Taurus 82/65 vs Smith 10/13

I have the Taurus 65 in 4 inch and several K frames 10, 4 inch, M&P 4 inch, 64, 4 inch, 64, 2 inch. The Taurus will fit the K frame holster. Are there differences? Of course but size isn't one of them.
The Taurus revolvers you mentioned are VERY close copies of the Smith K frames.

While I don't own the larger frame revolvers, I am using S&W J Frame holsters for my Taurus 85 and 942. The J Frame kydex and leather holsters fit fine.

Same HKS10A speedloaders fit them, too.

Mr. Mosin said:

Any difference in longevity ?

Click to expand...

I don't know much about the current production, the only Taurus revolvers I've ever owned came from the 80-mid 90's, but I never saw a world of difference really. I know I would have never fired one enough to know if one lasted longer than the other, and I doubt many other people do. Anything Taurus made that was the same size as a K-frame Smith and Wesson fit into (leather) holsters made for K-Frame Smith and Wesson's.

The model ten sure has the verifiable track record.

I had a model 82 made in the mid 1980’s. Great gun.

Since many folks have chimed in with reports on older Taurus revolvers, I want to share my experience, too. I have had a Taurus 85 that was imported from Germany and had been marked Hammerli Tiengen. That gun was surprisingly smooth and everything checked out perfectly well, fit & finish were great. More even than with S&W I would look at any Taurus individually, though because of poor quality control and the fact that Taurus has not a good reputation for thheir customer service. If a Taurus has left the factory properly set up, it can be great gun.

They are very close in size with the Taurus being just very slightly larger. And the Taurus doesn't have the flat spot on the bottom of the forcing cone like the S&W not that the flat spot has ever bothered me. I have owned 3 model 82s in the past and wish I still had at least one of them. I thought they were very well made guns especially for the money. And thats why I have pointed them out to you in some of the emails we have traded.

When Aim Surplus had some in stock for $200 I recommended that you get one of them but you didn't seem interested at the time.

I've owned a bunch of Taurus revolvers and a bunch of Smiths.

The Smiths usually have a better trigger.

I've had four variants of the Taurus Model 85 (basically a J-frame) and three variants of the Taurus Model 66 (basically a model 66).

If the Taurus happens to have a good trigger (some do and some don't) and is not a lemon (only one of mine was), it's as effective as a similar Smith.

My friend always brings his S&W Model 66 4" to the range. One day I brought my Taurus Model 689 4", so we shot and compared them side-by-side.

The S&W had a slightly better trigger. However, for both of us the practical accuracy was the same. There was no discernable difference in the group sizes.

I'm about to turn 56 and I've been shooting regularly since I was a teenager. I've never worn out a handgun. The closest I've come is replacing some worn springs. My oldest Taurus revolver is from around 1983, has been shot a lot, and still locks up tight.

I tried to shoot out the Taurus 66 I bought in 1987. In 1989, it was stolen, and I think shot a bit more. Got it back in 1992-ish, and resumed. Haven't succeeded yet. I don't think I could shoot out either maker's guns. I even carried that gun for a little while on the job in 1988; it fit the agency-issued holster supplied with the Model 67 Smith I was handed. The speedloaders I carried fit both guns as well.

I'm pretty sure bad guys shot by Brazilian cops were just as shot as those shot by American ones.