Bashing Taurus

While bashing Taurus revolvers is common, I find their products, while not as refined as S&W's, to be perfectly viable. I also appreciated the fact that they paid the 44 Spl. some attention, as these Model 441s and 431 attest.

Agree. For years I used a 441 Taurus. Shot very well. Wanting to "upgrade" I sold it and purchased a 21-4. The S&W arrived with several problems and had to make the trip to Springfield for overhaul. To date, I have never been able to get it to shoot as well as that old Taurus.
Let the hate begin!

50 shots D.A. @ 10 yds.

Krehmkej, your target makes me hurt.

Agree about the guns.

That is kinda like Raven MP25's .25 auto. Everyone that I have ever talked to about the say they are junk. I have owned a couple of the over the past 10 years or so and had 0 problems with either one of them. I believe it's like my dad said when i was a little boy, and asked him what was wrong with Studebakers and Hudsons, because I had heard folks call them junk. He told me that they are as good as any other car but they required a little more maintenance than some of the more expensive models. He also said that technology was far to advanced to turn out a car that couldn't measure up with proper care.
Kinda like guns I say. Your gonna get a lemon now and then no matter what it is your buying, gun, car, computer or TV.
Just my uneducated and uniformed opinion.
Peace,
gordon

I bought this one that used to be a guy's nightstand piece. Not a problem yet. I also have to say it wears a grip that is the first magna style that fits my hand. It's just a little ugly but in a utilitarian way. It kind of mimics an old Model 10 five screw.



This one is my 445 which has also never given me a problem:



I'm also curious why the .44 special is always ignored by both the buying public and the manufacturers.

And this 605 has been my bathroom gun for years. I used to keep Golden Sabers in it but I got tired of the hand torture during practice. Now it is loaded with some of my own hand loads.



And while so far this has been all about revolvers I want to add this PT92 that has eaten about as much WWB as my Glock 17. It's an older model lacking the decock lever but the safety is very positive and feels so much better than the slide mounted level that Beretta went to years ago. This is also the one and only blued carbon steel firearm that has never tried to rust on me. But much like S&W, this older model exhibits much better polish and bluing than current production.



I'm not going to say they are perfect since I have seen some with problems, but then I have seen S&W's, Colts, and Rugers with problems. I've seen Beretta's with cracked frames and seen Sigs jam for no apparent reason. So I just think everyone puts out a turkey. For the price, Taurus used to be a good buy to me. Now I'm trying to buy American and won't buy them any more. But what I do have works just fine. Her Taurus 94 .22 had a ammo sensitivity issue but a local gun smith seems to have fixed that. He fixed it for free and did something to charge it to Taurus under their warranty. So I'm plenty happy with them.

Per krehmkej, "Let the hate begin!"

This was posted on the THR Forum. Is it hate?

QUOTE
Heffron Firearm Classics

Charles City, Iowa 50616

(641)-330-9560

NEWS and ANNOUNCEMENTS

3/6/2011: TAURUS and THE STUFF I HATE TO DO: So; what do I hate doing? Well, weeding the garden is no fun. Probably my least favorite is moving snow. Last spring I purchased a skid loader for moving snow. I played with it all summer like a big Tonka Toy. It worked great. When we got our first snow in November, I drove the skid loader about 50 feet and it broke. I just got it back on Friday. Thank goodness for a nice neighbor North of me. But, the thing I really, really hate doing? Announcing a new service and then immediately pulling it. It makes me feel.......... bad!
THE STORY BEHIND IT? Well, Taurus. Through the years, I have received many, many requests from Taurus revolver owners wanting to know If I could tune their firearms. Based on some experience I had with them I always said "no". Then........ I researched this. I worked with a number of revolvers. Some we purchased, some were loaners. We came up with a system of tuning that offered great improvements. The revolvers we tuned showed great promise. This is why we offered the services. Keep in mind, this research was not based on 2 or 3 revolvers either. We worked on good number of them. I felt good about it. Ahem.........
Since marketing the services, we have received 22 revolvers for various levels of tuning. Out of these 22, only 4 were reasonably fit/built/finished from the factory. The other 18? Well, I really don't mean to be cruel, but the words "Paper Weight" or perhaps "Boat Anchor" come to mind. Where were these when we were researching? RRRRRR!!!!!
To get into further detail, please allow me to present the following list with issues found on many, many of these revolvers.
-Grossly oversized throats. Try like .035"+ oversized in some cases.
-Grossly oversized forcing cones. Same dimentional errors as the throats. In addition to this, FAR too deep. Like by...... .080"!
-Excessive endshake. So much so that firing pin impact pushes the cylinder into the rear of the barrel.
-Extremely loose cylinder lockup. If it wasn't for the oversized throats and forcing cone, there would be so much lead shaving one would swear it's a shotgun.
-Poorly fit crane latch. Poorly fit as in........ .100" or so of slop.
-Missing springs. Some of these revolvers actually are missing springs, right from the factory.
-Rough barrels. If I lapped them enough to really get them smooth, the rifling may actually be gone.
-Double Action shooting malfunctions. Such as binding, skipping cylinders and sometimes not moving at all.
Remember the 4 that were O.K.? Well, that is actually now 3 due to double action issues on a .22 Tracker in Kansas.
All of the Taurus revolvers HFC has serviced will have the HFC warranty honored. However, I have no choice but to discontinue service on Taurus revolvers. Our customers expect a certain level of performance. Research years ago revealed that tuning Taurus was a bad idea. Research months ago revealed that it could work. Recent reality has showed that this was NOT one of my brighter ideas.
I sincerely apologize for any inconvenience, but to maintain OUR quality assurance, this is the way it has to be.
Many years ago, I received The Gospel According To Roger (my Dad) which stated: "When it comes to revolvers you've got Colt, Smith & Wesson, Dan Wesson and Ruger. Everything else is just a noise-maker." To that list of the "good ones", I will add Freedom Arms and U.S.F.A., but how right he was; oh yes, he was.
Again, my apologies. I guess as always, we must stick with what works......consistently.
Have a great week everyone and easy does it. -Mike
END QIOTE

Now, of course not all Taurus guns are defective, and they produce very attractive and diversified guns. Some of their .38s and .44s, for example, have proven to be worth the money, until you have the misfortune of dealing with their phone reps and then learning that you have to pay the shipping costs (as many times as necessary) for the "free" repair.

I do not own a taurus.

thank you.

lagavulin62 said:

I do not own a taurus.

thank you.

Click to expand...

You stopped short of common sense. Lets modify it to "I do not own a Taurus, nor would I".

They're like the prancing trans-sexual in the parade. They kind of have the right shape, but its all smoke and mirrors, with no substance underneath.

Taurus revolvers help me to better appreciate how well made and aesthetically pleasing my Smith & Wesson revolvers really are.

Taurus revolvers are less aesthetically pleasing to virtually all older model Smith & Wessons; but some of the newer ones do a better job by comparison. Unfortunately, the relatively fewer number of Taurus revolvers makes their older, poorer quality handguns cast a shadow over even their better recent models.

pwhphd said:

Taurus revolvers are less aesthetically pleasing to virtually all older model Smith & Wessons; but some of the newer ones do a better job by comparison. Unfortunately, the relatively fewer number of Taurus revolvers makes their older, poorer quality handguns cast a shadow over even their better recent models.

Click to expand...

You are giving "The Bull" far too much credit....

AkRay said:

Taurus revolvers help me to better appreciate how well made and aesthetically pleasing my Smith & Wesson revolvers really are.

Click to expand...

I actually like the previous generation Model 85's. They have a unique design that I wouldn't mind owning one.

Taurus Judge

I own 19 Smith and Wesson Revolvers, 3 of them have the lock and I like them just fine, I wish they didn't have the lock but I still like them just fine. I have 5 Ruger Revolvers, 3 old H&R's ,and one unfired Colt Python.

I recently bought a Polymer Judge because it was the ugliest thing I have ever seen. I went out with my two son in laws and two grandsons walking from one end of a farm to the other and had more fun with that thing than I can remember.

Because of that experience I picked up a Taurus Slim in 9mm. Cleaned it, fired 100 rounds of ball, cleaned it, fired another 100 rounds of ball, cleaned it a third time, took it out with 3 different defense loads took the most accurate for use and shot up the rest. Not one malfunction.
Whats not to like.

While I consider myself a S&W guy, I'm also a fan of the 44 Special, and when there were no new S&W's made in that caliber, there WERE Taurii and Rossii. I've owned one of each. The Taurus was a bit on the sloppy side, the Rossi (which I still own and shoot often) was and is far better. I wonder if it was the inspiration for the S&W 696, the two are fairly similar.

It Ain't No Smith, but for $225, it was a good buy then, and still a good CCW gun. I'd rather have a 696, but the last one I saw was $900 and abused. BTW, for those with smallish hands, the factory grip on this Rossi is without peer.

I have a new M85 Taurus that has been giving me a little bit of trouble now and again. What was happening is that the cylinder would not rotate every once in a blue moon it trigger has pulled or hammer was cocked manually. Then it wouldn't rotate at all when cocking the hammer manually. I took side plate off and what was happening is the hand was moving straight up and passing over the ratchet while manually cocking hammer. But, when pulling the trigger the hand would immediatly move towards the ratchet engaging the lugs just like it's suppose too. I sprayed it with gunscrubber and worked the action slowly and it started to work fine again. Not sure if there was/is some machining debris in there, or if the hand pin was binding.

rburg said:

You stopped short of common sense. Lets modify it to "I do not own a Taurus, nor would I".

They're like the prancing trans-sexual in the parade. They kind of have the right shape, but its all smoke and mirrors, with no substance underneath.

Click to expand...

Wrong! I own quite a few pistols and revolvers. In my safe room resides Colts, Smiths, Dan Wessons, a Remington 1911, Kimbers, Rugers, and 3 Taurus. The 1911 Taurus goes to the range with me every week and has never failed. I have modified it to suit my tastes not because I had to but because I wanted to. The PT 92 needed a trigger job but so did my Colt. The PT 145 is my daily carry piece. I shoot it on a regular bases so I remain effective with it.

Folks that bash Taurus may have had a bad experience or may know someone that had a bad experience. I have a Colt that I had to work on to get it to shoot thru a full magazine. I still like my Colts. I have a Ruger that Ruger had to replace because of poor machining. I have a Browning that had to have its broken trigger replaced.

Taurus produces some of the best values in the gun world. I can make that statement because I use their products weekly and know I am getting a good bang for my buck.

Just wondering

how many LEO's carry Taurus products as their primary service weapon?

I've owned some Taurus but currently don't. There's a reason for that.
I'm not a hater so to those that have good luck with them, that's great.
I'm sure there're some good ones out there.

phenson said:

how many LEO's carry Taurus products as their primary service weapon?

Click to expand...

In my neck of the woods LEOs have 40 cal. Glocks. However political correctness make them use what they call the New York trigger. The pull weight is 12 lbs.

But I guess with your statement the same would apply to many other MAJOR gun makers. Did we ever think that our military would give up Colt 1911s for the 9MM Berettas?

I know I am not making any friends here but Taurus is still out there making a lot of guns and a lot of money while some of the old line companies are just shadows of former glory. The real Winchesters, Mossbergs, Colts entire DA revolver line, Smiths non-locks, Belgium Brownings, Hi-Standard, so on and so on. All gone, all out of production.

But I gotta go, I need to zero in the scope on my Japan made Browning designed Winchester.

Back when I first heard of Taurus I was told they bought old S&W tooling when it was retired for new, refurbed it and started making their revolvers. Hence why they looked so much like S&W designs.

I've never owned one of their revolvers but own two of their semi-autos.

I bought a PT745 when looking for a compact .45 ACP on the recommendation of a friend. Found a used stainless at a show for $325. Its mag catch broke shortly after buying it. Taurus sent a new one free. It has given no other trouble at all other than not being too fond of cast lead. I'm still working on that. I can carry it in a front pocket if I strech the definition of pocket gun a bit.

My brother sneers at the thing because he had a .40 caliber version of the same series and early on the takedown pin (which is also the link for the barrel) sheared off while firing.

I bought a PT-22 on a whim because it was only $160. With the right ammo it gives no trouble at all. The only ammo I've tried I didn't like was recent manufacture Remington Golden Bullet.