Member consensus on Taurus

csirre said:

it directly but the 856's trigger is unnatural to pull, I cannot fully hold the grip and pull the trigger comfortably.

Click to expand...

I suggest that you try some different grips for it then. I also found the rubber grips on my 856 and 942 did not fit my hand and made pulling the trigger feel uncomfortable for me. Now I don't have any problems with the factory wood grips on my 85. I have since bought Model 85 wood grips and installed them on my 856 and 942. The shape of the wood grips made a difference for me.

And for those that are wondering, yes the grips are fully interchangeable between the older 85, 94, 941, etc and the new 856, 327, and 942.

Here is a family photo of my Taurus revolvers with the 85 factory wood grips

12Bravo20 said:

I suggest that you try some different grips for it then. I also found the rubber grips on my 856 and 942 did not fit my hand and made pulling the trigger feel uncomfortable for me. Now I don't have any problems with the factory wood grips on my 85. I have since bought Model 85 wood grips and installed them on my 856 and 942. The shape of the wood grips made a difference for me.

And for those that are wondering, yes the grips are fully interchangeable between the older 85, 94, 941, etc and the new 856, 327, and 942.

Here is a family photo of my Taurus revolvers with the 85 factory wood grips

Click to expand...

Thanks for the advice. Though very stylish and beautiful, I hate the factory rubber grip too, removing them was the first thing I did. I tried 2 different grips without success. I think this is odd since the 85 family should be very similar to S&W Model 60. And model 60 has been very successful for decades that it must be good. So the different grip must be it. Here are my 856's pics with the grips, I like the smaller one for the look but it just makes pulling the trigger even more uncomfortable.

csirre said:

Thanks for the advice. Though very stylish and beautiful, I hate the factory rubber grip too, removing them was the first thing I did. I tried 2 different grips without success. I think this is odd since the 85 family should be very similar to S&W Model 60. And model 60 has been very successful for decades that it must be good. So the different grip must be it. Here are my 856's pics with the grips, I like the smaller one for the look but it just makes pulling the trigger even more uncomfortable.

View attachment 1087270
View attachment 1087268

Click to expand...

If you notice, the factory Model 85 wood grips allow your shooting hand to get a higher grip on the revolver than any of the grips you have tried. Maybe factory 85 grips will help. If not then it is just that the 856 doesn't fit your hands. Every firearm will fit differently among different shooters.

Well, I'm sitting here bored out of mind thought I'd look back through this thread and see if I can find a pattern.

So far, in my wildly unscientific test, negative personal experiences slightly outweigh positive ones but maybe not enough to be statistically valid.

Of the negative experiences with the firearm, poor CS came up with definite regularity.

Not surprising, positive experiences with the firearm that also had some issues also had positive experience with CS.

Quite a few posters had mixed feelings; multiple Taurus firearms, some with problems and some without so I considered that data a wash out.

Same with folks who had no experience either way but just wanted to tell a story (usually about another brand of firearm) so those weren't considered either.

Others had good experiences with their firearms but only disliked a specific issue (like grips or disappointed in the finish) which didn't make it a negative overall.

Like I said, just having a bit of fun with my curiosity but, it seems that folks had slightly, almost insignificant, more negative experience with the product itself and, slightly (again, I consider it insignificant) more negative opinion of CS.

And many others had mixed experiences which I consider aa much more realistic metric when it comes to consumer products in this day and age.

I’m a big fan of the Taurus ‘90’s revolvers. They were very nice guns at a great price back then.
I’ve never been attracted to their autos but, after reading many good reviews and with a $268 price tag and three 12-rd. magazines , I ordered a new G3C.
Picked it up today and it won’t chamber anything. At all. Rack the slide and it stops about an eighth of an inch short of battery. And it takes a lot of effort to retract the slide and eject the semi-chambered round.
So not a big fan of Taurus this evening.

I've got a 445 44 special stainless 2". No problems. But that's my only Taurus.

commygun said:

I’m a big fan of the Taurus ‘90’s revolvers. They were very nice guns at a great price back then.

Click to expand...

Concur. I had a stainless Model 85 that was an absolute jewel. The only Taurus I gave up on was a blued PT-908, but in hindsight, the magazines were probably causing its issues. A (pre-Millenium) PT-145 was superb (well, with the exception of the loooong sproingy trigger), don't know why I let it go (oh, wait, because I traded it for something worth twice as much). The Millenium Pro PT-111 was very good, gave it to a brother, that's how much I trusted it (I like my brother). My Model 94 was accurate and otherwise reliable but, the trigger was not very good. I let it go after I picked up a S&W 617, which was a better revolver, though I could've probably slicked up the 94's trigger.

A few of the folks that worked for me bought G2s, G3s, GX4s (or whatever they are now) and no one reported problems with them.

And my PT-92 AFS-D (1991) is still a worthy autopistol. Brazil has always been good to me. And I own several Berettas, 92FS and M9 versions.

I've got no issues with Taurus. I have decided I will no longer be a brand snob. Hell, I'm warming up to a few Turkish guns now.

The Taurus of today is different than the Taurus of yesteryear. There have been bad designs that were further compounded by bad QC and bad CS, but with what Taurus currently produces in 2022, with their current QC, and CS, Taurus is doing good and from my experience has been good for a few years now. I can't think of anything that is an outright lemon that Taurus is currently making or most prone to being a problem, but I'm not a fan of the PT22 and would avoid. Looking on the website, it appears they've completely dropped it.

TTv2 said:

The Taurus of today is different than the Taurus of yesteryear. There have been bad designs that were further compounded by bad QC and bad CS, but with what Taurus currently produces in 2022, with their current QC, and CS, Taurus is doing good and from my experience has been good for a few years now.

Click to expand...

Is it?

Do you have any way of quantifying your statement?

Have you been reading internet stories or maybe talking to the 2-3 non-gun guys at work who bought a Taurus product just to say they have something ("can't put a price on my family's safety, well, what do you know, I guess you can, let me look at them Taurus pistols over there") during this latest panic (who, at the very most) fired 2-3 boxes of ammo and decided how expensive and time consuming it was and decided to put it in a dresser drawer to be forgotten about until the next neighborhood picnic where the can join in on the conversation with "oh, yeah, I have a gun..."

Taurus did invest in better CNC machines which probably did help but you still have to employ at least a semi-skill person to assemble it: a guy with a decade or more at his craft" as opposed to just "a guy" makes a big difference.

TTv2 said:

can't think of anything that is an outright lemon that Taurus is currently making or most prone to being a problem,

Click to expand...

Taurus TX22 comes to mind instantly.
Brilliant idea with an eager and waiting clientele and they botched it's maiden run with BAD barrels and then scrambled haphazardly try to get them fixed.

So, here we are back to the question: basic QC before it leaves the factory or let the end user/customer service sort it out.

...and Taurus isn't the only company that uses it's end users as beta testers. Ruger comes to mind. So does S&W. And Colt. And so on and so on.....they all do it.

Taurus does seem to being a better job of responding to the market demands and I personally now own about ten of their handguns. Having Smiths, Rugers, and Colts gives me somewhat of a clear perspective. But, having worked in manufacturing, not guns, for nearly fifty years I can tell you that the workforce for good manufacturing help is almost nonexistent. Really hard to find people that can learn and care about the quality of the product or the satisfaction of the customer.

Y-T71 said:

Taurus TX22 comes to mind instantly.
Brilliant idea with an eager and waiting clientele and they botched it's maiden run with BAD barrels and then scrambled haphazardly try to get them fixed.

Click to expand...

Yes, one new to market firearm that Taurus introduced that had teething issues. My question to you is, does S&W, Ruger, Glock, Sig, Colt, Walther, CZ, FN, Springfield Arms, etc have the similar issues when they released new to market designs? I really want you to answer that question because if you believe that they are any better, I will happily cite all the recalls, "voluntary upgrades", serious safety issues, and early teething issues that the aforementioned companies have had respectivly.

The barrel issue with the TX22 has long since been resolved I assume as I no longer hear anyone one all popular firearm forums across the web or on YouTube bring up that issue anymore. All I currently see is people who were Taurus haters raving about the TX22.

Taurus of today and yesterday is night and day different. Even in this very thread, the overwhelming majority of negative experiences being cited are from older models. Yes, just like with any firearm manufacturer, some lemons still pass through the cracks. They manufacture nearly 800k firearms per year now, so yes, not all of them will be perfect. I see more issues with other manufacturers than with Taurus nowadays. It's just that other manufacturers get a pass when they have issues.

lincen said:

Taurus does seem to being a better job of responding to the market demands and I personally now own about ten of their handguns. Having Smiths, Rugers, and Colts gives me somewhat of a clear perspective. But, having worked in manufacturing, not guns, for nearly fifty years I can tell you that the workforce for good manufacturing help is almost nonexistent. Really hard to find people that can learn and care about the quality of the product or the satisfaction of the customer.

Click to expand...

I worked in manufacturing for years as well. I was an Extrusion and Injection molding lead tech for a large international fortune 500 company. There are also pressure on the technicians, machine operators, and assembly line to meet quotas and to minimize scrap and downtime. This often results in letting things slide by here and there.

Styx said:

Yes, one new to market firearm that Taurus introduced that had teething issues. My question to you is, does S&W, Ruger, Glock, Sig, Colt, Walther, CZ, FN, Springfield Arms, etc have the similar issues when they released new to market designs? I really want you to answer that question because if you believe that they are any better, I will happily cite all the recalls, "voluntary upgrades", serious safety issues, and early teething issues that the aforementioned companies have had respectivly.

The barrel issue with the TX22 has long since been resolved I assume as I no longer hear anyone one all popular firearm forums across the web or on YouTube bring up that issue anymore. All I currently see is people who were Taurus haters raving about the TX22.

Taurus of today and yesterday is night and day different. Even in this very thread, the overwhelming majority of negative experiences being cited are from older models. Yes, just like with any firearm manufacturer, some lemons still pass through the cracks. They manufacture nearly 800k firearms per year now, so yes, not all of them will be perfect. I see more issues with other manufacturers than with Taurus nowadays. It's just that other manufacturers get a pass when they have issues.

Click to expand...

Yes, all those manufacturers have sent products to market that could have benefited from in house QC; not a big secret since that same thing has happened with nearly all consumer goods (I believe I even mentioned that in an earlier post if you care to look)

Smith& Wesson seems to be mentioned frequently as of late with their ongoing problems with their new M&P10.

There was a time when Ruger released a new model almost immediately accompanied by a recall notice, almost comical in a twisted way.

Specifically speaking about those 2 companies, they fixed their products and moved along not having to deal with poor QC reputations that have persisted for decades.

Yep, sure thing my friend, they've all had problems over the years (remember S&W's Bangor Punta days? I do) however this thread isn't about S&W or Ruger or Cz, Colt, Walther, Springfield, Sig or FN...it's about Taurus.

As I stated in an earlier post, they all seem to be shoving sub standard products out the door lately in the name of profit and relying on what (if anything)customer service is going to do about it.

Sure, S&W QC doesn't seem to be much better than Taurus at the moment, (is that what you want me to say? Fine) when It comes to initial satisfaction; subsequent lack of acknowledgement that there even is a problem, or outright refusal to accept fault and make it right.

While Ruger at least seems much more willing to accept responsibility all while offering no explicit written warranty whatsoever.

So, I hope I answered your question, now back to you, when and who decided that Taurus QC is better now than it ever has been?
You? Do you have a metric you could cite supporting or is that a "gut feeling" or are your "feels" hurt?
Because I'm still seeing a less than 50-50 satisfaction rate from real owners/users in this thread alone (and there are hundreds more threads on numerous other websites echoing this exact subject and conclusions of this very thread) I'm not going to cite any because IDGAF; I'm not buying a Taurus and all the 2nd and 3rd hand stories of "my friends, uncles, cousins bought a Taurus and it *******...type BS wouldn't help.

I suppose I could ask the 5-6 other people I'm aware of that purchased a Taurus product in the last 5 years and then just shoved them in a dresser drawer neglecting to even fire one, solitary box of cheap WWB to see if it even worked.


Hope I answered your question satisfactorily.

Y-T71 said:

Yes, all those manufacturers have sent products to market that could have benefited from in house QC; not a big secret since that same thing has happened with nearly all consumer goods (I believe I even mentioned that in an earlier post if you care to look)

Smith& Wesson seems to be mentioned frequently as of late with their ongoing problems with their new M&P10.

There was a time when Ruger released a new model almost immediately accompanied by a recall notice, almost comical in a twisted way.

Specifically speaking about those 2 companies, they fixed their products and moved along not having to deal with poor QC reputations that have persisted for decades.

Yep, sure thing my friend, they've all had problems over the years (remember S&W's Bangor Punta days? I do) however this thread isn't about S&W or Ruger or Cz, Colt, Walther, Springfield, Sig or FN...it's about Taurus.

As I stated in an earlier post, they all seem to be shoving sub standard products out the door lately in the name of profit and relying on what (if anything)customer service is going to do about it.

Sure, S&W QC doesn't seem to be much better than Taurus at the moment, (is that what you want me to say? Fine) when It comes to initial satisfaction; subsequent lack of acknowledgement that there even is a problem, or outright refusal to accept fault and make it right.

While Ruger at least seems much more willing to accept responsibility all while offering no explicit written warranty whatsoever.

So, I hope I answered your question, now back to you, when and who decided that Taurus QC is better now than it ever has been?
You? Do you have a metric you could cite supporting or is that a "gut feeling" or are your "feels" hurt?
Because I'm still seeing a less than 50-50 satisfaction rate from real owners/users in this thread alone (and there are hundreds more threads on numerous other websites echoing this exact subject and conclusions of this very thread) I'm not going to cite any because IDGAF; I'm not buying a Taurus and all the 2nd and 3rd hand stories of "my friends, uncles, cousins bought a Taurus and it *******...type BS wouldn't help.

I suppose I could ask the 5-6 other people I'm aware of that purchased a Taurus product in the last 5 years and then just shoved them in a dresser drawer neglecting to even fire one, solitary box of cheap WWB to see if it even worked.


Hope I answered your question satisfactorily.

Click to expand...

I am NOT seeing 50/50 satisfaction rate with regards to what Taurus is currently manufactured. Taurus has been manufacturing firearms for over 80 years, and I'd say that for 70 or so of those years, they had a lot of issues. What you are mostly seeing is older generations of gun owners who had issues with Taurus in the past who are associating or giving the wrong impression that their issues are either recent or with Taurus current models. The overwheming majority, not all, of negative reviews I see stems from negative experiences from over a decade ago or with an older model that they purchased used. That's what I mostly see in this thread with few exceptions.

You name a firearm forum, and I'll give you my username for said forum. I'm also on Reddit and stay pretty up to date with most YouTube videos that are released as well as I read comments within. Websites simular to BudsGunShop also allows buyers to leave a review, and I read those reviews as well. The overwhelming number of reviews I've come across are positive. We can also take into consideration that bad news travels fast and far. I can come to the logical hypothesis that based on the hundreds of thousand of firearms that Taurus currently manufactures each and every single year compared to the minuscule number of first hand complaints on firearm forums, social media, YouTube, and issues being cited on firearm magazine websites, that Taurus generally do not have many issues especially compared to all the complaints I am seeing for other manufacturers. Then there is the fact that Taurus current line up of handguns have not had any safety recalls that I know of. There is also my own personal experience with the several newer model Taurus firearms I own.

I've been on firearm forums for over a decade now, and I've read and participated in Taurus threads somewhat similar to this one ad nauseam. Over the past decade or so, you'd find thousands of threads with tens of thousands of post and mentions of Taurus firearms. The number of personal experiences and members starting threads about having a negative Taurus experience 10 years ago compared to what I witness in the present is night and day. Last, there is also the fact that Taurus lost lawsuits, had a huge recall, and had a plethora of safety issues a little over a decade ago that they are not having now also factors into my opinion. They went from almost going bankrupt over CQ and design flaws with their firearms to being in the top three importers of small arms into the U.S., being one of the largest small arms manufacturers in the world, and selling hundreds of thousands of handguns every year. Despite all the inet talk and bashing, you don't become that successful and turn things around in such a short period of time by producing a high percentage of junk.

As I said before, bad news travel fast. People are more likely to take the time and energy to review a bad product vs a good product that is performing as expected. I am a realist and logical person. If we take the negative rhetoric about Taurus vs the several million of firearms they manufactured over the past decade or so vs the number of actual firsthand reviews from owners, something is not adding up...

I'm still seeing a less than 50-50 rate right here, in this thread; ha! Most people won't even consider one based on reputation.
I actually defended them, my one (1), one, that's a big o-n-e, was a great pistol that I admit to having regret get rid of it (although I traded it for a Wathher P-1=post war P-38 (so I'm POSITIVE I got the best end of that deal!)
You can disagree all you want, I have thick skin, plus as I mentioned before I. DONT. GIVE. A. SINGLE. SOLITARY. ****!.

Today's guns, yesterdays guns built more than 10 years ago???, tomorrows guns, I don't care.

I'll spend another $50-$100 and age a police trade in mod 10, 64, 67or even 66.

My family is worth that.

No, I'm not going to list all the websites and threads to Taurus quality control.
The onus of proof is on you.

Why? because IDGAF.

I stated earlier that I had a nice weapon, a PT-92 that I would love to have back but qué será será.

I even defended their quality control.

Fact is: they have a reputation for bad product and will never, completely, get out from under it.
Period.

I am NOT gun snob by anybodys idea but..

Listen, I don't want argue (I don't know if we are even arguing and I could not think of something else reasonably relevant to argue about!

Y-T71 said:

I'm still seeing a less than 50-50 rate right here, in this thread; ha! Most people won't even consider one based on reputation.
I actually defended them, my one (1), one, that's a big o-n-e, was a great pistol that I admit to having regret get rid of it (although I traded it for a Wathher P-1=post war P-38 (so I'm POSITIVE I got the best end of that deal!)
You can disagree all you want, I have thick skin, plus as I mentioned before I. DONT. GIVE. A. SINGLE. SOLITARY. ****!.

Today's guns, yesterdays guns built more than 10 years ago???, tomorrows guns, I don't care.

I'll spend another $50-$100 and age a police trade in mod 10, 64, 67or even 66.

My family is worth that.

No, I'm not going to list all the websites and threads to Taurus quality control.
The onus of proof is on you.

Why? because IDGAF.

I stated earlier that I had a nice weapon, a PT-92 that I would love to have back but qué será será.

I even defended their quality control.

Fact is: they have a reputation for bad product and will never, completely, get out from under it.
Period.

I am NOT gun snob by anybodys idea but..

Listen, I don't want argue (I don't know if we are even arguing and I could not think of something else reasonably relevant to argue about!

Click to expand...

You asked a question, and I gave my answer with supporting facts, logic, and personal and other firsthand experiences on how and why I came to the conclusion that Taurus is better now vs in the past. It's no secret that they have had problems in the past, and I wouldn't deny that. With that said, we are discussing current models of Taurus. The OP is inquiring about the current state of Taurus firearms as he is looking into purchasing a current model that is currently being manufactured. Some members including yourself are using dated experiences to answer the OP's question about current events.

As far as Taurus getting out from under their earned bad reputation goes, I think it will happen with time if they continue to improve their QC, CS, and lead times, and after the generation of gun owners who were around when they were much more problematic are no longer around to add their 2 cents.

lincen said:

Taurus does seem to being a better job of responding to the market demands and I personally now own about ten of their handguns. Having Smiths, Rugers, and Colts gives me somewhat of a clear perspective. But, having worked in manufacturing, not guns, for nearly fifty years I can tell you that the workforce for good manufacturing help is almost nonexistent. Really hard to find people that can learn and care about the quality of the product or the satisfaction of the customer.

Click to expand...

I've noticed this as well and while I'm not a good setup machinist, I'm good enough to do it, but most of the people I've seen who come in as new hires as basic operators struggle to do just that, let alone be considered to setup a machine. Those that can be setup guys leave as soon as a better offer is made elsewhere and that's where the gun makers really struggle, most of them cannot pay a competing wage with other manufacturing companies, so by the time someone has become an expert at whatever in gun manufacturing, he's already been gone for 5 years.

S&W is the only one I know of that pays a considerably good wage, then again they're in Massachusetts where if you don't pay at least $16/hr, the only people you're gonna be hiring is potheads and addicts.

It goes beyond just the people running machines or working at the assembly bench, the real issue is the middle management who are focused only on shipping products regardless of its quality and this is pervasive throughout the industry.

Where I see a better attention to detail and quality with firearms now is outside the US where the cost of living is lower to where the wages paid add an incentive and happiness to work. Both the best and worst guns that I have owned were made in the US, while everything made outside the US is just okay, but they were also a great price.

That said, I'm more apt to go with a US made semi auto as quality for those seems better than US revolvers, but for a revolver I almost exclusively go with Taurus now. There's nothing about current made GP100's or SP101's that make them worth a grand, same goes for similar S&W's. A Taurus 692 or Tracker .22 for $500? Yup, that's good.

Y-T71 said:

Is it?

Do you have any way of quantifying your statement?

Have you been reading internet stories or maybe talking to the 2-3 non-gun guys at work who bought a Taurus product just to say they have something ("can't put a price on my family's safety, well, what do you know, I guess you can, let me look at them Taurus pistols over there") during this latest panic (who, at the very most) fired 2-3 boxes of ammo and decided how expensive and time consuming it was and decided to put it in a dresser drawer to be forgotten about until the next neighborhood picnic where the can join in on the conversation with "oh, yeah, I have a gun..."

Taurus did invest in better CNC machines which probably did help but you still have to employ at least a semi-skill person to assemble it: a guy with a decade or more at his craft" as opposed to just "a guy" makes a big difference.

Click to expand...

The one "bad" Taurus I had was the PT22, aluminum frame. Taurus stopped making the metal frame PT22 years ago, so it's an older Taurus and it had issues, which older Taurus pistols seem to have. I couldn't tell if it was magazines or what, but it would have issues cycling a lot of .22 ammo, the one I found that it did fine with was a bulk Federal load that I don't think I've ever seen at a store in person. I sold it this year, bought a brand new PT92 and figured I'd see if it would run Winchester Forged and by golly it did. First 9mm I've owned that actually works with Winchester Forged. Not just that, but CCI Aluminum. Haven't had one malfunction with that PT92 and I love it. Just need to see if it will shoot closer to POA with 124gr, which I bet it will.

My mother has an older Taurus 9 shot .22 revolver... it's got issues. I have a Judge that's about 3 years old, it works.

Taurus TX22 comes to mind instantly.
Brilliant idea with an eager and waiting clientele and they botched it's maiden run with BAD barrels and then scrambled haphazardly try to get them fixed.

So, here we are back to the question: basic QC before it leaves the factory or let the end user/customer service sort it out.

Click to expand...

Basic QC would be nice before leaving the factory, but that's not what most gun companies do these days. Those that do, like Magnum Research or Freedom Arms, are exceptionally expensive.

Styx said:

You asked a question, and I gave my answer with supporting facts, logic, and personal and other firsthand experiences on how and why I came to the conclusion that Taurus is better now vs in the past. It's no secret that they have had problems in the past, and I wouldn't deny that. With that said, we are discussing current models of Taurus. The OP is inquiring about the current state of Taurus firearms as he is looking into purchasing a current model that is currently being manufactured. Some members including yourself are using dated experiences to answer the OP's question about current events.

As far as Taurus getting out from under their earned bad reputation goes, I think it will happen with time if they continue to improve their QC, CS, and lead times, and after the generation of gun owners who were around when they were much more problematic are no longer around to add their 2 cents.

Click to expand...

You may feel that you have "answered" the question but I still don't see 'supporting facts", personal opinion, sure.

So, with "Logic', personal opinion and first hand accounts (I don't even know what that means) here we go.

No, this is not "recent" but, since we're throwing "logic", personal opinions and "first hand accounts" in the mix, I respectfully request you consider my points as well.

(And it took me all of 2 minutes to find: IOW, this is a popular topic on the inter webs)

https://www.glocktalk.com/threads/lousy-taurus-service-rant-continued.1834636/#post-29008924

http://www.my3cents.com/showReview.cgi?id=63479

https://www.glocktalk.com/threads/taurus-pos-service.1814146/#post-28465376

https://www.glocktalk.com/threads/r...nd-taurus-non-responce.1806916/#post-28260794

https://www.gunandgame.com/threads/customer-service-suck.185080/

https://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=960098&highlight=G2C

https://gunsovertexasradio.com/2012/08/20/taurus-admits-they-suck-pledges-to-build-better-guns/

https://www.johnuustal.com/blog/12/defective-guns-not-covered-by-u.s.-product-defect-laws/

https://www.quora.com/Are-Taurus-fi...aking-a-slightly-more-budget-less-refined-gun

http://www.predatormastersforums.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1914929


https://www.bbb.org/us/ga/bainbridge/profile/gun-equipment/taurus-usa-0743-100389/customer-reviews.

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=414483

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=5&f=4&t=95429

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=530209&highlight=taurus

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=408285&highlight=taurus+quality

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=399391&highlight=taurus+quality

Well, you get the idea....there's at least 10-12 more of these (again, after a 2 minute search)

Fact is only the person who is plunking down their hard earned cash can make the decision on whether or not to roll the dice on one of these l.

Sad part is, before this thread, I was almost prepared to roll the dice (but then again I have 50+ firearms that have already proven themselves time and time (and time) again

You can have em all.

Y-T71 said:

You may feel that you have "answered" the question but I still don't see 'supporting facts".
"Logic', and personal and first hand accounts are immaterial.

This is not "recent" but, since we're throwing "logic' and personal a first hand accounts out there, I'll play too

https://www.glocktalk.com/threads/lousy-taurus-service-rant-continued.1834636/#post-29008924

http://www.my3cents.com/showReview.cgi?id=63479

https://www.glocktalk.com/threads/taurus-pos-service.1814146/#post-28465376

https://www.glocktalk.com/threads/r...nd-taurus-non-responce.1806916/#post-28260794

https://www.gunandgame.com/threads/customer-service-suck.185080/

https://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=960098&highlight=G2C

https://gunsovertexasradio.com/2012/08/20/taurus-admits-they-suck-pledges-to-build-better-guns/

https://www.johnuustal.com/blog/12/defective-guns-not-covered-by-u.s.-product-defect-laws/

https://www.quora.com/Are-Taurus-fi...aking-a-slightly-more-budget-less-refined-gun

http://www.predatormastersforums.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1914929

Click to expand...

I did use facts, my personal experience, AND the overall consensus from a pothera of personal reviews and comments from other owners. I also compared the factual number of firearms that Taurus manufacturers vs the small number of issues I've seen being reported overall. Several years ago it was common to see someone creating an angry and frustrated thread about their negative experience with Taurus; however, Taurus is producing more firearms today than they did back then, but complaints about their product are few and far between now. There is also that fact that they had several recalls, other safety issues, and lawsuits in the past, but I have not seen any or know of any serious safety issue plaguing their current line up. That is another fact in which one can logically deduce that Taurus improved.

Your response to me explaining why and how I came to the conclusion that Taurus improved is to cherry pick 6 or 7 anecdotal links of bad CS experiences? What does that proven? I mean I could cherrypick some bad reviews about every manufacturer, but that wouldn't prove anything.. I never cited a few cherrypicked anecdotal to support my argument like you just did in order to dismiss my argument. I'm basing my opinion/hypnosis off of the overall first had consensus from many sources over the course of several years, personal experience, and several other sources of information.

I own 100+ firearms including 8 Tauruses, and it's the S&Ws, Rugers, and a Diamondback DB9 that proved to be unreliable. It's rolling the dice with any mass produced firearm nowadays. I see a equal or less number of complaints and problems with Taurus's current line up of handguns vs some of the more respected firearm manufacturers.

Styx said:

I did use facts, my personal experience, AND the overall consensus from a pothera of personal reviews and comments from other owners. I also compared the factual number of firearms that Taurus manufacturers vs the small number of issues I've seen being reported overall. Several years ago it was common to see someone creating an angry and frustrated thread about their negative experience with Taurus; however, Taurus is producing more firearms today than they did back then, but complaints about their product are few and far between now. There is also that fact that they had several recalls, other safety issues, and lawsuits in the past, but I have not seen any or know of any serious safety issue plaguing their current line up. That is another fact in which one can logically deduce that Taurus improved.

Your response to me explaining why and how I came to the conclusion that Taurus improved is to cherry pick 6 or 7 anecdotal links of bad CS experiences? What does that proven? I mean I could cherrypick some bad reviews about every manufacturer, but that wouldn't prove anything.. I never cited a few cherrypicked anecdotal to support my argument like you just did in order to dismiss my argument. I'm basing my opinion/hypnosis off of the overall first had consensus from many sources over the course of several years, personal experience, and several other sources of information.

I own 100+ firearms including 8 Tauruses, and it's the S&Ws, Rugers, and a Diamondback DB9 that proved to be unreliable. It's rolling the dice with any mass produced firearm nowadays. I see a equal or less number of complaints and problems with Taurus's current line up of handguns vs some of the more respected firearm manufacturers.

Click to expand...

Fair enough.
Let's agree to disagree.
Since I don't have a dog in this fight it's time for me to call it quits.

Glad this didn't devolve into a ****fest.

Y-T71 said:

Fair enough.
Let's agree to disagree.
Since I don't have a dog in this fight it's time for me to call it quits.

Glad this didn't devolve into a ****fest.

Click to expand...

You are trying to have a discussion with the high roads GRAND POOPA of Taurus. Not worth it. High on emotion , low on facts, bleeds Taurus.

I just don't care enough to be worth it.

I don't have a Taurus, and, now, I'm not going to get a Taurus.

It simply isn't worth it and apologize to everyone in this thread for being somewhat confrontational about something that I could not possibly care any less about.

I'm done

This thread reminds me of the end of the movie Burn after Reading (John Malkovich, George Clooney, Frances McDormand).

• CIA superior) "What did we learn, Palmer?"
• (CIA officer) "I don't know, sir."
• (CIA superior) "I don't f***in' know either. I guess we learned not to do it again."
• (CIA officer) "Yes, sir."
• (CIA superior) "I'm f***ed if I know what we did."
• (CIA officer) "Yes, sir, it's, uh, hard to say"

Guy comes into thread, states he's not gonna argue, yet argues still. Finally gives up and says couldn't possibly care less about the topic. Good times.