Lets put the "controversy" over Taurus quality to rest once and for all!

[chaim]

OK, lets put this to rest once and for all. Some people, myself included, swear by Taurus revolvers, others swear at them. Empirically from reports on the internet it seems that 99.9% of the problem Taurus revolvers are in the Titanium. It also seems that just about everyone who owns either an aluminum alloy or steel framed Taurus is completely happy with theirs.

Please only post in this poll if you have firsthand experience with Taurus revolvers so that we can all have a better idea what the reality is. Preferably only post if you own, or owned, one. However, if a friend has one that you shoot and you are completely familiar with its history, then I guess that is ok.

Lets see if the Ti guns are really that bad. Lets see if Taurus really is a complete POC no matter what material. Lets see if Taurus quality is equal to/near/superior to S&W. Lets dispell some of the legends with some actual owners experiences.

Note: I set the poll so you can vote for more than one to account for the fact that some people may have had several different Taurus revolvers and different experiences.

 

[chaim]

Oh, in answer to my poll/question, I have had two Taurus revolvers before.

My first gun was a Taurus 82 (blued 4" .38spl, "clone" of the S&W M10). It was bought used, it had been a security guard gun that was nearly 10 years old. I didn't totally like it (I really wanted a .357 and I was kicking myself for buying a .38 to save money) but it was 100% reliable. Accuracy was so-so but part of that was I was a new shooter (my accuracy was so-so) and part of it is that I have trouble picking up the sights on a blued fixed sight revolver (on a run of the mill gun, like a new or used Taurus 82, or new S&W M10, I would now go ahead and paint the front sight so I could see it better). I sold it when I bought my K-frame .357mag and at the time I thought I wouldn't own more than 3 or 4 guns (so at the time I basically saw them as overlapping niches so I got rid of the .38) :banghead: .

I owned a Taurus 605 snub for a while. It was reliable, had a great trigger pull, was acceptably accurate (it was a 2" small framed snub) and I did like it. However, I decided that as much as I like .357mag in larger guns (incl. 2-3" K-frames) it is too much for a small, J-framed sized, snub. Since I figured on only using .38s in it for social situations, and usually at the range too, I didn't like the cost of 3 extra oz. of weight for a small hideout type gun. So I sold it.


I am happy enough with my experience with Taurus revolvers that I recently bought an 85CH on the internet that should be in my hands in a couple weeks. I also have several Taurus revolvers on "the list" (a replacement 82, a 445, a Tracker in .357, possibly a Tracker in .45acp). In addition to the "must haves" I look at Taurus alongside S&W and Ruger whenever I consider a revolver purchase (though I do lean towards used S&Ws simply because I really love the slightly older S&Ws- more class than any new gun could ever have). When I look specifically at new guns Taurus has the edge in my book.

 

[9x19]

Have owned a fair number of Taurus steel revolvers, and most were sound, a couple had minor fitting problems.

I haven't owned any Titanium revolvers, and have no desire to.

Just not my thing...

 

[SteelyDan]

Chaim, I think the wording of the question introduces a bias, since only those who chose to buy a Taurus are invited to reply. For example, in my case I've handled three Tauruses (Tauri?). The only one I shot was a buddy's .357, it was fine and functioned perfectly. The second one I handled was also a .357 (in a gunshop), and it was not, to say the least, impressive, so I didn't buy it. The third, which was also a gunshop handling, was a titanium .41, and when the clerk tried to pop out the cylinder to hand it to me he couldn't get it open. I'm not exaggerating; his eyes were bulging out as he "casually" tried to open the cylinder, but it was stuck shut.

My point is that I think there are good ones out there, and those are probably the ones that get bought, but by limiting the sampling data to the "good ones that get bought" it doesn't really end the controversy.

My two cents.

 

[chaim]

Well, there is a reason why the poll is "biased" by only asking for owners and the "directions" state:

Please only post in this poll if you have firsthand experience with Taurus revolvers so that we can all have a better idea what the reality is. Preferably only post if you own, or owned, one. However, if a friend has one that you shoot and you are completely familiar with its history, then I guess that is ok.

I am looking for people with actual experience with these guns. What is the real day to day experience of owning these guns? Are they good guns? I'm not looking for someone whose experience with Taurus is handling one at a gunshop and not liking it (or liking it) and I'm not interested in the "I heard on the internet that...".

I am trying to find what the quality of these guns is really like. When Consumer Reports wants to get a reliability survey of car models they survey owners, not people who have test driven a particular model, not people who have "heard" about them, not people who they just don't fit so they would never buy that model, etc. They survey those who live with the car day to day to see if it is a good car or a bad car, or something in between.

Well, that is what I want to see here.

Again, I'm looking for actual experience with these guns. What you have heard from one or two people doesn't count, you don't have actual experience (if one of them is an owner you are encouraged to direct them here to post however, I want the real experience not a pre-determined result). Whether you liked one at the shop or not doesn't determine overall quality. And yes, one bad gun at the gun shop that you didn't buy doesn't say much either.

I was at a gun shop once where three of their S&Ws, both J-frames and one of their K-frames, weren't operating properly (one wouldn't open at all), and I still buy S&W. The three S&W revolvers I own have been perfect- which is a common result judging from the experiences here at THR and over at TFL. This is something I would never have guessed if I judged them based on what that one dealer had. Maybe they tried to do something they shouldn't have (they did have a "gunsmith" on hand) or maybe they had a bad batch, or maybe who knows but those three at the shop are not the kind of experiences that most people on this board who own S&Ws have had.

The experience of one Titanium model at the gunshop may, or may not have, been representative of that gun. Who knows, if you bought it and had it fixed it may have been perfect forever after.

Now, if you look at my "directions" in the first post you will see one other option other than owners. I am looking for people with real experiences with these guns. People who regularly shoot a friend's Taurus, assuming they are also familiar with its care and maintenance, are also encouraged to post. If you regularly shoot your buddy's gun and know its maintenance history feel free to post about the experience of THAT gun.

Also, gun shop/range employees who have rental Taurus revolvers and who have first hand knowlege about their durability are also encouraged to post.

 

[chaim]

Oh, by the way, by the ancedotal evidence here on the internet, it sounds like cylinder binding and related problems are not uncommon with the titanium models. As a result I tend to recommend the aluminum and steel guns and dissuade people from the titanium. However, this is partly why I set up this poll. Often, those most motivated to post on the internet about any product are those who are dissatisfied. Thus, my impression of the titanium guns may be completely off. Maybe there is a large but quiet majority of titanium gun owners who are completely happy (and there have been quite a few who post positively about their titanium Taurus revolvers too). Maybe some who may not choose to post may at least be moved to check a box on a poll.

 

[tiberius]

I have had no problems with my 85Ti, unless you count the bound cylinder caused by jumped bullets with Fiocchi 158gr LRN rounds. The solution was not use factory heavy lead bullets since the little gun simly had too much recoil for them. This was not the gun's fault.

 

[WebHobbit]

Many years ago I had a Stainless model 85. It was my first new gun purchase and my LAST Taurus.

It was TUMBLING factory .38 hollow-points at the target from 25 feet.

Turns out the chamber mouths were WAAAAAY over-sized.

I know I could have sent it back to the factory for a new cylinder but at that point I was so mad at Taurus & mad at myself for buying a cheap foreign made S&W knock-off that I sold it off. I then corrected the problem by ordering a Smith & Wesson Centennial.

Since then I've owned a few Rugers but the Smith & Wessons have been the only guns that I've kept around.

I'm not all that happy with the MIM parts (I think they look cruddy in comparison to the old forged ones) & I HATE the new lock thingie but all in all S&W does make the best revolvers. I just can't see any reason to save a few dollars buying a Taurus over a S&W. In the long run I think you will always regret not getting the "real thing".

 

[Ala Dan]

Never Owned A Taurus Myself, but-

I did have a chance to qualify with a Taurus model 82
4" HB .38 Special (comparable to S&W model 10, he-he).
The gun had seen service as a contract security agency
revolver. While fit and finsih were O.K., this monster had
about a 25 lb. double action trigger pull! In my own
opinion, this weapon would best serve as a boat anchor.

So, I guess you could say that it was a stainless gun with
a few problem's? Would I ever buy one? Not
in this life-time!:banghead:

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

 

[Kevinch]

I have owned them, own them now, & would own them again.

Those who choose not to are missing out on some competitively priced, well made firearms - but again, that is their choice.

 

[stans]

My only experience with a Taurus has been with a model 96, 22LR, six shot, blued finish, six inch barrel. Its closest S&W counterpart would be the K-22.

The bore of this particular Taurus appears smooth and the rifling is sharp, but the forcing cone is extremely rough. The trigger overtravel stop was improperly set at the factory and the screw was so tight that it bent the stamped steel stop. The double action pull is heavy, at least 14 pounds. The single action is fair, but the hammer hook is poorly machined and rough. Accuracy has been fair.

It can keep all shots within the 8 ring of the 25 yard timed and rapid fire target, but it will not eat the "X" out of a target at 25 yards. I bought it because I wanted a 22 revolver and K-22's were over priced in my area. It is an "OK" gun, but I would not cry over trading it for something nicer.

 

[caz223]

I had a stainless 425 .41 mag, and it couldn't hit the ground if I dropped it.
That, and it developed timing problems later on.
Also blessed with a incredibly hard DA trigger pull, I was glad to sell it off.
I wouldn't call that a ton of problems, so I picked a few problems.

 

[22luvr]

Owned two of'em.....

NOOOOOOO problem.

Taurus mod 85 Ultralite. Nicely finished, fine trigger, accurate, totally reliable.

Taurus mod 605 in SS. Beautiful finish, awesome factory trigger and again, accurate, and totally reliable.

Again, Noooooo problem and I'd recommend a Taurus revolver to any one.

 

[dairycreek]

In the last decade I have owned six Taurus revolvers.

All were steel, five were in one model or another of .357 and one was an 85 in 38 special. All were NIB when I purchased them and all were fired with factory only ammo - no reloads. Three were fine revolvers and three had to be sent back to the factory for extensive reworking. Working with Taurus Customer Service is an experience in itself and, for me, not a good one at all. The three revolvers that were good were quite good the three that were bad never were IMHO adequately reworked and were unreliable. So, my direct experience with Taurus has been such that I do not want to buy another and run the risk of dealing with another "lemon". Good shooting

 

[Gmac]

Bought a Taurus model 689 .357 and it's never malfunctioned. Bought a new Ruger Bisley and it's a p.o.s. ! Go figure.

 

[P95Carry]

Maybe subconsciously even, I have never expected a Taurus to be by default as good as S&W .... mainly cos of reduced cost etc ...... but as I have mentioned on other threads ...... I do consider that overall Taurus has improved quality control this last decade and more ......

My M85 snub has been no prob at all and i like it. My M66 4" is good but not quite perfect ... I do tend to get sporadic tumblers evident at longer distances but ...... thus far have not gotten round to sending it off. It is a recreational revo ... and as such non critical and, usually used at close ranges.

 

[bountyhunter]

I have handled a few and was struck by the awful trigger. The coil mainspring design is just plain inferior because it produces stacking in the trigger pull. The new guns I pulled all had stacking and a very gritty feel. Don't really want to buy a gun with a bad trigger.

 

[Blueduck]

Only Taurus revolver I've owned was an older model 85. Pretty much as expected, rougher pull than S/W but perfectly functional at a great price. Could say the exact same thing about my PT-92 as compared to a 92FS.

 

[Prodigalshooter]

I had a Tracker, 357 with 4" barrel. No problems at all, I just decided I didn't like porting that much and also could not use it in IDPA, due to the ports and the 7th chamber. Gave it to my son, he loves it.

 

[Gerald McDonald]

Gee webhobbit, that comment about having regrets for not getting the real thing sound like some of the comments I get from Harley Davidson owners (mostly new riders) when they see my Honda. Of course my ride hasnt been in the shop for anything but tires in the last 15,000 miles so I aint complaining.
Gerald

 

[ACP]

I once had a Model 85 that was, by far, the most accurate snub nosed revolver I have ever shot -- including my Colt Det. Spec. and my S&W Models 640 and 642. Absolutely shot to point of aim and never failed to fire. I don't know why I got rid of it. Stupidity, I guess.

 

[denfoote]

I could only chose one, so I opted for the first choice. However, in addition to the M605 that is near to perfect, I also have the aluminium framed M85UL. It is durn near perfect too!! I think Taurus has indeed filled the niche left open by Squirrelly and Weasel's political blunder.

 

[gbran]

Two Tauruses

941, 4", 22 mag. Great gun, no problems........617T, 7rd titanium 357 snubbie, ammo-sensitive, got rid of it. Couldn't trust it as a primary carry. Too bad, it was any easy and comfortable gun to carry.

 

[Majic]

About 12 years ago I bought a 689, turned out to be a pretty accurate .357mag. I sold it to a buddy of mine only because he loved the thing and I had aquired a Python. As of today it's still shooting like it was when it was new. Before I bought the 689 I had bought a ss 85 with a 3" barrel. I still have that revolver and it's very accurate for a snub gun. Both triggers were a little rough when bought, but a little polishing and a spring kit improved them greatly. AS a comparison I just bought a M29 MG and it too had a gritty trigger from the factory, but cleaned up to be as nice as some of the older Smith's out there today.
I have owned 4 Tauri over the years, all were older models (2 steel framed revolvers and 2 alloy frame pistols), and I have never had to contact Taurus for any work on them.

 

[461]

I've had two Taurus pistols with mixed results. My first centerfire was a Taurus 6" Stainless .357 and dang I wish I had it back as it was wonderful. Later I bought a 3" Stainless .44spl as the basis for my first custom carry weapon and dang I'm glad it's gone.

The .44 went back to the factory three times and never was reliable. I put a lot of money into that weapon and would only feel comfortable using it as an Impact weapon. The .357 was smooth as silk and more accurate than me, if it weren't for the .44 experience I'd probably pick up another.

When a company stings me and proves poor customer service I don't give them a second chance. Yes it's a strong attitude, but then I don't expect people to give me a second chance either.