Taurus Handguns

[wendellgj]

I have had a new Taurus revolver in a box and now wondering whether to just sell it and go buy the most expensive handgun I can find? This one was not really cheap a stainless Raging Bull 454 8" I thought this might work nicely for an occasional deer or hog. Never having owned one (Taurus) I'm beginning to wonder if I made a mistake? I got this on a trade and frankly like it very much even though I have not fired it. I also like some of the other models as well as "Charter Arms". Of course I love all the big ones but can't always enjoy shooting the best if they are considered that. I never usually know since I'm not the money bag who gets all the best or the firearm tester. Either way right now I have just been saving up for brass and bullets and reading about Taurus and wondering if now I have more decisions in life to make?

 

[jimmyraythomason]

Never having owned one (Taurus) I'm beginning to wonder if I made a mistake?

Your mistake would be making a decision based on what you read on an internet gun forum and not from your own experience. Give your gun the benefit of the doubt until it proves itself....one way or the other.

 

[maxxhavoc]

I have 2 Taurus .357 revolvers, both are reliable and accurate.

From what I have seen, MOST of the complaints against any company's quality on the Internet is more about their customer service. If a typical 'net user gets a firearm and it fails to function, they contact the manufacturer.

If the manufacturer charges the buyer for shipping, then holds the gun for 2 months, and sends it back unrepaired people will scream about it on every forum they pass.

If the manufacturer pays shipping and gets the gun back in a week and it is 100% they are generally happy and silent.

Taurus fell into the first category for many years according to many people. It burned the brand. From what I can tell, they have improved, but it will take years to reverse general opinion.

Rock Island is the opposite. Their guns probably had as high an initial failure rate as Taurus (once again, better now.) My experience: I sent mine back with failure to feed issues and they diagnosed an out-of-spec frame. They replaced the gun, polished the feed ramp, polished the rails, and tuned the trigger. They also included a handwritten note with their findings and apologized for any issues. I was shooting again after 10 days. The gun I got back is smoother than my Kimber, the trigger is awesome, and I am more satisfied with it than if I had bought it and had no troubles. I have bought more of them, kind of secretly hoping they will have issues and need to go back to mama. You don't hear folks complaining about initial issues, you hear satisfied customers that rabidly defend RIA.

Hi-Point was the same way. I wore out my 9mm carbine firing pin channel. They replaced all worn/scratched/scuffed/bent parts (including the stock), tossed in 3 magazines and an apology. Less than a week passed while they had it. Folks may bash the looks (correctly) and material quality, but most owners will recommend you get one anyway.

 

[jimbo555]

Never owned a Taurus. But I owned glocks with fte problems and a sig p238 that had trouble feeding fmj 380. What does that prove. Nothing! With revolvers I stick with Colt, s&w and ruger. I have a 1905 model s&w and a colt police positive special made in 1934 that have never been apart and function perfectly. I trust the old ones more than the new ones.

 

[Onward Allusion]

I have had a new Taurus revolver in a box and now wondering whether to just sell it and go buy the most expensive handgun I can find?

Well, since you already have it, why not shoot it and find out for sure? What's the worst that can happen? You lose a few bucks because it's no longer un-fired in the box? It's a fairly inexpensive revolver after all. They are meant to be shot.

I highly doubt that it will blow up on ya. The bad thing is that Taurus' do not have good resale value, but for a shooter, it doesn't matter much.

 

[MCgunner]

I own 3 Taurus revolvers and have a 4th coming. I find them of very high quality vs modern Smith and Wesson. In fact the triggers are as good as my early 60s M10 Smith and my M85UL is the best out of the box trigger I've ever fired on a revolver, so don't tell ME my revolvers are second rate!

Now, what bothers me about your list is no presence of Glock? Hmm, surely it ranks up there in sales seeing as the cops all carry Glock and there's LOTS of Glock fanboys around. I'd have thought they might even lead the pack in sales, though Ruger does sell a LOT of firearms, both long guns and handguns, which is an advantage. I own 8 Rugers, so I'm a bit of a Ruger fanboy, though I'm not reallly keen on their recent centerfire handguns. I stick with my old KP90DC, fantastic shooter with a decock DA I really like.

I really don't understand the snobbery when it comes to Taurus. A good handgun is a good handgun. If I don't like it, I'll sell it off. If it's a keeper, I keep it. Now, that might get expensive if the handguns in question are thousands of dollars a piece, but when they're hundreds of dollars, I can afford to try 'em, just hit a gun show and rid myself of it if I don't like it. I've yet to have to do that with a Taurus. I have had to do that with a couple of Rugers, a couple of Smith and Wessons, a few Rossis, etc. My collection of handguns now is pretty well fixed at 26 keepers of all brands and descriptions. I don't own anymore affordable 1911s if that isn't an oxymoron, all gone and won't be replaced by a 1911, not at what a good one costs. Besides, I carry revolvers a lot and prefer my guns to fire DA on the first round without a safety to mess with. I DO NOT care for Glocks. I don't think "Safe Action" is particularly safe and I mostly only shoot cast bullets of my own making, which polygonal rifling is not supposed to be compatible with.

So, if I have a firearm prejudice, it's against Glock, but don't particularly like ANY handgun with a dohicky on its trigger. Either DA or true long travel DAO for me....or revolver. Taurus? I've had good luck with 'em, very accurate and great DA triggers and hold up quite well.

 

[MCgunner]

I highly doubt that it will blow up on ya. The bad thing is that Taurus' do not have good resale value, but for a shooter, it doesn't matter much.

True enough. I purchased my 4" 66 (a better gun than a K frame Smith IMHO) used for $197 at a gun show. I got my 3" 66 for $180 at a gun show. Find me a S&W M19 3" for $180 that actually shoots, let alone shoots 1.5" at 25 yards off the bench and can shoot the thousands of rounds that Taurus has since I got it.

Hey, if you buy new, you lose a bit, assuming you wish to sell a great shooting gun. If you buy used, low resale/high depreciation is a GOOD thing. But, then, the 605 Poly I'm getting I got for 300 bucks. So what if I don't like it and have to sell at a loss? I mean, I'm retired, living on IRA distributions, a part time job, and social security, not a rich man, but 300 bucks? I've got 600 in my wallet right now.

Depreciation of a Taurus does not concern me, put it that way.

 

[Onward Allusion]

Now, what bothers me about your list is no presence of Glock? Hmm, surely it ranks up there in sales seeing as the cops all carry Glock and there's LOTS of Glock fanboys around.

I was able to find 2012 Glock sales numbers in USD. I extrapolated it to somewhere around $500M based on sales increase and the devaluation of the dollar. I could be all wet, however.

 

[docsleepy]

How about Keltec?
I have bought some of their pistols (for cheap prices) specifically because I knew exactly how to repair their known defects.

My Taurus PT 99 is still going strong. I did replace the locking block preempt early with a high generation block.

 

[steelbird]

This may be a bit of a stretch, but I think what the OP is suggesting might be this:
If you have two companies ( not necessarily gun makers ) that have a similar rate of problems, but one company makes 3 or 4 times ( or more ) the number of products, that means there's going to be more products with more problems out there associated with that company. So, with Taurus making more guns than the other companies, there will be more returned with problems.
That being said, however, Taurus is legendary for QC issues, while Ruger, S&W, and so on, generally are not. I really don't think they have similar problem rates.

 

[MCgunner]

Taurus is legendary for QC issues, while Ruger, S&W, and so on, generally are not.

Yeah? http://www.chuckhawks.com/smith-wesson_dark.htm

 

[WestKentucky]

I am in the minority but I prefer Taurus to the others. I have had really bad experiences with s&w autos, and the s&w revolvers I have had were no far cry better or worse than the Taurus guns I have owned. Likewise with Springfield xd and ruger gp100 of which I have had experience with two that flat out sucked. I will gladly take a run of the mill Taurus gun over those any day, and by far prefer the Taurus special guns (raging series, tracker series) over most current models offered by the big ticket companies. Add to that the cost savings and it's a no-brainer. I own 3 currently and plan to add more, but with that said I do avoid polymer frames and model 85 guns just because the super-mass production does let out more bad guns than others. Also inspect carefully before opening the wallet on any manufacturers weapons, especially the used ones.

 

[Jim K]

The usual every time Taurus is mentioned. The Taurus haters chime in, then someone brings up the S&W haters, and the Ruger haters will be along any minute.

Taurus has had a lot of real problems, but most of their guns are OK. I would see no reason to give up on any gun without even trying it out.

Jim

 

[Kiln]

This may be a bit of a stretch, but I think what the OP is suggesting might be this:
If you have two companies ( not necessarily gun makers ) that have a similar rate of problems, but one company makes 3 or 4 times ( or more ) the number of products, that means there's going to be more products with more problems out there associated with that company. So, with Taurus making more guns than the other companies, there will be more returned with problems.
That being said, however, Taurus is legendary for QC issues, while Ruger, S&W, and so on, generally are not. I really don't think they have similar problem rates.

You should google the words "Ruger" and "Recall".

I like Rugers but I don't pretend they are perfect. Their beloved little SR22 was flinging slides into gravel 500 rounds in and the SR9 was experiencing firing pin related failures when they came out.

Pretty much every company will put out guns with issues, it is whether or not they are resolved that is important to me.

 

[Praxidike]

S&W have went kaboom, Glocks have went kaboom and had other problems, Springfield and Ruger had had recalls, etc... Why do the more expensive firearms get a pass while the budget firearms get called pos and when they have the same issues with some of their models? A Glock breaks and its: "my Glock had some feeding problems, but they fixed it, it works flawlessly, and their cs is great." A Keltec breaks and its: "I shot the keltec for the first time today. It had a couple of ftf. It's a pos. Every gun Keltec has ever made is now a pos. I'm sending it back to keltec, and I'm selling it when I get it back. I can't trust my life to it." There's a double standard here...
Plus, if and when someone claims to have a problem with a Glock or Springfield, it's almost always dismissed as it MUST be something the user is doing wrong or the poster is lying.... People will get defensive and will argue till they are blue in the face trying to discredit people who say anything about their expensive toy.

I own firearms from a variety of manufacturers, and I joint many manufacturer specific forums. In each of these forums you basically hear many of the same complaints...

I've owned 2 keltecs and one Taurus. Many of the problems that people regurgitate on web forums have long been fix. The problems is that unlike Glocks, Keltecs and Tauruses do not have in your face simple to understand revisions, e.g., how Glock has gen 4 that is usually prominently displayed when being sold.

Then you have gun snobs who believe that if you don't spend half a grand for a firearm, then the firearm is junk which is complete bull.

I can believe that Taurus is selling more. I tend to not buy Glocks and Springfields because I think that they are over priced for what you get IMHO. Where as because they are so inexpensive, I can justify buying another budget gun that I really do not "need."

 

[Scarpia]

I wonder how many negative comments would be posted about S&W and Colt revolvers if the Internet existed 100 years ago? Indeed, this has turned into the classic trash Taurus thread, oh well...

Anyhow, I have 24 hand guns of various manufacturers and calibers both revolvers and semiautos. I have never had a broken part or other issue with any gun that required repair other than a new TriStar C100 in 380 Auto (Canik55, Turkish CZ75 compact clone). The gun would not reliably cycle as the slide would bind up. I sent it back under warranty. I was told the slide had a burr which was cleared plus the slide stop was replaced. TriStar repaired the gun the day they received it and shipped it back the following day. Pretty amazing customer service. That gun has become my most accurate 380 chambering, firing and ejecting thousands of rounds. If I were looking for a compact 9mm/40 S&W, I would go direct to the TriStar C100.

My other semiauto's (Taurus, Browning, Beretta, Interarms, Bersa, CZ, Norinco, Ruger, Sig Sauer) have occasionally failed to chamber or eject a round with the exception of my Taurus PT145 Mil Pro (45ACP) and PT140 Mil Pro (40 S&W). The Mil Pros have NEVER failed to chamber, fire or eject a round. Two Llamas in 9mm and 45ACP are both unreliable to feed and and eject. I no longer shoot either gun. My S&W, Rossi and Ruger revolvers just keep blasting away.

For the record, my Taurus guns are the PT58 (380 Auto), PT92 (9mm), PT101 (40 S&W) and the Mil Pros describe above.

 

[MCgunner]

I like Rugers but I don't pretend they are perfect. Their beloved little SR22 was flinging slides into gravel 500 rounds in and the SR9 was experiencing firing pin related failures when they came out.

Hey, I LOVE my SR22! It does have a plastic sight that has needed super glue to keep in place. I was a bit of a beta tester on that one. I understand they switched to steel early on. I probably should hit 'em up for a rear sight. They're great about sending parts, something that Taurus seems to lack, though I've never actually NEEDED a Taurus part for my revolvers. I've gotten a taller front sight for my Ruger Old Army and a magazine release spring for my KP90DC (love that pistol) for free post haste from Ruger. I've owned 11 Rugers, still own 8, and that's all the parts I've ever had to get from them.

That little SR22 is a gem. It's my number one plinker even though I admit my Mk 2 is more accurate. But, the mark 2 has optics on it for hunting. I prefer to plink with the SR22.

I'm no brand snob, but own more Rugers than other single brand. The guns I've kept I like and that includes 3 Taurus revolvers.

 

[krupparms]

I have owned alot of firearms over the years & must admit that almost all have had some problems over the years. As far as Taurus gos, I will not buy their auto pistols! Every one of them I have owned had issues. Their revolvers are a much better buy . I have seen a few that were rough but worked fine. I have a Taurus .22mag. & a .38SPL. that work fine. But their auto pistols are very much hit & miss! And I will leave them to others!

 

[USAF_Vet]

I've owned two Tauri, a mid 70's vintage model 94 .22lr revolver that patterned like a shotgun and my EDC 709.

The .22 I traded off once I realized it couldn't virtue broadside of a barn if I were standing inside it. Of also experienced random cylinder lock up.

My 709 has been flawless, but I'm still only rating it as mediocre. I carry it daily, but last week was excessively humid and I sweat a lot for a couple days (moving). Come to notice, the slide had a nice 3" x 1" length of rust along where it was pressed against the holster which I apparently sweat through. OK, guns rust, it sucks. So I cleaned it using Safariland CLP and some 0000 brass wool, which managed to strip the finish down to bare metal.

So, two guns, one was a junker from the get go, ad another which functions well, but has a terribly thin and weak finish.

I'd still probably buy another Taurus, but I can't think of any model that I want that I can't get elsewhere (Beretta 92 and a 1911).

 

[USAF_Vet]

As an afterthought, Remington has considerably outsold every other manufacturer, but is now experiencing a massive recall on their flagship rifle, and had a horrendous rollout of a new pistol. At this point, I wouldn't be any more likely to recommend Remington or Taurus.

 

[Praxidike]

I've owned two Tauri, a mid 70's vintage model 94 .22lr revolver that patterned like a shotgun and my EDC 709.

The .22 I traded off once I realized it couldn't virtue broadside of a barn if I were standing inside it. Of also experienced random cylinder lock up.

My 709 has been flawless, but I'm still only rating it as mediocre. I carry it daily, but last week was excessively humid and I sweat a lot for a couple days (moving). Come to notice, the slide had a nice 3" x 1" length of rust along where it was pressed against the holster which I apparently sweat through. OK, guns rust, it sucks. So I cleaned it using Safariland CLP and some 0000 brass wool, which managed to strip the finish down to bare metal.

So, two guns, one was a junker from the get go, ad another which functions well, but has a terribly thin and weak finish.

I'd still probably buy another Taurus, but I can't think of any model that I want that I can't get elsewhere (Beretta 92 and a 1911).

My guess is that the gun was blued? Are you claiming that is you brought another blued firearm, exposed it to moisture, and then scrubbed the rust with chemicals and an abrasive material, the same exact thing would not have had happened? Maybe you should have purchased the stainless steal models?

 

[Praxidike]

I have owned alot of firearms over the years & must admit that almost all have had some problems over the years. As far as Taurus gos, I will not buy their auto pistols! Every one of them I have owned had issues. Their revolvers are a much better buy . I have seen a few that were rough but worked fine. I have a Taurus .22mag. & a .38SPL. that work fine. But their auto pistols are very much hit & miss! And I will leave them to others!

What autos did you own? When did you own them, and what letter did the serial begin with?

 

[BSA1]

One feature that Taurus got right on their revolvers that you never hear about is the location on the internal lock on the back of the hammer. Compare that to the ongoing criticism of the internal on S&W's.

In this sense NOT hearing about the I.L. is a good thing as it is not causing any problems but still credit should be given.

 

[MCgunner]

The Taurus 66s are stronger in the forcing cone than K frames, too. They are ROUND., no flat spot. I've had a k frame forcing cone split before. No such problems on the two Taurus 66s I own. The guns are a little heavier by a few ounces, though, owing to the slightly more beefy larger frames that allow that round forcing cone, but the weight is well worth it IMHO for the extra forcing cone strength.

 

[greyling22]

It could be that as far as QC goes, if you compare taurus to glock, glock makes basically 1 gun. and has always made 1 gun. Sure there are some variations on theme, but at the end of the day, 1 gun, and it hasn't changed much in 20 years. If they were having QC issues at this point, shame on them. Taurus, makes a lot of guns, in a lot of flavors, and they release a new one fairly regularly, so it makes sense they would have more teething issues.

Now, does taurus need a US branch of their service dept? you betcha. should they attempt to step up their game? sure. Have I ever personally had an issue with any of the 4 within my family? no. But bad reviews come from somewhere, so obviously there is room for improvement. You know who else needs to improve? remington (model 700 and marlin, I'm looking at you). ruger (my last mkiii had issues that required real work) keltec. eaa's customer service. Savages' finish has gotten cheaper and the price higher, springfields are oversprung, There are probably more, but those I the ones I know of personally.