What's wrong with a Taurus

[BLB68]

I think the QC problems with Taurus (and they do seem to have their fair share, including a revolver I owned) vary according to the product line or model of gun.

It's probably best to ask if a specific Taurus has a good reputation than to look at the company as a whole. They have a LOT of models, and some seem to have a better reputation than others. Perhaps some are produced at different facilities, or with methods of production that are better suited to turning out a consistent product at their price points. Beats me, but it's really hard to find a lot of owners with problems on some models, and not so hard with others.

 

[Russ Jackson]

You again Russ? As to your question, uh...not quite! Try HD sponsored Coolbeth, Hines & Krawiek. Anything else? Now, you show me yours. Or explain why?

All I am saying is that there is a lot of complaints about Harley as well....Russ

http://www.google.com/search?aq=f&s...f0b188327e19041&biw=1280&bih=673&pf=p&pdl=500

 

[fatcat4620]

BigN its not taurus bashing when you post once with your bad experience. It becomes bashing when that same person then has to respond to every positive post with negative comments and restate how bad taurus is. Then they go all gun snob on you and tell you how their smith or ruger is better.

 

[jad0110]

BigN its not taurus bashing when you post once with your bad experience. It becomes bashing when that same person then has to respond to every positive post with negative comments and restate how bad taurus is. Then they go all gun snob on you and tell you how their smith or ruger is better.

That's how I look at it as well. It'd be no different than someone with a Glock that breaks, claiming all Glocks are crap. I knew a guy that bought a new Toyota pickup about 15 years ago and the engine ate it's main bearings after only 20,000 miles, so he naturally concluded all Toyota trucks must be crap .

As for Smith or Ruger being better, it depends. I don't buy new anything these days, so I'm only considering used models. New Tauris and new S&Ws may well be on roughly equivalent ground these days, but comparing a pre-war hand fitted S&W to a Taurus (or a NIB S&W) is a little like comparing a Rolex to a Timex.

I think the QC problems with Taurus (and they do seem to have their fair share, including a revolver I owned) vary according to the product line or model of gun.

It's probably best to ask if a specific Taurus has a good reputation than to look at the company as a whole. They have a LOT of models, and some seem to have a better reputation than others. Perhaps some are produced at different facilities, or with methods of production that are better suited to turning out a consistent product at their price points. Beats me, but it's really hard to find a lot of owners with problems on some models, and not so hard with others.

Though I have no hard evidence to support it, my instincts and observations lead me to believe this is highly likely.

You rarely hear any complaints about their steel small and medium frame revolvers, especially their medium frame .38s and .357s (the Model 66 and 669 in particular). If I was to name a single Taurus that stands up as their best model, I'd have to select the medium frame .357 Model 66. I'd love to own one, but apparently the market agrees with me because they are often priced almost as much as a S&W 66.

At the opposite end of the spectrum, two of their .22s, the DA model 94 and the semi auto PT-22, seem to have a lot of issues. Some are good, don't get me wrong. But these two specific models seem to make up the lion's share of Taurus complaints.

 

[Shipwreck]

It becomes bashing when that same person then has to respond to every positive post with negative comments and restate how bad taurus is.

How about the reverse. People here could post 1000 negative stories, and some of the naysayers would still be complaining that everyone is bashing. It runs both ways. Some are in denial, and complain that people are lying, or they want documentation, or video of the failure, etc. That's ridiculous.

In fact, after 4 pages, this whole thread is ridiculous. I disagree with the locking of threads here - that they should have been left open. But this one, I think it should be locked. Nothing new is being discussed any longer...

 

[Pyzik]

Well, I posted in the other Taurus thread and I guess I will echo my statements here.

I have a 24/7 Pro in 9mm that is my main carry peice (80% of the time). I have never had a single issue, not one. I have about 1000 rounds through it. I have had it for three years. Fit and finish is great. It shows a bit of holster wear, but that is to be expected after three years of duty.

It is a little like the fat girlfriend that you don't want to tell your friends about. She has a great personality, is fun and doesn't get on your rear end about things, but she is still the fatty and your friends are gonna make fun of you.

 

[Ghost Tracker]

Then they go all gun snob on you and tell you how their smith or ruger is better.

How can you call a Ruger owner/shooter a "Gun Snob"? Ruger is a company born & bred on "value priced" firearms. Bill Ruger's design & manufacturing innovation let him go from a tiny upstart to effectively taking-on the existing gun-maker establishment. Folks who won't shoot anything but Perrazzi shotguns or Rohrbaugh handguns MIGHT be considered a gun snob...maybe. But guys who suggest Ruger, Glock, Springfield, Stag, Remington, etc. (as high-value alternatives) are NOT Gun Snobs. They've simply been satisfied (or lucky) with the performance, reliability and/or customer service of their selections. No name calling necessary or we'll start calling all you Taurus fans...Gun Saps.

 

[mdThanatos]

Well I have never bashed Taurus but I have had a bad experience with their product, a Rossi revolver. I bought it in February of this year and had nothing but problems with it. The firing pin kept breaking, it locked up and this was after 4 trips back for repair. Their service I don't have a complaint about, make a call get a pickup scheduled, fedex came and sent it off. I would get the gun back within 2 weeks, then I would get the letter saying they received the gun and how long it would take. But the product itself would not work for me.

 

[Guillermo]

Does Taurus have quality issues?

yes, many people have experienced problems


Do we have actually data on the subject or is it all here-say?

All empirical and hear-say as no company is going to release such information


Is this issue prevalent with some models more than others?

Yes, snub variants seem to have very few issues


Do some people put down on Taurus because of a sense of rivalry or snobbery?

Yes, people are brand loyal, insecure about their own choices, and/or just like to be contrary. Others are bitter over bad experiences.


Does S&W have similar issues with their revolvers?

Yes, Smith has had enormous quality issues with their revolvers.


Why does Smith seem to have happier customers despite problems and higher retail price?

Consistently fast customer service.


Would Taurus be in the same boat as S&W if their customer service were faster?

Unknown but they would be in a better situation, for sure. How a company handles a problem is of paramount performance.


Is Ruger experiencing similar amount of quality issues with their revolvers?

No


Sounds like, if one were looking at a new revolver, Ruger would be the first place to look.

 

[amd6547]

Myself, I will not "bash" Taurus in general. But I will keep posting on the horrid performance I got from My PT22, in hopes that if others are considering buying one, they do a google and find one of my threads. If Taurus, which has my new, one range trip pistol right now, makes it right...makes it so it fires when the trigger is pulled, so it feeds, so it sends bullets downrange tip first, I will post that as well.
For less than I paid for the PT22, I could have bought a Phoenix HP22...I owned one a few years ago, and it was absolutely faultless in performance...zero jams, excellent accuracy.
As far as looking something over before buying it, I am 54...I have been shooting since I was five, and have owned many pistols and revolvers. I looked at the PT22 I bought very closely. There was absolutely nothing to indicate that it would launch bullets sideways, that it would need the trigger pulled several times to get a cartridge to fire. Totally unaceptable performance.
Regarding S&W, yes, they goofed with the internal lock. In that case, at least, it is a simple matter to remove the mechanism and have a fine revolver. Many S&W complaints relate to that one "feature", and to the use of MIM parts. My own S&W experience is with several pre-lock, pre-MIM revolvers, and they have been faultless. There isn't a Taurus made which could wax their grips.
Several times in this thread, the comparison of Taurus models to the Ruger Redhawk has been made...what a joke! The Redhawk is one of the finest large frame revolvers ever made. I would not trade a Redhawk for five Taurus revolvers, unless I planned to sell them to Taurus lovers at a profit and buy another Redhawk.

 

[Ghost Tracker]

Everyone (EVERY ONE) wants to believe their own opinions (including buying decisions) are prudent & wise. No exceptions, regardless of the topic or product. I've re-read some of my posts & would like to apologize, especially to Russ Jackson. I've repeatedly "gone past preachin' and got plum to meddlin'!". It's not my purview to try & change ANYONE'S MIND because of my own experiences. It's just an opinion. If you've enjoyed your Taurus experience then I'm a ignorant, braying @ss. If you've had a bad Taurus adventure, then I'm another brother who (like you) got wiser. If you've never owned a Taurus, you STILL get a vote...'cause this is The High Road! Merry Christmas & Peace on Earth to Men of Goodwill.

 

[punkndisorderly]

I own one Taurus, a 970good in 22lr. It's accurate and reliable. It has the absolute worst double action pull I've felt. Horribly inconstant trigger pull from one chamber to the next. Length of pull and weght of pull ranges from gritty and heavy to "is this thing ever going to go off?" Cartridges become difficult to eject after 5 or 6 cylinders. Damn near impossible after 10 or 12.

Had the Ruger SP101 in. 22lr been out, would have bought that. Will probably trade up to it soon.

 

[zxcvbob]

It has the absolute worst double action pull I've felt.

Try a Nagant revolver M1895 sometime.

 

[Guillermo]

Everyone (EVERY ONE) wants to believe their own opinions are prudent & wise

this is true.

I WANT to believe that but this reality thing keeps me in check.

Guns I should not have bought.

Taurus Titanium Tracker 357
Hurt more than writing a check to the IRS.

S&W 686
Factory defect. Should have bought used.

Noble 12 gauge
can't get parts

Colt Detective Special
great gun but I prefer the snub diamondbacks so never carry it

NAA Guardian .380
Worked good but 9mm heavy

Remington model 11
got it cheap but the stock had been cut down, costing 50% of the value of the gun

J-frame snub
had hammer bobbed. Lousy trade

The list goes on and on

and the guns I let go...

Dear Lord...I don't want to think about that list :banghead:

 

[fatcat4620]

Went to the range today with my Taurus 605. Thought I was going to have to eat some crow. The cylinder would close but when you tried to pull the trigger it felt locked up. I opened it and the cartridges looked fine so I closed it and it still felt locked up. Well turns out that a piece of brass shaving was wrapped about the base of a round in front of the rim. Pulled it off, reloaded and the gun shot perfect. Moral of the story is that UMC .38 special +p 125 grain cartridges are all junk and you should never buy them. Instead you should save up and buy the more expensive Federal ammunition.

Oh and the Taurus ran like champ

 

[jad0110]

I own one Taurus, a 970good in 22lr. It's accurate and reliable. It has the absolute worst double action pull I've felt. Horribly inconstant trigger pull from one chamber to the next. Length of pull and weght of pull ranges from gritty and heavy to "is this thing ever going to go off?" Cartridges become difficult to eject after 5 or 6 cylinders. Damn near impossible after 10 or 12.

Sounds like the cylinder ratchet is roughly machined, or even out of spec in some places.

Everyone (EVERY ONE) wants to believe their own opinions (including buying decisions) are prudent & wise. No exceptions, regardless of the topic or product. I've re-read some of my posts & would like to apologize, especially to Russ Jackson. I've repeatedly "gone past preachin' and got plum to meddlin'!". It's not my purview to try & change ANYONE'S MIND because of my own experiences. It's just an opinion. If you've enjoyed your Taurus experience then I'm a ignorant, braying @ss. If you've had a bad Taurus adventure, then I'm another brother who (like you) got wiser. If you've never owned a Taurus, you STILL get a vote...'cause this is The High Road! Merry Christmas & Peace on Earth to Men of Goodwill.

Amen, and pass the ammunition!


Great post Ghost, and what you say of course applies to more than just guns. Everyone, Merry Christmas, stay safe and watch your six. People really tend to do stupid crap this time of year.

 

[fatcat4620]

One thing we can all agree on is merry christmas and pass the ammunition!

 

[BP44]

merry christmas to all and and to all, DONT BUY A TAURUS

Just kidding buy one iffin it works for ya!!!!!!!!!!

 

[amd6547]

Funny how Masterblaster changed my wording when he quoted me. I said in my post that "I will not bash taurus in general"...
He decided to edit out the "not". To me this is LOW ROAD with a capital L.

 

[amd6547]

Here is my PT22...photographed prior to sending it to Taurus under warranty due to it's inability to function properly.
It is shown next to the Beretta 21a (this one in 25acp) which inspired it. Funny that Taurus felt the need to put a plastic "buffer" in the front of the slide in their version. I say "buffer" because they chose a hard plastic material which is known to shatter. One post I found said it took six months to get a replacement when his "buffer" broke. I am guessing the Taurus has lower quality metalurgy requiring this "buffer" where the Beretta has never needed one.
This PT22 is a fine looking little pistol. Shame it is worthless.

 

[22lr]

I do greatly enjoy how people rag on Ruger for "copying" everyone else, yet folks don't seem to complain about Taurus........ S&W is a curse word to this day for many who don't like the lock, yet I don't think ive ever heard complaints about Taurus putting locks in there guns. Just kinda interesting to me how Taurus somehow gets a break in all this......

 

[LawScholar]

Funny how Masterblaster changed my wording when he quoted me. I said in my post that "I will not bash taurus in general"...
He decided to edit out the "not". To me this is LOW ROAD with a capital L.

Haha I noticed that too

 

[dirtengineer]

I do greatly enjoy how people rag on Ruger for "copying" everyone else, yet folks don't seem to complain about Taurus........ S&W is a curse word to this day for many who don't like the lock, yet I don't think ive ever heard complaints about Taurus putting locks in there guns. Just kinda interesting to me how Taurus somehow gets a break in all this......

Taurus got its start by purchasing a Beretta plant in Brasil with the tooling. I don't think it is considered a copy when you buy the rights.

 

[jad0110]

S&W is a curse word to this day for many who don't like the lock, yet I don't think ive ever heard complaints about Taurus putting locks in there guns.

In fairness to Taurus, their lock design is superior to S&W's.

 

[Guillermo]

S&W is a curse word to this day for many who don't like the lock, yet I don't think ive ever heard complaints about Taurus putting locks in there guns

the Taurus lock works perpendicular to the recoil of the gun.

only a retard would design a lock that works on the same axis as the recoil of the gun.

Only a idiot that would make pond scum look brilliant would design a lock that not only works on the same axis, but OPPOSITE the recoil of the gun.

It is the most pathetic design since the nuclear rifle that would not shoot beyond its own blast zone.

If a company is willing to do something that moronic, what other "brilliance" do they have in store?