Taurus Revolver Stigma

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have a Stainless Taurus 66 .357 with a 6 inch barrel and it has worked well for about 2000 rounds, mostly 6.1 grains of Unique and Missouri Bullets 158 grain LSWCs. It is almost identical to my Smith 686 Stainless with a 6 inch barrel.

They look about the same, weight about the same, and shoot about the same. The major difference is that the Smith's trigger is notably smoother, although the Taurus's is getting better. I got both of them new, and the Taurus cost 1/2 what the Smith did.

And I don't really mind shooting the Taurus in the rain or snow, or leaving it in the barn now and then, which I am loathe to do with the Smith,or even more so with my Colt.
 
I love my 66

I have a Model 66 made in 1989 that is just great. No problems, great both with .357 and .38 special. Fit and finish is real nice. When I bought it, the Smith next to it at the same price (Model 10) was very worn, had a terrible trigger pull and only shot .38s.

Quick question. How do you get your photos to show up in the threads and not as Thumbnails? Can't seem to figure it out.
 

Attachments

  • IMG00137.jpg
    IMG00137.jpg
    84.1 KB · Views: 8
Last edited:
No hater. I've owned them, I've handled and shot plenty of others. I'm also not talking about Taurus/Rossi revolvers from 10+ years ago. The only people that get offended about negative comments are people who currently own Taurus guns.

MCgunner, It's my fault for not stating that guns from 10+ years ago are not exactly in the crop of the shady quality Taurus guns today. Let's face it, most manufactures made better quality firearms 10+ years ago. The only revolvers that still have a 100% consistent vault like lock up is Ruger, although S&W revolvers are still consistent in every notch. Current Taurus and Rossi revolvers are poorly made. If your 20yo Taurus runs great and locks up like a vault, great! Go down to your local shop and handle some current models and tell me if they match yours in quality. ETA: Seems the happiest Taurus customers have guns from 10-20 years ago which may be the reason why there is confusion that they're the same quality today. Do a standard revolver check-up on your older Taurus models and then go do the same to a current production gun, I'll bet there's a difference. If the current models are as loose as your older models with 7,000rds in them, well..........

BTW, you didn't mention how loose the newer 85 cylinder is in full lock-up. If you guys think I'm lying when I say that every Taurus revolver I've handled has been loose compared to other manufactures, just to bash the brand, I'm not. These guns where made in the past 6-7 years. I've handled so many because when I was looking at revolvers, I considered Taurus as a competitor. Over time, I noticed they where all the same loose tolerances with a few showing signs that the timing was off right out of the box. Today, with what I know and what I've read, not a single Taurus handgun or revolver is considered when looking at firearms. No doubt they sell because of price and no doubt you'll get happy reports, but weather those reports are after a few 100-1000rds is not always clear. I can take a known problem gun, shoot 10-100rds in it and say "Mine runs perfect, I carry it everyday!" but it dosn't mean a thing in the real world.

I'm not saying current Taurus revolvers can't shoot a bullet, or hit paper, but the quality is just not there.
 
Last edited:
Well, Smith has gone to crap. I don't know about new Taurus revolvers, but my SIL has a couple of near new autos, a PT145 and a PT738 and both function flawlessly. I love that PT145, kinda want one. 10+1 rounds, 24 ounces or something like that, and very compact. It's an accurate little toot, too. Neither one of his guns have 1K rounds, yet, probably 4-600 on the PT145 as he's had it longer. He's in Afghanistan right now carrying one of uncle Sam's M9s.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/smith-wesson_dark.htm
 
What I'd like to know is if their revolvers have the same stigma

yes...deserved or not.

i have owned one problem-free Tauri product....purchased used.
old model 92 beretta type copy

i have owned three real stinkers......all purchased new
94
85 ultralite
m22

and i have seen problems on the range by others. Even know of one gun shop that will not stock taurus and make it clear to a customer that orders one there will be no warranty or exchanges by the shop........they have had that much trouble with the line in general.

if i was to purchase another Taurus today it would be the pt92. I will not take a chance on the rest of their product line despite the attractive costs and product innovation...not with the high costs of shipping a handgun involved for warranty work.

there is a large dedicated Taurus forum on the internet. interesting that as a guest you have 99% access to the board. When you join, you get access to a board hidden from public view...the complaints board...with horror stories concerning members who have had gun problems and the nightmares involving Taurus customer service.
 
I'm not saying current Taurus revolvers can't shoot a bullet, or hit paper, but the quality is just not there

The exact can be said for S&W.

Buying a new one is a crap shoot.

And the prices are high.

Were I buying a new revolver (I am not) I would look closely at Taurus and Ruger (depending on the usage).
 
Well, Smith has gone to crap. I don't know about new Taurus revolvers, but my SIL has a couple of near new autos, a PT145 and a PT738 and both function flawlessly. I love that PT145, kinda want one. 10+1 rounds, 24 ounces or something like that, and very compact. It's an accurate little toot, too. Neither one of his guns have 1K rounds, yet, probably 4-600 on the PT145 as he's had it longer. He's in Afghanistan right now carrying one of uncle Sam's M9s.

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

Under 1,000rds through any firearm is pretty low. It dosn't need to take that many rounds to work but it should at least have that many rounds through it to prove itself reliable. That's only 10 range trips max for most people.

Maybe you missed my question but how does your 85 lock-up compare to your older Taurus revolvers?

ETA: Nagants do have a terrible DA trigger pull, but shoot 2 cylinders full back to back in DA and every other revolver's pull seems like it had a trigger job. ;)
 
Last edited:
The exact can be said for S&W.

Buying a new one is a crap shoot.

And the prices are high.

Were I buying a new revolver (I am not) I would look closely at Taurus and Ruger (depending on the usage).

The prices are defiantly higher then Taurus prices. S&W revolvers are defiantly not at the same quality they were in years past. Comparing the two brands side by side today, S&W still wins in consistent quality and consistent lock up. I haven't handled any newer S&W revolvers with lead shavings on the cones from the factory test shots nor does every cylinder notch have a different amount of play. When I mean different, it goes from #1 very sloppy, #2 not as sloppy, #3 a little less sloppy, #4 getting better, #5 pretty decent, #6 acceptable....then right back to #1 being very sloppy.
 
Last edited:
Comparing the two brands side by side today, S&W still wins in consistent quality and consistent lock up

I am going to go to McBride's (I am told America's largest volume single store gun shop) and check out the lock up of S&W and Taurus revolvers.

Probably w be tomorrow.

I will report what I find.
 
Under 1,000rds through any firearm is pretty low. It dosn't need to take that many rounds to work but it should at least have that many rounds through it to prove itself reliable. That's only 10 range trips max for most people.

Maybe you missed my question but how does your 85 lock-up compare to your older Taurus revolvers?

I put 200 rounds through a carry autoloader trouble free and I'm good to go. I own 25 handguns and 20 long guns and shoot a lot of black powder cap and ball. I don't always put rounds through any one gun in a range trip. I rarely have time to stay out there all day. My SIL works when he's not fighting wars (national guard) and doesn't have a lot of time, either. He owns more than one gun, too, but he's got a ways to catch up with me. :D The one gun I almost ALWAYS shoot is my Rossi 511 .22 revolver, very accurate and rimfire doesn't need reloading. I have no idea how many have been fired through that revolver, but it'd best be measured in numbers of 550 round bulk packs, I reckon. :D I also have a scoped Ruger Mk2 that gets a lot of action.

As to lock up, that little M85 locks up just as tight as any revolver including my M10, my two 66s, and such. There are no gaps in the crane and no flex when locked up. No end shake and not much rotational play. Honestly, though, I don't worry about rotational play as it needs a little in a gun that isn't line bored.

Anyway, hey, if it shoots as good as it does, am I going to worry about a little end shake or something assuming it had any?

I'd say get off it. Roll the dice with Smith and Wesson if you're that well healed. If you don't want any Taurus revolvers, fine, leave 'em for me cause I've been thinkin' I might like a 405 sometime. :D Don't really need one, but just thinkin' about it. Since I sold my old 1917 Smith, I don't have a moon clipped revolver.
 
I've never owned one. But, two of my friends have. Both Trackers, one .41mag, one .44mag. Both liked them. I shot the .44, it was just fine. The guy with the .44 paid $200, used. Fantastic price to quality ratio.
I really like the Tracker concept (except for the porting!). 5-rounds of .41mag/.44mag./.45Colt in a 4" L or GP sized package. That to me, is a sweet trail gun.
If Ruger made a 4.2", 5-shot GP100 in .41mag, I'd be all over it.
I'd consider a Taurus, before a new S&W. Of course I'd want to inspect it first, like any gun.

My hierarchy for double-action wheel guns, I'd buy, is as follows:
1. Old S&W/Colt
2. Any Ruger (if extensive magnum use or heavy loads are desired, this gets put to #1)
3. Taurus (on a case by case basis)
4. Sharp stick
5. Dull stick
6. Rock
7. New (intergral lock) S&W

I have no experience with Dan Wesson, Charter, Rossi, etc...
 
Last edited:
My hierarchy for wheel guns, I'd buy, is as follows:
1. Old S&W/Colt
2. Any Ruger (if extensive magnum use or heavy loads are desired, this gets put to #1)
3. Taurus (on a case by case basis)
4. Sharp stick
5. Dull stick
6. Rock
7. New (intergral lock) S&W


LOL!!!

I like this hariph fellow!!!
 
Forgot to add, another friend just picked up a Titanium Tracker in .41mag. Paid like $300, I think? That should be ''fun'' to touch off. I think I can accept porting on that.
 
I put 200 rounds through a carry autoloader trouble free and I'm good to go. I own 25 handguns and 20 long guns and shoot a lot of black powder cap and ball. I don't always put rounds through any one gun in a range trip. I rarely have time to stay out there all day. My SIL works when he's not fighting wars (national guard) and doesn't have a lot of time, either. He owns more than one gun, too, but he's got a ways to catch up with me. :D The one gun I almost ALWAYS shoot is my Rossi 511 .22 revolver, very accurate and rimfire doesn't need reloading. I have no idea how many have been fired through that revolver, but it'd best be measured in numbers of 550 round bulk packs, I reckon. :D I also have a scoped Ruger Mk2 that gets a lot of action.

As to lock up, that little M85 locks up just as tight as any revolver including my M10, my two 66s, and such. There are no gaps in the crane and no flex when locked up. No end shake and not much rotational play. Honestly, though, I don't worry about rotational play as it needs a little in a gun that isn't line bored.

Anyway, hey, if it shoots as good as it does, am I going to worry about a little end shake or something assuming it had any?

I'd say get off it. Roll the dice with Smith and Wesson if you're that well healed. If you don't want any Taurus revolvers, fine, leave 'em for me cause I've been thinkin' I might like a 405 sometime. :D Don't really need one, but just thinkin' about it. Since I sold my old 1917 Smith, I don't have a moon clipped revolver.

I'm not saying current S&W revolvers are the best. As a matter of fact, I've owned and still own more Ruger revolvers over anything else and they seem to be the last company to still make them like they used to.

I will "get off it" since I usually don't get on these type of threads anyway. It always ends in a cluster which is why I avoid them in the first place. This time I made the mistake to join in and tell about my observations and experience with a brand. Maybe I should of just said "Taurus sucks" without any explanation and let people give the ol' :rolleyes: at me.
 
I am going to go to McBride's (I am told America's largest volume single store gun shop) and check out the lock up of S&W and Taurus revolvers.

Probably w be tomorrow.

I will report what I find.

I'll keep this thread saved just to see what your observations are.
 
This is a long and impassioned thread with many views, opinions and probably a bit of Internet lore. I'm a S&W and Colt homer, I'll admit it up front (been in counseling but I just keep buying them). That being said, I own four Taurus handguns. The current Tauri I have in my collection are:

94ss4 - Trigger sucks, gun works flawless. I carry it in the "trunk" of my ATV with a box of .22s. I have owned it quite a while and it's perfect for what I have it for, a cheap don't care if it get's dinged up tool. Really not a lot of rounds through it because I really don't like to shoot it due to the crappy trigger.

M419 (Judge) - a toy, fun to play with but I don't feel it's a serious-use revolver. Bought used, I've put hundreds of 2 1/2" .410's through it shooting hand-tossed clays with it (good fun by the way) and it never has given me a bit of trouble.

M66 - The only Taurus I have had problems with, I broke it, they fixed it (for free) no questions and turned it around in less than 3 weeks. The gun shoots well, has a decent trigger (not smooth as an old S&W), and is more accurate at 25 yards than me.

PT-146 - Been flawless since I got it. No problems, feeds everything I've tried to stuff down it's throat. I carry it in the truck. It's no longer as "pretty" as it was when I bought it used, but it functions 100% so far.

I don't necessarily seek out Taurus firearms, but when good deals come along, I'll still buy them.
 
I'm not saying current S&W revolvers are the best. As a matter of fact, I've owned and still own more Ruger revolvers over anything else

Well, we can at least agree on Ruger. They're getting more variety with the LCR, but just don't have enough variety to compete with all the stuff Smith and Taurus put out. And, I'm not talkin' about the Gooberner and the Judge. :rolleyes: Of course, my fave Rugers are my Old Army and 2 Blackhawks. I'm a single action nut along with being just a plain nut.

The trackers are neat and I've thought a Titanium .41 would be way cool as a trail gun, perhaps the best way to go. Yeah, I'm not a big on porting, but that thing is light. I'd rather not have it ported in .357, but .41 might need it.

As I said before, i've been kind of infatuated with the idea of the 405, .40 S&W snub with moon clips, for carry. I really don't NEED a new revolver, though. I'm kind of off on a black powder kick, lately. Been increasing my Pietta collection.
 
The trackers are neat and I've thought a Titanium .41 would be way cool as a trail gun, perhaps the best way to go. Yeah, I'm not a big on porting, but that thing is light.
MCgunner-- My thoughts were the same as yours about the tracker, and I was as giddy as a school kid to shoot mine. My Tracker story is redundant in several threads so I'll be damned to tell it again. To make a long story short the big chain store I bought the gun from tried to talk me out of it, but I was stubborn and so excited I didn't listen. The manager of the gun department said the Tracker was the worst of all Taurus, and he warned all the employees to steer people away (his inventory was not his choice). They warned me, but I did not listen.
I really like your posts MCgunner, and I've learned from your wisdom, but I do not see eye to eye with you on Taurus revolvers ;). I guess experience can shape an opinion.
 
So be it. If I buy a revolver, Tracker or otherwise, it has to pass MY inspection first.
That's a good start. But it doesn't help much if they skipped the heat-treating of critical parts -- there's nothing to look for until later when it starts to fail.
 
I am going to go to McBride's (I am told America's largest volume single store gun shop) and check out the lock up of S&W and Taurus revolvers.

Probably w be tomorrow.

I will report what I find.
I will be tuning in, just to see what you think of McBride's selection there, G
I have faith in your 1st person evaluations, I do

but after that, you really ought to swing on by Collector's Firearms in Houston, just to get that nasty "new gun taste" out of your mouth, bud

yeah, I know it's a bit of a drive
but the way I remember it, ya'll Texans never did mind driving a couple hundred miles, for nothing more than just a cold beer (leastways not around Dallas/Ft Worth they didn't) :)
 
My Tauri Story

The only Taurus I ever owned was a Model 441 .44 Special purchased new back in about 1992. Solid as a rock. Accurate, smooth. Never gave any problems whatsoever. Was it the odd "good" one? Can't say.

Last year, I stupidly sold it and purchased a new S&W Model 21-4 .44 Special.
The S&W arrived with a loose front sight blade, a divot out of the forcing cone, .020" B/C gap and 1/4 of the butt unfinished. S&W did quickly fix most of the issues. The gun never shot well. Was overjoyed to trade it straight across for a 4" Model 29-3.

Still regret letting that Taurus go, however.

S&W copied it with their Model 696, now a "cult" gun.

taurus.jpg
 
like a dork I posted this on the wrong thread

her you go

Just got back from McBride's

Looked at S&W and Taurus revolvers

They were 3 deep at the counter so I didn't take notes.

One Taurus was a 44 mag. It was used. The crane had a lot of movement. We discussed it and theorized that a numbskull flipped it closed a lot. Was not a tight gun.
Since it was abused I drew no conclusions.


Looked at a Taurus UL snubby, blue (didn't know they made them) Was not tight but I would not call it abnormally lose. Double action trigger was outstanding. Good, even gaps in the crane-frame fit.

Picked up a j frame and it was definitely tighter. I would say 40- 50% tighter. Fit was good. Trigger was mediocre at best. Was stainless so no comparison. (I saw no new blue Smiths in the case)

Of snubs, Taurus won the trigger pull, lost on tightness.

Looked at a Tracker .357. Finish was that dull, Taurus look. Trigger was ok. Fit was very good. Tighter than the J-frame-sized Taurus. Not as tight as the J frame.

Looked at a performance center .357 (627?)

Fit was pretty good except for a slightly large gap at the top of the crane. It looked to be machined that way, was tight against the frame farther from the surface. Trigger was fine, stainless was pretty enough. Was not as tight as the J frame, maybe a little better than the Tracker.

If not for the weird "gap" it would have won all categories. Was twice the price.

Was the Taurus snub particularly loose? Was the J Frame trigger particularly bad?

Don't know. Neither one impressed.

Tracker seemed fine. The PC gap was a little off putting.

I had to go because I was keeping an employee from paying customers.

Really can't draw any conclusions because the sample was so small.

Will go back another time when they are less busy and look at more.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top