Toughest Taurus revolver

Status
Not open for further replies.
Taurus and Rossi revolvers are essentially Brazillian rip-off's of S&W guns
Click to expand...

That is like saying that Mercury is a rip-off of Ford.

S&W owned Taurus and shared technology.

Later (after Taurus separated from Smith) they bought the Brazilian Beretta plant and got all of their machines and parts for the 92.

Rip-off is not accurate at all.
 
I have to agree with MCgunner.....the Taurus lock is a better design than the S&W. I wish they both got rid of that useless crap though. No gun needs a lock. When it comes to revolvers, putting a lock or a giant engraved warning is even more of a ridiculous idea. Don't they know who their market is? S&W would certainly sell more new guns if they ditched that lock. Yeah, I know who owns them and the reasoning there but it's still stupid.
 
I have to agree with MCgunner.....the Taurus lock is a better design than the S&W
Click to expand...
The Taurus lock is superior, works perpendicular to recoil forces, can't turn themselves on as the J frames have been known to do.
Click to expand...

nobody can disagree with statements like that.

And besides...McGunner is rarely wrong. Those exceptionally infrequent times can be identified when he is disagreeing with me. :evil:
 
Love my Taurus

I bought a used Taurus titanium seven shot revolver with a ported snub nose barrel (I think about 3") for $170. It is one of the best buys I ever made. Shooting full blown 357's out of it I can keep all seven shots on a 8" pie plate at 25 yrs. (Granted that's off a rest) but I have no complaints. The gun go's with me every where in my truck (I stay out of Wis. - they can't have any of my tourist or business monies) every where else I travel my MI CWP is valid). When ever I go into the woods it is on my side (belt slide holster) and I practice mostly with Winchester 38 spc ammo. It's very light weight, shoots well and has the 7 shot capacity. I will never sell this little gem.:D
 
The smith lock is easier to remove.

Taurus guns seem to have a better trigger feel out of the box(nowdays). But S&W is by far superior with gunsmithing tricks applied. There's just not as much you can do with a taurus to make it better.

Oh...taurus guns also seem to all come with buttugly grips. Man are they ugly!
 
See allot of Tauruses

I have a good number of them come across my bench, it's mostly cleaning up the crappy triggers with lots of polishing and a little fitting. Other wise they seem fine and that's about the only time I see one in our shop. The triggers can turn out pretty good as long as you don't crazy with the springs...don't cut them, just heavy polishing. In short...I own two that sit beside my GP100 and my 686 and Model 19. I love the CIA in 357.
 
Ruger "borrowed" the transfer bar idea from Iver Johnson, so let's not go there.

Don't get me wrong, I don't like any of the ILs, but the taurus IL's look really shoddy, you have to admit.
Click to expand...

Odd, mine is located in the hammer (semi-auto), and is at least as professionally done as anything S&W could hope to do.

S&W owned Taurus and shared technology.
Click to expand...

More Internet BS. Both companies were owned by Bangor Punta. There was supposedly some technology flow from Taurus to S&W. S&W never owned, nor operated, Taurus.

Later (after Taurus separated from Smith) they bought the Brazilian Beretta plant and got all of their machines and parts for the 92.
Click to expand...

Correct, sort of. Beretta had a contract with the Brazilian military to produce the original Model 92. Part of the contract stipulated a Brazilian plant. After the contract was fulfilled, Beretta was left with the option of building Beretta guns in Brazil, and competing with its other plants, or selling the tooling. They sold the tooling in the 1980s, well before the US Army Trials. Beretta shifted the safety location for the Army specs. Taurus continued to build guns with the safety in the frame. They later added the decock feature. Taurus has never suffered the broken slide, or failing locking block problems of Beretta.

S&W introduced the Model 29 revolver. They did so knowing the use of the gun. The Model 29 failed after a relatively few full-power rounds. Ruger introduced the Redhawk, and then the Super Redhawk, chambered for the .44 Mag, as well. The Redhawk and Super Redhawks were a superior design as far as durability is concerned. Size, weight, and so on, were defined by S&W engineers prior to the release of the gun. WHY the Redhawk, and Super Redhawk are better guns is of no consequence in the discussion. Both were designed by their respective engineers to shoot the .44 Magnum. Ruger is just, in this case, better at it than S&W.

The Taurus Model 66 is a sturdy revolver. Mine is a 3" version. It has withstood a steady diet of .357 Magnums since I bought it in the early 1990s. My Model 82 has withstood a similar use with .38 Special +P and +P+.
Both of my Model 85 revolvers are similarly fine.

To the poster who has 25 handguns in his safe, and no Taurus. I have 25 handguns in a drawer , none of them S&W. Enough said. I do have some older S&W handguns as investments. I do not shoot them, as they break way too often, and I don't feel like losing money that could have been used to buy better shooting guns. :)
 
I have a couple of Taurus Revolvers and the one favorite is my .44 Magnum
Tracker.Sweet.I've actually carried this pistol a few times.I reload for it and
tame it down a bit so as not to kill the bad guy and the neighbor down the street
with the same bullet.;)
 
Proud Taurus .357 owner here. My first revolver in around 1999, a model 608 I believe - might be long discontinued. A 7 shot .357 with 4" barrel. Handles like a dream and very rugged and tough. I would recommend one.
 
My Taurus is the 627SS. 7 rounds of full house .357 or .38, ported barrell, shoots straight and has never malfunctioned. Well worth the price in the 4" model. The 6" is a bit long for regular carry. I have S&W, Springfield and Browning pistols and cannot find any real drawbacks to the Taurus.
 
Toughest Tauri are the Raging Bulls. Front and rear lockup, heavy enough to soak up a good measure of the recoil and none of the ones we've sold have come back for any reason whatever....something we can't say about the small frame models, especially the .22s. My 17 tracker is the most accurate revolver I've ever had and I've had a few...maybe hundred...including K frames in 22,32,38, N frames in 38/357/44/45, Rugers of all makes and models, and not a few Dan Wesson.
 
I own High Standard, H&R, S&W, Colt, Rossi - and Taurus is on the list. Rossi is owned by Taurus now and mine is less than a year old, so it's a Taurus (sort of). I have a 66SS6 on the shortest of shopping lists. That will be my actual Taurus. I sold my only Ruger and have not regretted that (yet?).

You ask about toughest - for what purpose? Hitting rocks, pounding nails, shooting high pressure rounds, what's the actual question?

Even small frame Taurus's don't break frames or forcing cones. They occasionally come with MFG issues like a rough finished piece or something, but usually not. That can be taken care of by looking them over VERY CAREFULLY when you buy and making sure they are right before you get home. There are plenty of stories of Rossi broken firing pins, but it's not a big deal if it's not your SD gun? I know of no stories of broken FPs on actual Taurus's?

What do YOU mean by tough?
 
Given the recent reports I've seen on Taurus quality control issues, I'd go over any potential Taurus purchase with a fine-tooth comb before plunking down my money. That's from me who has two OLDER Taurus revolvers, a target 22 and a titanium model 85 snub, both excellent guns. All that being said, I've definitely read lots of glowing reports recently on the Taurus Tracker line.
 
I thought the Raging Bull line would've been the toughest. My buddy and I both had the same RB in .480. One day he can't cock the hammer. We opened it up to find the trigger pin (the part it pivits on) was broke. This pin is part of the frame (molded as part of the frame). I loved that gun, but after seeing the way the internals are designed, it makes me question their "toughness." All the parts and pins seem way to small. I think the trigger pin on my superblackhawk has more metal than every pin in the RB put together. You could also see that the side plate was force fitted with an angle grinder.
 
It's just an opinion, but in this order:
Raging Bull series
M44 series
Tracker series

I haven't had my Tracker long enough to account for its' "toughness".

I'd still rather shoot my SBH if toughness is an issue, but that's not what you asked.

God Bless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
  • Locked
Taurus .41 Tracker?
Replies
16
Views
4K
Backpacker33
Backpacker33
P
  • Locked
.22 Revolver S&W, Ruger, Taurus?
2
Replies
27
Views
1K
Pilot
P
U
  • Locked
Good taurus revolvers?
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
matrem
M
sfl_gunner
  • Locked
Which way to go
2
Replies
28
Views
1K
JTHunter
JTHunter
T
  • Locked
Revolver purchase soon..which one?
Replies
11
Views
635
Will5A1
W
Back
Top