I wish S&W were more like Taurus

[BluesBear]

You know, I'll wager that if S&W had decided to put their lock ON THE HAMMER (like Taurus did) instead of drilling a HOLE IN THE SIDE OF THE FRAME, that a whole lots fewer people would pizz and moan about it.

If S&W had put the lock on the hammer it could also be REMOVED and replaced with a plain hammer if the owner so wished. And it could be removed without leaving a HOLE IN THE SIDE OF THE FRAME.

If S&W had put a lock INSIDE THE GRIP AREA like Ruger did instead of putting a HOLE IN THE SIDE OF THE FRAME, then fewer would complain about how fugly it looks.

Even IF you decide to drill a HOLE IN THE GRIP to access the lock you can simpley INSTALL DIFFERENT GRIPS at a later time and not have to worry about a HOLE IN THE SIDE OF THE FRAME.


Unobtrusive seems to be a word that has evaded S&W managment.


As for Taurus developing a smart-gun, don't kid yourself for one nano-second that other companies aren't looking hard at it too. Taurus was very smart to advertise they were working on it, at a time when so many groups were getting lawsuit crazy. Has anyone heard anything more from them about it?
I haven't. I have seen and handled several new models announced AFTER their statement on smart-guns but I still haven't heard a peep about that new technology.



So until Taurus actually does something that infringes on my rights I'll be boycotting the boycott.


BTW if you are too dense to appreciate/understand the sarcasm in the above post please KTF Quiet.

 

[c_yeager]

You know, I'll wager that if S&W had decided to put their lock ON THE HAMMER (like Taurus did) instead of drilling a HOLE IN THE SIDE OF THE FRAME, that a whole lots fewer people would pizz and moan about it.

Good point. One thing that Taurus seems very good at is thinking things through. They don't seem overly bound to do what everyone else is doing and are willing to take some interesting risks with new guns. (i am thinking about that 5-shot .45colt snubbie they had, that was way cool).

Also I just remembered one particular Taurus revolver. It was one of their older ones (not sure what model). For whatever reason this revolver had the tightest lockup I have ever seen in my life. I suspect that everything just went right with that particular example. It also had a SWEET double action pull. So, Taurus is definatly capable of turning out some really nice hardware.

 

[Tacblack]

Maxinquaye I agree. I also with S&W would listen to buyer input on what new models to make.
I have spoke with S&W 3 times about making guns that sold out and people still want and they just don't care. Mainly the 3" models of the 610 and 627. A nice person I spoke to said people called in about the 627 like the one in Bloodwork 2 or 3 times a week every week since the movie came out. And they had no plans to ever make one again. Every 3" 610,3" 627 and 940 goes for a premium I don't understand why they will not make anymore of them.
Seems some people didn't read you post and went into Smith vs Taurus quality. Seems they don't know who started the deal with the government about the "smart guns" to boost government sales of their guns to LE.
I wish they would start up runs of guns I missed out on that are hard to come by. They made them once.

 

[Highland Ranger]

As for Taurus developing a smart-gun, don't kid yourself for one nano-second that other companies aren't looking hard at it too. Taurus was very smart to advertise they were working on it, at a time when so many groups were getting lawsuit crazy. Has anyone heard anything more from them about it?

There's a thread on this board of which I took part on the SMARTGUN topic - Tom Gresham of Guntalk fame also jumped in at one point. Tom has the president of Taurus as a frequent guest on his show.

Not sure if we had anything to do with it but right around the time of that thread and the ensuing heated discussion regarding Taurus' real loyalties around the second amendment, they announced they were dropping their Smartgun program. Wise of them.

Which is why you haven't heard anything about it.

All that aside, comparing Taurus and Smith quality is just silly. Taurus has made great strides, but they still aren't there yet.

As for the hole in the frame . . . . . turn the gun over and look at the other side.

 

[PaleRyder]

I have no problem with the locks. If I have to leave my .357 in my glove compartment, I'm glad I can unload it and lock it so it can't be used.

 

[unspellable]

Quality

I have to place myself in the camp that says they all make a piece of crap now and then.

I have or had:

Ruger revolvers with misaligned chambers and a spare cylinder with poor alignment.

Taurus revolver with misaligned chambers.

A S&W wwith marginal chamber alignment.

Taurus with really strange timing issues.

Colt Mustang pistol with the rear sight falling off.

Colt Anaconda with a misfitted cylinder latch.

Whitwirth rifle with parts falling off.

browning pistol with a hold open that didn't work.

Ugartechea that jammed due to metal chips left in the works.

Pedersoli rifle with a misfitted stock.

AMT Backup that was a jammomatic.

Stoeger 22 LR Luger look alike that was a jammomatic.

5 or 6 S&W's that came out of the box with endplay and cylinder gap issues.

And for my money the bolt timing on virtually any S&W revolver is early.

A Colt style cap & ball revolver with the worst trigger pull I've ever encountered.

etc., etc.

I could put the gun smith's kid through college.

 

[Redhawk1]

Keep your Taurus, I would not own one again. I will stick with a S&W or BFR.

 

[Crownvicman]

Thanks Redhawk, smaller demand in the whole "supply and demand" equation equals lower prices for me.

 

[Redhawk1]

Crownvicman, anything to help you out.

 

[JMLV]

I have a varity of revolvers and autos from a host of manufacturers

Colt, Ruger, Taurus, S&W, H&R, Dan Wesson, AMT, Backal, Norinco, Uberti, Herders, Charter Arms, Browning, Rossi, and probably more I forget now. I have no brand loyalty to any one manufacturer if I like a particular gun I buy it. If its junk I get it fixed ir sell/return it(like the last jennings I owned) I find my taurus revolvers and autos to be as good or better than some versions of other makers and I am well pleased with them. My 94 is an excellent 22 caliber kit gun and i enjoy shooting it a great deal. The 9 round cylinder is a neat idea for a gun so small. I actually prefer my PT99 to the baretta due to its frame mounted safty. I simply prefer the Taurus design. And it shoots like a house afire eating any ammo I feed it and accurately too. what more can you ask for. If a gun does what you want bought it for its a good gun. The fit anf finish of my Taurus guns are excellent and are only surpassed by a couple of my classics from days gone by when hand fitting was normal. But those days are gone for all manufacturers. I like handguns all makes and models can attract my attention what I buy means it works for me. does'nt mean it will worjk for you. to each his own. I like Taurus guns and will continue to buy and use them.
Jim L

 

[Pylon]

I have one of the Taurus 905's in 9mm. I love the thing to death. It has excellent lockup, quality is superb and has never failed me.

However! The moonclips they provide are really really flimsy and is a deffinite sore spot for them. Hey, gotta save a little coin here and there to provide those cheap prices right? But i knew what i bought into, the gun otherwise functions great. You honestly don't even need to use the moonclips unless you are trying to do really quick reloads.

 

[PaleRyder]

All I can say is the people that have gotten Taurus weapons and had no problems with them are lucky. S&W, Ruger and Astra are the only revolvers (Sigs, Glocks, Brownings and Berettas the only semis) I've had no problems with.