that is holy and good in the universe, please, not bring up the stupid lock in every single thread in the revolver forum?

[rolltide]

Correia,

Don't be shy, tell us how you really feel. :D :D :D

Best regards,

Roll Tide

[plexreticle]

Could we please, pretty pretty please, for the love of John Moses Browning and all that is holy and good in the universe, please, not bring up the stupid lock in every single thread in the revolver forum?

What lock?

[DAdams]

The Mod is right. Can't go on a wheel gun thread anywhere in the freaking universe and someone is whining about the lock,,"dis-abling device" etc. Give it up for crying out loud or get a job on the S&W marketing team and change the world. :neener:

Talk about http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m22/dadams111/beating_2Da_2Ddead_2Dhorse.jpg

[JERRY]

sure, if we talk about the ruger sp101.....:neener:

[Diamondback]

To my mind the only thing a current manufactured S&W J frame has over a Taurus is a better resale value and good old-fashioned American customer service. Comparing a new small frame S&W to a new small frame Taurus......the S&W's just aren't any better built today.

American made, better resale, and great customer service are what you get for $100-200 more when you buy a currently made S&W, IMHO. Otherwise, functionally, they are identical. Just my 2 cents.

- Regards

[DawgFvr]

Really? As I understand it...Taurus looks good exterior wise, however, once you look into the internals one finds that S&W is more polished and refined. I am not bashing Taurus though...cuz the best pistol I own is a Taurus Millennium PT145. I was just a bit suspect on the revolvers though...

[Nightcrawler]

I was really surprised to learn that the current crop of J-Frame Smiths have coil mainsprings. All Taurus guns have coil mainsprings, as do Rugers. But most S&W guns have leaf mainsprings. Have the J-Frames always had coils, or is this a recent change? If it's a recent change, why did they make it?

[steelhead]

If saving $100 is the central issue then go with the Taurus. Either way you won't be disappointed. I agree that the Taurus revolvers have nicer out of the box triggers but you can easily get the S&W's to be just as nice. Both can be made to be really nice.

Maybe grip choice is the only practical reason for going with the Smith.....

[Jkwas]

where s&w still shines is their customer service if and when there is a problem with the gun.
+1
I have a Taurus 605 and the fit and finish is superb. It also has a Smith M36 mainspring in it as well! I believe the leaf spring is used on the K frame on up.

[Golddog]

J frames have always had coil springs.

Taurus quality control has often been a gamble. If it doesn't work after a few hundred rounds, you haven't saved any money.

[Old Fuff]

Nightcrawler:

Recoil sensitive? Why the dislike of .357s, or even +P .38s?

I don’t “dislike” either the .38 Special Plus-P or .357 Magnum cartridges. I admit that I suffer from a combination of old age and a medical disability that has crippled my hands, but I never take this into consideration when offering advice to others unless they are in the same boat. Happy to say, you aren’t. :)

The current thinking on this forum seems to often be that one should have the most powerful cartridge possible in even the smallest and lightest guns. I disagree. :scrutiny:

Let me digress for a moment to make my point: Recently a deranged teen shot his ex-girlfriend at point-blank range 4 times with a .44 Magnum. Then he turned the gun on himself. From all perspectives this was a terrible tragedy, but even so we can learn from it. The victim was taken to a hospital, and although grievously wounded she survived, and even went home after a few days. I am delighted with this outcome, but it points out that big bullets in Magnum cartridges are no guarantee that a hit, or several hits, will stop a shooting. Under the rules of engagement, dictated by law in most states, a person cannot respond with deadly force unless they are under some kind of lethal attack. That means that the aggressor(s) usually get to start, and under the best of circumstances means that they’re victim is at a disadvantage. To survive they must (1) quickly respond and hit the attacker, (2) hit them precisely in a vital place so that they will be instantly disabled and cannot continue the assault, and (3) be able to do this repeatedly and quickly.

It is not necessarily a Magnum cartridge or high-performance (hollow point) bullet that will get the job done, but rather the exact place that bullet hits. As I illustrated above, simply making holes in someone doesn’t necessarily work, and while it isn’t working you may still be under fire. The FBI learned that the hard way, in a Miami, Florida shoot-out some years ago. :what:

Just to humor a demented old man, take a .38 pocket revolver (such as a J-frame Smith & Wesson or ’85 series Taurus, and fill the chambers with either 148 grain mid-range target loads (somewhat hard to find these days) or some 158 grain “cowboy loads,” made for cowboy action shooting. Mount a piece of regular 8 ½” x 11” printer paper about 5 ½ to 6 feet off of the ground. This represents an assailant’s head. Stand back about 12 feet, draw the revolver as quickly as you can, and empty the cylinder as fast as you can and still keep the shots in the center of the paper. (Shots on the edge, “near hits”, and misses don’t count). Don’t make the mistake of accepting poor marksmanship in exchange for faster speed.

See if you don’t find that the greater accuracy and speed isn’t worth giving up some raw power that you can’t control as well.

Oh, and I think Plus-P .38’s and .357 Magnums are fine in an appropriately sized and heavier revolver. There I can take advantage of the greater power without sacrificing those other important considerations – accuracy and speed. ;)

[SnWnMe]

S&W has slipped and Taurus has climbed up...

I've been hearing this for almost 20 years now. How many more years does Taurus need to catch up and surpass?

[SnWnMe]

BTW, I'm a S&W snob. :p

But to each his own. Follow your heart.

[wcwhitey]

I think it is a complete toss up. Try them both side to side and see which one you like best. Quality is about equal these days. BTW, I am not a fan of the .357 J frames because of the size increase. I have a 640 No Dash .38 +P, Great Gun but it is a smaller package same as your 642. Bill

[Nightcrawler]

I'm not hardcore on the getting the lightest gun and putting the hottest loads through it craze. I didn't even buy a 4" .44, I got the heavier 5" Classic becuase I don't like it when guns beat me up too much. (And most of my loads are sub-1200 fps in velocity.)

You won't see me shooting a scandium .357. Ouch. Which is why in a .357 I want to go to an all-steel gun. It might well be too heavy for daily pocket carry, but it'll at least be an option for days when I don't or can't wear a cover garment. On the upshot, I've lost weight, which means I have several pairs of pants that are now too big. Perfect IWB pants now! :cool:

I am of the belief that if you've only got five or six shots, you should get the most out of them. Most powerful load that you can control. I think it's more important in a sub-2" .38 snub, though, where penetration (remember, ballistic gel doesn't have bones) might be a concern. Fortunately, modern bullet technology lets one finesse performance without using so much raw power. The Speer "short barrel loads" are a prime example of this. I had trouble with +P .38s in the snub at first, so I practiced more. No problem now.

(As an aside, the worst mistake you can make with a snub is not practicing with it. As I've said before, they're uniquely challenging weapons to master, and they require effort on your part. If your load recoils too much for your comfort, take Old Fuff's advice and go to something lighter until you're comfortable with your capabilities.)

Normally though? For defensive ammo, I just grab whatever's there. My .45 mags currently have a mix-and-match of 230 grain +P Cor-Bon and Golden Saber JHPs. Both feed reliably in my Colt (as does everything else I've tried), so I just bought what the gun store had.

For all of our debating about what load is best, hey? LOL :D

[blazer610]

Are there documented cases of a Smith & Wesson weapon failing to function due to "the lock"? How about MIM parts?

I own revolvers produced by Colt, Charter, Dan Wesson, High Standard, Ruger, Smith & Wesson, and Taurus. It is sort of ironic that the only revolver that I own that ever had a mechanical failure that rendered it inoperable is a Smith & Wesson Model-10 that has a pinned barrel, hammer mounted firing pin, and was produced long before MIM parts and internal locks were ever though of.

It's sort of like our fond memories of those safe, reliable, and efficient fine automobiles of the 1950's, 1960's, and even earlier. Why certainly they were much better than the clunkers that roll off the lines today.

Maybe it's those damned CNC machines that have ruined everything!

Larry

[Croyance]

I had a Taurus revolver I didn't like and people in the places I go to find that it is kind of hit or miss.

That said, it comes down to the individual gun. If you think that this one has a better trigger and it checks out in all the other ways, go for the Taurus.
As for the quality of the insides, as long as the parts are strong, durable, and functional I don't care if all the little non-contact areas are polished with a J-frame type. With a Python, yes.

[Kevinch]

Are there documented cases of a Smith & Wesson weapon failing to function due to "the lock"? How about MIM parts?

To answer the question: yes, I think there is a thread over on the S&W forum where folks post about incidents where the lock as caused issues (I wish I had a link, but I don't - sorry). IIRC, under the stiff recoil of full power .357 loads in the scandium framed guns, the lock will "partially" engage. Usually, fully engaging the lock, then disengaing, is the only way to clear it.

I don't think it's been an issue in the aluminum framed .38 guns (like the 642).

FWIW, when purchasing revolvers for both my wife & daughter last year I went back & forth between Taurus & S&W. I'm not trying to start or perpetuate an argument here - just stating what my decision process was like. I have owned, & currently own, guns from both Taurus & S&W. I've had to send guns from each back for warranty work. When the guns were finally returned, they worked well.

So - my personal experience is that S&W & Taurus have about an equal footing as far as quality goes. So which to buy? What I don't like about S&W is the the way the lock is executed, & I haven't forgotten about the HUD Agreement. However, when I returned my M85 for warranty work, the experience was not as smooth as when S&W worked on my 686-2.

In the end, I bought my daughter a M637 & my wife a 3" M60, deciding that the Customer Service & Support of S&W was more important for them. If buying for myself, I might just go the other way & choose Taurus, taking advantage of the lower cost & the better executed lock. (Another option is a pre-lock, pre-Agreement S&W.) As I'm more of an enthuiast, I have other options available if a particular firearm needs to leave my possession for repair and am probably more comfortable dealing with the manufacturer. As more guns come & go, I might change my opinion but for now I see no reason not to go with Taurus.

[PX15]

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a73/Laserlips/100_6347.jpg

My pre-lock 638.... ;)


J. Pomeroy

[jflovelady]

I have four Rugers, two Smith & Wessons and one Taurus. They all work fine and are all fun to shoot. Why the big fuss over brand names?

[PX15]

jflovelady:

Hard to be a snob when you've got two of these suckers laying around... ;)

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a73/Laserlips/100_4832.jpg



Best Wishes,

J. Pomeroy

[420Stainless]

Anyway, is there any reason I shouldn't buy the Taurus equivalent and save a hundred bucks?

Perhaps not a good reason, but I like living and working in the U.S. and don't mind spending more for an equivalent product produced here. Having said that, I own a Model 85 (purchased when my LGS was boycotting S&W) and do believe it is equivalent to my S&W's. If you do not share my bias, then there is not a good reason to spend more.

[sig228]

Nightcrawler, you KNOW that you want the Smith. If you buy the Taurus, you will always be nagged by the fact that you didn't buy the Smith. What are you going to be more proud of at the range - a great All-American Smith and Wesson or a Brazilian made Taurus:barf: ???

Is there really any choice?

Spend the extra dough. You won't regret it.

[PX15]

Just a thought:


Taurus has a terrible customer service reputation.

Smith & Wesson has an excellent customer service reputation.

If, when, or ever you decide to sell your revolver your S&W will be easier to sell, and you will get the difference back you paid initially over the Taurus.

Smith & Wesson American made, Taurus not...


Reasons enough for me.

Having said that, and preferring Smiths over Tauri I think you would be well served with either. Buy what you want.


Best Wishes,

J. Pomeroy

[Texfire]

Nightcrawler, you KNOW that you want the Smith. If you buy the Taurus, you will always be nagged by the fact that you didn't buy the Smith. What are you going to be more proud of at the range - a great All-American Smith and Wesson or a Brazilian made Taurus ???

Is there really any choice?

Spend the extra dough. You won't regret it.

Taken to it's logical conclusion, if he buys the Smith then he'll always wonder if the Taurus would have been just as good. Only way to know for sure, buy both... :evil:

I'd say that making an emotional argument like alluding to patriotic spirit is a little silly, but people make purchases for emotional reasons every day so if buying an American made firearm makes you proud then by all means do so.

For myself, pride in country isn't that big a consideration in my purchasing decisions. I buy the "best" product, "best" being a interaction of such factors as quality, cost, value and aesthetics. Is country of manufacture a part of that decision matrix? Sure, but it's not the paramount criteria. That said, in situations were all other factors are equal I'll keep my money in the local economy if given the option.

Tex

[CZ.22]

PX15
Might I inquire as to what the heck those are? Are they early Tauri?

[Vern Humphrey]

A pox on both your houses. I buy Colts.:neener:

[PX15]

CZ22: BURGO's.... Pot metal W.German made I think, possibility 38 long caliber. (I've never shot them, or even paid any attention to the caliber).

Here's the story on these "beauties".. It's kinda long, so quit reading anytime you get tired.

My 80yr old MIL bought one of the Burgos used for personal defense sometime in the early 1970's in Statesboro, Ga., from a pawn shop for (she said) $15.00 incld free holster.

My now deceased FIL (married to another at the time) bought his Burgo new at a sporting guns/hardware store in Jacksonville, Fl. in the late 1980's... Don't know what he paid for it.

Fast forward to the middle 1990's..

She moved to Waycross (to be near her only child, my wife).
He divorced, remarried, and moved to Waycross in a job transfer.

His 2nd wife died, later he met my MIL at Church and sometime thereafter they got hitched.

When they were combining households they were surprised to see they had matching Burgo's. Neither revolver had been shot (I don't think) since they got them, but they asked me to clean them up and make sure they would shoot..

In cleaning them I was surprised to see they were consecutive serial numbers..

He died two years ago, and she gave me the Burgos.. They aren't worth poop, but the story of how the consecutive serial numbered Burgos got back together is pretty neat.

Thanks for askin'.

Best Wishes,

J. Pomeroy

[Texfire]

A pox on both your houses. I buy Colts.

Oooooo, point, set, match! :)

Tex

[PX15]

Vern Humphrey:

Like mine? ;)

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a73/Laserlips/100_5032.jpg

Best Wishes,

J. Pomeroy

[Super Trucker]

I prefer the S&W over Taurus personally, but as a side note the 640 gets heavy in the pocket after a few hours. I have pocket carried a 642 then 649 and now 340.

[Serpico]

I'm no snob but every morning my butler brings me the paper, coffee and my smith on a tray. My valet and driver do carry tauruses though.

[Vern Humphrey]

I'm no snob but every morning my butler brings me the paper, coffee and my smith on a tray. My valet and driver do carry tauruses though.

You poor fellow! Sometimes we forget how the unfortunates in this world have to live, until a post like this brings it home.

I'll remember you when my naked slave girls come crawling toward me each morning, bringing me my Colt New Service and massaging my feet.:neener:

[HammerBite]

Vern certainly has style!

[popeye]

I've got 5 j frames left. 638 no ILS. 632 no ILS. 432 W/ ILS. PRE 40. and a 63. I don't carry the 63. All of them share one thing in common. All barrels are 1 7/8", just right for front jeans pocket carry. The j frame .357 steel guns have a 2 1/2" barrel don't they? I remember I got a 649 .357 a few years ago and I found it too heavy and long for the way I carry the j frame. I don't like Taurus. No reason, JMO. $100 will barely put a down payment on a gumball anymore.

[Caimlas]

My opinion is that S&W revolvers are generally overpriced for what they are, and it's largely due to S&W structures their model release.

For instance, they'll release one model for a year or two, limited production, and then they'll stop making it for a couple years, or change it slightly and alter the model number. This drives up both price and demand "because they don't make this gun anymore", giving it a broader collector's appeal. This, in turn, causes the other similar S&W revolvers - the mainstays - to be priced slightly higher than they normally would be, simply due to their technical similarity to the 'discontinued' revolvers. "Hey, it's just like this discontinued model except for minor x and y features, so it's only $50 less."

Then other revolver manufacturers end up pricing their revolvers a bit higher as well - because it's still cheaper than an auto, for the most part, and they've really only got to beat out S&W on price if they want to make the sale.

At least, that's my take.

I don't think that S&Ws are that much better than Taurus, not unless you're spending on the more expensive models. For a 'cheap' revolver like the ones you've mentioned, I'd personally not splurge, and get the Taurus instead.

[DAdams]

My father-in-law always says, "it only costs a little more to go first class".

When you got it, flaunt it. :D

[Feanaro]

You can't be initiated into the S&W Snobs club unless you will accept nothing less than a pinned and recessed model. If there is room in your heart for even one made of steel that does not stain, they shall know and root you out.

A Master Snob cannot even have this much mercy in his soul, he must cast out all revolvers made after the downfall of the year nineteen and sixty five. To sit upon the Coucil, you must purge yourself of all desire for them made after the second of the great wars. Few are them that can reach such heights.

None living know what a man must do to sit in the Amazing Comfy Leather Armchair of the Grand Wazoo, if such a being may still be a man.

[popeye]

ALL HAIL THE GRAND WAZOO! Keeper of the Devine Golden Knurled Screwdriver.

[Sniper X]

Cause you'll get black balled by the Smith clique if ya by a Mr. T!:what:

All kidding aside, I have two Taurus's and love them both. I am sure the 88 has work done to it, got it used, but it shoots better than my Smith 66 and is slicker but otherwise a nickel copy of such. My 605 shoots great as my model 60 did and I like it a little better because of the lugged barrel....so I guess I am gonna get kicked outta the Smith club! :D

[Feanaro]

I believe the S&WSS(Smith and Wesson Snob Society) uses stainless steel balls instead of the more traditional black. Blued or nickel balls in place of white.

ALL HAIL THE GRAND WAZOO! Keeper of the Devine Golden Knurled Screwdriver.

And the Cosmik Debris.

[LightningJoe]

Guns are like cars in that quality and price don't track each other very well. Taurus is just as good as S&W and Honda is just as good as Mercedes. Most people prefer Mercedes, though, if they can afford it. $100 is not a big difference. If you get more pride of ownership, it's probably worth it.

[Mark8252]

I own both and like both. What anyone else thinks does not matter.
Just be safe.

:) :) :) :)

[JERRY]

IF, if you must buy a locked gun, the taurus revolvers execute the lock better than the s&w revolvers by the fact that it can not be recoil induced to self engage because of the set up in the frame has it athortships opposed to fore and aft....

[snow]

I have a taurus 605 snub in .357 magnum. As I stated earlier I have had problems with the timing out of the box, which seemed so far to have remedied itself. Not sure what happened my dealer told me that it could have had a bur that fell of and now it is functioning properly. recoil is not bad nice fit with inside the pant holster. I don't think I did a bad thing by choosing taurus over smith at the time because it was all that I could afford then. I needed it for working late night performing service calls in unfriendly areas. Now that I can afford a higher quality American made pistol it will not be a smith but a Ruger in either .41mag or 45colt.

[Bullet Bob]

By selecting a S&W, you are not a snob. You are a person of class and distinction, not someone who knows the price of everything, and the value of nothing. You value the best, and appreciate over 150 years of American history.

Okay, slightly tongue in cheek, but I own too many S&W's, more than a couple of Colts, and don't tell anyone, even one Ruger (Bearcat). I do bleed S&W blue, whether the gun is old or new.

I have tried to shoot a couple of Tauri in the past; one wouldn't, and the other managed to fire 2 of the rounds in the fully loaded cylinder, but some people love 'em, who am I to deny them their pleasure.

[Kevinch]

I keep seeing this - what in the world is a "Tauri"??

[Vern Humphrey]

I keep seeing this - what in the world is a "Tauri"??

It is the plural form of Taurus -- a large, cud-chewing animal that haunts these forums and leaves its droppings for us to step in.:p

[Bullet Bob]

Smith & Wesson, whether old
http://fototime.com/5F3CB629DD490A9/standard.jpg

New
http://fototime.com/43262C0B6AC554D/standard.jpg

Or older
http://fototime.com/47033EC715CF238/standard.jpg
http://fototime.com/58B3A7FEFA331B9/standard.jpg

Or really new
http://fototime.com/159C7CC9B61E4BA/standard.jpg

It's all good.

[Feanaro]

I keep seeing this - what in the world is a "Tauri"??

Multiple ugly male bovines, the kind that ram fences and fart on everything. I don't know why some people are talking about cattle in Latin when everyone else is discussing revolvers in English but to each their own. :evil: