Taurus 85 SS2 better than S&W Equivalent (637)??


PDA






GWARGHOUL
December 11, 2012, 09:30 PM
I was just wondering if I was the only one to notice or feel this way..

The guns externally look almost identical. I have no idea how much the internals vary.

I have a Taurus 85 Stainless (85SS2) not a untralite..

Even though I had a broken cylinder stop on my 85 (unknown what caused it, may have been on its way to being defective from the beginning, but was repaired in 7 or 8 days round trip by Taurus on 100% their dime),
I have handled (but admitted not shot) a few newer Smith and Wesson 637's, and I feel that the Taurus is a better gun. A little bit cheaper too.

The Taurus feels stronger, more rigid, and has more metal, and seems to have more bulk where it counts, like for example having a protected ejector rod and a "fuller" barrel.

The Taurus has a smaller front sight, as in it does not gradually go up the entire barrel.. less to snag on..

Seems like the Taurus has a more ergonomic and comfortable grip, and while other aspects of the gun appear virtually identical, the frame seems a little smoother on the eyes.

The lockup has been about the same with both brands, and the better trigger has actually been on the Taurus.

While there are a few things about my 85 that are not 100% perfect as in robot made and milled.. it seems to all go together and handle/feel better.

Oh, and shooting.. it hits better than the last smith I did shoot (can't recall the model.. but was proclaimed as one of the "heyday" snubbies").
goes where I want it, and is easy on the hand..

Am I the only one who is very fond of these Taurii?

If you enjoyed reading about "Taurus 85 SS2 better than S&W Equivalent (637)??" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Quoheleth
December 11, 2012, 10:13 PM
Glad you like yours - that's what counts in the end.

That said, I suspect you're in the wide minority in a Taurus vs Smith comparison.

Q

S&Wfan
December 11, 2012, 10:26 PM
I love your comment about how the M85 broke; how you don't know how the insides are, yet how you "feel" the Taurus is a better revolver.

I've seen folks bring Taurus guns to the range, and also to the matches and try to compete. One even had their front sight fly off during a pin match . . . and he still loved that thing!!!

The main thing is this . . . you like it!

rule303
December 11, 2012, 10:33 PM
The 85 is a good gun. I wouldn't say it is better than a Smith, but if you like it, it will serve you well. A gun from any manufacturer can have issues, but Taurus seems to have more than others. The 85, along with the 66, and PT92 are generally very well liked by people who actually own them.

788Ham
December 11, 2012, 10:38 PM
Mmmm, thats kind of like comparing an old Boy Scout knife and a Randall, they both have blades, thats where the comparing stops!

TennJed
December 11, 2012, 11:18 PM
I would not make a comparison like that unless I had at least shot both

clang
December 11, 2012, 11:31 PM
You have to compare the Taurus 85 SS to a S&W Model 60 for an apples to apples comparison. They are both stainless steel 5 shot snubies.

The 637 is more like the Taurus 85 Ultralite. Alloy guns are much lighter and feel less substantial in your hand. I have an 85 Ultralite, it' a decent gun, but feels nothing like my stainless steel S&W Model 60. This is mainly a function of the construction material, not the design.

Also keep in mind the grips can make a big difference. Pachmayr Compacs are my personal favorites.

As for reliabilitiy and resale value, most people prefer the S&W (myself included).

BYJO4
December 11, 2012, 11:50 PM
You can't compare the feel of a stainless gun to that of an alloy frame gun. I feel the quality of materials and cosmetics are better in S&Ws and they will they will outlast a Tarus.

bainter1212
December 12, 2012, 12:53 AM
Last time I was at my LGS I compared the S&W 637 Airweight side by side with the Taurus 85 Ultralite. When picking up one and cocking/dry firing, then immediately doing the same to the other, I noticed that the Smith had a much smoother and easier cycling action, a much better asthetic finish, however the 85 grip was noticeably better. At only $20 more though, my judgement was that the Smith was a better value. Can't beat a Smith (I might be a little biased when it comes to revolvers - don't like Smith autos though.)

BSA1
December 12, 2012, 08:43 AM
It just so happen I was looking at handguns with my daughter yesterday as she wants to get her ccw permit. The fit and finish of the Taurus was equal to the S&W.

IMHO the internal lock of the Taurus is superior to the S&W.

How well they compare when shooting can only be determine on the range.

bannockburn
December 12, 2012, 10:41 AM
Glad that you're satisfied with your Taurus, but I don't feel they're better built than any currently made S&W revolver.

A couple of years ago I was looking for a lightweight snubby with a concealed hammer. Tried out a number of Taurus models but couldn't find one that had a decent trigger, solid lock-up, and a better fit and finish than a comparable S&W Model 638.

snooperman
December 12, 2012, 10:56 AM
To get a good perspective on the debate between Taurus vs S&W, I would turn to gunsmiths like Grant Cunningham and others, who have worked on them and know their strengths and weaknesses. Taurus guns are difficult to bring up to par with a S&W according to Grant in his latest book. Their parts do not fit properly to improve them the way a S&W can be.

Guillermo
December 12, 2012, 11:08 AM
in the name of disclosure, I loath the fact that S&W quality has plummeted and they employ all kinds of cost-cutting methods in what they market as a premium gun.

The methods by which they produce Taurus and S&W revolvers are virtually identical but a discussion on a THR thread made me investigate the end product.

Since I have no desire to own a revolver filled with injection molded parts my only recent experience is with friends guns. So in order to answer my THR friends I went to McBride's, a local gun store that enjoys the highest sales volume in the country. If it is available, they have it.

I looked at a couple of Taurus' and S&W snubbies.

Forgive me but I do not remember all of the specifics but the overall impression was that neither one was a quality piece. I do remember that the Taurus' had abysmal triggers and one of the S&W's had a horrendous crane/frame fit. The S&Ws, overall, seemed to have less issues.

All of this is to say that both are such a mixed bag. No matter which way you go, read the revolver sticky at the top of the page and go over the gun with a fine toothed comb.

Both of these manufacturers kick out a lot of lemons.

Tread carefully my friend.

snooperman
December 12, 2012, 11:24 AM
Yes Guillermo, that is why I buy the older S&W guns. Last week I found an old pre-model 10 made in 1946 with the long action and 6" pencil barrel. A little blue off but very nice for $320 and the trigger was very smooth. I can't resist the older guns and have been shooting here at the range for a week.

bikemutt
December 12, 2012, 11:54 AM
Admittedly an academic exercise but, imagine for a minute what the result would be if the comparable S&W, Rossi and Taurus guns all sold for the same price.

25cschaefer
December 12, 2012, 12:04 PM
The Taurus internals are more simple but not as adjustable or "slickable" as the Smith. The Taurus uses a transfer bar safety and the Smith uses a hammer block. If the Taurus safety breaks, you cannot shoot; if the Smith breaks you can. There are less things that can go wrong with the Taurus but, the quality of the Smith should prevent things from going wrong. In my opinion, the one you like is best.

GWARGHOUL
December 13, 2012, 01:33 AM
compared the S&W 637 Airweight side by side with the Taurus 85 Ultra


I'm not talking ultralites of either brand. Quite frankly, the machining, fit and finish on both brand UL's were sub-par.

I don't see S&W with their cost cutting building ANY different than any new Taurus.

They even look pretty much the same, only difference being the front sight ramp, and Taurus has a protected ejector rod.

OARNGESI
December 13, 2012, 04:21 AM
how does the triggers compare?

BigWoolyBanjo
December 13, 2012, 11:01 AM
I had the exact same gun break the same way twice. Yes, Taurus did fix it and return it quickly, but come on, twice? That lead me to trade it in for something I felt safe carrying (Ruger SP101).

I will never spend my hard earned money on another Taurus product. Learned my lesson.

Go with the Smith

BBQLS1
December 13, 2012, 11:39 AM
In general, S&W and Ruger make better revolvers, but not for the price. There are a few S&Ws snubs out there that do feel cheap compared to a Taurus. These are the cheaper S&W CC guns.

S&W and Ruger hold their value better than Taurus.

That being said, Taurus generally works pretty well. I carry a used and worn Taurus 605 99% of the time because it works fine for me and it's not worth very much (about $225). I can't get another EDC for what I could get out of it, so I just keep it, and use it.

I've had 4 Taurus Revolvers and all have worked well for me. Got 2 of them now.

GWARGHOUL
December 13, 2012, 01:25 PM
how does the triggers compare?

The trigger feels better on my 85. It lets ya know its there, I can't explain that.

I will never spend my hard earned money on another Taurus product.

Cool, more for me and the millions of others.

n general, S&W and Ruger make better revolvers, but not for the price.
Exactly. I spent $289 and had it transferred in for $20, free shipping. The S&W 637 is about $340, and didn't feel as solid.

I don't have to worry about holster wear on my Taurus.

There are a few S&Ws snubs out there that do feel cheap compared to a Taurus. These are the cheaper S&W CC guns.

Exactly.. like the 637 I'm comparing the85 too. The 85 hands down is a more solid gun, in my opinion.


love your comment about how the M85 broke; how you don't know how the insides are, yet how you "feel" the Taurus is a better revolver.

I broke my 85, or the shipper, distributor, or hell maybe even the FFL I had it transferred too. They had it back to me in 8 days, fixed solid, and with a detailed repair description.

I find that satisfying, not funny. Needless to say, I treated it the same just throwin it in the pocket, letting sawdust get all in it, and banged around until I finally got a in-pocket holster for it a few weeks ago. Shoots like a charm, locks up well.. lifetime warranty (not sure if S&W has that?)..customer service was good to me, repair was quick and good to me..

I don't know how to completely strip down the lower and upper end of a 426 HEMI, but its a good engine, and a performer.


I don't plan on selling the gun. Ever, so resale value is of no issue. I suspect I can get my $289 back, or pretty darn close.

The methods by which they produce Taurus and S&W revolvers are virtually identical

No doubt, which is why I have no reason saving some money. Inspect and test ANY new revolver from either of the two. I got a good one, and I think it knocks the socks off the Smith 637.

You have to compare the Taurus 85 SS to a S&W Model 60 for an apples to apples comparison.

Maybe you're right. My dad had a 60 Cheif's special made in the late 70's early 80's. Nice gun. Wasn't +p rated, and all of a sudden S&W claims leaps and bounds of technology in metallurgy makes it possible to consistently shoot +p loads out of a gun that was originally nothing more than a rushed sized up mock up from a .32 revolver...

Not bashing on the Smith. You gotta look over each these days. They aren't the same smiths of yesteryear. yet the Taurus.. well, I think they are getting better, and the 85 always had at minimum a good reputation.

GWARGHOUL
December 13, 2012, 01:28 PM
I want to add that the frame feels more ergonomic, and looks a little easier on the eyes than the model 60, or the 637 both. If I ran out of ammo, I suspect it wold make a better weapon too.

Jaymo
December 13, 2012, 09:43 PM
I've never shot a Taurus revolver that didn't have a better factory trigger than a J or K frame Smith.
Smiths are vastly overrated by fanboys, just like Glocks.
I like Smiths and Glocks, but I don't worship them.
Smith has been resting on their prewar laurels for many, many years.

bdb benzino
December 14, 2012, 01:30 AM
Exactly.. like the 637 I'm comparing the85 too. The 85 hands down is a more solid gun, in my opinion.
The S&W 637 is about $340, and didn't feel as solid.

I don't think you are understanding, you are comparing an all steel Taurus 85 to an aluminum framed light weight S&W 637. If you want a better comparison, use a S&W 60 or 36 to see what an all steel S&W feels like. The steel framed revolver is always gonna feel more solid than an aluminum one!

dawei
December 14, 2012, 01:34 PM
I have owned ten Taurus® revolvers.
• Mdl 85B2CH 38 Special - 1994
• Mdl 669SS4CP 357 Magnum - 1996
• Mdl 85B2 38 Special - 1997
• Mdl 617SS2 357 Magnum - 2003
• Mdl 605SS3 357 Magnum - 2006
• Mdl 85SS2UL 38 Special - 2007
• Mdl 605SS2 357 Magnum - 2010 (Replaced with a 2012 605SS2)
• Mdl 425SS2 41 Remington® Magnum - 2012
• Mdl 605SS2 357 Magnum - 2012 (Replaced 2010 605SS2)
• Mdl 85SS2UL 38 Special - 2012

All have performed superbly and I continue to shoot them all almost every week.

I have only encountered these problems.........
• Mdl 85B2CH broke a firing pin (part# 19) after 11,000+ rounds. I replaced the firing pin & it's still going strong.
• Mdl 85SS2UL had the cylinder stop (part# 44) wear down after 10,000 rounds. Called Taurus® and they shipped the part right away. Installed new cylinder stop and now the gun works fine.

I have zero complaints with Taurus® customer service. The times I had to send a gun in they fixed and returned it when they said they would. Specifically.....................
• Mdl 617 developed excessive cylinder to forcing cone gap (.011") after almost 6,000 rounds. I sent it to Taurus® and they replaced the cylinder (part# eight and adjusted the yoke [part# 9]) I've since put 3,000+ rounds through it and it's still going strong.
• Mdl 605SS2 cylinder would not advance to next chamber after shot and trigger would not reset (after 5,400 rounds). Taurus® replaced the firearm with a new (2012 605SS2)

Taurus® is the only gun manufacturer that warrants the firearm; and not the original purchaser. You could be the 50th owner of a used Taurus® (1977 or later), or Rossi® (1999 or later); and you have a lifetime warranty. No other firearm manufacturer offers this, NONE!

I will not hesitate to buy additional Taurus® revolvers. They are an outstanding value.
Here is a wealth of Taurus® information..........

Taurus Firearms Forum - TaurusArmed.net (http://www.taurusarmed.net/forums/index.php)

JR47
December 14, 2012, 03:03 PM
Their parts do not fit properly to improve them the way a S&W can be.

Huh? I hope that a real gunsmith never said anything that silly. If the parts don't fit together properly, the gun won't work.

As the Taurus uses a transfer bar, and the S&W doesn't, and the resulting lock-work is slightly different, improving the trigger might just require someone who actually isn't trying to use S&W tricks on the Taurus.

Using Colt tune-up tricks won't work on a S&W, either.

Try Cylinder and Slide for a bit of understanding Taurus guns.

Personally, I've had two brand new S&W revolvers fail on me. One on the first shot. My 625-3 failed on the first shot, letting the cylinder spin freely. I've also had the timing on a new Model 29 go bad within 50 shots of regular, non-hot, White box .44 magnum.

Smith and Wesson repaired both under Warranty, both taking roughly six weeks each gun.

I actually think that S&W, Glock, and the likes are as problematical as any other brand. Their fan-boys just cannot accept that, and carry tales of every other brands failures from Site to Site, making it SEEM as though brand X is worse than their "baby".

franco45
December 14, 2012, 11:19 PM
I'm very surprised at some of the fair objective posts in this thread. When I read the title I pictured flamethrowers starting up all over The Highroad Nation. I just got back from shooting a new (to me) Taurus 605. I paid $250 dollars for a lnib 5 shot 357.
Frankly I was a little concerned about my first trip to the range with it today. This happens occasionally when I take a Taurus to the range for the first time. Must be a nervous reaction from all the Taurus bashing on the web. It not only was 100% reliable it was surprisingly accurate with both 38 special and 357 magnum.
I also put 50 rounds through my Taurus TCP. It too was perfect as usual. :cool:

GWARGHOUL
December 15, 2012, 02:23 AM
I intend to purchase three more Tauri. A PT92 to compliment my Beretta 96, a long barreled 357 and 1911.

J_A_C
December 15, 2012, 11:33 PM
I've had several guns from both companies. 3 Taurus guns, all junk. A Stainless PT1911 that would choke at least once a mag, a PT709 that was so badly made it took a hammer to disassemble, and a .22 mag pocket gun that felt like the action was filled with sand and it kept binding up. I tried talking to customer service but they told me to pound sound. LGS let me return the guns. I've had probably 10 S&W's, both M&P autos and J frames, and the only gun I ever had a problem with was the M&P 22. Called Smith, they emailed me a shipping label and I had the gun back within a week, along with 2 free mags for the trouble. The Smith costs more, sure. But I think the Smith has a better chance of running 100% out of the box, and if it doesn't they will make it right. Worth the extra $$$ IMO.

PabloJ
December 16, 2012, 01:07 AM
I've had several guns from both companies. 3 Taurus guns, all junk. A Stainless PT1911 that would choke at least once a mag, a PT709 that was so badly made it took a hammer to disassemble, and a .22 mag pocket gun that felt like the action was filled with sand and it kept binding up. I tried talking to customer service but they told me to pound sound. LGS let me return the guns. I've had probably 10 S&W's, both M&P autos and J frames, and the only gun I ever had a problem with was the M&P 22. Called Smith, they emailed me a shipping label and I had the gun back within a week, along with 2 free mags for the trouble. The Smith costs more, sure. But I think the Smith has a better chance of running 100% out of the box, and if it doesn't they will make it right. Worth the extra $$$ IMO.
Did you buy all of them at the same time or just bought numero dos and tres because previous one was POS? I prefer stuff with little or no warranty that actually does not break like a Ruger.

J_A_C
December 16, 2012, 07:41 AM
My uncle is a big taurus fan, so i kept telling myself it was bad luck. After the 3rd time, I swore them off. And I agree about ruger, I love my minis and 10/22s, and my dads SP-101 is a tank.

Rodfac
December 16, 2012, 08:09 AM
Haven't had a personal experience with the Taurus model you mentioned, but both my wife, daughter in law, and her mother have S&W 637's that I helped them buy, qualify with and carry on a daily basis. They're quality guns and quite accurate for a short barreled revolver. We mounted Crimson Trace grips on two of them, and I was able to get a sub 2" five shot group at 28 yards with it. For a fact, I couldn't do that with the iron sights, but the laser made it possible and S&W assembled the gun that did it.

One of the three, new out of the box, tied up after several cylinder fulls of standard velocity training LSWC's. My call to S&W Service Dept. was answered in less than a minute, they sent a FEDEX shipping label the next day, and I had the gun back in 7 working days...fixed right and at no expense. Their customer service is 2nd to none in my opinion (had a similar happy ending with a M36 that we've owned for over 20 yrs tho not the same problem). I have had no other service failures with any of the dozen plus Smiths we've owned over the years...they're just made right from the start.

If anecdotal evidence is to be believed, Taurus customer service leaves much to be desired, as does their basic quality out of the box. I'll admit the my experience with them is limited to a pair of "Judges" brought out to our farm for a try out, and some LGS handling. Those two "Judges" were not built as well as any Smith I've had.

JMHO, Rodfac

JR47
December 16, 2012, 06:04 PM
I've had several guns from both companies. 3 Taurus guns, all junk. A Stainless PT1911 that would choke at least once a mag, a PT709 that was so badly made it took a hammer to disassemble, and a .22 mag pocket gun that felt like the action was filled with sand and it kept binding up. I tried talking to customer service but they told me to pound sound. LGS let me return the guns. I've had probably 10 S&W's, both M&P autos and J frames, and the only gun I ever had a problem with was the M&P 22. Called Smith, they emailed me a shipping label and I had the gun back within a week, along with 2 free mags for the trouble. The Smith costs more, sure. But I think the Smith has a better chance of running 100% out of the box, and if it doesn't they will make it right. Worth the extra $$$ IMO.

Odd how you keep calling them POS, yet keep buying them.

As stated, I have 14 Taurus handguns. Some approaching the 35 year mark (they were bought when Interams imported them). That includes the Model 941 .22 WMR revolver, and a 709. My Pt1911 is in .45 ACP. NONE of them has seen the factory due to a Warranty issue.

I have, in the past ten years, bought three new S&W revolvers. All three of them failed immediately. The 625, after the first round, had a free-spinning cylinder. The 617 locked up so badly that it required a gunsmith to get the cylinder open to remove live ammunition. The Model 29 shot loose in 50 rounds. It was spitting what felt like half of the bullet with each trigger pull. NONE of these guns was returned in less than six weeks, either. They represent almost $2000 in guns. The 617, when returned, would bind up after less than one hundred rounds. It's gone.

The 625 is now good to go. The Model 29 was sold to a S&W collector, who promptly shot it. He managed three of four hundred rounds of ammo, and it went out of time, again.

I've has similar experiences with other manufacturers, Colt, Sig, HK, and even Wilson. The repairs were made, and only a couple of them were still unreliable.

Now, I see a lot of the same stories traveling from site to site. Some of them improve as they go, as their story's errors are pointed out. However, until some manufacturer actually publishes total output, and total warranty claims, the only thing here is supposition, innuendo, and opinion.

strange246
December 16, 2012, 06:27 PM
I have multiple Taurus's, a 608 (8 shot .357mag), 605 (5 shot .357mag snub), 617 (7 shot .357mag) and just ordered a model 94 in .22LR, that said I also own Rugers, CZ's, and alot of others, I'll take ANY of my Taurus's over a comparable model from S&W, (except the 94 only because I havnt put it through its paces yet) in my opinion they're built substantially more durable, and the trigger and lockup on the three .357's is as smooth or smoother than any S&W that I've ever oned or shot, just my $.02

1 old 0311-1
December 16, 2012, 06:36 PM
I own a few Taurus wheelies but they are in no way even close to S&W.

GWARGHOUL
December 16, 2012, 11:27 PM
My gut got gained a few pounds since I quit smoking back in August, and its much more comfortable to carry my Taurus 85 than that full sized Beretta 96 these days..

raider-one
December 17, 2012, 01:52 AM
I have owned both S&W and Taurus Model 66 blued 4" 7shot, my smith felt like a death trap the trigger was so light I accidently fired it on three diffrent occasions, I barely rested my finger on it and it went off, it was safer to fire in double action. I traded if for a SA Ruger, but I prefer DA so I traded it in and bought my Taurus, I preffer the trigger pull on it in both SA and DA. I think it is a solid well made weapon, I sent my Taurus to the factory because the casing swelled in the cylinder and had to be removed, Taurus made the repairs and paid the freight both ways and no cost to me, I got my gun back in 8 days with a spent casing and a new cylinder. I have fired S&W 686 Colt Python and King Cobra. Expensive guns with no backing when they break after the first year that's when the warrenty runs out, fact all guns have the potential to break down. I found these guns to all have similar action and accuracy, the trigger on the Taurus is very similar to the Python and King Cobra, the mechanism on the Taurus the springs in the side plate are the same as the 686. FYI The Taurus model 66 was first imported into the US in 1968, The S&W 686 was first produced in 1980, so who copied who, the copy always follows the original. Find what you like and buy it.

clang
December 17, 2012, 12:18 PM
"I don't think you are understanding, you are comparing an all steel Taurus 85 to an aluminum framed light weight S&W 637. If you want a better comparison, use a S&W 60 or 36 to see what an all steel S&W feels like. The steel framed revolver is always gonna feel more solid than an aluminum one!"

This is the point I was trying to make in my first post.

----------------

"Maybe you're right. My dad had a 60 Cheif's special made in the late 70's early 80's. Nice gun. Wasn't +p rated, and all of a sudden S&W claims leaps and bounds of technology in metallurgy makes it possible to consistently shoot +p loads out of a gun that was originally nothing more than a rushed sized up mock up from a .32 revolver..."

The S&W Model 60 has been available in .357 Magnum for the past 15 years. It can probably handle +P .38 Special.

PabloJ
December 17, 2012, 02:12 PM
"I don't think you are understanding, you are comparing an all steel Taurus 85 to an aluminum framed light weight S&W 637. If you want a better comparison, use a S&W 60 or 36 to see what an all steel S&W feels like. The steel framed revolver is always gonna feel more solid than an aluminum one!"

This is the point I was trying to make in my first post.

----------------

"Maybe you're right. My dad had a 60 Cheif's special made in the late 70's early 80's. Nice gun. Wasn't +p rated, and all of a sudden S&W claims leaps and bounds of technology in metallurgy makes it possible to consistently shoot +p loads out of a gun that was originally nothing more than a rushed sized up mock up from a .32 revolver..."

The S&W Model 60 has been available in .357 Magnum for the past 15 years. It can probably handle +P .38 Special.
It should be able to handle .38+P even in pre-Magnum J-frame. They made J-frame stainless in '9mm Parabellum' a cartridge that is rated at 35,000psi in standard loadings.

ArchAngelCD
December 17, 2012, 03:22 PM
I don't care you like the Taurus or any other gun better than a S&W or whatever but you can't compare the Steel Taurus to an Aluminum Alloy J frame and then say the Taurus feels stronger. You said that several times in a few posts but you are comparing different types of revolvers. The M637 is an Airweight which weighs 15oz, the Stainless M85 weighs 22.5oz. Compare it to the S&W M36 (19.5oz) or M60 (22.6oz) and you won't come up with the same conclusion.

Also, how can the Taurus feel different when they took the S&W design for their own. Taurus always "borrows" good designed from everyone else and sells them as theirs.

Maybe you're right. My dad had a 60 Cheif's special made in the late 70's early 80's. Nice gun. Wasn't +p rated, and all of a sudden S&W claims leaps and bounds of technology in metallurgy makes it possible to consistently shoot +p loads out of a gun that was originally nothing more than a rushed sized up mock up from a .32 revolver...
Those all Steel revolvers could safely shoot so called +P ammo. How can a barrel be marked +P is there was no +P ammo at the time? If you would have said the technology in metallurgy advanced from the 20's sure, but from the 70's and 80's, not so much... +P ammo is only a marketing ploy but that's for another thread.

GWARGHOUL
December 17, 2012, 04:38 PM
The S&W Model 60 has been available in .357 Magnum for the past 15 years. It can probably handle +P .38 Special.

I feel better with the purchase I made. $289, $20 transfer, and $9 shipping.. $309 for a reliable, all steel comfortable good shooting good trigger, lifetime warranty.. pretty good deal I would say, and the 85 has been around quite a while, and has a generally good rap.

GWARGHOUL
December 17, 2012, 04:40 PM
I've already mentioned, if you bother; that perhaps I was comparing the wrong gun, and someone else noted that in some cases, the Taurus was around before said model of S&W...

BBQLS1
December 17, 2012, 05:00 PM
I've had several guns from both companies. 3 Taurus guns, all junk. A Stainless PT1911 that would choke at least once a mag, a PT709 that was so badly made it took a hammer to disassemble, and a .22 mag pocket gun that felt like the action was filled with sand and it kept binding up. I tried talking to customer service but they told me to pound sound. LGS let me return the guns. I've had probably 10 S&W's, both M&P autos and J frames, and the only gun I ever had a problem with was the M&P 22. Called Smith, they emailed me a shipping label and I had the gun back within a week, along with 2 free mags for the trouble. The Smith costs more, sure. But I think the Smith has a better chance of running 100% out of the box, and if it doesn't they will make it right. Worth the extra $$$ IMO.

The Taurus designed autoloaders had some issues in the past. Not sure about their current crop, but you don't see many training with them.

I'm happy with the revolvers I've had though. Resale isn't good on them though.

BBQLS1
December 17, 2012, 05:02 PM
I intend to purchase three more Tauri. A PT92 to compliment my Beretta 96, a long barreled 357 and 1911.

For a little more money, you can get a Springfield Armory, Colt, Kimber, or for a little less a Rock Island..... all hold their value better than a Taurus. I'd pass on a Taurus 1911 unless it was real cheap.

GWARGHOUL
December 17, 2012, 07:35 PM
For a little more money, you can get a Springfield Armory, Colt, Kimber, or for a little less a Rock Island..... all hold their value better than a Taurus. I'd pass on a Taurus 1911 unless it was real cheap.

Any of those have a lifetime warranty? I'm kinda scared by the whole "tuner" nature of the 1911, honestly. The Taurus has a lot of bells and whistles.. and the ones I have handled (not shot), felt better than the Ruger at least.

Cluster Bomb
December 18, 2012, 01:12 AM
i have owned a Taurus 85 and loved it.shot really good. feels right in all the right places. I had the stainless DAO version.

clang
December 18, 2012, 05:48 PM
"I feel better with the purchase I made. $289, $20 transfer, and $9 shipping.. $309 for a reliable, all steel comfortable good shooting good trigger, lifetime warranty.. pretty good deal I would say, and the 85 has been around quite a while, and has a generally good rap."


If you are looking to save money, you can find a good used steel 85 around here for about $200 OTD.

Jaymo
December 18, 2012, 10:21 PM
I found a used, stainless Taurus 85CH with the wood banana grips for $175.00, at the LGS, last week. It has a very smooth trigger, just like its twin. They wanted $225 for it, but I pointed out that the cylinder felt rough when turned.
All it needed was a cleaning & a drop of oil. :)

GWARGHOUL
December 18, 2012, 11:50 PM
If you are looking to save money, you can find a good used steel 85 around here for about $200 OTD.

Huh? I already bought it back in late October. But thank you for being helpful.

GWARGHOUL
December 18, 2012, 11:52 PM
I found a used, stainless Taurus 85CH with the wood banana grips for $175.00, at the LGS, last week. It has a very smooth trigger, just like its twin. They wanted $225 for it, but I pointed out that the cylinder felt rough when turned.
All it needed was a cleaning & a drop of oil.

Nice score.. whats the CH? Is that blued Stainless or something, or something to do with the hammer?

Mine is a 85SS2.. the uh.. stainless stainless.. hehe

(the reason I point this out is, the UL's look stainless, and have stainless cylinders, or at least some do, and I saw a blued SIG semi-auto with the slide marked "stainless".)

GWARGHOUL
December 18, 2012, 11:56 PM
I found a used, stainless Taurus 85CH with the wood banana grips for $175.00, at the LGS, last week. It has a very smooth trigger, just like its twin. They wanted $225 for it, but I pointed out that the cylinder felt rough when turned.
All it needed was a cleaning & a drop of oil.

Nice score.. whats the CH? Is that blued Stainless or something, or something to do with the hammer?

Mine is a 85SS2.. the uh.. stainless stainless.. hehe

(the reason I point this out is, the UL's look stainless, and have stainless cylinders, or at least some do, and I saw a blued SIG semi-auto with the slide marked "stainless".)

skt239
December 19, 2012, 08:55 AM
I owned 4 Taurus revolvers, none were 85's but all were snubs. I currently carry a 637 and I much prefer it to the Taurus's I owned. The hammer on my 637 cracked early on and was repaired by S&W, free of charge. All for of my Taurus had problems, from serious to minor.

Nothing about my 637 feels "cheap", in fact it's quite the opposite. My Taurus revolvers on the other hand all had problems with cylinder latches and ejection rods would normally shot themselves loose.

The 637 is my EDC so I mainly shoot what I carry, +P loads. After a few thousand rounds I've seen no abnormal wear or had any problems with parts coming loose. FWIW, my Taurus revolver were purchased almost ten years ago and like I said, none were 85's.

BBQLS1
December 19, 2012, 11:19 AM
Any of those have a lifetime warranty? I'm kinda scared by the whole "tuner" nature of the 1911, honestly. The Taurus has a lot of bells and whistles.. and the ones I have handled (not shot), felt better than the Ruger at least.

Springfield and Ruger have much better customer service records than Taurus.

Springfield has a lifetime warranty to the original purchaser.

Ruger will fix just about anything that breaks that shouldn't have even though they have no warranty.

Springfield is an American Owned Company

Ruger is an American Company and the whole gun is made in the US.

The Taurus will have terrible resale value where you can just about get what you paid for the Ruger or Springfield if it's in great condition.

Springfield offers all the Bells and Whistles that Taurus offers, Ruger does too with the exception of a light rail (which I usually wouldn't want on a 1911). Oh, I guess you can get gold plated parts on the Taurus which you can't on the others. The Taurus might be about $100 cheaper though.

I have never seen a Taurus that was finished even close to as well as a Springfield and definitely not the Ruger.




I own a few Taurus handguns and have owned several more. All were revlovers and I never had an issue other than the loosening of an ejector rod that I didn't tighten well enough. I think the 1911s and PT92s are decent guns, but the 1911 just isn't a good value IMO. If it were priced like a RIA, it would be.

Jaymo
December 19, 2012, 12:52 PM
CH stands for, Concealed Hammer. It's the version that had no hammer spur and the hammer was flush with the rear of the frame.

GWARGHOUL
December 19, 2012, 04:41 PM
Springfield is an American Owned Company

I wonder who makes their frames in Brazil.

My Taurus revolvers on the other hand all had problems with cylinder latches and ejection rods would normally shot themselves loose.


Can someone tell me how to check and tighten these? I'm a bit weak on my revolver anatomy.

BBQLS1
December 19, 2012, 04:45 PM
I wonder who makes their frames in Brazil.


It usually says it on the frame: IMBEL with Springfield Armory as the importer. Also, some of the guns are actually built in the US, but IMBEL frames are used. These are usually NM prefix in the serial number. The higher end models (IE Professional, Custom Carry) are done in the US by skilled gunsmiths again on the IMBEL frame.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMBEL

GWARGHOUL
December 20, 2012, 04:00 AM
Good info, BBQ.

From what I have seen.. like range reports, and there was a fella that posted on here that worked at a rental range..

The Taurus was absolutely a solid gun. I think he replaced a MIM slide stop with a aftermarket one, but other than that..


I think the 1911s and PT92s are decent guns, but the 1911 just isn't a good value IMO. If it were priced like a RIA, it would be.

Seems like an excellent value. Its not a lot more expensive than the RIA, and cheaper than the Ruger, and the Springfield.

If you look, you can find a PT1911 in some form or another for around $500 and some change. I should have jumped on those when Bud's had them.

But I will take a closer look at a Springfield, when the 1911 day comes. I'm not sure when that will be, though.

BBQLS1
December 20, 2012, 10:49 AM
Seems like an excellent value. Its not a lot more expensive than the RIA, and cheaper than the Ruger, and the Springfield.

If you look, you can find a PT1911 in some form or another for around $500 and some change. I should have jumped on those when Bud's had them.

But I will take a closer look at a Springfield, when the 1911 day comes. I'm not sure when that will be, though.

Pricewise Taurus sits between SA/Ruger and Rock Island. The difference is how fast and how much you can sell the SA/Ruger/Rock Island vs. the Taurus. The better value is in the other guns IMO.

Guillermo
December 20, 2012, 11:56 AM
Springfield and Ruger have much better customer service records than Taurus.


Please be so kind as to provide where you acquired this information

Thank you

dawei
December 20, 2012, 12:47 PM
Yes please as Ruger® offers NO WARRANTY (as stated in the manual) with their firearms.

BBQLS1
December 20, 2012, 02:06 PM
It anecdoteal. Go look for all of the customer service threads on Ruger, Springfield and Taurus. Ruger and Springfield will be way in the lead.

As far as Ruger's lack of warranty, it is true. Ruger has no written warranty. Ruger still stands behind their product. They have often fixed many a gun that failed provided it wasn't wore out from normal use or obviously abused. Got a problem with your Ruger that was Ruger's fault? Give them a call.

BSA1
December 20, 2012, 04:45 PM
I owned 4 Taurus revolvers, none were 85's but all were snubs. I currently carry a 637 and I much prefer it to the Taurus's I owned. The hammer on my 637 cracked early on and was repaired by S&W, free of charge. All for of my Taurus had problems, from serious to minor.

A cracked hammer is about as major of a problem a gun can have. Why are you giving S&W a pass?

buck460XVR
December 20, 2012, 05:10 PM
Folks should be happy with their firearms, if not, they should dump them and move on. Folks need to be confident with the reliability of their carry weapon, if not, they need to find something different. That said, folks do not need to be chastised for their choices when they differ, nor should one really feel the need to pound their chest about their choice. IMHO, Doing either or both is just a sign of one's insecurity about their own choice. Guns are just a tool. What one accomplishes with said tool is up to the one using it. Many times the skill and methods used has a greater influence on the outcome than the tool itself.

Guillermo
December 21, 2012, 08:26 PM
The hammer on my 637 cracked early on and was repaired by S&W, free of charge.

It HAD to be a forged part because MIM is not brittle.

:neener:

If you enjoyed reading about "Taurus 85 SS2 better than S&W Equivalent (637)??" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!