taurus revolvers?

[RonC133]

lanternlad1: wrote "What I don't understand is, if the plans are the same, why can't Taurus build guns of the same quality as S&W?"

They can. But the price would go up about $200 so what would be the point?

Even if they did, there are enough Taurus bashers around who never forgive and never forget, so that they would be unlikely to ever get appropriate credit.

On the other hand, there are a number of testimonials in this thread so far that indicate Taurus is doing an acceptable job at an acceptable price.

Similar conversations are going on around the Rock Island Armory 45s. There are a number of diehard top end 45 fans who refuse to believe a quality 45 can be sold so cheap. From the discussions, many of them have never held or fired a RIA, but it is their studied opinion that they are junk.

 

[Virginian]

Smith fans hate Taurus. They have to, to try to maintain their illusion of superiority, and justify their huge cost disadvantage. Try a S&W today, if your credit line is good enuf and/or you like holes in the frame with a lock socket showing. They have had plenty of issues lately, too, with out of the box guns, including Performance Center guns.
(Don't tell me how good the old ones are or we will bring up Colt and give you an inferiority complex all over again. )
Both Taurus and Smith have fixed any problems I have ever heard of. I believe the bean counters have figured it is cheaper to fix a few problems, than pay good people up front to keep any problems from getting out in the first place.
I recently bought a new Taurus and am completely satisfied with it, but my honest opinion is they are all chasing Ruger in the quality area since their last round of changes.
I believe you can buy any of the name revolvers and be pretty sure of ending up with an excellent gun. The odds of having to pursue "cures" after the initial purchase just vary a bit from one maker to the next.
We need to quit these "arguments". No one is about to change anyone else's mind one little bit.

 

[MCgunner]

The only revolver I have ever had jam was a Taurus. the hammer got stuck in a halfway position. I will say, however, it had been sitting in a safe for 15 years untouched. I detail stripped it to check the internals and springs and oiled it up and did not have another problem. I am now considering a new M85.

This guy I know who has never taken care of anything he has ever owned in his life, almost like he's wanting to see if it'll break, brought me a Smith body guard air weight the other day with the cylinder stuck. I thought, of course, maybe the ejector rod had gotten loose, common. Well, it turned out, a whack on the cylinder thumb release with a hammer/drift punch loosened it up. It just needed cleaning. It didn't look like the gun had ever had a drop of lube on it. Thing's finish resembled those painted zinc guns like a Bryco or something. LOL I thought later I should have offered him 100 bucks for it. He had no idea how much the thing was worth, I'm sure, and being the cylinder was stuck, might have bit. But, then, on second thought, I realized I don't think this guy could be relied upon to not have a hot gun, so good thing I didn't think about buying it from him, really.

If I had to judge all Smith J frames from that pathetic example of one, I'd say they were all junk. LOL! Of course, that's not the case. But, yeah, even the gun God himself must carry (if you believe the hype) has to have some TLC once in a while.

I also believe the best out of the box revolvers built are Rugers. However, they don't build anything like the variety of carry guns Smith and Taurus do. The little SP101 is one awesome well built, well designed revolver. I'd like to have another one. But, at 27 ounces, the thing was sort of impractical for pocket carry and I can carry a larger gun IWB effectively. I have a 3" M66 Taurus that's not a lot heavier and carries one more round and fits in the same holster and shoots better with its longer sight radius. I tend to prefer adjustable sights, too, even for IWB carry, though I'd rather have fixed for a pocket revolver.

 

[SaMx]

The only revolver I have ever had jam was a Taurus. the hammer got stuck in a halfway position. I will say, however, it had been sitting in a safe for 15 years untouched. I detail stripped it to check the internals and springs and oiled it up and did not have another problem. I am now considering a new M85.

I have a similar story, although it wasn't my gun. The cylinder wouldn't rotate in single action or double action mode, unless you jiggled it by hand first. It was the 7 shot .357, with porting near the muzzle. It seemed like a nice gun otherwise, and I might look at Taurus again if and when I'm looking for a .357, but right now Ruger is higher on my list (they would be at the top if they brought the old style grip with the wood panels back on the gp100).

 

[MCgunner]

but right now Ruger is higher on my list (they would be at the top if they brought the old style grip with the wood panels back on the gp100).

www.ajaxgrips.com has all sorts of wood, mother of pearl, etc inserts for Ruger grips. I prefer Hogues on mine, though. I don't like the feel of the stock Ruger grips, too boxy and I prefer not to have my middle finger behind the trigger guard.

 

[44and45]

Totally agree with the Virginian poster, right on.

Time to stop trashing and bashing, be a gent for a change. :banghead:

Jim

 

[Hawk]

I don't own a Taurus revolver, hence am not in a postion to comment on them. I generally post in one out of every 200 Taurus threads and I think I'm due.

I hate porting. I really, really, hate porting.

Taurus has a lot of revolvers cataloged that don't have porting but my dealers seem to go out of their way to insure that they stock only ported Tauri. This may be intentional to keep me from buying Taurus.

How much do I hate porting? More than I hate frame mounted integral locks, and I don't like frame mounted integral locks even a little bit. Extra holes are extra holes, doesn't matter to me if they're on the end of the barrel or just over the cylinder release. I don't like billboards on the barrel either. The rest of the thing could be so nice that Python owners would rush to drop their Colts in the sewer but those dang holes just ruin it for me.

One of these days my dealer will screw up and stock a Taurus without extra holes and I'll buy it and report back. In the meantime, if they would make a few more without the holes, I'd be happy. I'd be a sucker for a .44 mag without porting or billboard.

 

[thebaldguy]

I have a blue steel 85 that's a great little revolver. I got it barely used for $200. The fit and finish is very good, and it shoots well. I like it.

 

[Z71]

I have owned a couple Taurus's in the past. They are not too bad.

I don't think they quite equal a S&W or Ruger for quality control. I do think the design is just fine. Just that the workmanship sometimes suffers. Not so sure the S&W revolvers are maybe having the same QC issues these days.

I've only got one Taurus at the moment, a PT-22. Really a nicely made little pistol. Does have a few issues.

My revolvers were good guns. One was a 3" Model 82, and the other was a Model 85. I had to clean up a few burrs inside the 85 to get the da trigger pull to work prpoerly. The 82 needed the barrel turned a bit to hit the target.

Fairly minor problems. However, someone else would have been sorely disappointed to find that the double action sometimes locked up on a new revolver, or the gun shot substantialy to the left(like the 82 did). I just fixed the issues and got on with it.

I actually thought the lockwork looked well designed and made on my guns. Just lacked that final fit to bring either gun to perfection.

 

[esq_stu]

All my bad snubbies were Tauruses.
Taurus 905 9mm (when new) - failures to fire, stuck cases, "stellar" clips useless
Taurus 606 .357 - failures to fire, seizing of cylinder
Taurus 650 (when new) .357 - failure to fire, seizing of cylinder
Taurus 445 (44 spl.) - failures to fire, seizing of cylinder
Taurus 94 (.22 LR) - failures to fire
Ruger Speed Six - flawless
Ruger SP101 - flawless
S&W 642 - flawless

It took a while, but I have learned my lesson.

 

[george29]

I had two, a 905 and 44c. Nothing I can put my finger on but I prefer Ruger and S&W.