Russ Jackson
member
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2009
- Messages
- 564
I am sure there are 1000 Rugers to every Taurus. The Ruger Universe is larger....Russ
There's a GOOD reason for some things! Must be Halftime , Still 25 to 2I am sure there are 1000 Rugers to every Taurus
I owned a Taurus........once.
I REALLY needed it once, and it failed me.
Now that I'll certainly agree with. I can't stand handgun porting, and having that on something as relatively tame as a .44 would be a disqualifier for me.If you have ever shot a ported 44 vs a non it just isnt a comparison.
Without any doubt! The Taurus Raging series has kind of a moderistic interpretation of sort of Python-esque barrel rib combined with that strange barrel profile and Huffy bicycle-looking grips. (No revolver, except a Python, or maybe a Dan Wesson, should wear that vent rib... it's only "ok" because its a Python. Kind of like only Nixon could go to China.)You really think the Ruger is a better looking gun?
Uh, we're talking about REVOLVERS here. The entire concept is "dated." And that's a good thing. The Ruger Redhawk manages to hold the classic lines while still being a tough relatively modern design.But the Ruger is dated.
The Taurus Unlimited Lifetime Repair Policy™ is just that. The lifetime of the gun...not the buyer('Cause the buyer won't live long enough to see it come back from our service department...).
What? I've shot Tauruses. In fact, I'd shot a Taurus revolver about a decade before I ever shot an S&W. I've not fired a Raging Bull, but I've handled/inspected them and have formulated certain opinions.A bunch of guys reviewing a gun they have no experience with. Even the Moderator hates a gun he has never shot.
Seriously? You think most "Ruger guys" like them because they haven't been exposed to Taurus producs? That seems unlikely. They aren't exactly hard to find these days.Got to try new things every once in a while. If you can get a Ruger guy to actually try something new or different he might actually find it superior.
Again, WHAT? I didn't say I'd shot ONLY one.So once you've shot one Taurus you have shot them all?
I guess this is where you and I will never see eye to eye. Personally I do not think you can give an opinion on something you have not tried. Apples to Apples. You can give your opinion on the one you have tried. But then you have nothing to compare it to. Telling your experiences about the Super Redhawk is acceptable. If you knew someone who had a problem or success with the Raging Bull it would be helpful to the original poster. Blatant slamming of a gun you have never shot it not only unfair but unproductive. The poster did not ask about Customer Service or to see someones unrelated pictures of Ruger Handguns(nice collection by the way). I assume he wanted to hear about personal experiences of the two handguns. I have shot both and reviewed both of them admirably. Others took me to task and disregarded my findings with an attack at Taurus even claiming I was an employee. The Ruger speaks for itself with it long tenure in its particular field. The new guy (Raging Bull) is trying to establish itself against it. It will never do so by offering a clone of the Redhawk. It must add something new/different. Maybe in looks,porting,accuracy,price,hand feel, recoil, in order to compete against the benchmark for the past four decades in 44 caliber long barrel double action revolvers.Again, WHAT? I didn't say I'd shot ONLY one.
And this is no more legitimate than someone claiming you have to have shot EVERY one to have an informed opinion.
The guy asked which is a better gun buy. My opinion is the Ruger, based on my experience shooting and my observations in handling them both.
I suppose if I'd have loaded a round into the last Raging Bull I handled and actually fired it, the veil would have been lifted and I'd now see the wide world of guns in a whole different light. Perhaps that is so. But I didn't fire that fateful round, so my opinion stands.
Personally I do not think you can give an opinion on something you have not tried.
Oh. I did not realize that it was impossible or illegitimate for one to make a choice between to options based on experiences with similar but not identical options. That one could not make an aesthetic judgment without having fired a weapon, could not make a choice between two manufacturers with whom you have direct experience based on those experiences, could not weigh options based on reputation of those manufacturers, could not weigh the benefits or detriments of specific features of an item unless you've used those features as presented on that specific item...
I make those kinds of decisions every day. I don't have to rent, own, or test thoroughly in my own hands and item before I can decide if I would buy it -- especially if I'm given two choices and told simply to PICK ONE.
He asked for opinions on which we would buy, that's all.
Here it is:
1) I prefer the aesthetics of the Redhawk over the Raging bull. Period. You can't say that I don't, and I promise I'm not lying to you. I don't have to have ever even been in the same STATE as EITHER to make that decision.
Agreed however handling and first hand and upclose might change ones opinion?
2) I prefer not to have porting on a handgun, especially one as mild as a .44. That's based on significant experience with porting and without. I don't need to shoot that EXACT gun with ports to know that I don't like ports.
What is it about porting that you do not like would be helpful?
3) Based on the fit and finish of various examples of Ruger guns and Taurus guns -- including the EXACT guns we're discussing -- I'd choose a Ruger. I don't have to have fired a live round through either to make that choice.
What was the difference in the two finishes? Was one shiny vs dull? Machine marks? Personally the blued version of the Red Bull was one of the finest I have ever seen.
4) Based on the reputations of the two companies, I'd expect to have fewer problems with Ruger products, in general, and if I DID have problems, I'd rather (by far) deal with Ruger's service department. I don't have to have fired either gun, nor ever had any problems at all, personally, with either brand of gun to make that choice.
Agree
It doesn't mean that I hate Taurus, or the Raging Bull. It doesn't mean that the RB can't be a suitable firearm for a task. I simply, personally, wouldn't choose it given those two options. That's all there is to it.