Taurus Vs S&W

[Art in Colorado]

Is Taraus closing the quqlity gap with S&W? I have no basis for this since I have never owned a Taraus and only one of the MIM parts with internal lock Smiths' which was junk compared to all of the older Smiths' with hammer forged internals with no internal lock that I have owned. This is not to mention the new way S&W is rifeling their barrels. No real basis for this. Just a feeling I am geting.

[Der Gebirgsjager]

Taurus is one of those companies that seems to have their ups and downs in quality control. As recently as 3 to 5 years ago they were generating a lot of complaints, but lately not so much. Every company will turn out the occasional lemon that can maybe/maybe not be fixed, but during that time period they seemed to have lots of returns for mechanical problems and very poor customer service. Way back when, lots of years ago, they were their own independent company, but were then acquired by the same conglomerate that owned S&W. S&W had to send some of their employees down to Brazil to bring the products up to snuff, and when they got done the Taurus products were just about as good as the Smiths, maybe 95% as good. The two companies, under arrangement by the umbrella company, divided the world market between them with Smith getting the North American continent and Europe, and Taurus getting South America and pretty much the rest of the world. Eventually the parent company sold both of them off and once again they started going their separate ways. I used to sell many Taurus Mod. 66 and similar models in the 1980s, and through my business Taurus outsold Smith by about 5 to 1 because of the price difference and similar quality. Taurus is a very innovative company and seems to be constantly coming out with new models, especially in the area of semi-autos. I guess, to answer your question as best as I am able, if a Taurus caught my eye and I liked it's features I wouldn't hesitate to buy it.

[Petrol & Powder]

I'm going to weigh in on this:

My experience with Taurus is sometimes you get a good one and sometimes you get a bad one. Because some people end up with a decent example they will metaphorically stand on a street corner and proclaim that Taurus makes good guns. The reality is Taurus occasionally makes good guns.

I've had both good and bad Taurus guns, including revolvers. I've seen other people with good and bad Taurus products.
I will no longer play in the Taurus sandbox. It just isn't worth it to me.

The one Taurus model that they somehow had good quality control on was the Model 85. I've seen quite a few model 85's that gave good service for many years. Some of the old model 82's were also decent guns. But, I've seen some real JUNK with Taurus stamped on the side.

As for the current quality of S&W, I don't think MIM parts are the end of the world. S&W needed to keep production costs down and they could either innovate or go out of business. As for their new rifling process and two piece, tensioned barrels; again cost saving manufacturing techniques to stay competitive. When you get beyond the complaints of the traditionalist, I think S&W is still building a decent gun but it's not the same gun they made in the past.

The two piece, tensioned barrel actually has a lot going for it; just ask the owner of a Dan Wesson revolver!
The two piece barrel allows much faster assembly and that assembly can be done by less skilled workers. Plus the barrel shrouds will always be "clocked" properly. Features such as ejector rod shrouds, sight ribs, external barrel profiles, etc, can be selected by simply selecting the desired shroud at the factory.
The electrochemical machining process used to rifle the barrels produces a very good finish and it does it quickly. Again, different from the old days but not necessarily bad; just different.
MIM parts are faster to produce and require little or no fitting; which drastically reduces assembly time and cost.

The internal lock ? I can't defend that one. The Internal lock is just a stupid idea all around.

[Bigslug]

Taurus burned their bridges with me for horrid CS back in the 2003-2005 range with what seemed to be bait and switch tactics surrounding their "Lifetime Warranty". We had a couple customers with revolvers that should have been easily repairable, but got word back that they weren't, and Taurus would "allow" the customer to buy a replacement gun at a discount. Might have been inability to readily get parts from Brazil - I dunno. Considering that it was good money after bad, necessitated ANOTHER California waiting period for the new serial number and the accompanying fee, at that shop we quit carrying Taurus RIGHT quick!

I judge a manufacturer not only by their standard of quality, but in how they deal with the inevitable duds when they do occur. Taurus was horrible at that point in time, S&W has always been at the very worst fair, and Ruger has always been above and beyond.

But I fear that the revolver is becoming a machine that't too expensive to build well, which I find unsettling, seeing as they were able to manage it in 1836. [smilie=b:

[9.3X62AL]

What Bigslug said. Buying a sidearm is FOR adventure travel, and should not be adventure travel of its own. No interest in any of the Tauri, long or short.

[tazman]

I have also owned both good and bad Taurus guns. More good than bad. The mention of poor customer service is also true.
When they discontinue a firearm, they also stop making any parts for it. Very soon, any replacement parts dry up, hence the offer to let a person buy a different one. It isn't that the gun cannot be repaired. It just can't be repaired with factory parts any more.

[kungfustyle]

Even though Taurus has a lifetime warranty, try it out. Call them. If you don't get them on the line, wait a day and call them. If that doesn't work wait another day and repeat till you get them on the phone, may take a week or a month. Then on a whim, give S&W a call and be speaking to someone within 5 minutes. Just my past experiences. Taurus is cheaper all the way around, but it that what you want?

[bmortell]

I agree with that other guy, most of the smith hate is people trying to be traditionalist and nostalgic and looking for proof to say I told you so. to me who wasn't alive back then, they still have the best feeling mechanics of the standard shelf brands imo. there not using the same processes from 1950 and its not a smooth as your gun that's been smoothed over for decades, that should kinda be a given

[Guesser]

I've had good and bad service from Ruger, Taurus, Colt, S&W. I've had nothing but fantastic service from Charter Arms. I buy a gun based on what I want. If I don't get what I want in performance, service or any other factor I get rid of it. Worst service I ever had was Ruger, took 9 months to resolve and I had to get the Hawaii Secretary of State to intervene, still got the gun and that was in 1979. S&W failed to send me parts after billing my card, took a bunch of phone calls but I finally got them. Taurus has been good to me; mostly, but I've never owned a Taurus semi auto; just revolvers. I don't swear off any gun brand for exactly the reasons stated above..........fluctuations in price, quality, availability happen. The only way to know is to jump in, experience is worth more than depriving myself of a new adventure.

[Froogal]

I've never owned a Taurus. Never will.

[rintinglen]

I have a Smith and Wesson model 69 and a Taurus Tracker. The Taurus is the better of the two, but I have a Model 29 that is better than either. I do not buy Taurus semi-auto's, but would cheerfully buy a revolver of their manufacture--provided I could give it a careful once over before purchase.

[megasupermagnum]

As far as I'm concerned Taurus has equaled S&W quality. That's not saying much, as both are about bottom of the barrel for accurate revolvers right now. You might get a good one, or you might get a sewer pipe that goes bang.

[Drm50]

I have a few S&Ws and all are P&Rs. I'm not interested in newer S&Ws. They aren't the gun they use to be. I've owned several I took on trades and found them to be good guns and they shot well. Taurus, junk as far as I'm concerned. I won't take them on a trade because Im not going to give much for them. Makes quite a few guys mad when I allow $50 for their " just as good as S&W" gun. Funny thing is 9 out of ten is trying to trade against a S&W.

[osteodoc08]

I bought a Taurus 66 or 67 model. It was a 7 shot 357 mag SS 6”barrel model. It worked well for several hundred rounds and then started spitting lead everywhere. It went down the road. Haven’t bought another. I’ve bought several other smiths along the way.

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

My personal experience, I've owned two Semi-auto Taurus, both were PT24/7, one in 40 and one in 45.
Both guns were excellent functioning and accurate in my hand. Can't ask for much more than that.
I've never owned a Taurus revolver, but some friends of mine have. They seem to be 50-50, whether you get a good one, or a lemon. I imagine it could likely be the same with their Semi-autos...and I just got lucky? I heard of horror stories about Taurus lemon semi-autos.

As to current production S&W, I owned a newer 29, made in about 2013...I swapped it, after I had issues with it. I have looked at several new ones at Gun Stores ever since, and haven't seen one yet, that I'd want to buy.

With that said, I don't think it's realistic to compare them...but if it means anything, I'd buy a new Taurus revolver before a new S&W revolver.

[azrednek]

I’ve had four Taurus revolvers and only had one problem. Can’t recall the model number, it was a seven shot 357. Shooting the first cylinder the wood grip cracked. Resulted in a back and forth with Taurus as they sent me a rubber replacement. I eventually got a new set of wood grips.

I still have three Taurus revolvers and simply love my model 608, an eight shot 357. At the time of purchase it was apx $550 cheaper than a similar eight shot S&W. I also bought a new Taurus 22RF revolver as the comparable S&W RF revolvers were near double in cost.

I’m a S&W collector but I refuse to pay the exorbitant prices for new. If S&W quality gets its quality to what it once was I might be willing to pay the price. The quality of the older blued steel and early stainless S&W’s just can’t be beat.

[fatelk]

I passed up a used Taurus revolver at a show a couple months ago and kicked myself. I forget what model, an older .357 mag, 6” ribbed barrel. They wanted $250, but I had gone with the thought in mind that I was not going to buy a gun no matter what.

By the time I hemmed and hawed, looked up reviews on that model (very good), thought about it more and decided to buy it, it was gone.

[azrednek]

I passed up a used Taurus revolver at a show a couple months ago and kicked myself. I forget what model, an older .357 mag, 6” ribbed barrel. They wanted $250, but I had gone with the thought in mind that I was not going to buy a gun no matter what.

By the time I hemmed and hawed, looked up reviews on that model (very good), thought about it more and decided to buy it, it was gone.

Sounds like my gun show strategy as Murphy never fails to do me in. Change my mind and go back it’s sold. Buy one then without fail find another in better condition for less money.

Rarely do I go to a gun show and stick to my budget. Go with the intention of buying something in particular and nothing else. Seems like I leave with something else. Although my plan is to sell high and buy low seems to always reverse itself.

[MT Gianni]

I have owned a Taurus I thought I could not get any less expensive. It is long gone. 9mm auto that started to shoot loose after 1000 rds. My latest S&W is a used 69. No the lines on the shroud don't exactly match. It is an accurate, handy revolver with no factory fit or finish issues. Throats are uniform at .430", bbl is less than that with no tight spots. I cannot think of someone I would lend a firearm to that I would lend a Taurus.

[engineer401]

I have owned both brand new and older Smith revolvers. All have shot well with no issues. I shoot them better than other double action ones. I also purchased Taurus revolvers. They didn't shoot as well as the Smiths but for the price I cannot complain. They still shoot fairly well. I replaced the Taurus grips. I've owned and sold my double action Ruger revolvers. They simply didn't shoot well for me. They were not a good fit. I kept the single action Ruger's and like them a lot. Every revolver I owned functioned properly with no issues of any kind.

[9.3X62AL]

I just bought a new S&W Model 642-1 revolver. It appears to be PERFECT. Hoping to give it a test drive within the next few days.

[mtnbkr]

There are too many good used S&Ws and Rugers to consider a Taurus at any price other than free.

Chris

[Longcarbine]

I have owned several Taurus Raging Bulls in .44mag and a couple of their Tracker models in .357mag, all functioned flawlessly and were quite accurate. However, I have also owned several of their rimfire revolvers in .22lr and .17hmr and every one of them turned out to be garbage. To say that Taurus customer service is bad would be a huge understatement.

[Geezer in NH]

As a former gunshop partner and manager I stopped buying Taurus to sell do to the problems they had and could not/would not fix.

S&W in their worst years were still 100% above Taurus. You get what you pay for.

[azrednek]

One thing to keep in mind buying Taurus. Taurus likes to hype the lifetime warranty but it’s very expensive shipping to their Florida location. I discovered it was cheaper to have my FFL’s $20.00 fee plus USPS Priority postage than to pay FedEx’s ridiculous overnight rate. Unless things have changed Fedex will only ship a handgun from a non dealer by overnight. Going through FFL it can be returned directly to you.

Friend shipped his revolver to Florida from Arizona and Fedex charged him over $50.00. Can’t recall what the part was he needed but Taurus would not sell it directly to him. He had to have it repaired by one of Taurus’ approved gunsmiths or send it to Taurus.

I had a real nightmare dealing with Taurus service. The rear sight on an older 9MM auto cracked. Sights are not covered by their warranty. My first attempt their computers were down and they couldn’t process bank card payment. Rep on phone said he would try it later and if there was a problem he’d call me back. I followed up about three weeks later and was told it wasn’t shipped because my card failed. When I mentioned I was told I’d get a return call. The rep said “oh we don’t do that”.

Long story short Taurus sent the wrong part three times. The third attempt I sent photos and the sight which was in two pieces after I removed it. Taurus sent me four sights, none which would work. Being sincerely pissed off I called demanding a manager, not somebody claiming to be a manager. Got a woman who obviously had little gun knowledge but understood the problem. Told me she would look into it and call me back which she did apx 30 minutes later. She told me Taurus no longer manufacturers the same rear sight and the clerk sent me variety hoping something might fit. She said the part I needed was very close to a drift adjustable 1911 rear sight and asked me to try it. The only difference was the 1911 sight was slightly longer. About five minutes with a file, black oxided the shiny ends and I was finally in business. Took five try’s and about two months of back and forth.

About 4-5 months ago I was spammed by Taurus selling grips. Long story short my dog got ahold of my 38 and chewed the wood grips. I ordered a new set of grips and sure enough they sent the wrong ones. The grips fit so I kept them.

Friend had a similar problem ordering spare mags for his 45ACP, 24/7 OSS model. There was a very slight difference in the OSS mags from the standard 24/7. Sure enough Taurus sent the wrong mags. Following my advice he sent photos and eventually got the correct mags. He lucked out as his card was debited for the lower cost 9MM, 24/7 standard mags.

In summary, Taurus’ service SUX!!

[fatelk]

I've heard so many stories over the years about problems with Taurus guns that I am leery of them. I also understand that there's no way they could stay in business if everything they sold was junk. So, you take your chances, and it appears that in general some products are better than others. That's why I kicked myself for not buying a used .357 at a show. I looked up reviews on that model online, and found it was an older gun with generally very good reviews, figured it was worth a chance, but it was already sold.

I can understand if you've been burned with a bad one never wanting to take another chance on one. Then again, for many average gun buyers a box of ammo will last decades, and their accuracy expectations are very low, so they may never even notice flaws.

It's kind of like Heritage Rough Rider revolvers. A lot of people love them, but I'll never buy another. A brand new gun that's clearly defective from the start, and they want $50 to even look at it? No thanks. Doesn't mean they're all junk. Most of them might be great guns, but a bad one spoils it for me. Oh yeah, Heritage is owned by Taurus.

I still would have bought that old Taurus .357 though...

[FergusonTO35]

The one and only time I had to use Taurus warranty was for a Rossi 461 with a yawning barrel to cylinder gap. I fully expected them to send it back with a note that said it was within specs and no problem found. To my surprise, they replaced both barrel and cylinder and now that little wheelgun has a tight .003 gap and will easily keep up with my S&W and Ruger .38's. Of course, that is only one experience and the Rossi revolvers made their exit awhile ago.

[Lefty Red]

I’ve sent more pistols back to Ruger and Colt and S&W and Sig than I ever have to Taurus.

My only problem with a Taurus is magazine availability. Seems that they do use Mec Gar mags, but doesn’t allow MC to sell all models under their own brand. And that is frustrating. As a self admitted magazine *****, I get twitchy if I don’t have a Source of magazines.

Lefty

[Markopolo]

i cant speak to Taurus Slide guns, but my main carry model 44 is just the perfect bear gun. ported so it makes lots of noise, easier to stay on target with heavy loads, diddnt cost me an arm or leg 20 years ago, works flawlessly, eats the lee 310's for lunch and doesnt punish my wrist from a box of shells. sold my shiny model 29 after it started collecting dust years ago. Now my son carrys the same thing in 357... whats not to like.

249885

yes I have read the horror stories and such just like everybody, but I bought mine new in the box over 20 years ago, and actually carry mine pretty religiously 7 months out of the year through the muck, salt, brush, under the damp seat, with waders fishing and hunting, mushroom picking, and clam digging. i simply love my Model 44. Its been Alaskan Sturdy for over 20 years and counting. my son's new 357 looks to be cut from the same cloth.

no, it not a shiny Mdl 29, but its a great tool, one that you will use and will serve you and I dont mind getting mine dirty.

hope this helps...

marko

[FergusonTO35]

Seems like you have the best results with Taurus models that have been around forever, mostly wheelguns.

[gnostic]

If you're into shooting double action, S&W is the only game in town because of the non stacking trigger and the quick reset. And, as someone here pointed out. With so many used older S&W's out there, why buy a Taurus?

S&W is the standard that revolvers are compared too and the new ones that I've shot, were good as it gets...

[Tenbender]

I have a Taurus 85 feather weight stainless and a mod.60 S&W. The looks are very simular and they shoot equal. The Taurus , for some reason, will misfire from time to time. I carry the Taurus because it in lighter and cheaper. If I loose it I'm not out as much. It is a tossup . Just about money on this one.
I have had 2 Taurus Mod 92 carbines. 45 Colt and 357 Mag. Both great well made rifles.

[Outpost75]

I don't own any S&Ws made after 1989, or any Colts made after 1972.

I don't care for them. I regularly shoot both Colts and S&Ws that are over 100 years old and that are still accurate and reliable. I also have no trouble getting them worked on professionally, although the number of factory-trained gunsmiths who still do Colts is a shrinking number. Sandy Garrett at NoVA Gun Works does mine.

I don't know of a single practicing professional gunsmith who will even work on a Taurus.

That speaks volumes. The best advice I ever got from Sandy was that "an old gun that works is worth more than a new gun that doesn't."

To the fellow who claims that a Taurus is all he can afford, I ask, "Do you also drive a Yugo?"

[9.3X62AL]

That little 642-1 in 38 Special +P was a delight to shoot on Friday (10/18). No hitches in its git-along whatsoever, 50 boringly reliable rounds downrange at 15 and 25 yards. The tiny OEM pocket grip set did me few favors, but I kept the 6" dinger-plate singing a merry tune at both distances. 90% hit rate @ 15 yards, 75% at 25. Too much fun. If the Pachmayr Compacs will pocket-carry unobtrusively, I will be a happy camper. They are due here on 10/24.

I doubled-down on new S&Ws last week, and snagged a Performance Center stainless Model 625. I got to hold hands with it on Saturday (10/19) at the toy store where it remains pending release on parole on or about 11/5. One gun every 30 days, don'cha know? I feel safer already.

I understand Outpost 75's preference for pre-89 S&Ws and pre-72 Colts. The preponderance of my examples in both makes fit that description as well. And YES, there are a few older S&W revolvers of the "small hammerless 38" and "large 45 ACP/AR revolver" type out there, scarce--expensive--and largely unavailable to me in California. The 642 and the 625 can be bought here pretty easily. Both are VERY well-made as best I can tell (that trigger on the 625 is EXQUISITE in both modes). Are they as nicely made and finished as an early 1960s S&W or Colt? Possibly not, but they are a dern sight nicer than ANY Tauri and I won't have to finish building/finishing them like a few Rugers that I own. I made myself happy by purchasing them and via enjoyment of the little 38 afield. That's what matters to me.

[bluelund79]

Not to ruffle any feathers, but this isn’t even a comparison. I’ve had a “good” Taurus 607, but my 627 blows it out of the water. From fit and finish to the warranty if ever needed. Too many people worry about the lock. I’ve not had an issue with them. If you don’t like it, there are delete kits. The trigger is much better, and there is a better aftermarket support for the Smith. If I want a cheaper than Smith revolver, that is what a Ruger is for. My GP100 in 10mm was purchased as an alternative to the Smith, before the redux of the 610 came out. I’ll keep the GP100 since I already own it at a fraction of the 610, thanks to internet shopping

[Petrol & Powder]

Al, thanks for the update on the 642.

I am also a fan of the older S&W revolvers and I have no problem laying my money down for a good example. (it would be better if I had more of a problem laying my money down - but that's another story).

I formerly played in the Taurus sandbox. I left that sandbox many years ago and I will not return. I hear people speak of good Taurus handguns and I've owned a few good Taurus pistols and revolvers myself. However, I've encountered enough bad Taurus handguns (some mine and some owned by others) that I am done with Taurus. It's just not worth it !

I had long separated from Taurus when a friend showed up with a Taurus pistol. It was a brand new pistol chambered in 9mm. It was junk when it was new and it remained junk after several sessions at the range. It wouldn't reliability function with a variety of ammo, including factory loaded 115gr FMJ. It wouldn't hold less than a 12" group before I tightened up the rear sight (loose right out of the box) and it only got slightly better after the sight was fixed. Any thoughts I had concerning the possibility that Taurus had got their act together were eliminated. He traded that gun for an inexpensive Ruger and the replacement was a fine gun.

[JoeJames]

There are too many good used S&Ws and Rugers to consider a Taurus at any price other than free.
ChrisI expect that unless one is a person who always hangs on to whatever revolver they ever get; if you try to trade a Taurus, you will get poor mouthed to death on the trade. I never owned a Taurus, but about 40 years ago I owned a Dan Wesson, and just barely got out of trying to trade it off alive. That broke me from ever getting into the secondary level of gun buying or trading - Dan Wesson, Taurus, etc. On the other hand, I don't think I will ever buy or trade for a Smith with the Hillary Hole.

[Markopolo]

whats a "Hillary Hole"??? something you buy off the Dark Web???
I guess I need to get out more?

[gnostic]

whats a "Hillary Hole"??? something you buy off the Dark Web???
I guess I need to get out more?

That's the lock, it's easy to turn your nose up at the new S&W's if you've got a dozen of the earlier guns. The S&W new or otherwise is still always a good choice. For single action shooting, the Rugers are as good as any...

[fatelk]

I’ve never really understood the whole buy/sell/trade thing. It’s a game I don’t like to play. I tend to think about it and research for a while before buying what I want, then just keep it forever (unless it’s something I just end up hating). I don’t remember when I last sold a gun, and don’t think I’ve ever traded one. I have given away a couple though.

[stubshaft]

I've never owned a Taurus. Never will.

I think that S&W quality has deteriorated to the point where Taurus is becoming viable. I still won't buy a Taurus.

[Outpost75]

I think that S&W quality has deteriorated to the point where Taurus is becoming viable. I still won't buy a Taurus.

I would buy neither a current S&W nor a Taurus, and will restate the wisdom imparted to me by Sandy Garrett of NoVA Gun works that:

"an old gun that works is worth more than a new one that doesn't."

[FergusonTO35]

I think Taurus could right the ship if they would just quit coming out with new models at too good to be true prices, and just focus on proven products that have been around forever and sell well. They also need to realize that there are some categories of guns that they will never be competitive in. Full size poly autoloaders for one thing. How many different ones have they introduced in the past 20 years? The only one that anybody has ever given a hoot about is the subcompact Millenium Pro. All others (24/7, 809, whatever they are pushing nowadays) are dead in the water and no one will ever care about them.

[PapaG]

Many years of experience with both, both as a customer and dealer. I have sent ten times as many Tauri back for serious quality problems as Smiths. Problem is, Taurus didn't fix sixty percent of the guns I sent in. They also lie about what they agree to do. Judge is ill-designed, poorly supported and a joke. Throats average .010" over bore size and the guns lead horribly. Send one back with specific instructions (which they agreed to follow per phone) and you will get the gun back with the note "adjusted timing".
One personal gun has been great, a .17 Tracker. Small frame .22s are notoriously poorly timed and heavy in the trigger. Large frames, pretty fair. Autos, overall good. Several PT1911s had feed problems.
I kept my .17. I am keeping all my Smiths. Only one I have trouble is a 63 that galls and needs polished up after 18 or so rounds. (Third one like that).

[tazman]

The only Taurus handguns I have kept are a couple of PT92 9mm pistols.
Taurus didn't develop these on their own. They bought the factory, machinery, and hired the personnel from Beretta. Many of the Beretta parts will interchange.
Mine are thoroughly reliable.
The only thing I changed on them is the barrel. I swapped in Beretta barrels and the groups got much better with cast.
Mine have been trouble free for thousands of rounds.

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

One of the recently made S&W revolvers I have owned, 625 JM, shown below.
I wasn't happy with the loose grips, as well as getting moon clips of ammo to drop in.
There are a couple other things I dislike as well.
BUT...I took it to the range yesterday, and I had a good shooting session, and now I think I like it...shooting it without Moons.

250465

[WRideout]

The only Taurus handguns I have kept are a couple of PT92 9mm pistols.
Taurus didn't develop these on their own. They bought the factory, machinery, and hired the personnel from Beretta. Many of the Beretta parts will interchange.
Mine are thoroughly reliable.
The only thing I changed on them is the barrel. I swapped in Beretta barrels and the groups got much better with cast.
Mine have been trouble free for thousands of rounds.

I once spent an afternoon at the range with a Knox County TN sheriff's deputy who let me shoot his Taurus 92. It seemed about equal to the issue Berettas I had in the Army National Guard. Still miss the Gummint 1911's though.
Wayne

[Lefty Red]

I think Taurus could right the ship if they would just quit coming out with new models at too good to be true prices, and just focus on proven products that have been around forever and sell well. They also need to realize that there are some categories of guns that they will never be competitive in. Full size poly autoloaders for one thing. How many different ones have they introduced in the past 20 years? The only one that anybody has ever given a hoot about is the subcompact Millenium Pro. All others (24/7, 809, whatever they are pushing nowadays) are dead in the water and no one will ever care about them.


Think they may have listened Ferguson!

When the new management took over a few years back, their main objectives were to make good on the lawsuit surrounding the 24/7 series, scrapping all models that had a high rate of return and focus on the reminding models. They parred it down to the G2 series (old pt111), the TH9 (formerly the PT809) and the 738. Plus wheelguns and the wonderful PT99.

Everyone can live in the pass and complain about Taurus, but they are in the game to win. They are putting out slimmer and more refined pistols than ever before. Now if they would just open up sales of their magazines!

Lefty

[tazman]

I once spent an afternoon at the range with a Knox County TN sheriff's deputy who let me shoot his Taurus 92. It seemed about equal to the issue Berettas I had in the Army National Guard. Still miss the Gummint 1911's though.
Wayne

I like the 1911 pistols better as well. I had the PT92 pistols first, though and want to keep them.
One of the reasons is the safeties on the PT92 works in the same manner as the 1911 does where the Beretta 92FS works backwards.
I want to be able to run my pistols without having to think about which gun I happen to be using when a bad situation comes.

[FergusonTO35]

Think they may have listened Ferguson!

When the new management took over a few years back, their main objectives were to make good on the lawsuit surrounding the 24/7 series, scrapping all models that had a high rate of return and focus on the reminding models. They parred it down to the G2 series (old pt111), the TH9 (formerly the PT809) and the 738. Plus wheelguns and the wonderful PT99.

Everyone can live in the pass and complain about Taurus, but they are in the game to win. They are putting out slimmer and more refined pistols than ever before. Now if they would just open up sales of their magazines!

Lefty

The Taurus small frame revolvers sell really well around here, even in shops that refuse to carry other Taurus products.

[redhawk0]

I have a Taurus 85 and I like mine. It's shot hundreds of 38+P rounds without a hiccup. My only complaint has been the weight. Its the 2" model but its all steel....so its just a touch on the heavy side for my liking. Otherwise...its been a great carry gun.

redhawk

[Petrol & Powder]

I have a Taurus 85 and I like mine. It's shot hundreds of 38+P rounds without a hiccup. My only complaint has been the weight. Its the 2" model but its all steel....so its just a touch on the heavy side for my liking. Otherwise...its been a great carry gun.

redhawk

The model 85 is probably the one gun Taurus got right. Some of the old model 82's were also good.
I've seen a lot of high mileage Taurus model 85's that just keep working year after year.

[FergusonTO35]

The 856 seems to be getting more popular, my local shop has sold quite a few of them with very few complaints. I imagine an 856 will find it's way into my battery at some point, since Ruger and S&W have zilch interest in making a carry size .38 with six rounds.

[Lefty Red]

The 856 is a feather in Taurus’ hat! I have one of the older ones and it’s beat and scratched from pocket carry and glovebox use. Still throws DEWCs in the ten ring at 15 yards!

You won’t regret getting one! I’m about to put a new one in layaway soon.

Lefty