Used Smith vs New Taurus

[proco]

Smith all the way. Just like what 4v50 Gary said.

- Pat

 

[Litlman]

S&W!!!

 

[D_Burchfield]

Go for the gusto! S&W N-Frame. Or any Smith over the Taurus.

 

[hansolo]

S&W

My first centerfire is/was a 1956 blued(natch)M/P .38 Special....carried a lot(Cop's service gun, LAPD)shot a little. The forcing cone looks NIB! Blueing is also, LNIB(O.K., maybe 98%). I bought some one-off beautiful wood smooth grips...I tried a friend's small .38 +P Taurus(85?)..DA seemed like 50 Lbs. -- I wouldn't mind having one for desert hikes....feral dogs & meth lab losers -- S&W=Older Cadillac, Harley Davidson........... Taurus=Kia

 

[chaim]

Taurus=Kia

Now those are fighting words!

Seriously, using my friend Hansolo's comparison:
If older S&W=Cadillac, then new S&W=Chevy and new Taurus=Pontiac (virtually indistinguishable in quality but both well below Caddy). Or since I'm more of a Ford guy than GM guy: older S&W=Lincoln, newer S&W=Mercury, Taurus=Ford.



I like both. I love older S&Ws, I like newer S&Ws and I like Taurus. For me the answer really depends upon what I am looking for. I'd take an older S&W K-frame over a medium framed Taurus any day (nothing wrong with the medium framed Taurus, just preferance). An exception, I love the Taurus Tracker series. For small framed snubs I'd prefer the Taurus. The expection being the aluminum J-frames (I really want a 642 or 442).

Taurus today makes quite good revolvers, S&Ws of old were incredible. Today's S&W revolvers are quite good too, but I'm not sure that they are that much better than current Taurus revolvers anymore.