Taurus .22lr revolver


November 11, 2012, 11:48 PM
Hey folks, I'm talking about this.


Anyone have one of these? I like the concept and looks. Figure its a poorman's S&W 317 or SP101 .22lr.

Any problems with these little guys? Really interested in one but a iffy about it because I haven't heard much about it.

All I really care is that it doesn't need to be baby'd and that it goes bang every time.

Thanks folks!

If you enjoyed reading about "Taurus .22lr revolver" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
November 12, 2012, 12:04 AM
Well to begin with the frame size of the Tracker is not small . It is a mid frame gun that is used for cartridges all the way up to 44 magnum.

Taurus small frame 22 revolver is the Model 94 . Taurus always draws a host of comments on the forum, from good to bad. Likely this thread will do more to confuse you that enlighten, but I will will give it a stab.

I own, and owned, both the Tracker and the small frame models of the Taurus. Given that you get a good example the guns can be, and are very servicable. Their design and metalergy are excellent. Problems that occure are generaly from poor quality control in manufacturing. The 4 revolvers I owned were all good, and I carry one every day. I would not hesitate to purchase the Tracker in 22 rimfire, and in fact, that might be a real sweet shooting gun to own.

November 12, 2012, 12:50 AM
Thanks for the info MN, I'm interested in the 94 actually :neener:

Didn't know the Tracker was so large!

November 12, 2012, 12:59 AM
I own a M94 4 in Bbl. I love to shoot it. It does not like cheap or old ammo though. Had a problem with some old winchester rounds not expanding enough and locking up the cylinder because they were pushing out the back.
Use nice new clean ammo and you should enjoy tours as much as I enjoy mine.

November 12, 2012, 01:06 AM
Would that mean no bulk packs? Thunderbolt, Federal, etc.

Really main concerns are mechanical, I don't want to send back to Taurus. If I can't get a for sure functioning gun out of the box I'd rather save the money and buy a better product...

November 12, 2012, 02:50 AM
I have a 2" Stainless Model 94. I also have a S&W 317 and an SP101 22 to compare it to, since you mentioned them also. The 94 I have is the all steel version, not the Ultra Lite. I wanted the all steel. When I got it, the trigger was so heavy, you almost couldnt pull it in Double Action. Seriously. I thought something was wrong with it. I opened it up, and nothing was binding, and there were no metal shavings like I had read there may be. I took out the mainspring, and it cycled just fine. It was the mainspring, its absolutely the heaviest spring there ever was on any revolver ever built. Must be 50 pounds. I had a centerfire spring, and decided to try it. Its much better, and reliabilty is still 100%. When I started shooting it, I was pleased right away with the accuracy, but quickly noticed the cylinders were leading badly. The forcing cone and barrel were ok, but long slivers of lead would come out of the cylinder, and lead all over the cloth I had laid down on the rail at the range. I decided to run a patch thru the barrel, and when I did, it snagged on rough rifling, and was pulling big, long threads from the patch. After about 150 rounds, it was keyholing badly. I cleaned the cylinder really good, and the keyholing was gone. I shot it again with maybe 200 rounds, and the problem returned. This time, I decided to use a Stainless Tornado brush on the cylinder, and you should have seen the lead that came out. Only 350 rounds at that point, and it looked like 40 years of abuse. Once I got the cylinder really clean, I decided to have a closer look inside, and the cylinder holes were so rough, it was amazing. I have since continued to work on the cylinder chambers with the Tornado brush, and the last time I had the 94 at the range, there was no build up of lead at all. I really like this little revolver, but I dont think you should have to do the finish machining on a brand new gun. I also have 2 other Taurus products, and they both have been just fine, but my 94 was a real challenge from the start. Just some info for you to be prepared, and really look your revolver over good, before you sign for it. Here is a pic of the machining of my cylinder, right out of the box. It is a nice little revolver NOW, and accurate. It isnt very easy to shoot it Double Action, because the trigger is still pretty heavy, but Single Action is just fine. Oh... and comparing it to my SP101-22 and 317, its not even close, but those revolvers were also $100 and $250 more, So in this case, you really do get what you pay for.

Oh, and as far as bulk ammo... Its just fine in mine. Mine dosnt have any real ammo sensitivity, as far as function, but does have a preference for Blazers for the best accuracy.



November 12, 2012, 02:53 AM
They have their detractors, and they have their very passionate proponents.

My old man has the non-magnum capable .22 Tracker, and it can't keep it's timing, keeps locking up between cylinders in DA. It's been sent back to Taurus 3 times so far. Last time at the range, fresh from Service, it made it through one cylinder before locking up a few shots into the second. the gun exhibited no issues in the shop, only seems to have the trouble when it's Loaded.

Not even up to 200 rounds lifetime in the gun, just sick of sending it back and forth now. Their service has been terrible at best, incompetent at worst.

On the other hand, a good friend has been belly-carrying one of their 90's .357's and it's a damn fine pistol, even completely rusted on one side. (it's been his jogging/sweating gun for years, and shows it) it runs as well as the Model 10 S&W.

If you try one, try to have enough snap-caps on hand to dry-fire the holy hell out of it before you buy.

November 12, 2012, 04:31 AM
Weblance - A picture perfect example of the crap they are capable of. When you see a bad one, it is so bad as to be rediculous .

Taurus can, and does ,put out some nice guns, but they can turn right around and build junk as well. Hard to figure out why they can't get a better handle on the quality of manufacture . If they could avoid the awful mistakes they could have a much larger share of the market and a good reputation as well.

They will have to get read of the drunken monkey's if they want to improve.

November 12, 2012, 04:34 AM

The story on the Taurus 94.

There are links in the last link to go through.

November 12, 2012, 07:16 AM
I had a M94 back in the late-eighties, that I got to teach my then-wife to shoot with. I liked it a lot; made a good mate to my M66. Never had any issues with it. We divorced in 1996, and I let her take it with her.

November 12, 2012, 08:18 AM
The link you posted is the tracker 992 and it is heavier and beefier than the M94. I have the 992 in SS with 6.5" barrel. It is heavy but it is very accurate and also comes with a .22mag cylinder. Changing cylinders is very easy with a push of a button.
The 992 is my favorite shooter but again it is heavy. My granddaughter really likes shooting it.

November 12, 2012, 10:12 AM

That picture says it all!!! Unless and until Taurus fixes their quality control problems, I wouldn't own one of their handguns Period. If QC let's crap like that pictured out the door and someone buys it I'm not sure who's more to blame.

Smith and Wesson's quality isn't much better these days unfortunately. Given a choice between comparable models from each company I wouldn't buy either of them!! My money would go directly to RUGER.

Save your money a little longer, I will go out on a limb here and say a Ruger will shoot more than 200 rounds without having to go back for warranty repair, in fact odds are it will never need warranty repair. This is my opinion only and is not legally binding....:)

November 12, 2012, 12:02 PM
I skipped Taurus and went immediately with Ruger revolvers years ago. Every maker has their 'problems' - and I found them in my Rugers - all had QC issues, which I could fix... except for a 5.5" SS .45 RH - brand new, it needed a new hammer, cylinder, and trigger, spending it's first month back at Ruger. Not returned but both required lots of TLC were my two .32 H&RM models - a BHG SSM and an SP101, both having SAAMI-max ID chambers (Worked the brass, limiting reloading.). My one perfect Ruger revolver is still here - a SS BP 'Old Army'!

My switch to S&W began over ten years ago. I have bought a number of brand new S&Ws since - most with the IL - and never had a problem. To fund them, I have sold some nice firearms - including most of my long guns (... and Rugers!). Over four years ago - at sixty - I sold my last bottom-feeder - a Ruger MKII - and bought a 4" 617 - WOW! Three years ago, I bought a 5" 63 from a friend's estate. Too long. Two years ago - finally - the 3" 63 was out - and I got one -WOW!!. Perfection! Last fall, I finally found my Holy Grail of rimfire revolvers - an unshot ANIB 4" 651 (.22 WMR). Neat. Loud. Expensive to shoot. Here they are:


They all sport S&W '60 Pro' grips - great handfit to my medium+ hands. If I could only keep one, gag what a thought, it'd be the 3" 63. 8 shots of .22LR is just right - one of Dave's DS-10 Speedloader & loading plate making a range trip even more fun. The gun feels like a natural extension of my hand/arm. Only one other handgun has ever deserved that title to me - a 4" 19/66. I did get to A-B my 3" 63 with a friend's new model 4" SP101 in .22 LR nearly a year ago. The new SP101 is a nice revolver - and most of a C-note less than the new 3" 63 from S&W. One could be extremely happy with it. My experience aimed me towards S&W... it meant Ramen noodle lunches, but it was worth it to me.

Re Taurus revolvers. Three friends owned them - one had one, a 94, and it was enough for him - no more! The LGS he bought it new from wouldn't take it on trade - he sold it cheap. Another didn't like his .44M Tracker - bought a .45 ACP Tracker - loves it! He has shot it once, however - keeps it as a bedside piece. Another fellow has had an 85 as a car gun for eons. My son bought, against my suggestion, a .45 bottom feeder - works fine - he has ~200 rounds of ball ammo through it now - groups miserably. I had considered Taurus revolvers at one time - but the ports put me off! I am glad I saved longer...


November 12, 2012, 12:09 PM
I just have to ask, doesn't anyone of you check guns before you buy them? A blind man could have seen that.

Now, truly, S&W has it's problems. There was a recent article in Guns Magazine where a NEW Model 629 was tested. They ended up honing the cylinders to the proper size, and finish, and THEN had to cut the forcing cone to size. This on a gun costing multiple times that of the little .22.

Instead of playing the sad tunes on the Web, try looking at what you're buying, BEFORE you pay for it.

I don't know how many times we've been treated to moans about improper barrel-cylinder gaps, forcing cone issues, canted barrels, weak finishes, and timing issues that could have been picked up if anyone had bothered to LOOK at the gun. Ruger, S&W, Taurus, Charter Arms, Freedom Arms, and the rest of the manufacturers all have problems, many caused by the upsurge in demand overwhelming their QC.

The LGS gunsmith recently showed me an order for a dozen S&W revolvers in .38 Special, and .357 Magnum. They were J-frames, K-frames, and one L-frame. Out of the bunch, two were completely unserviceable, six had timing issues, and one was missing the yoke screw. THREE were what he considered acceptable.

Taurus is another brand that needs the buyer to check it before putting down their hard-earned cash. You wouldn't buy a car without checking it thoroughly, would you?

November 12, 2012, 03:39 PM
JR, not everything is testable in the shop without an active firing range, and those are few and far between in stores here.

My old man's been shooting for 50+ years, he's never owned a gun that behaved like this cruddy little Taurus, and he's the sort to ask for a chair to sit down for half an hour with the gun before he buys. He's bought 2 New guns in the last 30 years, nearly everything else he has is C&R. took him 2 sit downs just to buy his CZ-82

That being said, the gun should have been fixed by Taurus the first time it was sent back, Or the Second... or the THIRD. They Manufacture the blasted things, and while one may slip by a purchaser with relatively High familiarity in firearms, there is no excuse for the Builder to repeat the same mistakes so often.

November 12, 2012, 05:20 PM
I just have to ask, doesn't anyone of you check guns before you buy them? A blind man could have seen that.
Instead of playing the sad tunes on the Web, try looking at what you're buying, BEFORE you pay for it.

I ordered my Model 94 because no one had that model in stock. When I picked it up at the LGS, I saw the cylinder machining, and asked for the revolver to be sent back to the distributor for an exchange. The owner of the shop refused and told me to contact Taurus customer service. I was very angry about this, and just decided to try and work things out myself. Since the LGS was no help, I decided that I wasnt sending it back and letting my brand new revolver sit in the factory for months. I am not blind. I see very well, thank you. I also am not an idiot, and am not playing any sad tune. I was simply warning someone about an issue I had with a gun.

November 12, 2012, 07:52 PM
^^ Weblance, you really didn't owe JR47 an explanation, but thanks for sharing it anyway.

November 12, 2012, 10:30 PM
Cost seems really important to you. Quality should be a bigger issue. When I was younger, I always trusted that a reputable manufacturer actually produced a sound product. I have learned over the years that that is simply not the case. If you buy, do everything you can at the shop to test it. Ideally, I would shoot it before buying if they will allow it. Some dealers will have ranges. I doubt that they will let you shoot it unless it is a used gun.

I would suggest you just save up for the new Ruger SP-101 in 22. However, I have never seen one at a gun shop since they were introduced. They must sell very quickly. Even the Ruger will have a pretty heavy trigger in double action.

What do I own? I own Colts, S&W, and Ruger revolvers in 22. The Ruger LCR-22 was my last 22 purchase. I have been pleased overall. But it is no target gun. Fun as can be, but not a target gun.

November 12, 2012, 10:57 PM
I have a tracker .22 6" stainless.

It was kind of an impulse buy a while ago, got a good deal on it, and wanted a revolver (my only one). It just sits in the safe mostly since I got the Ruger SR22P, but it is fun to shoot when I want to. I've got a few thousand rounds through it, and it's been flawlwss from day one. Shoots walmart bulk pack whatever without a problem. I usually go with the Federal 550 plated because it seems cleaner.

It's big and feels a little front heavy. The grips feel smaller than they are (but that could always be changed), but work well for my wife's small hands.

I do like the fact that Taurus has a lifetime warranty. I've only had (have) 2 taurus's. They both have been fine.

Just my 2c.

November 13, 2012, 12:57 AM
handled one in the store this weekend. The trigger was horrible. long and hard, but the gun seemed well made and looked really nice. I might pick one up if the price is right

November 13, 2012, 02:21 AM
I once owned the the Tracker 22 and 44. They are not very well made. My 44 tracker went back to the factory and my 22 Tracker went to the pawn shop.

Live and learn if you want... that's what I did.:(

November 13, 2012, 06:45 PM
.22-Rimfire really hit the nail on the head!! His explanation should make sense to one and all. He speaks the truth through experience. For young shooters, it will save you money and frustration in the long run.

If you enjoyed reading about "Taurus .22lr revolver" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!