Taurus aggressively targeting Glock with marketing now, tee hee.

I have had 4 Taurus handguns to date, the newest being a Taurus PT140 Millennium Pro (basically a scaled down 24/7) and I have had nothing but good luck (combined I have had no reliability problems of any kind). Am I just lucky? I doubt it.

My PT140 M. Pro is incredibly accurate for its size and nearly as accurate as my full-size autos. It has been 100% reliable (not one hiccup). The fit and finish is equal to pistols costing double, no machine marks and fits up quite nice. The only complaint is that the bluing might be a little thin, but then it isn't showing any wear so I could be wrong on that. It is a nice enough gun that after shooting it and then taking it down and inspecting it my best friend, a Kimber and Kahr owner who's "cheap" gun is a CZ 85 Combat, was quite impressed.

As for Glock v. 24/7, maybe the Glock is still a little better quality. It is possible. But around here I can get 2 new 24/7s or Millennium Pros for the cost of one Glock and a box of ammo. For close quality (0 problems and good fit and finish v. 0 problems and good fit and finish) I'll take the less expensive gun. Oh, and when I picked my PT140 I did choose it over a Glock, I was looking at a used Glock 26 (I'll never buy a new Glock but that is for another thread).

I've never been impressed with the Taurus autos I've shot. No scientific study. Take my opinion for what it's worth.

That's an interesting comment about Glocks not being know for accuracy, because every Glock I've ever owned or fired shot exactly where it was pointed, dead accurate.

I currently own a 19, and have owned or fired the 17, 23, 26 and 36.

The vast majority of people have no idea how "accurate" their handgun is.

They can say how well they shoot one gun compared to another but they don't know how accurate either one really is.

I bench rest most of my guns at 25 yds and base my views on that. From this practice I have yet to see a Glock I would call accurate. Again, experience not opinion. My 1911s and CZs have consistently shot far tighter groups. In Glock's favor I have yet to see a Glock that was unreliable. Experience, not opinion. Perfect, no, but they get the job done. Their utter reliability is the reason why my HD pistol is a G21. Nicely customized with some features I want, and stoked with 16 rounds of my favorite 230gr JHPs. At in-the-house distances, I don't need match accuracy. It just needs to go bang 100% of the time.

GR

when someone uses a 24/7 to kick some high-priced 1911 butts
in competition then I will take notice..

I don't post too often on here, but...

I will say this: I own both a Taurus 650 CIA revolver and a Glock 23. These are the only 2 handguns I own (give me a break, I'm only 20 so I will eventually own more ). I have owned the Glock for well over a year, and the Taurus for about 7 months. The Glock has NEVER failed to work flawlessly. The revolver has. I had to send my gun back to Taurus for about 2 months (they told me 2 weeks ) and I had to pay shipping both ways. Now the revo is a decent gun, but the Glock was perfection from the get go. If it comes down to me grabbing a gun for protection, I will choose the Glock first every time. My confidence in Taurus is not good. It's pretty sad that Taurus can't make a revolver more reliably than Glock can make an auto.

Jesse485: you have learnt that the revolver more reliable than semi-auto is a myth..shoot safe!!

Island Beretta

I don't know that I would say that the "revolver v. semi-auto" thing is a myth. Overblown? Perhaps. However, its just simple common sense that a revolver, in theory, will be the more reliable handgun, for reasons that have been posted on the High Road repeatedly.

Taurus is the best manufacturer of crap. Crap being lorcin, hi point, jennings, bryco, etc.

One of Taurus's "features" is a lock. Go figure.

Well, as of this morning my newest peice of Taurus crap has sent 1,200 rds of 45acp downrange with out a single failure. It does 3 inch groups at 25 yrds from the rest which is more than adaquate for what it is.
I stopped counting the rounds fired in my 650CIA, and it still hasn't failed, even when I mixed up my ammo and ran a few rounds thru it that were loaded for my Contender.
The wife doesn't shoot as often as I do, so she only has a little over 3,000 rds thru her 650CIA, still without problems.
All 3 pistols have locks, and none have caused problems, although I do admit to accidently dropping some loctite in my 650.
Dang, 3 pieces of Taurus crap and they all work just fine. I must be living right.

i love my 24/7 it has over 1000 rounds through it with out one failure of any kind. I choose the 24/7 over every handgun out there and am very happy that i made the right choice for me. i love the way it feels, the way it looks, the way it shoots, and the benefits (price, warranty, nra, etc).

Taurus didnt enter the firearms world with the best quality in their original models but their clones were always top quality. And now the new lines of pistols are also top quality. Taurus has one of the biggest most diverse product lines out there and i have spoken with hundreds of satisfied taurus owners.

I TRUST MY 24/7 WITH MY LIFE AND THE LIVES OF MY FAMILY AND I HAVE FAITH KNOWING THAT IT ALWAYS GOES BANG.

Oh also, why would someone call the 24/7 a cheap POS??? It has more features on it than any glock. The glock is the biggest rip off of all time, they are uglu, uncomfortable to hold, have no safety(that retarded trigger doesnt count) and are known for going kaboom instead of bang.

Taurus is the best manufacturer of crap. Crap being lorcin, hi point, jennings, bryco, etc.

Click to expand...

Don't ya just love these informed opinions, supported by substantial amounts of documentation?

I've owned several Taurus "pieces of crap" over the years (not that I'm an experienced shooter, having been shooting only about 35 years or so) ... from the PT-92 to the PT-145 ... every Taurus product I've owned has been excellent, accurate and totally reliable. The PT-92s and the Model 85s are worthy of being held up alongside comparable Beretta and Smith and Wesson products. By the way, I normally favor more high-end handguns (I'm a collector of fine 1911s), but there's a place in my family of guns for Taurus products.

My wife, in fact, carries a PT-145 (and yes, I let her); I am now thinking this pistol is superior in many ways to the four Glocks I've owned.

One of Taurus's "features" is a lock. Go figure.

Click to expand...

Of course, no one ever comments on the locks on Springfield Armory pistols, Rugers and Smith and Wessons, eh?

Actually they HAVE commented on the locks on SA and other pistols.

Who cares about thse things? HOw about just ignoring them? Thats what I do on my SA 1911 and Taurus rifle - never been an issue.

I don't think Taurus makes crap at all. Everything Taurus I have owned has been very good.

Listen, there will always be somebody that trashes the lower cost guns..even the ones that are good pieces and work well. The Colt people trash Springfield Armory and Charles Daly 1911s, the Glock people trash the XDs, the Beretta people trash the Taurus 92s...the list goes on. Moany of these people are just pissed that along came a pistol that cost much less than their high-priced big name gun and it shoots just as well.

Ignore these folks...I do! Most of them are dead wrong.

-Brickboy240