taurus model 94


PDA






WildLifeGuy308
February 25, 2011, 07:53 PM
Hey guys i want to buy a Taurus 94 .22lr what do you guys think is it reliable and accurate if any one owns it have you had any problems . Is it also worth the money or is the a better .22 lr revolver thats better quality thats not too much more .
thanks

If you enjoyed reading about "taurus model 94" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Trebor
February 25, 2011, 08:01 PM
I have a Taurus 94. Mine had to go back to the factory after only a few hundred rounds. Something went wrong internally and the trigger became very hard to pull. It also had problems with light strikes.

It came back OK, but after I bought a S&W Model 18 (used) I found out how much better the S&W revolvers were compared to the Taurus.

Based on my experience, and the general poor QC of Taurus, I'd pass on the 94. Save up for a S&W or Ruger .22 revolver instead

crankyoldlady
February 25, 2011, 08:06 PM
I have some experience with the 94 and I can tell you it has the trigger from hell. Took it to my gunsmith to have him lighten the pull only to be told he does not work on any Taurus.

Save your pennies and look for a nice S&W 18-3 or-4 shooter.

couldbeanyone
February 25, 2011, 08:52 PM
I own no less than 16 of the Taurus 94-941 series of revolvers. Four of them had problems with locking up when new. I was able to fix them myself with minimal effort. They have all been reliable, a couple are near the 40,000 round mark, and accurate. No parts have broken and I have had no other misshaps. The factory double action trigger pull is horribly stiff. This can be helped a lot with a wolff 6 1/2 lb trigger spring.
Having said all of that, I would not recommend a Taurus 94 to anyone unless they are mechanically inclined and willing to completely disassemble the gun and clean out the copious amounts of grit and gunk that reside in the internals of one of these guns when new. If you don't mind tinkering a little you can make a nice little gun out of one of them. I would buy another one for myself in a heartbeat. The basic gun and its design is sound, they just sometimes need a little finishing.
If you are a person who can look at something and figure out how it works,and have enough patience to do a little fluff and buff, I would say go for it. If you can't, I would say pass.

WildLifeGuy308
February 25, 2011, 11:53 PM
thanks i changed my mind ill try to look for a used smith & wesson

dhfenno
February 25, 2011, 11:59 PM
I have a 94.
Trigger is terrible. Beyond terrible actually. If you try to improve it then it becomes unreliable.
When you can fight the trigger back and make it go pop it is accurate as hell.
I have the 2 inch and can hit a golf ball at 20 yards.
But that's only after spending 2 days getting used to that terrible trigger again.
I will keep mine to throw in the tackle box when I go fishing just in case it falls in the water and gives me an excuse to buy another .22 revolver.

Ala Dan
February 26, 2011, 05:26 PM
Listen to the crankyoldlady; she has it right~! Tauri International
is not known for the best triggers out of the box; and I don't blame your
gunsmith; as I would not work on Tauri products, period~! :rolleyes: :cuss:

DMZ
February 26, 2011, 06:37 PM
I have two blued M94's. A 4" and a 5". Both were sent in for warranty work and returned fixed in 6 weeks.

The DA triggers are very heavy, but not unmanageable. Run a brick of bulk ammo through one and you will figure out how to shoot it DA with accuracy. Hint: you can stage the trigger. Plus the trigger will break-in some.

The SA triggers are nice a crisp. These are not SD revolvers, but plinkers and campers. 90% of the time you are going to cock the hammer manually.

Both are very accurate with most ammo and get a good deal of use. The 4" balances very nice and I like the small frame.

Would I buy another? No. I am looking for a nice K-22. Would I recommend one? Not really.

Am I interested in the Taurus medium framed Tracker .22LR/.22Mag conversion revolver. You bet.

bergmen
February 26, 2011, 08:50 PM
Ditto on what most have said here. I bought my wife a Taurus Model 94 several years ago (used) since it seemed the perfect fun gun for her. She absolutely loves it but we were been plagued by FTFs from the git-go.

We sent it back, they put stronger springs in it. Cured the FTFs but made it a bear to DA fire it. Okay, the wife gets used to it then the transfer bar broke jamming up the action. Back it went again to get that fixed.

I just wish there were other choices in hi-cap .22 wheel guns. The S&W 617 is the only other choice but at over $800.00 it takes the fun right out of getting one.

Dan

gofastman
February 26, 2011, 08:56 PM
I have a 94. Its a fun gun and with a Wolff 6.5lb trigger spring the trigger went from "terrible" to just "bad" :p
I say its worth the money.

hardluk1
February 27, 2011, 08:00 AM
I have an old model 94 that is my cheap to practice with 22 for a 85ss i carried for 25 years. After all these years I had to send it in for a tune up. Fireing pin was shot. Taurus did it for free but I had to pay shipping one way. It and the 85 have trigger pulls that suprised many s&w owners over the years. Light and smooth. Like every handgun I have all have wolf spring in them. But these taurus;s are a a pair of great shooters. If your looking at used revolvers . Look for a older well used one and see how it feels. Might be one of those oldes that give up nothing to the over priced smith and wessons.

Racinbob
February 27, 2011, 08:38 AM
Taurus is already known for 'iffy' firearms out of the box. The 94 probably upholds that reputation the best. Find a nice used S&W 63,18,17, etc. and you'll be much happier. My personal favorite is the 63.

JR47
February 27, 2011, 05:19 PM
Taurus is already known for 'iffy' firearms out of the box.

Ah, the lore of the Internet. I have a pair of 94s, both 4", one blue and one stainless. I also have a blued, 4", 941.

All three were cleaned with the side-plate removed before shooting. They were also lubed properly. The DA trigger is about the equal of my S&W 617. Oh, the Taurus, all three of them, will allow the cylinder to release when the button is pushed. My 617 won't. It's been at S&W for weeks. For the cost, they should have provided me with a loaner.

This is my SECOND S&W revolver to fail. One out of the box, a 625-3 that failed on the first shot. Then, the 617 failed with less than a box of .22 through it.

It would appear as though S&W is an "iffier" proposition than Taurus

Gato MontÚs
February 28, 2011, 04:32 AM
No it wouldn't. I too was going to take the leap and get a 94 but the bad press on that particular model is alarmingly high, I mean really really high.

I wish Ruger would come out with a 22 LCR already. An eight shot polymer snub would be the cat's meow.

ArchAngelCD
February 28, 2011, 04:47 AM
If you're looking for a budget .22 revolver I recommend a Charter Arms product.

PapaG
February 28, 2011, 09:47 AM
One of the most "returned to factory" guns we sell. Horrible triggers that don't respond to much in the way of gunsmithing. Nasty problems with lockup...bolts don't want to come up. Once in a while, cylinder binds against rear of barrel. Don't know how they can copy Smith and do such a crappy job of it.
Personally, I've had a couple and got rid of them. My Smith 63, however, is the same size and a much nicer gun in all respects.

JR47
February 28, 2011, 04:08 PM
I would think twice about S&W revolvers. My new 617 hasn't come back yet.

As for the Model 63, at $769.00 MSRP, it strikes me as over-priced for an MIM laden gun.

Locally, the "most returned revolvers are, sadly, Charter Arms.

No it wouldn't. I too was going to take the leap and get a 94 but the bad press on that particular model is alarmingly high, I mean really really high.

Yes, it would. As for bad press, listening to it on other subjects will cause you to get rid of ALL of your guns.

Why is it that, despite several posters who have had excellent service from Model 94s, it's ignored for the couple of nay-sayers?

Racinbob
February 28, 2011, 05:16 PM
No, not internet lore JR47. 35 years and dozens of Smiths as well as others type experience. I don't buy into the internet mumbo jumbo and
I'll never comment on just that.

PapaG
February 28, 2011, 05:36 PM
My 63 was used and I paid about the same as for a T94.

showmebob
February 28, 2011, 05:56 PM
I have a S-W as well as the 94. The 94 SA trigger is almost as good as the S-W. No problems at all after 4-5 thousand rounds. Finish isn't anywhere as good as Smith and DA trigger pull is terrible. For the wifes gun it is worth every dime we paid for it.

couldbeanyone
February 28, 2011, 11:16 PM
Don't know how they can copy Smith and do such a crappy job of it.
Newer Taurus revolvers are not a copy of a Smith & Wesson. The internal lockwork is not even remotely the same.

wrs840
February 28, 2011, 11:32 PM
My Smith 63, however, is the same size and a much nicer gun in all respects.

I have a S&W 63 5"bbl and a Taurus 94 4"bbl. Both new within the past three years. The S&W 63 trigger and hammer is noticeably better in both SA and DA. My wife refuses to shoot the Taurus because she finds it uncomfortably stiff, not because she's reading gun-boards and turning into a anti-Taurus snob. That said, I like the Taurus 94 enough that I haven't sold it, and I've had no troubles with its function, nor do I have any complaints about it's fit and finish. I think it's a pretty good gun... "Stiff", but fully functional, and it "feels" good in my hand. I guess I just have stronger hands than my wife.

Gato MontÚs
March 1, 2011, 12:30 AM
Yes, it would. As for bad press, listening to it on other subjects will cause you to get rid of ALL of your guns.

Why is it that, despite several posters who have had excellent service from Model 94s, it's ignored for the couple of nay-sayers?

Cause it's NOT just "a couple of nay-sayers", it's a whole boat load of them, and just for this particular model. Even taken into account the internet bias and anti Taurus sediments, the 94 can be considered the poster child for Taurus quality concerns. Any Google search will confirm that, from a myriad of sources. If you got a couple of good 94s, excellent, I'm happy for you, but don't try and paint this as a Taurus bashing episode.

And for the record, I have no qualms with purchasing Taurus products.

wrs840
March 1, 2011, 12:59 AM
the 94 can be considered the poster child for Taurus quality concerns. Any Google search will confirm that, from a myriad of sources.

My google search does not confirm that "the 94 can be considered the poster child for Taurus quality concerns..."

Not meaning to dog you on this, but could you please post your google search that confirms this?

Gato MontÚs
March 1, 2011, 02:12 AM
http://forum.pafoa.org/general-2/55984-taurus-model-94-22lr-9-shot-revolver.html
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=323888
http://www.xdtalk.com/forums/non-xd-handguns/78687-taurus-revolver-review.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRHhLNuJX_g
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHt36pzhbig&feature=related
http://www.taurusarmed.net/forums/index.php?topic=20691.0
http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?38205-taurus-94-.22
http://www.nationalgunforum.com/archive/index.php/t-18647.html
http://www.thefirearmsforum.com/showthread.php?t=68408
http://www.nationalgunforum.com/showthread.php?21815-Taurus-94-comes-to-a-tragic-end

I restricted my search from using either THR or TFL threads as there is a lot of crossover in those communities, as well as you can find those here lazy pants!

Again, I was looking to buy one of these oh about six months ago, but even with positive threads came the "oh yeah this gun is sweet even though it had to go back to the factory..." Not something I want to hear on a potential purchase.

PapaG
March 1, 2011, 09:40 AM
On the other hand, I have a Taurus Tracker 17, blue, that is without a doubt the most accurate handgun I've ever owned...with 2-7X scope mounted it will do an honest sub MOA at 100 yards from the sandbags on a calm day. Good trigger, tight action, but not a small frame. It regularly bests my Contender match chambered bull barrel 22 and does it with any one of three manufacturer's loads.
I'm not anti Taurus, just anti bad Taurus. The 92s, large frame "Bulls" and a few others are quite fine firearms.

MCgunner
March 1, 2011, 11:08 AM
Don't know how they can copy Smith and do such a crappy job of it.

Yeah, I wouldn't want a copy of the Smith done right, would be a POS. :rolleyes: I'll buy Taurus after a close inspection and save money, myself. Smith and Wesson charges twice the price for crappy QC.

I have 3 Taurus revolvers, two were bought used. All are fantastic. None are 94s, though. I have a few NAA .22 revolvers and a Rossi 511 kit gun. I like 'em, don't need another .22 revolver, though if I ever stumbled upon an old K22 for a good price, i'd be tempted.

JR47
March 1, 2011, 05:05 PM
I restricted my search from using either THR or TFL threads as there is a lot of crossover in those communities, as well as you can find those here lazy pants!

Speaking of lazy, how many of those posts concerned the same gun? Inquiring minds.

Old Ranger
March 1, 2011, 06:35 PM
I bought a Taurus 94 for my wife. I'm a pretty strong guy; and I could barely pull the trigger in double action - - - she couldn't budge it. Sloppy cylinder; Taurus doesn't make different pins - - - so you're stuck with what you get. She loved it anyway, so I took it to my gunsmith, who replaced the springs and polished eveything up: a beautiful, smooth DA pull and hair trigger single action. Now she really loves it. I put a Crimson Trace grip on it, sighted it in and she shoots ragged holes in targets. It is definitely accurate - - - dead accurate. I've found that most Taurus revolvers are.

However, Taurus springs suck. I've never owned one that didn't need a trigger job. I bought an 817 (seven rounds) last Summer. Rated + P, right. Remington 158 grain + P and Double Tap caused the cylinder to counter rotate slightly (bad ju-ju). Weak spring, bad lockup - - - too much vibration in the ultralite frame - - - not + P. I got it fixed too.

Taurus customer service is pretty awful; don't bother.

I've bought them because they're accurate and cheap. You can spend up to $800. on a Smith snubbie, ala 360PD; which also has a lousy trigger; which my gunsmith couldn't or wouldn't fix due to the materials involved. OR, you can buy a Taurus for $350, get a trigger job and shoot it til you wear it out - - - which happens; but it takes a while. I had a model 66 that I used for matches.:)

crankyoldlady
March 13, 2011, 06:07 PM
There is a well respected gunsmith who's website I keep up with. He recently blogged regarding his experience with Taurus revolvers. Some here may find it of interest.

http://heffronfirearmclassics.com/NEWSANDANNOUNCEMENTS.aspx

snow
March 13, 2011, 07:23 PM
I have a model 94 I bought back in 2009. I think the trigger sucks but it has been reliable up to this point. I must admit it has not seen a lot of use. I bought it as a night stand gun for my wife and only shoot it at the range on occasions. It has roughly 300-400 rounds through it but not one malfunction. The cylinder was very sticky at first but the more I shoot it the better it gets. It is accurate and i can hit what i aim at and so can she. I have shot stingers, velocitors, vipers round nose and hp out of it. So far I have seen no problem but I am looking for something a little more refined but this time I want it in 22mag. Thinking of a NEF.

steven58
March 13, 2011, 08:52 PM
I have personally experienced only 2 94s. Both 4" stainless and purchased several months apart in 2010.

The DA trigger pull on both were very heavy. One measured 18 lbs and the other was off the scale on my Timney Trigger Pull Gauge (tops out at 25 lbs). on the latter it's not binding or sticking. It really is so heavy that 11 yr old and 15 yr old girls could not pull the trigger single handed.

Single action broke at 9 and 12 lbs respectively and both took great effort to cock.

Currently one is back from a trigger job that improved it to a crisp 4 lb. single and smooth 9 lb. double. The revolver is reasonably accurate, say 3-5" at 25 yds. single action.

In my opinion the cost of the 94 + the mandatory trigger work puts it too close to the price of a S&W .22 kit gun for it to be worth buying the Taurus.

For the money I'd be looking for a used smith .22 on either a J or K frame.

weregunner
March 14, 2011, 04:45 AM
I do own a 94, a new one at that, and had the older model that was 20 years+ old.

The triggers were stiff, but using snap caps and 500-1000 repetitions smoothed things out on both of them.

Same thing for the 941 in .22WRM.

The 94 is my understudy gun for the other medium frame centerfire revolvers for when I need to get practice in. The budget rimfire rounds let me get in more practice than firing of many boxes of centerfire ammo.

Not that I do not practice with the bigger centerfire revolvers. I do. Just that I can fire the rimfire ammo,set my goals, and accomplish them, without sacrificing anything.

Here's the recalls on S&W:
Information
Handgun Safety Rules
Shooting Fundamentals
Model 22A Pistols Safety Recall
Model 22A Return Form
Walther PPK PPKS Safety Recall
Walther PPK/PPKS Return Form
i-Bolt Rifle Bolt Safety Recall
i-Bolt Rifle Return Form
i-Bolt Rifle Sear Engagement Pin Safety Recall
Performance Center Model 460 Safety Recall
SW1911 Safety Recall
SW1911 Return Form
Performance Center Model 329 Safety Recall

Yes sir, that is some S&W superiority there. :eek::rolleyes::o:banghead::cuss::scrutiny::fire:

Maximumbob54
March 14, 2011, 10:42 AM
I bought the 94 hoping it would be as great as my 605. The 605 has an amazing out of the box trigger and has had zero problems. The 94 has about a fifteen pound double action trigger pull if not more. In single action it is just fine and laser accurate with good ammo. It came dirt cheap so the pain is made up with the price. Maybe a new spring kit would make it better but it just isn’t a big deal to me.

steven58
March 14, 2011, 09:35 PM
Would be nice if Ruger made the LCR in rimfire with 4" bbl, DA/SA trigger and adjustable sights.

Might fill a niche for moderately priced DA rimfire revolvers...

crstrode
March 25, 2011, 10:56 PM
I've got a Taurus 94 stainless, 4-inch 9-shot revolver. I bought it brand new in 1990 and it has never given me a lick of trouble. As a matter of fact is it one of my favorite 22LR revolvers of all time.

I also have a Taurus model 85 (.38 special snubby) that I've had for at least 20 years - also not a lick of trouble.

Yes, I shoot them both.

Yes, I have other "higher quality guns" in many shape, size and configurations.

In my experience, Taurus makes a good value product.

There are more nay-sayers and haters on this website than any I have ever seen.
I was reading a thread earlier that asks what gun would you Never Buy. There is not a gun made that is not on that list!

johnnylaw53
March 26, 2011, 07:30 AM
I"m looking for a .22 revolver in doulble action so I have been keeping an eye on anything about the mod 94. It seem everyone say the tigger pull is very heavy. Does anyone hav a mod 94 and a s&w mod 642? The reason I asked is that what I carry for my CCW and I have read where lots of people say it have a heavy trigger pull so I would like to know how the mod 94 pull compare to the 642. thank you

be safe

oldfool
March 26, 2011, 09:26 AM
"do you guys think is it reliable and accurate"
No
"if any one owns it have you had any problems"
lots and lots of people who own them have had problems with them
"Is it also worth the money"
probably... er uh maybe.. it is pretty cheap
"or is the a better .22 lr revolver thats better quality thats not too much more"
costs not much more pretty much kills that notion


luck of the draw, you just might be lucky enough to get a Taurus 94 that doesn't have serious issues, but it is not a real good bet
if you are that lucky, they tend to shoot well enough in SA only mode (but the DA trigger will always be total crap, there is not much you can do about that, a new return spring, not main spring, helps very little, but nowhere near enough); if you really want really cheap and SA ONLY, even a Heritage Rough Rider with plastic sights will likely do as well

I own and love other Taurus revolvers
I do not and will not own a Taurus 94 (have handled some and have shot some of them)
dirty rotten shame - the Taurus 94 was supposed to imitate an OLD model 4" S&W 63 kit gun, and it is about $600 shy of accomplishing that
(back when Rossi was not owned by Taurus, their version was only ~$200 shy of that, but better than the Taurus 94)

PS
me, I LOVE "cheap and good"... just don't see much of it

Petros
March 26, 2011, 10:43 AM
Sure hope you found another brand of .22. The 94 4" I had would not go through one cylinder full without locking up. When it did fire, the bullets were key-holeing the targets. That was with 4 brands of ammo on hand. Took it back to store and got my money back. Then ponied up another 300 clams for a S&W 617 4". After shooting it, I did not feel so bad about the price because I was now having fun shooting instead of cursing. I have also had 2 other Taurus revolvers, model 85's in blue and stainless. They worked but the timing was set that the hammers would fall during or just before the cylinder latched (depending on what cylinder). Taurus in my opinion is a low end product. Petros

steven58
March 26, 2011, 11:00 AM
I just got the second 94 back from the smith. The single action is a decent 4 lb. break. The double action is much smoother and lighter at 8 lbs. Accuracy is 3-5" at 25 yds with 40 gr. Federal Champion HV.

Current cost $ 331 for the 94, $ 100 for the work = $431.00 Is it worth that much now? I doubt it.

If shot moderately and taken care of for 5-10 years I doubt this revolver would be worth $431.00

So, what if instead you got a new S&W 317 for $ 601.00?

http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/cPath/21_39_72/products_id/26286

or sniff around Gunbroker for S&W kit gun in the $400s?

under the same circumstances, in 5-10 years I think they would at least hold their value against inflation if not increase. In the meantime, you get to play with a much nicer toy.

YMMV

skidder
March 26, 2011, 11:24 PM
Why is it when people say something negative about Taurus they are "bashers" and "haters"? I have two Taurus revolvers, A tracker 22 and tracker 44. The tracker 22 has been a great gun for about 8 years now. I just purchased a 44 tracker (brand new 3/2/2011) and it was a pile of dung. I sent it back to taurus with a conversation and a letter and the gun arrived not fixed and in worse shape. It came back with tool marks and greasy dirt and fingerprints all over the gun.:eek: The only way I could tell it was mine (after cleaning the crap off it) was the serial number. When you have a date with their CS department you won't be skipping thru the tulips either.:mad:

fyi...... The hammer is not centered correctly (or bent) so there is a groove in the frame (top right), I don't know if taurus made this groove so the hammer wouldn't catch on the way down or if the hammer caused the groove. Either way, it still rubs in the groove on the way down. I have never fired the gun. My other major complaint is their were 13 rips in the rubber grip 9 of these tears go all the way through to the inside. They told me it would have a new grip when it got back, but it did not. Just dirty grease all over the original grip. I will never ship this gun back to those animals!!!

My Lovely Date with CS
I talked to them on the phone "politely" and a detailed letter was shipped in the box with the gun (as they had instructed). When the gun showed up at our door my wife was afraid to tell me what she saw (in the box) for fear of it ruining my day until I got home. She was right, I was furious.:mad: I used to stick up for taurus because of the success of my tracker 22, but I never called people with a bad experience "bashers" and "haters".

I'll tell you something if you think that taurus is all "marshmallow stars" and "moon pies" your gonna wake up one day to a nightmare!!!

steven58
March 26, 2011, 11:53 PM
The two 94s I have experienced belonged to a friend and a relative.

My .22 revolvers are a S&W K-17 and a Ruger Super Single Six.

I picked up the last 94 from the smith myself and we got to talking. He told me that when he opened it up it was filled with a mix of grease, metal chips and shavings as was the last one that he worked on for my friend. Although that one had less of the crunchy filling than this one did so in a way they are improving them! "More crunchy cream filling!" Now that's an advertisement:rolleyes:

skidder
March 27, 2011, 12:02 AM
Thanks for making me laugh steven, maybe I was wrong about the "moon pies".:rolleyes:

Animal Mother
March 27, 2011, 09:55 AM
I made the mistake of buying a Taurus, thinking I could get a good one or fix any minor problems that came along. I love a deal and some people might go so far as to call me cheap. I have a whole safe full of commie milsurps that are really good guns, so I'm not a gun snob. Long story short - I've gone through two Taurus rimfire revolvers, a 96 and a 94. They were never satisfactory either in fit or function. I broke down and followed the advice here on the forum spent a couple of hundred more and bought a used S&W K-22. I could not be any more happy with my Smith, it is a great gun. I used to think all the Taurus bashing was just an internet phenom, but I learned a painful if informative lesson. I will never buy another Taurus revolver. Do yourself a favor, spend a little more and get a Smith, if your time and aggravation are worth anything, you will not regret it.

JR47
March 27, 2011, 12:19 PM
The mythical "used S&W" is becoming harder and harder to find at reasonable prices. Look around before you send someone out on a wild goose chase.

I have a pair of 94's, both 4", one blue, one stainless,. I also have a 4" Model 941, in blue.

The FIRST thing that I do with ANY revolver, new or used, is inspect it PRIOR to paying for it. This does away with the cosmetic problems. I also check the cylinder gap. I just picked up a Mint Model 17 S&W. I don't think that it had more than a box of .22 through it, it was that clean. The cylinder gap was .002"!! Tell me that won't bind after 30-40 rounds!! However, I found it prior to paying good money.

The next thing that I do is pull the sideplate when I get it home, and clean out the internals. Gun Scrubber works well. After that, it's lubed, and ready to shoot. Many foreign manufacturers ship their guns filled with preservatives. This is due to the manner of shipping, by sea. They usually arrive via container ship, and are often stored open to the weather, protected by the container. Humidity and other conditions require corrosion resistance.

By following that program, I've been pretty good at finding, and keeping, decent guns. No matter who made them. :)

oldfool
March 27, 2011, 04:45 PM
JR47 is dead on when it comes to checking out used guns, no doubt about it, ANY used gun, ANY new gun, ANY make/model/caliber

it's a dirty rotten shame that Animal M. got a raw deal on a Taurus 96, 'cause somebody did things to the one he got that nobody should ever do to any firearm (and he never had a chance to inspect 1st hand, up front) If you saw those pictures, and knew anything at all about revolvers, you know that was not "factory", no matter the brand name. At least he finally got a good S&W, none better, if you check 'em out right before buying. If you routinely find those for <$300, please let me send you a dollar, so you can buy a lotto ticket for me.

But this whole notion that brand X is great and brand Z is flawless is just plain utter nonsense.

I own a pair of k-17s "to die for", both bought used, and a Taurus 96 bought used, and all three are to be envied. (Same to be said for a pair of S&W 66s and a Taurus 66, all in 357, one S&W bought NIB back-when, one bought used 20 years later, the Taurus bought used within a few months of the 2nd S&W, all three bought for ~$330 a pop, color me happy. The k-17s cost me near double that. Color me happy.

One of my two k-17s has the cylinder gap JR47 complains about. More people should be so lucky. Some people have to pay for custom refitting to achieve that. A 12 second wipe down of the cylinder face every 60-75 rounds with a CLP soaked patch is no burden for me, happy to do it. Only one I own that applies to. Don't need all mine to be that tight, but glad that one of mine is; flawless, runs like a champ in DA fast mode, just keep excessive powder residue off the face. A CCW self defense gun it ain't supposed to be. Just pretty and smooth and real real accurate.

OP was not Taurus vs. Ruger vs S&W vs. Dan Wesson vs. Freedom Arms vs. Korth.
OP was not even about what to beware of when buying used.

OP was what people think about a very specific make/model ~$300 NIB 22 revolver.

People ought know not to expect a custom shop hand fitted and tuned K-22 for $300, and they mostly do not expect.
A Taurus 94 22 rimfire can serve the needs of many (and obviously does, for some).
When it does, it's a good deal.
but the very specific make/model/vintage gun in question is nothing short of notorious for quality issues; back surf this or any other popular gun forum (rimfirecentral included) and you will endlessly read same-same.

if you get an acceptable one, it is capable of very good accuracy in SA mode
it has one of the worst DA revolver triggers ever made
it doesn't cost what a K-17 or k-22 or Korth does
want one, get one
buy yourself a lotto ticket same day
(what could it hurt, only costs a buck - you only have to win one of two bets to be happy, because if the 94 doesn't work out you can always buy a Korth)

me, I want a S&W 651 in WMR to match my old model "mint" S&W 63
saw one on gunbroker for ~$900.. this ain't gonna happen
and a Taurus 941 ain't going to happen either, checked out a few too many of 'em
(a mint S&W 6" k-48 did work out, but $300 it was not, but it was a gamble)

OP wanted to know if a Taurus 94 revolver was a good bet for his hard earned dollar
well, it depends mostly on the price of the lotto ticket, and what payoff you are hoping for

If you buy your revolvers based on internet "woobie brand" wars, or gun rag articles, expect to suffer from a lot of disappointments
improve your odds by doing what JR47 said

if asking for internet gun forum advice, ignore "brand wars", and pay close attention to comments from those who have 1st person experience with specific make/model/caliber/vintage

good luck, OP
it was nothing if not entertaining

steven58
March 27, 2011, 04:46 PM
Funny Thing; wild geese are the only ones I've ever had to chase with a gun. The domestic ones just come right up to you if you hold out your hand :neener::neener:

I didn't imply that used S&W .22 revolvers at fair prices were easy to find. But "mythical"? Please, if you don't get up out of the old lounger and look you will never find one.

So JR47, I did a search on gunbroker for completed sales in the past 90 days. Here's what a few SECONDS found for me:

S & W .22 LR Mod 17-4 Revolver Blue 6" SOLD $434.07 on 1/23/11
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=211559666

S&W .22/32 Kit Gun Round Butt .22 w/Box SOLD $449.99 on 2/6/11
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=212765317

S&W Airlite .22 LR 8-shot 3" Stainless SOLD $500.00 on 2/20/11
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=215885850

S&W Smith & Wesson 34-2 22 LR .22/32 Kit Gun SOLD $455.00 on 3/27/11
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=220964685

Now, I only got to page 4 of 28 and found the above. Hey, maybe I should try to find bigfoot while I'm at it!;)

So boys and girls show of hands: for the above prices, who would rather have one of these used S&Ws instead of a brand spanking new Taurus 94 with trigger work? anybody? Beuhler?


Know what else I noticed on gunbroker? many of the used Taurus revolvers for sale (there seem to be a ton!) took the care to put "not S&W" or something similar in the title so a search for S&W .22 revolvers "accidentally" turns up the Taurus as well. None of the S&Ws had "not Taurus" in their titles. Wonder why?:rolleyes:

Yes, guns are often shipped filled with preservatives to prevent rust. So what were all those metal shavings and chips? Sacrificial anodes?:D

oldfool
March 27, 2011, 05:11 PM
"for the above prices, who would rather have one of these used S&Ws"

without holding 'em in my own hand and checking them out myself (or an opinion from Jim Supica), none of the above

the ejector star on the k-17 don't look quite right to me

(so.. how many of those did you buy, steven ?)
better gamble than a Taurus 94, yes, but caveat emptor nonetheless
which is really all JR47 was saying, you know

skidder
March 27, 2011, 05:19 PM
I wonder what the net-carbs are in that cream filling.:rolleyes: The one I got back had choclate cream on the outside, but haven't got to the center yet. Sometimes when you pull an Oreo apart they break.:uhoh:

I need something to relieve my anger at Taurus and I hope it don't cost $500 dollars. :banghead: hmmm..... maybe a trip to the gun show.:rolleyes:

steven58
March 27, 2011, 06:44 PM
Hi Old,

No, I didn't buy any of those. I just posted those as a response to the "mythical used S&W" wild goose chase" comments.

I see what you mean about the star on the 17. Must have been the lighting cause the buyer feedback was

A+ "better than he said it was, very satisfied, will buy from again."

I bought my Model 17 about a year ago on gunbroker. It was LNIB, never fired, with the box and all papers and the original receipt from 1987 ($261.00 with tax!) I paid about $550.

It's a superb revolver with amazing accuracy and a great action. I just changed the grips and went to a smooth narrow trigger for double action use. It is by far my favorite handgun. See attached.

As far as buying used? Yes, caveat emptor, trust but verify, and always be prepared to call "shenanigans" if warranted.

Seriously, in my modest experience on gunbroker I have found that asking the right questions in advance is the key. Maybe I've just been lucky but so far selling has been much more of a PITA than buying.

Patriotme
March 28, 2011, 04:00 AM
I'm going a bit off topic but have you considered a used Hi Standard? My Dad had a 9 shot Hi Standard in .22lr for decades and I picked one up a few years ago for about $150. I've seen them at gunshows and local gun stores now and then. I probably see about 2 per year. Maybe it's just my area or something.
Anyway, the trigger is nothing to brag about. It's probably about as bad as the Taurus but the guns are cheaper and seem very reliable. I used mine as a training gun for my daughter and it was shot on a monthly basis for a couple of years without any issues.

oldfool
March 28, 2011, 08:04 AM
Patriotme, good suggestion as an alternate to small frame 94
I own one myself, Hi-Std Double Nine, very accurate and well made, bought it used but in excellent condition many years ago, both cylinders, 22LR/WRM. Even though the DA trigger is indeed at least as bad as the Taurus 94, they are not high priced when found, and an excellent value.
It is the reason I have never felt any need to buy a Ruger Single Six; the D-9 makes a mighty nice SA shooter, 9 rounds vs 6 and easier to load/unload. People will think it is a Ruger Single Six unless they take a 2nd glance or watch you reload.
Preferable though, to get the steel frame vs. alloy frame models (they made both), and not recommended to use a WMR cylinder that did not originally come with the gun.


steven58
good deals can be had on gunbroker, yes. Bought my 6" k-48 22 magnum thataway. But even with pictures and phone calls, not held-in-hand equals hold-your-breath until you see what you really get. I got lucky on my k-48, partly because they listed it "properly", hence did not turn up in a "22 magnum" or "WRM", and partly because of the crappy looking homemade grips; good deal for me at ~$450, gun checked out essentially "like NIB unfired" upon receipt, and I have a whole duffel bag full of extra k-frame grips anyway.

What's to love about a nice k-17... EVERYTHING, of course.
On the other hand, a lot of new (and old) shooters out there looking for a decent $300 gun, and unwilling to pay ~$500 (w/ shipping & transfer) sight unseen and unheld.
Can't blame 'em for that, we all love a bargain, except when it isn't.
(I saw the Taurus 96 listing AM bought for a really good low price on GB, and would have bought it myself, before he did, if I did not already own one; it happens.)

The Taurus 94 looks, at 1st blush, like the solution to that $300 scenario, which is why the question so oft comes up on gun forums.
It's not bashing to give 'em some honest feedback, but it doesn't help 'em all that much to tell 'em to just pony up a couple hundred extra, either, even if it that is the better bet in the long run.

(but if you run across a real good deal, worth the gamble, on a nice 4" j-frame S&W 22WMR, lemme know !)

HankR
March 28, 2011, 05:50 PM
I read all of the internet hype, and decided to buy one anyway. I got it about a year ago, mainly for my nephews to use when I went to visit them over the summer. I didn't care for the double action trigger, but couldn't find any "Flitz" locally, so took it along on the trip pretty much as it came from the factory. The kids (probably about 10 and 12 years old, along w/ my own 12 year old son) REALLY didn't care for the double action trigger. They shot almost an entire brick single action, with no functional problems. My sister-in-law had trouble w/ the DA trigger, and shot her 9 shots SA also. I didn't think it was THAT bad, but didn't really have anything to compare it to. I was thinking that I should have brought my single-six instead, or bought a bearcat, but the swing out cylinder did aid in loading (w/ three kids waiting for the next turn) and made it easier for them to show that the gun was safe after they took their turn. I probably put another brick through it, with a couple of failures to fire (with the bulk pack ammo, that's to be expected, our Savage Mark II had about the same ratio, and when we'd put them in the revolver they'd go boom when the firing pin hit a different spot on the primer). The DA trigger doesn't seem to be getting any better, but it's hard to tell (and it's only been about 1000 rounds).

I later compared it to a "Taurus Tracker" in .22 lr (I don't recall the model number). I liked the DA trigger on the Tracker much better. The 94 is smaller, and easier to cock with the thumb of my main hand if shooting single action. Both were accurate. I realize it's not a "long term" test, but thought I'd post my experience.

Rodentman
April 2, 2011, 09:25 AM
I bought a 94 in 2008. After 1 range trip (fewer than 50 rounds fired) I took it home and cleaned it. The cylinder assembly came out. It has sat in the safe since then. Today I am trading it for a 617 (adding cash). IMNSHO the 94 simply isn't made well, and it's not up to my standards.

Obviously YMMV, but that's my extinguished opinion. A gun I don't like, that sits in the safe, isn't something I want to keep.

JR47
April 2, 2011, 03:21 PM
The cylinder assembly came out.

What caused that? If you removed the forward side-plate screw, it's supposed to come out. That's what holds it in place.

Sometimes, one has to wonder why people do the things that they do.

Ratshooter
April 2, 2011, 04:31 PM
I have owned two taurus 94s, a 3" 9 shot 22 and a 4" stainless 22mag. The 22 would spit lead like crazy because the cylinder didn't line up with the barrel and every time you fired the 22 mag you just about had to hammer the empties out. And that was even after I polished the chambers.

I found a S&W 34-1 in a pawnshop fpr $250 OTD. The taurus guns were sold. I do have one taurus model 85 that seems to be about perfect. But I will buy no more Taurus guns.

tdv
April 2, 2011, 08:12 PM
Good discussion. I have had various Taurus, Smith and Wesson, and Ruger .22 cal revolvers. One of my favorites is my M94 blue, 4" Taurus. Actually, all .22 cal revolvers have poor DA triggers, and stiff SA triggers due to the necessity to provide solid ignition on a rimfire cartridge. I have found that after a break-in period, my M94 is a solid functioning revolver, and affords 9 shots as other brands and models limit their .22s to 6 rounds. I get excellent accuracy with my 4" M94, virtually as good as my Ruger Single Six with a 6" barrel with comparable ammo.
I have had functional problems with a few Taurus revolvers, mostly the Tracker series shooting DA. They seem to be tuned for SA shooting and can come a little out of sync in the box. But I have had to return Smith and Wessons, and others for various reasons too. For total reliability, Ruger has given me the least problems in the revolver class of firearms. But unfortunately, they don't offer a real comparable .22 DA revolver in the same class as the Taurus M94. I recommend that when choosing a .22 cal revolver in DA, select one with a blued finish. I have had far better results with the function of blued revolvers, especially considering the stiff action of a DA rimfire. For a SA like the Ruger Single Six, stainless is wonderful. Lastly, I purchased my latest M94 as a companion to a Taurus M66 in .357 mag. Same action, finish, yet the .22 is much cheaper to shoot. Both are field guns, for small and medium game. Both are superbly accurate. What I most like about the Taurus revolvers are the sights. They are all a better grade than an other stock revolver I have owned and used regularly. These sights promote better accuracy, and have proven durable as well.
All said, I believe the M94 is a solid revolver, and it's smaller frame size lends itself well for children, women, and adult shooters. Also, when I have had functional problems, Taurus has been one of the absolute best service departments I have ever dealt with. The M94 is a fun, serviceable, and well made .22 revolver. Own one in confidence, and shoot the heck out of it. They get better with use, and so does your marksmanship! tdv

mainmech48
April 3, 2011, 12:42 PM
I bought my old stainless, 4" Taurus M94 over twenty years ago. I intended it for use as an inexpensive 'tackle box' and knockabout/utility RF revolver, in which role it has served me admirably. A large part of the decision to purchase it was the fact that it cost, at the time, approx. half the price of a comparable S&W M63.

As it came from the box, the action operated quite stiffly and the DA pull was extremely heavy. The timing and cylinder lock-up were very good and the barrel/cylinder gap quite reasonable at 0.006". Given the 'budget' price, it was pretty much as I expected.

A thorough cleaning of the lockwork and some judicious lubrication made a quite appreciable difference in how the action felt, and running a couple of thousand rds through it even more. Accuracy was perfectly acceptable for its intended purposes with nearly any brand of HS .22 LR ammo, and quite suprisingly good with a couple of flavors. Ignition reliability was as close to 100% as one can expect from a .22 RF revolver and run-of-the-mill fodder.

At about 4.5K rds., I discovered that the factory rebound/trigger return spring was actually stouter than the mainspring (a whopping 14# compared to 11#!) and decided to see if I couldn't do something to reduce the DA pull. I purchased a Wolff "Shooter's Pack" spring kit for it from Brownell's and began experimenting. It took a few tries to find the combo that gave me the most reduction in DA pull weight without sacrificing reliability of ignition or positive trigger return, but the results were very gratifying. I ground the serrations off of the trigger and recontoured it slightly for more comfortable DA shooting, and other than a set of Pachmayr Compac grips, I've pretty much left it at that.

Now somewhere well into the five figures in rd. count, it still locks-up nicely, the timing is still good and it still hits right where I point it when I do my part. Nothing has broken nor worn out and it still looks pretty decent for all the miles on it.

OMMV, but I'm happy with mine.

22-rimfire
April 3, 2011, 01:38 PM
I like Oldfool's advice above. The Taurus 94 looks, at 1st blush, like the solution to that $300 scenario, which is why the question so oft comes up on gun forums. It's not bashing to give 'em some honest feedback, but it doesn't help 'em all that much to tell 'em to just pony up a couple hundred extra, either, even if it that is the better bet in the long run.

I am a very big fan of DA 22 revolvers and I have to admit that I have almost purchased a Taurus M94 more than once. They really look good and feel fine. Yeah, heavy trigger and all that stuff. The old H&R's are given rave reviews often and they all had very heavy triggers, but the reviews continue. I have owned these in the past.

If you want to purchase one, I would take snap caps with me to the store or ask permission to used fired LR cases, and put it through it's paces so at least you know it is functioning correctly. Don't assume that a new Taurus product is sound unless you check it out. It still might have problems later, but that is the way of many Taurus M94's. It is your choice as the buyer to pay the price for what appears to be a great product or anti up and spend the money for a more respected product such as a S&W M17 (or similar) or a Colt 22 revolver. To this point, I have anti'd up for the Colt or S&W product.

I went through the same kind of interest for the Ruger SP-101 in 22LR. After looking at many, I opted to not buy one and they were in the $300 area at the time. When I run onto a SP-101 in 22 caliber, I still can't help myself from really considering it. But I have absolutely no need for another DA 22 revolver, but that does not stop me from considering one when I see something that strikes my fancy.

JR47
April 3, 2011, 02:53 PM
Why do people compare the K-frame Model 17 to what is more a J-frame Taurus?

The J-frame S&Ws all have much heavier triggers than the Model 17. My Model 17 came with a cylinder gap of .002"!! It bound up after less than 50 rounds.

I also own an old H&R Model 650, with dual cylinders. This gun is easily as accurate as the Model 17, and has a nicer trigger.

I have, as stated, a pair of 4" Model 9i4s. They are both over 20 years old, and are still plugging along fine.

As for the "more respected" product, I haven't seen anything that fits that description new from either Colt or S&W in years. QC has certainly slipped, even as the prices rose steadily.

GEM
April 3, 2011, 03:35 PM
Had one, the cylinder froze, the sights fell apart. Now, I have a SS Bearcat for plinking.

22-rimfire
April 3, 2011, 04:10 PM
Why do people compare the K-frame Model 17 to what is more a J-frame Taurus?

Okay. I still think my new J-frame Model 63 is a safer purchase than a Taurus M94 and will have a better trigger.

Colt doesn't make any double action revolvers anymore even though there is an indication that they are looking at bringing out something in the future. I would put my D-frame Colt Diamondback 22 against a Taurus 22 any day of the week in terms of being a better product overall. I prefer it to Smiths in general. But the purpose of my last post was not to stir the waters, it was to voice my opinion based on my limited experience. JR47, you certainly have more experience with the Taurus M94 than I do or ever likely will.

But, not everyone wants to spend $500 or $600 or more on a DA 22 revolver. Taurus and Charter Arms currently fill that market gap. Both would charge more if they felt the market would support the price. My guess is that their sales would tank.

skidder
April 3, 2011, 04:40 PM
My 970 tracker has been a gem, but what happened to the newer Trackers? My 44 Tracker has tool marks and a sloppy cylinder. The finish is two tone (smooth on one side matte on the other). :confused: I'm pretty good at polishing stainless so I did a little work to it, I smoothed out the groove caused by the hammer and polished out some of the tool marks.

I went to visit another gun store this last weekend and asked to handle the new 44 tracker in the display case. I was shocked! This gun was worse than the one I purchased. The cylinder was a little tighter, but it had more tool marks and it had the same grove worn by the hammer (much deeper than mine). Normally the pin that holds the front sight is cut and smoothed off. On this gun they just bent it over and smoothed it a little. :eek:

When I set both my trackers side by side, and take a close look, it appears they came from two different planets. Maybe my new one came from their new facility on Uranus. :rolleyes:

oldfool
April 3, 2011, 05:49 PM
JR47
"Why do people compare the K-frame... to..a J-frame"
I agree, J frame geometry rarely (if ever) yields a K-frame DA trigger

22 rimfire
"I still think my new J-frame Model 63 is a safer purchase than a Taurus M94 and will have a better trigger."
likewise, that has been own experience, shot side by side, and by more than one hand
the Taurus 94 owner was in real obvious agreement, no contest
(acknowledged it was old model 63 vs current model 94)

JR47
"I also own an old H&R Model 650, with dual cylinders. This gun is easily as accurate as the Model 17"
interesting, given different bore size of 22 WMR vs 22LR
be happy, H&R made some real nice revolvers in the way-back-when
my brother-in-law owned one back in the sixties
shame they are not in the game anymore

"a pair of 4" Model 94s. They are both over 20 years old"
I too own a pair of over 20 years old Taurus revolvers (model 96 and model 66) and rate them equal to my over 20 years old S&Ws, for accuracy and trigger

alas, yesterday is gone, caveat emptor
be it new Taurus, or the "new" S&W, or the "new" Dan Wesson, or X/Y/Z
I keep looking at the Taurus 94/941 because I keep hoping to find a good old one, not a new one... but no such luck
same reason I am real fond of older J and k frames
these days, "new" is more of a crap shoot than used to be back-when

but no matter how you slice it or dice it, telling somebody to grab up NEW model/make/caliber because your/my 20 something year old is great is unintentionally misleading

specific topic is the model 94, and way too many have lost that gamble on current production

but as long as we are sliding around and around, the small frame Taurus 85 snubbie gets an awful lot of good reviews by a lot of owners, and I was real well pleased with a couple of 'em I shot (owned by others).. if they can win good marks on a small frame snubbie centerfire, it is doubly frustrating that they cannot do better than their model 94/941 on the small frame rimfire
somebody at Taurus just doesn't care, buyer beware

I would happily roll the dice on a new model S&W 63 before I would even think about a new model Taurus 94, but you won't get that done at same price, so it's not really a great solution for anyone looking at $300

tdv
April 3, 2011, 07:45 PM
I own and get great service from the various M94s i have owned. I appreciate the K-frame Smiths I have owned also, but don't understand why they don't turn out a 9 shot varient as a standard? Seems with modern manufacturing processes, it would be a common industry standard. Same for the Ruger SP 101 .22 cal, limited to 6 round cylinder by design? i liked the H&R models due to their higher cylinder capacities, even on older models. the Taurus as a small frame revolver, with a higher capacity, seems to be the best concept available to me. It is very much a "kit gun" so to speak, easily carried and efficiently proportioned. I challenge Smith and Wesson to build a comparable to the M94 in dimension and capacity. I generally would advocate firing most DA .22 revolvers in SA mode to negate the stiff DA action. But with many rounds fired through M94, it is sweet to shoot both SA and DA. I even have found 9 shot speed loaders for my M94, and get the full training value of marksmanship and weapons handling, etc to replicate my center-fire DA revolvers. A good gunsmith can remedy the action with polishing alone. or as some have advocated, by replacing the factory springs. All considered, i marvel at the innovation that comes from the Taurus line. From the "Judge", to the "second-strike" mechanism on some of their semi-auto pistols, to the elite after market sights available on most hanguns from the factory, to the "Raging-bull" line of revolvers in many capable calibers such as the .17 HMR and .454 Casull, Taurus pushes the envelope where others rest on tradition. I agree, they can have QA problems as any brand can. But Taurus has proven to me to be a responsive and innovative brand, producing some of my most accurate handguns I have ever owned. I will keep buying and using them, and communicate any problems or concerns I have quickly to their service department and technical reps. But they routinely produce innovative and serviceable firearms that I own and trust. tdv

oldfool
April 3, 2011, 08:34 PM
welcome to the forum 7 poster
(does the "T" in tdv stand for Taurus ??)

"don't understand why they don't turn out a 9 shot varient as a standard?"
cause they thunk 10 shots were better than nine, I guess (S&W 617)
but 9 shot 22 rimfires have never been particularly rare; actually pretty common, easy enough to find speed loaders for 'em, always was

Some rimfires are very deliberately intended to be training companions to their centerfire cousins, you know, which makes perfect sense, and is a long standing S&W tradition
(S&W k-17, k-48, k-19/66, for example, what I use anyway, all six shooters)

Which small frame 9 shot Taurus centerfire revolver are you using your small frame 94 to companion train for ???

The Taurus 94 some think is pert near perfect size and balance for a kit gun specifically because Taurus was striving to imitate the classic S&W kit guns, of course; but even Rossi did a better imitation than the Taurus 94 with their 511/515 (before Taurus/Braztech existed)

"I challenge Smith and Wesson to build a comparable to the M94 in dimension and capacity."
Even the NEW S&W evidently favors guns which go bang a lot without breaking - like the new model 63.. or 317 8 shot, or 351PD 7 shot in 22WMR
(better than two that go bang, and then leave 7 unfired in a out-of time locked up gun gun, you know)

"I generally would advocate firing most DA .22 revolvers in SA mode to negate the stiff DA action. B"
stay out of gunfights, friend, or get a k-frame or Colt
or consider abandoning that model 94 training "to get the full training value of marksmanship and weapons handling" cause a speedloader ain't going to do much for your cause in SA only mode

"A good gunsmith can remedy the action with polishing alone. or as some have advocated, by replacing the factory springs."
balderdash, that non-solution has been beaten to death many times as being specific to the notorious model 94
a good gunsmith cannot just polish parts that don't fit, and cycling a sloppy fit action does not smooth in a poorly fit action, it just wears it out faster
lighter mainsprings cause misfires in the model 94, and a lighter return spring helps very little

yo, apply for a sales position at Taurus International, I think you have a great career opportunity awaiting you.. but they will probably be a tad more impressed if you use an innovative spiel, instead of memorizing their existing "in praise of phrases"

one good woobie deserves another, you know :neener:

PS
fitness for function = quality
innovation never was a substitute for quality workmanship
not for Taurus, not for Winchester, not for S&W, not for Colt, not for anybody

22-rimfire
April 3, 2011, 09:41 PM
You know, I really want the Taurus Model 94 to hold its own in a fair comparison to a Smith 22 revolver. I would have loved the SP-101 22 to be comparable to a Smith. Someone mentioned the Ruger LCR.... I'm hoping Ruger comes out with a 22LR version of the LCR and it is as good as the 38spl version but with a 8-shot cylinder. Me, my next likely purchase in the 22 revolver area is likely to be a 3" Smith M63. After that, more than likely it will be another collector Colt.

tdv
April 4, 2011, 03:02 AM
No tdv doesn't swear allegience to the Taurus brand, nor any other for that matter. Simply to a particular firearm I have grown to trust by experience. I know gunsmiths that won't work on any revolver but a Smith and Wesson, or believe anything but a series 70 Colt M1911 is not worth carrying. The M94 is a solid DA revolver and many others agree. I advocate SA use of the DA .22 only for those who find it difficult to operate one otherwise. It is in fact a dual-mode firearm, capable of being used as such. No different than manually cocking an M92F Beretta, when time and greater precision afford this. Actually, what I best like about Taurus firearms, is that they are not made in a country that we fought and defeated in WWI or WWII! Now that is merit that deserves some brand loyalty! I still hear similar distain for Savage bolt guns that is common for Taurus firearms. Yet everyone who I know who shoots them, marvel at their accuracy out of the box. Heck even gun-scribes mess up and complement Savage frequently now. Performance and affordability are hard to pass up. Superior performance from a more cost effective product, is addicting!

DMZ
April 4, 2011, 09:55 AM
I have posted to this thread already, but after following it I have some additional thoughts.

One is in regards to the heavy DA trigger on the model 94. That seems to be one of the biggest complaints. I learned to shoot my M94's DA with patience and practice. It was not that hard. But I often wonder why all the concern about it. I never, ever considered my M94's as a SD revolver. I use them strictly for plinking and hunting. Therefore, most of time I use them SA. My snubbies are always fired DA, but not my rimfire revolvers.

I see some pretty weird stuff in any Taurus 94 thread, but one thing I rarely, if ever read about is poor accuracy. Both of my 94's are very accurate. Taurus may not fit and finish so well, but they do know how to cut a great barrel. That is probably the # 1 reason I tend to grab one when I go out in the woods. hitting what I point at is my objective when the trigger is pulled, and my 94's do that better than any of my other rimfire pistols.

Marlin 45 carbine
April 4, 2011, 10:08 AM
I have a 94 s/s 4" bbl I bouight back in early '90's, fucntion is fine but trigger was stiff from the box so I took it down and slicked up the internals for a noticeable improvememnt.
accuracy is fair but I sure wish I had the knowledge to improve on it, it spits some and fouls the forceing cone and bbl really bad with Blazers and such, no so bad with copper washed slugs.
anyone got ideas on how I could improve on this?

DMZ
April 4, 2011, 10:34 AM
accuracy is fair but I sure wish I had the knowledge to improve on it, it spits some and fouls the forceing cone and bbl really bad with Blazers and such, no so bad with copper washed slugs.
anyone got ideas on how I could improve on this?

One of mine did the same thing. Spit a bit out the left side and fouled the left side and top of the forcing cone with lead. I sent it in to Taurus with a note explaining, in detail, what it was doing. It was fixed and sent back within 6 weeks. Call or write Taurus CS to get a auth.# and get it fixed.

tdv
April 4, 2011, 10:46 AM
Oldfool...
Thanks for the welcome to THR! Yeah I am a 7 poster, just stumbled on THR by accident. Never wrote a thread in my life till now. Mostly due to being gainfully employed as a Navy SEAL for almost 27 years, much of it served at our elite unit. Now as a 100 percent, disabled combat vet, I have more time on my hands. I am just another gun loving, master class level shooter, with plenty of combat and law enforcement experience to know what I prefer and admire in a firearm. I appreciate your allegience to Smith and Wesson revolvers. I carried an issued M686 with a 6" barrel into harms way many times, as opposed to my issued SIG 226, or Beretta 92F. I could always count on it, not so for the semi-auto pistol. It was my first line, with 2 speed loaders, 6 single rounds of .357 mag for a tactical load, and 2 grenades. I never felt under-gunned, and it was my back-up to my M4 or M700 anyway. I will say, bad guys had slightly bigger eyeballs, when I covered down on them with that M686 as opposed to one of my team-mates with a SIG. The psycological factors many times are a reality. You can appreciate what a competent shooter can do with a M686 .357 mag, even at a range of 100 yards or more. So it is hard for me to break from such confidence in a good Smith myself. But I still appreciate a good value. The M94 to me is just that. I get as much joy and therapy shooting it as any other firearm I own. We both know ammo prices have really put a dent in our passion for shooting. Part of why I look for a serviceable handgun these days. I will always recommend buying a M94, and spend the saved couple of hundred dollars on ammo or a spring kit etc to get it just right. The man or woman that shoots and masters that type of gun, is generally more proficient than the shooters with a high dollar gun, he rarely shoots. No surprises there. But knowing Taurus built the M94 as a "kit gun" to emulate those made by Smith and Wesson, and to be used mostly for plinking and field carry, I commend them for doing a pretty good job at that. God bless the free-market economy. Competition results in all of us having so many options. I still understand, yet don't condone a gunsmith that refuses to work on a Taurus, Charter Arms or anything but a Smith and Wesson. If all hanguns were right or needed no improvement out of the box, we wouldn't need them and they wouldn't have a job. I admire the smithy that simply makes any firearm in front of him, serviceable or better, keeping functional firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens. Isn't that what makes America so great! Take care oldfool, I look forward to future debates, you are a righteous man! Good shooting! tdv

tdv
April 5, 2011, 08:59 AM
Lot's of opinions out there, in general also prejudice for certain brands. To the guy who started this discussion, or others who simply seek a cost effective .22 revolver for general use. I have this to say. Truth be told, to make any brand of firearm suitable for competitive use such as PPC, Bianchi Cup, Bullseye shooting, etc. All require extensive hand-fitting, polishing, and great attention to improve the overall tolerances and timing of the piece. Yet, it would not be prudent to rely on such a gun for combat use. Companies like Les Baer, Wilson Combat and others go to great lengths to produce a pistlo that is both very accurate and reliable for combat. We pay a heavy price for such work. I have been to the Smith an Wesson factory school years ago, and learned what it takes to get the most out of their well made revolvers. That effort is not put into a .22 revolver from their factory. No manufacturer does this kind of handi-work except if they have a custom shop varient available. Every brand of .22 revolver I ever owned will cut some lead at the forcing cone if you run cheaper Blazer lead ammo through it! But some still shoot well and put far more lead in the squirrel or tin can you are going after. Let's get real, you get a good value and decent performance in a Taurus M94. You may get better performance in a Smith and Wesson kit gun, and you pay for it. But both can be improved with care maintenance, and a good gunsmith. If you are new to spring kit use in revolvers, beware. They will induce a "light strike" if you don't have the right set and combination. I consider a "light strike" totally unacceptable! I can't live with the concern of one every time I press the trigger. You can replace the guts with such after market parts and get great reliability. It takes experience through some trial and experimentation. In a revolver, much can be improved by honing and polishing the friction areas internally. I hope you all meet an honest smithy who will share with you the crazy factory flaws he has corrected on yes a Smith and Wesson revolver.
Many will just protect the brand loyalty and refuse to work on your Taurus! So to the man who originally considered the purchase of the M94. I say buy one! Prove to yourself from that experience the merit of the revolver. Shoot the heck out of it, put some meat on your table, etc. Most of all, have fun exercising your right to bear arms! It has been said numerous times in these threads. The M94 will fire every time, and they are generally very accurate. Other factors can be improved if desired. For the money, that is a fair trade. All .22 revolvers will run smoother after thousands of rounds shot through them. I find that the funnest action job available. You do that and you will shoot well. I don't care what you have in your hand, if you can't shoot, all you have left is bragging rights over your financial buying power. I like my M94, it is every bit as good a .22 as my Ruger Single-six in all factors. I have owned dozens of both. Some came better finished out of the box. All improved after thousand of rounds shot through them. Go empty some brass!

JR47
April 5, 2011, 03:40 PM
"don't understand why they don't turn out a 9 shot varient as a standard?"
cause they thunk 10 shots were better than nine, I guess (S&W 617)
but 9 shot 22 rimfires have never been particularly rare; actually pretty common, easy enough to find speed loaders for 'em, always was

Haven't been particularly rare? Other than the H&R or the High Standard, what other nine-shot revolvers (the Model 94) have been brought to mass market?

Some rimfires are very deliberately intended to be training companions to their centerfire cousins, you know, which makes perfect sense, and is a long standing S&W tradition
(S&W k-17, k-48, k-19/66, for example, what I use anyway, all six shooters)

Which small frame 9 shot Taurus centerfire revolver are you using your small frame 94 to companion train for ???

Which center-fire S&W is the 317 going to companion train for?

The Taurus 94 some think is pert near perfect size and balance for a kit gun specifically because Taurus was striving to imitate the classic S&W kit guns, of course; but even Rossi did a better imitation than the Taurus 94 with their 511/515 (before Taurus/Braztech existed)

You know this how? Bring some real proof, beyond your opinion, please. Perhaps you have a release from Taurus stating that?

"I challenge Smith and Wesson to build a comparable to the M94 in dimension and capacity."
Even the NEW S&W evidently favors guns which go bang a lot without breaking - like the new model 63.. or 317 8 shot, or 351PD 7 shot in 22WMR
(better than two that go bang, and then leave 7 unfired in a out-of time locked up gun gun, you know)

Golly, and my 617 is still at S&W. It decided to lock up tight after about 75 rounds or so. Local gunsmith gave up on it, and we sent it back. This was the second S&W that I've bought that has failed inside of 100 rounds. Great legend you're spouting, just not the truth.

"I generally would advocate firing most DA .22 revolvers in SA mode to negate the stiff DA action. B"
stay out of gunfights, friend, or get a k-frame or Colt
or consider abandoning that model 94 training "to get the full training value of marksmanship and weapons handling" cause a speedloader ain't going to do much for your cause in SA only mode

Who actually goes into gun-fights with a .22 if they have a bigger caliber? As for his advocating SA for others, maybe that's not him when training? Using a speedloader is a part of training. Do you not advocate training with one?

"A good gunsmith can remedy the action with polishing alone. or as some have advocated, by replacing the factory springs."
balderdash, that non-solution has been beaten to death many times as being specific to the notorious model 94
a good gunsmith cannot just polish parts that don't fit, and cycling a sloppy fit action does not smooth in a poorly fit action, it just wears it out faster
lighter mainsprings cause misfires in the model 94, and a lighter return spring helps very little

Oddly enough, the majority of people who actually do something besides bash the little guns seem to successfully polish the guns themselves, or have a 'smith do it. There are several already in this thread, or has that been a "missed" post? Is anyone posting a certified gunsmith? If not, then let's just forget the opinions, masquerading as truth .

yo, apply for a sales position at Taurus International, I think you have a great career opportunity awaiting you.. but they will probably be a tad more impressed if you use an innovative spiel, instead of memorizing their existing "in praise of phrases"

That appears to edge very close to an ad hominum attack. I've pulled up some other threads, and you seem to always be ready to denigrate others weapons. Too bad that all that "experience" appears to be directed solely to destructive ends.

one good woobie deserves another, you know

No, I don't think he did, or deserved, one.

oldfool
April 6, 2011, 08:24 AM
well, if nine is your magic number, and High-Standard, or H&R (or subsequently NEF), or Astra-Cadix, or JC Higgins, or Comanche, or Taurus don't ring your chimes hard enough with 22 rimfire ammo, you could always seek out a LeMat revolver
nine round revolver (in 40 caliber no less), plus a center 16 gauge barrel to boot, all-in-one... innovative if nothing else

what sort of patterns do you reckon you would get out of a 16, as opposed to say a 410 shot shell ? inquiring minds want to know

maybe we can all petition the big T to re-introduce it
(they really oughta' do something innovative and worthy of their Thunderbolt success) :D
mebbe they could call it the "Circuit Bull" or "Outrageous Judge", but what would da' Judge say ?


PS
have no fear, friends, tdv can hold his own, USN Seals ain't no wussies

tdv
April 6, 2011, 08:43 AM
JR47...
Your rant sounds like oldfools to the letter. Both from Georgia, hmm. Wow Smith and Wesson loyalty is fierce dude! Maybe you both work at the same gunshop? I just won't be fooled to think a M94 is not suitable for a value minded shooter to consider to carry on their hip. Get real! Stay on topic. The guy that started this thread, simply wanted a basic .22 and asked for thoughts on a Taurus M94. You likely see no merit in anything but a Smith and Wesson revolver anyway period. So who has bias? Fortunately, I much prefer shooting, hunting, and carry any issued rifle and pistol into combat in service to my country, than arguing over stuff like this! So get off your high horse, open your mind, and consider we all got our opinions. The M94 works, plain and simple. You go spend $600 on a .22 revolver and brag on! Many folks see that as unecessary. Whatever I write in a thread, it is to encourage people to shoot! Also to challenge the fierce brand loyalty that many times cover the truth! Some guns are better made for sure, but that doesn't mean all others are junk. Hey here is an example. At my local indoor range, they have Glock days and competitive shoots. You can only compete with a Glock! Don't bring another gun...that would be real competition! The lengths people go to protect their egos and brand loyalty is amazing. Enough on the M94, if you got one, enjoy it. If you hate them, more power to you! Whatever you got shoot the heck out of it! That is much more productive than debating the issue!

tdv
April 6, 2011, 09:05 AM
Hey oldfool! Thanks for the compliment! I now consider you my friend...yes Navy SEALS ain't no wussies is correct! But darn we can be so cheap enough to go out and buy a Taurus. Got to spread my money around you know. If you buy too many top of the line guns, you end up with too few to fill the gun safe, haha! What a mistake, I actually liked some of their models. Yes I love my Smith and Wesson revolvers, maybe as much as you. Take care brother, good shooting!

JR47
April 6, 2011, 05:20 PM
tdv, I wasn't trying to associate with oldfool any more than any other poster. My point was that his post to you was overly broad, and without factual basis. I no longer work in a gun shop, that was decades ago.

I have no high horse beyond being unable to understand people who never have anything good to say about a gun. I have, as was mentioned, a pair of Model 94 revolvers that haven't given me a moments trouble. Along with that I also have a 4", blued, Model 941 that has been likewise trouble-free.

I pointed out that my experience with S&W hasn't been quite as fine a walk in the park as some others would have one believe.

I feel that the Taurus Model 94 is easily a good revolver. I currently own 14 Taurus handguns, and use them to teach new shooters, as well as CCW. Alongside them are Baer, Wilson, Colt, Springfield, and Korth weapons. S&W, in their hay-day, looked like they were finished with a coarse file alongside my Korriphila revolver.

I agree with the shoot them till you drop idea. I have no idea of brand loyalty, having been collecting guns for 55 years. Being an expert witness for the Federal Courts until my retirement enabled me to gather up examples as work expenses.:)

Oh, and class number? :D

Hunt480
April 6, 2011, 07:24 PM
Dispite what has been posted on this thread. I have a stainless 5" 94 with thousands of rounds through it with no problems what so ever. I even knew what the trigger pull was like before I bought it. The trigger is good enough for me. It is accurate as my old 22 Colt Frontier or my Single Six Ruger. It is a quality gun for a great price with a great warranty like all Taurus guns. I bought it new about 4 years ago and I got no complaints.

tdv
April 7, 2011, 10:13 AM
JR47...I agree with you my friend, I am frustrated with the QA of every brand from time to time. Class 103, I'm legit. Retired Command Mater Chief. Just another gun nut, freedom loving citizen. I generally seek a bargain in a field gun, I am hard on them in the woods. Like most, I invest more in a CCW piece and tactical gear. The M94 fills the field use role nicely, and my sweetheart shoots it well. It gets shot a couple times a week along with an assortment of other .22s, never any problems. I'm up here in the rural Blue Ridge Mountains of NC now. Much the same values as there in Georgia. Keep pounding on the service reps of all those manufacturers. We drive the quality and market, a good gunsmith is the second place I go. If the manufacturer doesn't listen, they should be out of business. Enjoy your chosen battery of firearms. Good shooting, hunting, etc!

tdv
April 7, 2011, 10:27 AM
JR47...I will add, I had a M941 to give to my daughter, she is very petite, yet shoots very well. She had difficulty with the DA trigger. So I bought her a Smith "Airweight" and put a Crimson Trace grip on it for her. It is a better concealment rig for her needs. An example where I chose the right fit and greater cost to fill it. She has had that little wheelgun through graduate school and now as a wife. I am sure we think alike on this stuff. I too have little brand loyalty, although I have greater confidence in traditional models that work. What do you carry now typically for CCW? I have changed mine around a few times the past 10 years. Between semi-auto and revolver, and .357, .45 Colt, and .45 ACP. Also have a warm weather vs summer rig. I won't carry anything without good sights, unless it is a fixed sight revolver. I have found a few good options...curious what you have learned after 55+ years?

22-rimfire
April 7, 2011, 05:40 PM
I looked at a new Taurus M941 yesterday. I have to say that the trigger was the strongest trigger I have ever tried on a 22 handgun in about that frame size. I can see why your daughter had trouble with the trigger. I did too.

I know that I am prejudiced against products made by Taurus, Hi-Point, Heritage Arms, and a few others. I just don't buy the cheap stuff any more.

I handled that 941 and a 94 yesterday to renew my sense of perspective. I can't say that I'm wrong, but I am certainly somewhat prejudiced against the Tier II and III guns.

I want to like a Taurus M94. I handed a Uberti single action in 22 yesterday too... I have to say I was somewhat impressed with the way if felt in my hand as well as the trigger and general workmanship.

rogertc1
April 7, 2011, 08:13 PM
I own no less than 16 of the Taurus 94-941 series of revolvers. Four of them had problems with locking up when new. I was able to fix them myself with minimal effort. They have all been reliable, a couple are near the 40,000 round mark, and accurate. No parts have broken and I have had no other misshaps. The factory double action trigger pull is horribly stiff. This can be helped a lot with a wolff 6 1/2 lb trigger spring.
Having said all of that, I would not recommend a Taurus 94 to anyone unless they are mechanically inclined and willing to completely disassemble the gun and clean out the copious amounts of grit and gunk that reside in the internals of one of these guns when new. If you don't mind tinkering a little you can make a nice little gun out of one of them. I would buy another one for myself in a heartbeat. The basic gun and its design is sound, they just sometimes need a little finishing.
If you are a person who can look at something and figure out how it works,and have enough patience to do a little fluff and buff, I would say go for it. If you can't, I would say pass.

You have 16 ...are you touvhed?

tdv
April 8, 2011, 07:40 AM
The M94/941 do have a tough DA trigger. SA is acceptable on the ones I own. The DA pull has gotten much better after a few thousand rounds on mine. But my 94s do shoot very well. I would like to see Ruger, take there LCR modular trigger housing and apply it to a 9 or 10 shot .22...maybe that would be a great frame for a compact .22 revolver. The trigger on my LCR is remarkable. Not sure if it would be so light and on a rimfire? By the way, I own numerous Uberti firearms. All in .45 Colt or BP. They have proven to be well made and solid performers. I will continue to buy them.

couldbeanyone
April 9, 2011, 12:06 AM
You have 16 ...are you touvhed?
Am I touched? I guess some might say so.:) The Taurus 94/941 series are my do everything guns. After all the hundred or so handguns I have owned in the past, they are all I now own.
I use the 94's for hunting and shooting rimfire steel challenges, and general practice. I use the 941's for concealed carry and hunting. I even have a couple I have had rebarreled with 9" barrels.
They have good single action triggers and can often be bought very cheaply. I have learned how to work on them and tune them.
The double action triggers are a little tough, but can be improved with a little polishing and spring work. The trigger pull is still a little stiff, but is a very short and snappy pull that works for me. My wife has a S+W 5" barrelled model 63 that has a longer and lighter double action pull, but my rapid fire accuracy and times have always been better with my 4" model 94's than with her S+W. I don't recommend the trigger pull, but it works for me.
I shoot around 750-1000 rounds every time I go shooting. When I practice shooting steel rapid fire in the summer, I will take more than one identical gun because they get a little to warm to touch after a while if you shoot only one.
I have all barrel lengths and ultralights. How did I get so many. A bargain here, a bargain there. I really didn't figure they would hold up as well as they have. At the rate they are wearing I definitely have a lifetime supply of them. Touched? Maybe, but I am happy with them.

DMZ
April 9, 2011, 11:49 AM
Am I touched? I guess some might say so.

I do not think you are touched. You have found a revolver platform thats suits you well. I have collected 4 Taurus small framed revolvers (M605, M17, 2-M94's). I like the feel and point-ability of them. Mine all wear older style Taurus wood grips. I shoot my 94's a good deal because they are comfortable and I am very proficient with them because of that.

tdv
April 10, 2011, 07:03 AM
Your not touched...just fully experiencing the M94s merit. I am not surprised you have such success with them. Especially if you go to the lengths of tuning the action. I agree with the accuracy results you have had. My M94s are very accurate. I won't give up my M94s either, they do all I need them to do.

JR47
April 10, 2011, 04:07 PM
Both of my Model 94s, and my 941 loosened up on the trigger pull, as was mentioned, after a session or two of dry-firing, with snap caps. Watch TV, and exercise my trigger finger.

My wife loves revolvers, but fell in love with my old Colt Government Model .380, in Coltgard. It's her pocket/purse gun. The thing has been trouble-free for the twenty plus years that I've owned it. When I bought it, it was from an officer who said that the slide wouldn't lock back. Took it home, pulled it down, and lo and behold, he hadn't put the slide stop spring. Cost me a couple of bucks, and away we went.

Tier I Tier II Tier III, ad nauseum. There is no such grouping outside of personal opinion.

If you enjoyed reading about "taurus model 94" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!