Quantcast

Taurus

Discussion in 'Handguns: Revolvers' started by The Hillbilly, Jan 10, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. entropy

    entropy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    9,571
    Location:
    G_d's Country, WI
    I have and carry a PT145 and occasionally carry my PT1911AR also. The only 'problem' I had with either is the sights on PT145 were too high, so I took them off. Shoots better now. I'm wearing the PT145 as I type this, and have had it on all day. I trust either of them when the chips are down.
     
  2. Varminterror

    Varminterror Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2016
    Messages:
    7,965
    Haywood likes this.
  3. zaitcev

    zaitcev Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2016
    Messages:
    743
    I have an M380 and the trigger on it not particularly smooth. It is also much heavier than it needs to be. Well, it cannot be made lighter with the existing mechanism. I know that because I tried to install lighter mainspring, and it caused light strikes. The cinematics is just poor. If they learned how to make nicer triggers (e.g. like Kimber) and if they licensed/stole/reinvented a clipless ejection mechanism like on Charters, it could be a nice gun.
     
  4. DougW

    DougW Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2004
    Messages:
    2,069
    Location:
    North Texas
    My wife has a PT111G2 for HD, and a stainless 85CH when she is in the car. Both work flawlessly.
     
  5. ms6852

    ms6852 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    1,956
    Location:
    TEXAS
    I normally carry a 1911, but occasionally I carry this Taurus I bought 32 years ago when I need to rest my 1911's and air out the Taurus.
    IMG_6121.jpg
     
  6. DougW

    DougW Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2004
    Messages:
    2,069
    Location:
    North Texas
    Had a PT92AF back in the late 80's. Had too sell to buy groceries. Really loved it. I have a Beretta 92 now just for fun and usually the car gun. I prefer Glocks though.
     
  7. SeanSw

    SeanSw Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    1,125
    Location:
    Illinois
    I did carry a Taurus occasionally, until I realized it would never feed my preferred self defense ammo reliably and it was sold it off. I have had two Taurus TCP 738 pistols and my first one would would feed the ammo fine but the second one would not, so off it went. It was great with FMJ. I still have a much older Taurus model 96 .22 target revolver and it's quite nice.
     
  8. tlekas

    tlekas Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2003
    Messages:
    6
    Location:
    Hudson, NH
    I carried a Taurus 2-851129ULT for a number of years in a pocket holster. Then it developed a problem where some of the time it got stuck with the hammer part way back when fired in double action. I sent it back and they fixed it but I didn't trust it, sold it, and got a Ruger LCR. I have been happy with it.

    I have had reliability and/or durability problems with other Taurus firearms including a P-32, P3AT, PT 99 AF 9 mm, and PT1911. I have had a Taurus 94 for a long time which I am happy with except that the trigger pull and cocking the hammer is very difficult. Not a problem for me but it is for many of my students.

    I would not carry a Taurus for Personal Protection again.
     
  9. mnrivrat

    mnrivrat Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    4,903
    Location:
    MN
    I carry a Taurus 731 Titanium . I have had no trouble with it and have been shooting it for about 10 years. It is a 6 shot in .32H&R mag.
    I have also owned a Tracker in .44 mag - I wish I had it back. And I still have a M94 , and a 24/7 with no bad experiences with either.
     
  10. jeepnik

    jeepnik Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Messages:
    2,152
    Location:
    SoCal
    With more than a few handguns, from quite a few manufacturers, my wife could take her pick. About twenty years ago she picked up a Taurus 85 I'd gotten in a trade and decided it is her gun. Still carries it, and it isn't wise to think that she is poorly armed, much less poorly skilled.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice