Taurus M94?
- Thread starter Geech
- Start date
- Status
JMLV
Member
I habve had one for a few years now
It started life as my mothers house gun 10 years ago. Now its in my safe as just a plinker works well never any trouble and mom used to rip all 9 rounds out pretty quick too for a older lady who never had a gun befour. Now I use it and like the little bugger its got a perminate home in my safe.
It started life as my mothers house gun 10 years ago. Now its in my safe as just a plinker works well never any trouble and mom used to rip all 9 rounds out pretty quick too for a older lady who never had a gun befour. Now I use it and like the little bugger its got a perminate home in my safe.
94
I am curious about what kinds of experiences people have had with these too. My next purchase will be a .22 revolver. I was all set on a 4" S&W 617, but the Taurus 94SS4 was brought to my attention and seems to be at least $100 less than the smith. If I am using it as just a fun plinker, will the Taurus suffice, or should I go with the 617?
I am curious about what kinds of experiences people have had with these too. My next purchase will be a .22 revolver. I was all set on a 4" S&W 617, but the Taurus 94SS4 was brought to my attention and seems to be at least $100 less than the smith. If I am using it as just a fun plinker, will the Taurus suffice, or should I go with the 617?
JMLV
Member
Id go with thw taurus
as a matter of fact I did. And I am quite happy with it.
as a matter of fact I did. And I am quite happy with it.
10-Ring
Member
I've had my 94 for a very long time. Absolutely hated it for most of that time. Heavy, gritty trigger & very small sights. Tried to sell/give it away a few times. Then 3 years ago, I picked it up again. I wanted to teach myself how to shoot DAO. I put 1000's of rounds through it. The sights didn't make much difference to me and the flaws in the trigger helped my learning curve. Today, the trigger has smoothed out alot and lightened up a bit and I shoot the little guy everytime I go to the range. She's a keeper now 
scbair
Member
I bought one!
I wanted a small-framed, all-steel .22 DA revolver to teach some relatives and friends the basics. The Taurus 94 filled the bill perfectly. I've found it to be totally reliable, and it shoots as you'd expect such a .22 to shoot.
The beauty is, as it's relatively inexpensive, all stainless, and strictly recreational, I don't feel a need to clean it thoroughly after each range session. I'll brush powder & fouling from the extractor star, maybe run a dry patch down the barrel to remove loose powder, wipe it down and place it back in its locked drawer. I'll clean it up good once a year, whether it needs it or not!
Accuracy-wise, well, I've been spoiled by my Ruger MkII, and can't match that level of precision with the Taurus. That said, it's plenty accurate for clay pigeons offhand at 25 yds. If my "students" reach that level, it's time they buy their own darned pistols!
I wanted a small-framed, all-steel .22 DA revolver to teach some relatives and friends the basics. The Taurus 94 filled the bill perfectly. I've found it to be totally reliable, and it shoots as you'd expect such a .22 to shoot.
The beauty is, as it's relatively inexpensive, all stainless, and strictly recreational, I don't feel a need to clean it thoroughly after each range session. I'll brush powder & fouling from the extractor star, maybe run a dry patch down the barrel to remove loose powder, wipe it down and place it back in its locked drawer. I'll clean it up good once a year, whether it needs it or not!
Accuracy-wise, well, I've been spoiled by my Ruger MkII, and can't match that level of precision with the Taurus. That said, it's plenty accurate for clay pigeons offhand at 25 yds. If my "students" reach that level, it's time they buy their own darned pistols!
I have a beautiful 94SS4...have put several thousand rounds through same...very accurate...never a problem, I did smooth up the trigger a bit, however. Great value for the price. Also have a tuned-up Ruger Bearcat. If I had to keep one of them it would be the 94SS4...it's heavier and a better target gun.
oldfool
Member
checkout rimfirecentral for opinions on 'em... lots and lots of postings on the 94 over there, it being strictly a rimfire forum
some love 'em, but many do not (and rather loudly so)
friend has one, likes his, though not real happy with the DA trigger pull, decent accuracy in SA mode
(but it's definetly not for me)
some love 'em, but many do not (and rather loudly so)
friend has one, likes his, though not real happy with the DA trigger pull, decent accuracy in SA mode
(but it's definetly not for me)
oldfool
Member
go 617 (or a K-17, but don't expect cheap)
it's in a whole other class than the Taurus 94
I have experience with a M94 and find them to be a good gun for the money.
It is a rimfire, and a 9 shot, so do not expect a light DA trigger pull no matter what. To be reliable they have to have a strong hammer spring. Leave the factory one alone .
The SA pull is generaly very good and gets better with either usage, or by proper smoothing (honing) . A lighter trigger spring can also help. The DA will also smoothen up but will remain heavier than some folks like. If you compare it to a K-frame S&W it realy isn't a fair contest.
I have had two of them and still keep one . My aunt has one and has a M941 as well which is the .22 magnum. They have been giving good service to both of us.
It is a rimfire, and a 9 shot, so do not expect a light DA trigger pull no matter what. To be reliable they have to have a strong hammer spring. Leave the factory one alone .
The SA pull is generaly very good and gets better with either usage, or by proper smoothing (honing) . A lighter trigger spring can also help. The DA will also smoothen up but will remain heavier than some folks like. If you compare it to a K-frame S&W it realy isn't a fair contest.
I have had two of them and still keep one . My aunt has one and has a M941 as well which is the .22 magnum. They have been giving good service to both of us.
Cornhusker77
Member
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2008
- Messages
- 629
We have a 94 and a 941 (.22 mag), both 2" snubbies.
Both good guns but pretty stiff sprung.
I am looking to get a 4" just for plinking.
Both good guns but pretty stiff sprung.
I am looking to get a 4" just for plinking.
richie
Member
I've got a nice blued one with a 5" barrel. The trigger pull in double action is pretty heavy, but in single action its pretty good. I've had no problems with it at all, very reliable and accurate.I've read alot of complaints about 'em, miss fires etc. but usually its because someone messed with the spring to try an lighten the trigger pull.
jad0110
Member
Okay, I guess I'll be the first to post a negative experience with the 94.
First off, please don't think I'm bashing all Tauris; I owned a really nice 66 once. I'm not even bashing all 94s, as lots of folks have good ones. Every company makes lemons, though be advised that in my observations Taurus makes more lemons (percentage wise) in the 94 line than others. So check it out carefully, something I didn't do when I picked mine up.
My 4" stainless 94 had a stiff, extra crunchy DA pull. I found the pull was jerky/rough enough that it really wasn't useable in DA mode. There was a massive burr on the trigger about 1/3 of the way into the pull that almost always resulted in a jerked/missed shot. The SA pull, in fairness, was useable. And the gun was capable of decent accuracy.
Worse, the gun would bind every 100 rounds or so at first. And I always eject the empties straight down to avoid lead build up under the ejector star, so that wasn't it. I tried cleaner shooting CCI Stingers. I even attempted cleaning the gun every 50 rounds. It would still bind up. The cylinder gap appeared to be in spec, so I don't think that was the problem.
So I sent it back to Taurus, noting how I eject the casings and that I was cleaning the face of the cylinder and forcing cone every 50 rounds. After 6 weeks I got it back with a terse little note to clean it more often. To add insult to injury, Taurus actually made the gun worse: somehow they turned the gun into a lead spitter. Accuracy suffered as a result. I always wear safety glasses; I was reminded why by this 94. When I heard chunks of lead bouncing off my glasses, I put the gun down and never fired it again. I sold it off, disclosing my troubles and picked up a used S&W K-22 for only $120 more than I paid for the NIB Taurus. I have never looked back.
In fairness, this is an apples / oranges comparison. The Taurus 94 is a small frame revolver, about the size of a S&W J Frame. The 617 is a medium K Frame revolver. That said, if you have no preference size/weight wise, to me the 617 is a no brainer.
First off, please don't think I'm bashing all Tauris; I owned a really nice 66 once. I'm not even bashing all 94s, as lots of folks have good ones. Every company makes lemons, though be advised that in my observations Taurus makes more lemons (percentage wise) in the 94 line than others. So check it out carefully, something I didn't do when I picked mine up.
My 4" stainless 94 had a stiff, extra crunchy DA pull. I found the pull was jerky/rough enough that it really wasn't useable in DA mode. There was a massive burr on the trigger about 1/3 of the way into the pull that almost always resulted in a jerked/missed shot. The SA pull, in fairness, was useable. And the gun was capable of decent accuracy.
Worse, the gun would bind every 100 rounds or so at first. And I always eject the empties straight down to avoid lead build up under the ejector star, so that wasn't it. I tried cleaner shooting CCI Stingers. I even attempted cleaning the gun every 50 rounds. It would still bind up. The cylinder gap appeared to be in spec, so I don't think that was the problem.
So I sent it back to Taurus, noting how I eject the casings and that I was cleaning the face of the cylinder and forcing cone every 50 rounds. After 6 weeks I got it back with a terse little note to clean it more often
. To add insult to injury, Taurus actually made the gun worse: somehow they turned the gun into a lead spitter. Accuracy suffered as a result. I always wear safety glasses; I was reminded why by this 94. When I heard chunks of lead bouncing off my glasses, I put the gun down and never fired it again. I sold it off, disclosing my troubles and picked up a used S&W K-22 for only $120 more than I paid for the NIB Taurus. I have never looked back.In fairness, this is an apples / oranges comparison. The Taurus 94 is a small frame revolver, about the size of a S&W J Frame. The 617 is a medium K Frame revolver. That said, if you have no preference size/weight wise, to me the 617 is a no brainer.
Last edited:
JR47
Member
I've had a pair of 4" versions, one blue, one stainless, since just after they came out. I also have a blued 4", Model 941, in .22 WMR, that I also bought after they had just come out.
No problems to date. The triggers smoothed out after several thousand rounds. I would suggest that you check the guns thoroughly prior to buying. f course, I suggest that for ALL guns. Price is no guarantee of quality in individual weapons.
Pay attention to the barrel gap, it should be no less than .003", nor any more than .006", for reliable functioning. A feeler gauge will do for that.
As for burrs on the trigger, you should be able to discern them while checking the overall trigger pull. CLEAN and LUBE the gun before firing it.
No problems to date. The triggers smoothed out after several thousand rounds. I would suggest that you check the guns thoroughly prior to buying. f course, I suggest that for ALL guns. Price is no guarantee of quality in individual weapons.
Pay attention to the barrel gap, it should be no less than .003", nor any more than .006", for reliable functioning. A feeler gauge will do for that.
As for burrs on the trigger, you should be able to discern them while checking the overall trigger pull. CLEAN and LUBE the gun before firing it.
- Status
