Taurus 65 & 66 Dimensions

[Jackal1]

Would somebody please pull out their calipers and measure? I am looking for definitive proof of Taurus 65 and 66 frame size compared with S&W.

Why? Just b/c some folks say "Oh, they are both K-frame, trust me!" While other folks say, "The 65 is a K but the 66 is an L, trust me!" Well, let's take a moment and actually measure.

The below S&W dimensions were excerpted from: http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/Smith%20&%20Wesson%20J,%20K,%20L%20and%20N-frame%20Comparisons.htm

Frame Thickness at Thumb Latch (inch):
S&W J: 0.544
S&W K: 0.656
S&W L: 0.658
S&W N: 0.664
Taurus 65: ? (6rd)
Taurus 66: ? (7rd)

Cylinder Diameter (inch):
S&W J: 1.306
S&W K: 1.446
S&W L: 1.559
S&W N: 1.710
Taurus 65: ? (6rd)
Taurus 66: ? (7rd)

 

[MCgunner]

Meh, well, I don't have a new 66. I have two older models, one is built in the 80s, the other in the 90s, both are 6 shooters. I can tell you, the newer gun doesn't fit a K frame Hume JIT Slide holster quite and the older 66 fits it like a glove. The other differences are the rear sights and the fact that the older one uses a hammer block safety while the newer one uses a transfer bar. IOW, the gun....I THINK, used to be similar to K frames, but was beefed up in a re-design. I can also tell you both guns have a ROUND forcing cone with no flat on the bottom like is the bane of the K frame.

I have some time to goof off so I'll go get my calipers out of my roll about and my guns out of the safe.

 

[MCgunner]

This is all I can do for ya. Don't have a 7 shooter and don't have a 65, just a pair of 66s. My newer gun is a nickel 4"er and my older gun is a blued 3"er that feels a lot lighter, though I don't have an accurate scale. The barrel could be the only difference in weight, don't know, but like I said, it does appear the newer gun has more metal in the frame.



Frame Thickness at Thumb Latch (inch):
S&W J: 0.544
S&W K: 0.656
S&W L: 0.658
S&W N: 0.664
Taurus 66: (6rd) older gun .632 "
Taurus 66: (6rd) newer gun .632"

Cylinder Diameter (inch):
S&W J: 1.306
S&W K: 1.446
S&W L: 1.559
S&W N: 1.710
Taurus 66: (6rd) older gun 1.445"
Taurus 66: (6rd) newer gun 1.501"

Wow, confirms my suspicion that the frame window is bigger as the cylinder on the newer gun has significant more diameter to it. The newer gun won't slide down all the way into that Hume holster due to interference with the trigger guard, so the frame is taller. The cylinder window of the newer gun measures 1.530" top to bottom. The older gun measures 1.460".

BTW, my S&W M10 also fits that same Hume holster just fine. It's a .38, so I won't bother with measurements especially since you have some S&W measurements already.

I'd be interested to see how a newer 7 shooter measures in comparison to my older 6 shooter. Heck, they could have done another re-design. I use the 4" as a hiking/outdoor gun and my 3" is a carry option. Both are very accurate revolvers.

 

[MCgunner]

Why? Just b/c some folks say "Oh, they are both K-frame, trust me!" While other folks say, "The 65 is a K but the 66 is an L, trust me!" Well, let's take a moment and actually measure.

Thoughts on this, but I think the only difference in the Taurus 65 and 66 is that the 66 has the adjustable sights, the 65 is fixed. I'm pretty sure they're the same otherwise. The older gun is pretty danged close to a K frame as you can see, but my newer gun is a little beefier in the cylinder window, but not to L frame size. IIRC the thing weighs 38 ounces with a 4" barrel. I think K frames are about 4 ounces lighter and L frames are a few ounces heavier. IMHO, the newer gun fits between K and L frames.

Again, I'm wondering if the 7 shooter got beefed up or not? Someone with a 7 shooter and calipers will have to answer that one.

 

[maxxhavoc]

Frame Thickness at Thumb Latch (inch):
Taurus 66 (7rd): .631"
Taurus 605: .532"
S&W Airweight: .541"
Taurus 85 UL: .541"

Cylinder Diameter (inch):
Taurus 66 (7rd): 1.53"
Taurus 605: 1.373"
S&W Airweight: 1.306"
Taurus 85 UL: 1.346"

 

[CajunBass]

I've owned both in the past. All I can tell you is they both fit my holsters made for K-frame Smith & Wesson's. The 66 was heavier but it was a 7 shot, and had a full lug 4" barrel. The 65 had a half lug 4".

 

[MCgunner]

Looks like the 7 shooter underwent another revision in cylinder diameter and probably window height to accommodate that cylinder. It's close to the L frame.

Very informative thread. Thanks.

 

[Jackal1]

Still haven't received Taurus 65 measurements but now we have a fair collection.

Until someone measures, I guess we can assume a contemporary Taurus 65 uses the same frame and cylinder dimensions as a contemporary Taurus 66.

It looks like Taurus frames are typically narrower than S&W's comparable frame. It also appears Taurus 66's started out as a K-frame copy and now the 7rd version has a near K-frame thickness with a near L-frame cylinder.

I can see why folks make contradictory statements about Taurus frame sizes as Taurus has changed the dimensions over time but kept the same model number.


Frame Thickness at Thumb Latch
Mnfr Model#: Inch
Taurus 605: 0.532
Taurus 85UL: 0.541
S&W J AirWgt: 0.541
S&W J: 0.544
Taurus 66: 0.632 (6rd), ~1980's style
Taurus 66: 0.632 (6rd), ~1990's style
Taurus 66: 0.632 (7rd)
S&W K: 0.656
S&W L: 0.658
S&W N: 0.664

Taurus 65: ? (6rd)

Cylinder Diameter
Mnfr Model#: Inch
S&W J: 1.306
Taurus 85UL: 1.346
Taurus 605: 1.373
Taurus 66: 1.445 (6rd), ~1980's style
S&W K: 1.446
Taurus 66: 1.501 (6rd), ~1990's style
Taurus 66: 1.53 (7rd)
S&W L: 1.559
S&W N: 1.710

Taurus 65: ? (6rd)


Much thanks to those who have taken the time to measure!