While I don't have that particular model, and thus can't comment on any potential .22mag binding issues, I will say something about the quality of Taurus small framed revolvers.
I have had two small framed Taurus revolvers. I had a 605 (.357mag snub) that was a great gun. I shot just over 500 rounds through it before selling it (the recoil of the .357mag was too much in such a small gun, and I didn't want the extra weight if I was to only shoot .38s). Currently I have a Taurus 85CH which I'll keep forever. Both have been 100% reliable, both have had great DA triggers, the 605 had a great SA pull as well (the 85CH is DAO), the 85 is certainly more than reasonably accurate.
My current plan is to get a .22lr snub as one of my next two or three handguns (a compact 1911 or other compact auto and a SA revolver are the other two on the list). The only reason that the Taurus 94 isn't definately it, and that I may consider the S&W, is that Taurus puts adjustable sights on the 94 and 941. I want the 94 as essentially a trainer for my 85 which has fixed sights. Still, I'm strongly considering it since I love Taurus small framed autos (maybe more than comparable S&W J-frames). Also, I've heard (but don't know for a fact) that Taurus is selling them now with fixed sights too. If true, that will put it over.
Now, if I ever decided I wanted a defensive gun in less than .38spl my two choices would be the 941 or Taurus 731 (.32H&R Mag) and I probably will get the 941 just for the heck of it eventually (in a few years).
Certainly if you are considering the 941 my advice would be "go for it".