New revolver or maybe not?
- Thread starter ziondogg
- Start date
- Status
moxie
Member
Did you post this before or after you called Taurus, or whomever you bought it from?
bannockburn
Member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 26,307
ziondogg
Not on any revolvers I have ever looked at. It appears to be more like something found on a prototype or a heavily used test gun. I would definitely be talking to someone (i.e.-the dealer you bought it from and/or Taurus), about it.
Not on any revolvers I have ever looked at. It appears to be more like something found on a prototype or a heavily used test gun. I would definitely be talking to someone (i.e.-the dealer you bought it from and/or Taurus), about it.
I got it from a guy off gunbroker who had it posted as n.i.b. and never fired. Besides the extractor the gun looks to be in perfect condition, no scratches no dings and the barrel is clean as a whistle. I also did a serial check and it was manufactured in 2007, who buys a gun like this and not fire it for almost 5 yrs? Im awaiting an email back from the guy to see what his story is. Hey fxstchewy it does make me feel a little better knowning your judge has the same thing but its hard to believe they would send it out the door like that.
Onward Allusion
Member
Let me preface this post by saying that I own quite a few Taurus revolvers and this is not a Taurus bashing post.
Based on recent personal observation, their machining leaves sharp rough edges. I bought 2 of those 327 revolvers in stainless and the stars look similar to what you are showing. I'd compared it to my slightly older (2 to 3 yo) Mdl 85 and the machining wasn't as rough. Going back to a couple of my even older Taurus 82 revolvers, the machining wasn't rough at all on the stars.
My conclusion is that Taurus machining has gone downhill. BUT - all of 'em still function fine. They aren't S&W's or Rugers.
moxie
Member
It may work, and may not be critical, but shoddy workmanship like that is unacceptable. Your only recourse is to go to Taurus and ask that it be repaired.
SorenityNow
Member
I wonder if its a gun that was just in the gun case. If my gun shop sells a gun that has been in there case, then they list it as "used- never been fired" and some of those weapons are 10 years old..
The ratchet teeth are rough, but I suspect functional. A larger problem is that the extractor star is not concentrict with the chambers. This could cause issues if you were trying to insert a cartridge into a chamber. I suppose you can choose between returning it to the seller, or keeping it and sending it back to Taurus.
It is not unusual to find older guns that haven't been fired. I have one example - a Smith & Wesson .38 Military & Police that other then then the original test rounds hasn't been fired although it was made in 1918. Another one is a Colt .38 Police Positive made in 1942. It was apparently issued to a plant security supervisor who put in a desk drawer, and there it remained.
It is not unusual to find older guns that haven't been fired. I have one example - a Smith & Wesson .38 Military & Police that other then then the original test rounds hasn't been fired although it was made in 1918. Another one is a Colt .38 Police Positive made in 1942. It was apparently issued to a plant security supervisor who put in a desk drawer, and there it remained.
Thanks for all the input guys. I finally talked to the seller and he said he's not the original owner but was told when he bought it that it was unfired. He said he is willing to refund some of my money if I think its been fired. Ive posted this on 2 other forums and the general concensus is that it came like that from tuarus, many said that there taurus has the same flaw. So now Im not sure what I should do, I mean if its not going affect the function of the gun than I guess its not that big of deal. Hey old fluff what to you mean the star is not "concentrict" with the the chambers, in one of the pics I have it pushed out a little if thats what you noticed
788Ham
Member
Whew! I'd definitely have second thoughts about buying one of these revolvers, if they all look like the cylinder on the one shown. I am not bashing guys, calm down, I would think they'd do a better job on QC than that is all. I've got a H&R 922 that was made in 1929, the cylinder on that is a whole lot smoother than this one, God only knows how many 10's of thousand rounds have been thru it.
It's not only pushed out, but has also rotated. I wouldn't expect it to do this after moving such a small distance. If the star rotates and then isn't fully seated when the extractor returns to the forward (seated) position you might not be able to chamber a cartridge.
If you don't have trouble when unloading the cylinder and then inserting new rounds you may be O.K. but experiment to be sure that's the way it is.
- Status
