A different S&W v. Taurus question.

[chaim]

I am wondering if anyone knows why the small frame Taurus revolvers are heavier than the equivelent J-frame S&Ws. For example, the Taurus 85 (.38spl) is 21 oz, the S&W 36 is 20oz. The Taurus 605 (.357mag) is 24oz, the S&W 60 (.357) is 22.5oz. The .38spl aluminum alloy S&W 642 and 442 (Centennial) and S&W 37 and 637 (standard hammer) are 15oz, the aluminum alloy Taurus 85 (.38spl) is 17oz.

At first I figured it was due to the full shroud and a slightly longer barrel (the .38s are a full 2" instead of 1 7/8"). Well, the .357mag S&Ws have the full shroud and the same length barrel as the Taurus so it doesn't explain the difference in the .357 snubs. What is the difference? Taurus designs are usually based on S&W designs and I think the snubs are too. The Taurus usually has some pretty "meaty" grips, and the S&Ws use Unkle Mike's boot grips or Hogue Bantam weight grips. Can that couple ounces be simply due to the grips?

Also, is that 2 oz of difference between the 637 and aluminum 85UL going to be noticable?

 

[SnWnMe]

1. Some dimensions are different. Plus, claimed weight is a sometimes thing.

2. No 2 ozs wouldn't matter.

 

[C.R.Sam]

Taurus designs are usually based on S&W designs and I think the snubs are too.

Similar; yes. Copies; no.

Sam

 

[DDGator]

I think 2 oz. is "noticeable." I can certainly notice the difference between a 15 oz. S&W Airweight and a 12 oz. scandium gun. Now -- does it make a practical difference... probably not. But it is noticeable to me.

 

[4v50 Gary]

Outwardly they appear alike and have "comestic" differences. The real difference is in the internal lockwork and S&W is by far the better of the two designs.