Taurus 85 Vs. S&W 642

[Ala Dan]

Typically, I don't recommend Taurus products~!

But, the one thing I will have to give 'em is the fact that they have many
models of the 85 available to the consumer. From the Ti's, to the Ultra-
Lites, to the all steel model. And, quite frankly I sell many of these guns
to the crowd known as "first time buyers".

While I strongly recommend something from Smith & Wesson, most of
John Q. Public has heard or read 'bout Taurus products; good or bad~!
My reasoning is this, Smith has a "Lifetime Warranty" that the company
honors, and has the reputation for outstanding customer service; while
Taurus offers a "Limited Lifetime Warranty" that has been known to not
be the best in the business; with their service being less than stellar. I
recall one gentleman here on this forum returning a Taurus revolver to
the factory four times, before the problem was resolved. Friends, this
is totally unacceptable. I realize that sometimes any company might
release a bad product; but I have read (or heard) too many horror
stories about Tauri International not living up to the standards of the
business.

The one and only good thing I've ever heard about Taurus came from
our state three time IDPA champion. He claims too have worn out a
Taurus model 65, with over 70,000 rounds fired thru it. He supposedly
returned it to the factory for a rebuild; and instead, the company sent
him a brand new firearm. True or not, I don't know? But, this fell'a is a
darn good customer, and would have NO reason to lie~!

But, I will stick with my final answer- Smith & Wesson.

 

[MikePGS]

All of you make good and persuasive arguments, but i think Orion put me in the S and W camp when he said the thing about customer service and gave the prices for that. Thank all of you for your help, and when i get the gun (it might take awhile) i'll make sure to post pics of it to fill your gun porn fix.

 

[rich642z]

Taurus 85 vs S&W 642

I had a steel one and a ultralite taurus 85,and I sold both of them. Then I got a 642 and a 64 heavy barrel cheaper than a Glock 17. I got them both for under $425.00 dollars.

 

[Eric708]

Go with Smith & Wesson it's was only about $50 difference in price when I got my 642. I think the 642 is a way better deal then the Taurus. I'm not knocking Taurus or anything but I just think S&W is a little better quailty for the little difference in price.

 

[Alan Fud]

The 642 is smaller and lighter than the 85. The 85 absorbs the recoil better due to it's slightly larger size and greater weight.

Personally, I would recommend the 605 -- same gun as the 85 but chambered for a .357mag.

 

[surjimmy]

If you plan on keeping the gun get the Taurus, if your going to resale it later get the Smith. Taurus's are one of the finer made guns, but their resale stinks.

 

[pv74]

Being that the price difference is not all that much, I would go with the S&W.
Made in America by a company that pretty much invented the modern revolver as we know it today.

 

[Jkwas]

Personally, I would recommend the 605 -- same gun as the 85 but chambered for a .357mag.

+1 My 605 gets about 90%+ of carry time. It shoots nice and has a shorter trigger stroke than my wifes M36. That does require a heavier hammer spring, so it's a trade off. Handle both, see which one you like. You might like something completely different. Better yet, get a 605 or 642 and a 85UL. This way if you need to send one in for repair, you'll have a backup piece.