taurus vs S&W

[phred]

need a BUG: taurus vs S&W

I am looking for backup gun to carry on duty. I am trying to decide between a taurus 905 and a S&W 637/642. My duty weapon is a Sig 226 in 9mm, so the 905 sounds good because it would use the same ammo as my duty gun. I spoke with my usual dealer and he told my that the taurus 905 ultralight (aluminum frame) will be out in about 3 weeks. However, I think that at some point in the future I may want to put a set of laser grips on, and the only ones for the taurus are the larger "combat grip" style that would not work well for an ankle gun. Whereas the smaller "boot style" is available for the J frame. If you guys could just throw some ideas at me and help me out, I would greatly appreciate it.

 

[Sunray]

If it were me, I'd be looking at a Taurus PT111. Small frame, 10 round, semi-auto in 9mm. Although, I'm not a big fan of Taurus firearms. And your ankle is no place for a firearm. Difficult to get at in a hurry, adds an odd weight for those wonderful foot chases and you could lose it or bash your other ankle with it when running. A good holster in the small of your back. If it's comfortable enough when sitting in the car.
Have a look here. http://www.thegunsource.com/shopping/store/manufacturer_name.asp?idmanufacturer=44&idcategory=2

 

[drone23]

The Smiths have a nicer trigger and feel a little better made in general IMHO. The Smiths have many more options for grips and other accessories. The Taurus are cheaper and are still darn good guns. Both will serve you well, but the Smith is the slightly better gun if you ask me.

-D

 

[Ala Dan]

IMHO, the S&W 642 would be best suited for a really
nice backup weapon. I'm not wild about concealed
hammer weapons; but I do like the 642. During my
days as a LEO, I have been known to carry an old
model S&W 60 .38 caliber "Chief's Special" as a BUG
to my .45 caliber SIG-SAUER P220A.

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

 

[Old Fuff]

I have generally had good luck with Taurus and older S&W revolvers. Haven't had occasion to buy a new Smith lately so I'll pass on offering an opinion. I have heard on this forum that some have had problems with Taurus 9mm moonclips, although the guns seem to be O.K. There was a recent thread on the Taurus 905 - I suggest you look it up.

 

[Nick96]

I wouldn't think that ammo compatability would be much of an issue if you choose a revolver as a back up to the Sig. All revolvers I know of that use semi-auto cartridges really need moon clips to operate properly. I somehow doubt the situation would likely arise where you could take a "time out" to load your moon clips from rounds taken from a spare Sig magazine.

To me, the small revolver seems a good choice (though would prefer pocket to ankle carry). That said, the light weight S&W J frames are more likely to give you reliable & consistant performance than the Taurus's. For an extra $100 bucks or so - I'd go small & light S&W over small & light Taurus.

 

[hankrearden2000]

I'm a long time lover of S & W revolvers. But, I have to tell you. The last few years the new Taurus revolvers that I've handled are every bit as smooth as the S & Ws. I have a Taurus Model 85 to complement my J-Frame collection and have no complaints.

 

[E357]

I have two Taurus 85's - one in Blue steel and one Titanium with laser grip. The blue steel is super smooth, while the TI's trigger is a little gritty. With the laser I can shoot the tops of bowling pins at 50 feet with no problems.

You are 100% correct about the size of the laser grip (S&W boot vs Taurus combat size). since I belt carry, I feel Ok with the taurus. However, for a more compact carry I would opt for the S&W 642 (sorry I sold mine) and the smaller CT laser.

That Taurus 905 (9mm) does look very good and will probably pick up one when funds arrive. It makes more sense - to me - than a snubby 357.

Elliot