Glock vs Taurus.

I've shot them both. Both shoot good, but I'd be a fool to expect the Taurus to hold up to the same rd count as the Glock. That's why its $150 less, +-.

^^ But the Taurus gets to its "end count" without nearly as many reloads.

If anything, the GX4 is more a competitor to the G26, not the six-round-magged G43.

MedWheeler said:

^^ But the Taurus gets to its "end count" without nearly as many reloads.

If anything, the GX4 is more a competitor to the G26, not the six-round-magged G43.

Click to expand...

Or maybe even the 43X or 48.

Taurus has upped their game substantially over the years, but they don’t make anything that I would buy right now.

The Gx4 is the size of the 43, and fits in some of the same holsters, but holds 13 rounds and is not as fat and stumpy as a 26. I don't know about the longevity of the Gx4 in particular, but my PT145 has some 2000 rounds through it, and still runs fine. I shoot my PT1911AR a lot more, lost count on it a long time ago. I replaced some of the innards when the ambi safety lost an arm, jamming it up. Only problem I've ever had with it.

I would try the Taurus and see how it feels. I don’t like Glock grip angles. I say that full well knowing you would never wear out the Glock. If you feel comfortable carrying the Taurus then I guess it’s good to go.

Would rather carry a hi-point than a Taurus . Hi-point is heavy clunky and ugly as sin , but they go bang when you pull the trigger. Never seen a Taurus auto that I trust to do that

I've owned several Taurus revolvers, and two autos over the last 23 years or so. My first handgun was a Taurus 82. I once went with a Taurus (an early DAO, not the SA/DA later version, PT 140 Millennium Pro) over a Glock 26 or 27. After years of resisting, I finally bought my first Glock (a G22) a couple months ago, and loved it so much I quickly followed up with a G19 and I'm considering adding a G43X or G48. So, I come to this as something of a fan of both.

Taurus has been hit or miss on quality over the years. My previously mentioned PT140 died some years back and I've been stalling on sending it back to be repaired (I do need to get to it as it is old enough, there is a chance they'll replace it instead of repair it, and I'd love one of the two closest guns Taurus makes, the G2C or G3C). I had a couple Rossi revolvers from after Taurus bought them. One (the 3") was fine, the 2" would sometimes bind and you really had to force the cylinder open when shooting magnums (it did fine with .38spl however). Some research online found that cylinder binding wasn't uncommon with Taurus in those years (5 or 6 years ago). That was disappointing since their revolvers had historically been their better guns, and I did well with a 605 I once owned and the 85CH I still own. They have had some rather well publicized issues with their polymer autos over the years.

That all said, it seems that over the last few years, Taurus has gotten their act together. The G2 and G3 line as well as the GX4 have developed a terrific reputation for reliability and overall quality. In the new 856 line of revolvers, while occasionally putting out an occasional bad apple, Taurus seems to have fixed the issues they had for a few years with their revolvers. My 856UL has been perfect, and I'm strongly considering the 856 Defender (3", small frame, 6 shot revolver with a front night sight, what's not to love). The Tx22 is IMO one of the best .22lr pistols on the market, mine eats up any ammo I put through it.

I don't think you'll go wrong with the Taurus. However, I do believe that the Glock is still going to be the more durable and better built gun. If your budget it tight, get the Taurus and spend the difference on ammo. If you can more easily afford it, the Glock will likely be the better way to go however.

I really can’t go by what alot of people say .. I try to learn from my own experience …

I owned a 43 .. never failed me …
But swapped it for a S&W Model 12 snubbie
( I think I did good)

I own a GX4 … which is my primary carry ..
But I do carry others .. but not as much as the GX4
I carry with the 13rd extended mag
This little gun runs on any 9mm I fed it
But I carry 124gr HST standard pressure
Im thinking seriously about getting another

GX4 compared to a 26

I carry a 27 quite often .. No comparison in carry

GX4 vs 43



The 43 is a thin single stack 26 basically

A lot of people like to virtue signal and think it's cool to bash Taurus even when they never owned the firearm in question, can't tell you what reliability problems they think it has, and they have zero experience or clue about the firearm. They still see the name "Taurus" in the title, and will stop by for no other reason than to bash a product they know nothing about and aren't interested in.

The Gx4 is a good gun from what I seen. There are a few very experienced gun owners on DefensiveCarry.com who EDC and rave about them.

The only downside is Taurus's lead times for warranty work, their warranty isn't all that good compared to Glock and Ruger, and replacement and spare parts aren't going to be as easy to source.

I may well be buying a Gx4 in the next few weeks to take advantage of that $50 rebate, so that should tell you my opinion.

I chose Taurus (G3c) over Glock (26). No reliability issues with either pistol. The ergos were the deciding factor. Also chose a PSA Dagger over the Glock 19 for the same reasons - ergos. Have owned 5 or 6 Glocks over the years and my only complaint about any of them has been how they fit my hands.

Styx said:

A lot of people like to virtue signal and think it's cool to bash Taurus even when they never owned the firearm in question, can't telling what reliability problems they think it has, and they have zero experience or clue about the firearm. They still see the name "Taurus" in the title, and will stop by for no other reason than to bash a product they know nothing about and aren't interested in.

The Gx4 is a good gun from what I seen. There are a few very experienced gun owners on DefensiveCarry.com who EDC and rave about them.

The only downside is Taurus's lead times for warranty work, their warranty isn't all that good compared to Glock and Ruger, and replacement and spare parts aren't going to be as easy to source.

Click to expand...

The vast majority of those badmouthing Taurus are basing it on the original products produced by the old company. They are moribund in their thinking, it's easier to remain vacuous then to actually become knowledgeable.

For the past few months I have been hearing and reading that Taurus has made great strides in upping their game in QC and Customer Service. I have never owned a Taurus, but I am considering one of their 608 or Raging Hunter .357 Magnum revolvers.

Here's a Forbes article from 2015 that explains how Taurus changed.

This changed earlier this year when Forjas Taurus and Taurus Holdings, Inc. were bought by Companhia Brasileira de Cartuchos (CBC), also headquartered in Brazil. CBC’s ammunition brands include Magtech, Sellier & Bellot (S&B), and MEN. CBC’s stepped in to fix the problems, but they didn’t just get heavy handed about steering its U.S. division back to prosperity; they came in with a stick and cleaned out management and then brought in an experienced American gun-guy, Anthony Acitelli, to be president and CEO. Acitelli has over 20 years of experience in the U.S. firearms industry. He was previously a senior vice president of sales at Colt. He also led the sales and marketing teams and eventually ran the Accessories Division at ATK’s Sporting Group (now known as Vista Outdoor, which has over 30 consumer brands).

Acitelli said, “One of the first things we did was to hire—and we are still hiring—an engineering team from the American market. We need gun guys. We need engineers who know how to innovate for this robust American market.

Click to expand...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/frankm...e-an-overnight-market-leader/?sh=3016fea62609

It's now 2022 going on 2023, it's no longer the old Taurus. If I was up on this back then I would have purchased Taurus stock.........

kje54 said:

The vast majority of those badmouthing Taurus are basing it on the original products produced by the old company. They are moribund in their thinking, it's easier to remain vacuous then to actually become knowledgeable.

Click to expand...

Extra internet points for using both moribund and vacuous in the same sentence.

kidneyboy said:

Extra internet points for using both moribund and vacuous in the same sentence.

Click to expand...

Yup, I got me one of them thar colege edumacations.

We picked up a couple of G2C’s when they were on sale for $199 back in the day. They shoot well and haven’t given us any issues. They reside in strategic locations within the house for quick access (but not for our grandchildren) just in case.

We also own a few other Taurus pistols, as well as past models, and I’ve never felt at risk with those guns.

I also own several Glocks and feel the Glock has the edge on several areas but the Taurus pistols are a good alternative at a lower price point.

There was a good interview on Gun Talk Radio a few months back about Taurus’ manufacturing move and their increased QC. I’m a solid Glock guy and have a safe full but I’d look at the GX4 without much hesitation. Price is certainly nice compared to the Glock.

Spats McGee said:

I've never owned a Taurus, and only 2 Glocks, both of which I sold. As a result, my opinion is worth what you paid for it. That said, I've been haunting the gun boards long enough to know who's who and who knows what they're talking about. Based on all of my reading about pistols over the years, my comments are: (1) Taurus has had spotty QC over the years, but they seem to have done some things right in the past few years; (2) If the price were right, I'd buy a GX4, just to see what the fuss is all about; but (3) I wouldn't trade my Shield Plus for one.

Click to expand...

Only thing that would prevent me from buying a Taurus Is if they still make the customer pay for a return for factory service.??

Years ago I had a PT 9mm and shot the heck out of that gun, never missed a beat

Styx said:

A lot of people like to virtue signal and think it's cool to bash Taurus even when they never owned the firearm in question, can't telling what reliability problems they think it has, and they have zero experience or clue about the firearm. They still see the name "Taurus" in the title, and will stop by for no other reason than to bash a product they know nothing about and aren't interested in.

The Gx4 is a good gun from what I seen. There are a few very experienced gun owners on DefensiveCarry.com who EDC and rave about them.

The only downside is Taurus's lead times for warranty work, their warranty isn't all that good compared to Glock and Ruger, and replacement and spare parts aren't going to be as easy to source.

Click to expand...

What is their lead times? Smith is running 3-4 weeks.

kje54 said:

The vast majority of those badmouthing Taurus are basing it on the original products produced by the old company. They are moribund in their thinking, it's easier to remain vacuous then to actually become knowledgeable.

Click to expand...

Even at that, the old revolvers that I've seen worked fine amd had pretty good fit/ finish compared to some guns today from Smith and Ruger (the Ruger and Smith are exponentially better guns but I was speaking to fit/ finish. Chatter marks/ bluing etc etc) . I have an old pt1911 and pt92 that work fine and shoot great and I know more people who actually owned a Taurus and was happy than owned one and wasn't.

All of that said, I'll carry a Glock over any Taurus anyday. There is no more tried and tested gun than the Glock . If you were around during the early days of police transition to Glock.... people abused and tried to stop Glocks to make them look inferior. Chemical degreasers, thrown from helicopters, ran over the mags with their truck, sunk them for months in salt water.....all to prove the 1911/third gen smith/revolver was better. Lol . They didn't try all those things with the others

kje54 said:

Yup, I got me one of them thar colege edumacations.

Click to expand...

Word a day calenders and apps work too. Lol

Rule3 said:

Only thing that would prevent me from buying a Taurus Is if they still make the customer pay for a return for factory service.??

Click to expand...

Sig is the same. They make great guns but that doesn't sit well with me.

crestoncowboy said:

What is their lead times? Smith is running 3-4 weeks.



Even at that, the old revolvers that I've seen worked fine amd had pretty good fit/ finish compared to some guns today from Smith and Ruger (the Ruger and Smith are exponentially better guns but I was speaking to fit/ finish. Chatter marks/ bluing etc etc) . I have an old pt1911 and pt92 that work fine and shoot great and I know more people who actually owned a Taurus and was happy than owned one and wasn't.

All of that said, I'll carry a Glock over any Taurus anyday. There is no more tried and tested gun than the Glock . If you were around during the early days of police transition to Glock.... people abused and tried to stop Glocks to make them look inferior. Chemical degreasers, thrown from helicopters, ran over the mags with their truck, sunk them for months in salt water.....all to prove the 1911/third gen smith/revolver was better. Lol . They didn't try all those things with the others



Word a day calenders and apps work too. Lol



Sig is the same. They make great guns but that doesn't sit well with me.

Click to expand...

In the Forbes article he stated the Taurus QC issues began in 2013 when Taurus began trying to rush products to market to keep up with other manufacturers. That's when I began hearing all the negativity concerning Taurus, before then not so much. Personally unless Glock fixes it's 2x4 ergonomics I'm not interested and that's the only issue I have with Glock.