Taurus 66 vs Smith K frame
- Thread starter Colombo38
- Start date
- Status
Zaydok Allen
Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2011
- Messages
- 13,274
So home defense, CCW, and hunting capabilities? And I see you prefer fixed sights also. In one gun?
It's very difficult to get one gun to fill all of these roles. I believe the closest you will come is bannockburn's suggestion, a 4" 686 Smith. However, if it were me I would probably pick up a 3" 686+ 7 shot for home defense and CCW, and then a 4 or 5" 629 in 44 mag later on if I want to hunt.
Good luck and welcome to the forum.
Thanks for your reply. I will probably drop the hunting requirement.
I prefer fixed sights as well for the same reasons. And it's pretty rare you can not find a decent defense load that will shoot reasonably close to point of aim; at the common encounter distances, it almost doesn't matter anyway. You may even luck out and find one that shoots close enough for hunting.
kBob
Member
Back in the mid 1980'when I worked for one of those gun magazines I did a side by side look at the then new Taurus 66 six shot and the Model 19 that rode to work with me in my briefcase every day.
Basically I thought the price difference at that time made the 66 a good for a first time buyer that might just want a gun for General Purposes but was not yet a full blown gun geek, but was not going to trade my M19 for one. They seemed pretty even on the range.
There was an issue with the test 66....there were flakes of the plating floating around in the grease that came in the action. Breaking the 66 down and stripping all the factory lube of the parts and frame and replacing it with Rig made everything fine.
-kBob
Basically I thought the price difference at that time made the 66 a good for a first time buyer that might just want a gun for General Purposes but was not yet a full blown gun geek, but was not going to trade my M19 for one. They seemed pretty even on the range.
There was an issue with the test 66....there were flakes of the plating floating around in the grease that came in the action. Breaking the 66 down and stripping all the factory lube of the parts and frame and replacing it with Rig made everything fine.
-kBob
Monster Zero
Member
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2008
- Messages
- 590
Don't replace it, just buy another one and then you'll have two.
Sunray
Member
When the Taurus' first came to Canada, 35 + years ago, every one of 'em had tool marks. Now, Taurus has a reputation for really poor customer service. Wouldn't touch one for that reason alone. Even if 'K' frames did fit my hand. A GP fits like a glove.
"...but slightly hefty..." The extra round will do that. So does the full lug. It weighs a bit less than 2 ounces more than the Smith M66 4", 38 ounces. A 686 4" weighs 1.7 ounces more. A Model 10 has no sights and weighs 4 ounces less at 34.4 oz. A Model 64 is just a SS Model 10 at 35.6 oz. They're all pretty much the same. No sights is not a good thing though.
"...but slightly hefty..." The extra round will do that. So does the full lug. It weighs a bit less than 2 ounces more than the Smith M66 4", 38 ounces. A 686 4" weighs 1.7 ounces more. A Model 10 has no sights and weighs 4 ounces less at 34.4 oz. A Model 64 is just a SS Model 10 at 35.6 oz. They're all pretty much the same. No sights is not a good thing though.
hemiram
Member
I'm the other way. I'm currently lusting for an S&W 28. I already have 3 other .357 guns, a DW 15-2, a DW 715, and a SAR SR 38. All are pretty beefy, the DW's have 4 and 6" full lug barrel shrouds. If S&W made a 28 with a full lug barrel, I would be looking for one now.
chaim
Member
Have you made your choice yet?
If not, the more I think about your situation, the more I think you should keep your 6" Taurus 66 and buy a 2nd gun for CCW. Since hunting is one of your planned uses, a 6" .357mag would be a good field gun. Finding one gun that is good for both hunting and carry may have too many compromises (too short a barrel to get the most out of the cartridge, too long a barrel for easy concealment). If money is tight, you can get a Taurus 85 (one of their best) for around $200 right now. While a 5 shot small framed snub isn't my first choice, you can do worse, and millions of people have relied on them for decades. The Taurus 85 is cheap right now so you could use that until you saved enough for a 3" K-frame or L-frame for a more capable carry gun. If you just don't plan to own many guns and money is fine, get the 3" K-frame or L-frame now.
If not, the more I think about your situation, the more I think you should keep your 6" Taurus 66 and buy a 2nd gun for CCW. Since hunting is one of your planned uses, a 6" .357mag would be a good field gun. Finding one gun that is good for both hunting and carry may have too many compromises (too short a barrel to get the most out of the cartridge, too long a barrel for easy concealment). If money is tight, you can get a Taurus 85 (one of their best) for around $200 right now. While a 5 shot small framed snub isn't my first choice, you can do worse, and millions of people have relied on them for decades. The Taurus 85 is cheap right now so you could use that until you saved enough for a 3" K-frame or L-frame for a more capable carry gun. If you just don't plan to own many guns and money is fine, get the 3" K-frame or L-frame now.
entropy
Member
The Taurus is a good gun; my son has one and took a deer with it 3 years ago. Nothing wrong with a good K Frame Smith, either. Sounds like a win either way. Keep the Taurus and save the $$$ would be what I'd do. Put it towards another guitar! BTW, nice axes in your avatar: A Telecaster and is that a LP TV or Jr?
Yes a tele and a PRS SE One
entropy
Member
Now that I look at the headstock better, pretty obvious it wasn't a Gibson. I had a '59 Jr. back in '80 til about '84.
stchman
Member
I cannot speak about the S&W K frame, but I own a Taurus Model 66 and it's a solid revolver, very accurate. Keep the Taurus and get a K frame too.
I've always been a big fan of the S&W K frame revolvers. No other S&W revolver fits me as well as the K frame, it just feels so well balanced and points so well.
I only owned one Taurus and it was a good one. But I'll take a S&W every tie.
I only owned one Taurus and it was a good one. But I'll take a S&W every tie.
.455_Hunter
Member
Taurus has an advantage over S&W in available configurations at reasonable prices, especially used. I picked-up an early 2000's Taurus Total Titanium K-frame equivalent snub in .44 special for $349. It predates the recent quality concerns and there is nothing like it in the S&W catalog.
CoalTrain49
Member
I have Taurus 85 that I beat the hell out of. Had it for about 25 years. I think that's a knock off S&W 36. Great utility J frame revolver. Probably carried that one more than any I own. I also have several K frames and an N frame that I frequently shoot. I've also owned a few L frames but never could see the point there. Personally I like the K frames better than any revolver I own. I have a model 19 (2.5" barrel) that I've carried some. The thing about K frames, that would include model 10, 14, 15, 19, 66 and some others I'm not up to speed on, is once you get around a 3'' barrel they can be a formidable weapon at 25 yards. The standard for many years in LE was a K frame with a 4" barrel. When 357 became popular in the 70's the model 28 N frame was standard for LE. The best for 357 full house loads.
I have a model 19 with a 2.5" barrel that is very easy to keep on a paper plate at 25 yards using 38 spl. I'm not saying that's what you need because they are getting spendy but you get the idea. K frame snubby. Keep the Taurus as you will regret having sold it some day.
I have a model 19 with a 2.5" barrel that is very easy to keep on a paper plate at 25 yards using 38 spl. I'm not saying that's what you need because they are getting spendy but you get the idea. K frame snubby. Keep the Taurus as you will regret having sold it some day.
- Status
