There are some good ones. I have had a semi-concealed hammer Mod85 for years and have had no problems. I bought a new G2C from Combat Armory for $160 and my grandson put about 250 rounds through it with not one malfunction. A couple of magazines were target and self defense mixed.
My daughter talked me out of that one so I bought another one for $200 and my grandson just got through checking it out. Same result, no malfunctions. One good thing is the mags hold 12 rounds. I have heard that they will fix any problem but that it takes a long time. Not good.
In my opinion the G2C is a lot of gun for the money. Besides that us older folks can easily rack the slide where we couldn't on the Shield. Please don't come on with bad procedure, I know how.

__________________
Mighty 90's,Trying 4 a 100!

I had a Taurus 85 humpback for years. Thoroughly reliable.

That said, my SW 442 is equally reliable and I picked that up new for $60 more than I paid for a Taurus. Being a SW forum and all, my figuring is the resale and customer support is better on a SW. People value things differently, but for a 20% price differential, I would recommend SW.

Not to represent myself as smart, I bought the awesome P32 years ago. Great gun, especially so small and pretty reliable too. However, I bought two other Keltec pistols after the P32, both needed a trip to the factory to even be semi- reliable. My takeaway was no more Keltec pistols.

YOUR MONEY, AND YOUR CHOICES---BEST WISHES......

__________________
'Nam 1968-69.DAV,VFW,NRA Inst.

I own an Taurus 85 as well as 2 G2s and 2 later model TCPs... All of them have functioned perfectly... I own dozens of handguns.. Most of them are from S&W, Ruger, Springfield, Sig, Walther, and CZ... The only firearms that have failed on me machinically were from S&W and Ruger... The only guns that failed function wise (that i no longer own) were my DiamondBack DB9 G2 and a Kel Tec PF9 with steel cased Tula ammo...

People who were burned a decade or two ago and/or who are gun snobs are going to hate on Taurus no matter what... It comes with the territory....

YouTube

__________________
Retired Career Security Guard

It's great Taurus offers the warranty that they do.Odds are,you will need that :-)

__________________
SWCA#2208
KK4EMO

If the guns work for you that is all that matters. Just ignore the peanut gallery. OTH it is well known that Taurus threads turn into nightmares, why open up yourself when you are satisfied?

your right

__________________
Mighty 90's,Trying 4 a 100!

Honestly, if the best that you can say about Taurus handguns is that "there are some good ones" that's really not High Praise.

I don't have enough discretionary income to go buy a Taurus and hope I got "one of the good ones" and I'm certainly not going to bet my life by carrying one. Not when I can get a used Glock for roughly the same price.

I mean if you got " one of the good ones" and you enjoy it and you're having fun with it great. I'm happy for you but please excuse me if I don't rush right out and buy one.

I would however like to encourage you to do one of two things with your Taurus. Either do a 2000 round challenge with it or take it to a high-round count class. One where you're going to shoot a thousand rounds in a weekend.

In case you're not familiar with it the mm round challenge is very simple you clean and lube your firearm then you fire 2000 rounds through it without any additional cleaning and lubrication and you document any failures.

Let us know how it works out for you

__________________
Retired Career Security Guard

I'd take a good vintage Smith over a new Taurus any day! Just my opinion of course.

Yep.. sumpin' for everybody, I see people drivin' Hyundia's. Even see a Yugo now and again.

I have only one Taurus firearm, a Model 96, which looks almost exactly like a S&W Model 14. It does not have the smooth, crisp trigger typically found on a S&W Model 14, but it cost a whole lot less than a S&W. Mine has performed well and it is a great piece to use to introduce someone to the world of handgun shooting.


Has Taurus turned out lemons? They certainly have, so has Colt, Dan Wesson, Kimber, Ruger, Smith & Wesson, and probably every other company that mass produces firearms.

I try not too be a gun snob. I buy and and shoot what I can afford and what works for me and I assume everyone else does the same. The same with a house and vehicles. There are people with cars and houses that are nicer than mine and also some that are not as nice as mine. I just have what I can afford and what works for me. That's not good or bad. It's just life. Larry

250 rounds are hardly any valid parameter to show a guns reliability and longevity. Heck, even my S&W 22A made it past 20,000 rounds before the first firing pin broke. The difference to Taurus is, that S&W has an excellent customer service and I had a replacement firing pin within a week, free of charge.

I've had some Taurus handguns including a 3" .44 special, TCP .380, slim 9m/m, and a few others and all were perfectly reliable and accurate and a quite incredible value. I didn't put thousands of rounds through them maybe several hundred, but that's all many gun owners shoot and maybe don't want to pay more money. I was satisfied with my purchase and realize you won't get champagne on a beer budget.

I had a recent issue with their terrible customer service. A fellow brought me a Taurus revolver that was missing the rear sight blade and a screw. I called Taurus and they wouldn't sell me the parts other than a complete sight. O.K., no biggie, how about telling me what size the screw is? I was told they would't give any specifications other than what was listed on their website. So I asked the guy is there was someone else I could talk to. He told me "no" and even if he had access to the screw size, they wouldn't give it to me. I told him no wonder his company had such a terrible (but I used another word) reputation.

A few years ago one of my friends who is more of a low-end gun trader and swapper than a shooter brought over a 6-inch Taurus Model 66, which was their blued steel revolver comparable to a S&W Model 19. It was the first Taurus revolver I’d seen. I was surprised by what a nice little revolver it was, and when we started shooting it, it turned out to be no slouch there, too. He had saved $100 over buying a Model 19, so he was happy. I have no idea how long that revolver would last, but for a fellow who doesn’t shoot much, he made his choice based on price and he was not disappointed. That was my sample of one. On the other hand, the friendly local gun shop I visit doesn’t like to sell Taurus products because they have to send too many back for repair.

I took in a Stainless Taurus 1911 in 38 Super on a trade a couple of years ago. The plan was to clean it up and flip it. It came with a box of ammo. A few days later I took it out and shot up the ammo but was suprised how accurate it was. I wasn’t expecting much. Long story short, I decided to keep it, bought a set of dies and have worked up a load for it. I have many other guns but this is the only Taurus. Would I buy another? Probably not, but I do plan on keeping this one for awhile.

IMHO, I would buy another one of these over a Taurus, and for less money-just sayin'

__________________
John

Wouldn't have one if it was free. Bought a new TCP and could not get through a mag without jamming. Yes, I fired over 200 rounds through it.
Sold it at a loss to a guy and told him of the problems.

I am currently driving a 2009 Kia with 351K miles on it. I bought it 9 years ago, used, with 19K miles on it. It runs like a top. Next week I pick up a used PT1911. It will be my first Taurus. I hope that it runs as well.

Old news on a discontinued model. The G2 guns are different.

__________________
Release the Kraken

I am 0 for 2 on Taurus. There won't be a third time.

Good suggestion, but shooting 2000 rounds no matter the cartridge except 22 LR and you'll have spent 2-3 times the cost of the Taurus brand new.

I'm sure Taurus puts out a few guns that work well enough. But they have earned their bad reputation and I'm not willing to risk even $200 trying a Taurus out.

I bought a Taurus 605 which I was very happy with. Then I bought a S&W 638. The 638 will shoot rings around the 605.

There is nothing wrong with being a gun snob. It's a hobby just like everything else and there is a reason fishermen use Penn or Shimano over Zebco, mechanics use snap on or mac over China brand, and you dont see any Iron Chefs using Ginzo's....

There's something wrong with bashing a firearm as well as demeaning the choice of a fellow gun owner who purchased said firearm for no other reason than you can afford something that is higher end, but preforms the same basic task and fuction... Why bash the fire choice of gun owner who had nothing but great experience and reliability with said firearms...

Plus, I've been hearing more and more about S&W reliability and shotty work than I'm hearing about problems with current model Taurus firearms... I've been hearing more problems coming from Sig than Taurus lately. Walther just had a recall on the PPS M2... Facts are facts... When I first got into firearms started following firearm forums and youtube channels, they were filled with post from owners who had problems with their Taurus firearms. Nowadays, the forums are filled with Sig and Smith problems mostly, Taurus, not so much anymore... The inet seems to be filled with Taurus owners who like them, and bashes who claim they'll never buy one now...

There are also thousands of round count videos on YouTube where the Taurus G2 preformed just fine as well as a live video where the Taurus Slim G2 outperformed the Shield and other single stack 9mm and preformed equally as well as the G43 and Walther PPS...

The one and only thing Taurus deserves to be bashed on is their one year warranty on newer models as well as their customer service. They seemed to have stepped their game up on reliability though, even if the haters and gun snobs refuse to acknowledge that fact...

Ditto on the Taurus 96. I have one from 1990 and it has been a flawless, tack driver. No problems whatsoever and a joy to shoot.

I may just be lucky with the one I have due to it being 30 years old. Perhaps better quality control was in place at that time, but I don't think I would buy a new one. I'm a little leery of the current quality control and probably wouldn't chance getting a lemon.

__________________
Free advice is worth the price

I've said it before and I'll say it again...

Taurus Firearms themselves aren't usually bad. In fact, more often than not they make good, reliable lower cost firearms. The real problem is their Customer Service which is quite possibly the worst among mainstream firearms manufacturers. Taurus firearms only appear to be of deceptively poor quality because folks who got a lemon often have to play telephone tag with CS, pay for shipment both ways, wait several weeks, and more often than not get the firearm back with every part replaced save for the faulty one, which in turn results in them telling the story out of pure bewilderment/disbelief. As a result, the take away by most folks from the outside looking in is; "All Taurus firearms are lemons." due to the sheer number of reports of terrible experiences with CS.

In reality, I would estimate that the actual number of lemons turned out by Taurus are no more than Ruger, but the difference is that Ruger tends to have good Customer Service, ergo reports of problematic Rugers tend to be much smoother and reach a satisfactory conclusion which the average consumer only even bothers to recount in the event in which they are active members of firearms forums where threads regarding the quality of Ruger CS are posted.

Generally speaking, as long as you look over a Taurus before you buy one at the gunshop and it functions perfectly then and there, then it will most likely remain in working order just as long as you take proper care of it, which leads me to another statement I'd like to make.
I have a theory that a large number of Taurus firearms which do fail after leaving the gunshop are the result of neglect. Based on my observations, folks tend to be excessively rough and often downright negligent towards Taurus firearms due to their image/reputation, ergo failure becomes something of a self-fulfilling prophecy because the owner is so convinced that the gun is a cheapo piece of junk which will inevitably fail on them anyway that they don't bother to take proper care of it, then when the gun malfunctions they immediately jump to the conclusion that the gun is at fault when in reality said malfunction could be due to the fact that they haven't cleaned/lubed it in awhile.

Between my family and I, I've had personal experience with a total of 5 Taurus brand firearms, all of which have been thoroughly tested, and have proven to be mechanically sound.

That being said, I honestly don't mind Taurus having a bad reputation nor do I mind how many of them get sold off under the erroneous belief that the gun is junk because it renders them dirt cheap on the used market in many cases, leaving folks like me who either know better or are otherwise know enough about firearms to work on them and get them running smoothly to pick them up on the cheap.

Agreed... Several years back, Taurus was the only pistols and revolvers you could get for around $200-$250... The next closes were CM model Kahrs and Kel Tecs which were around $325ish. The Shield, PPS, XDS were all closer to $400 or more... Nowadays, you can get Rugers, M&Ps, XD's, PPS M2s, etc for from $250-$300 respectively... All these brands have better customer service and warranties than Taurus. That fact is the one and only reason why I'd caution others from buying a Taurus and why I personally won't buy another... Other than that, I haven't seen anything to suggest that they're bad guns other than old outdated information...

Their all stainless revolvers and their 6 shot revolvers are still priced extremely competitively. If they had a better warranty, I'd probably own a few of them already...

Yea, but they don't fix anything right the second ( or third) time through the factory either. Been there-Done that.
Since 85's are the topic... I had two 90's vintage model 85's before I saw the value in SW. First was a 85CH that ran Ok but loosened up considerably after just 500 rounds or so of (mostly) range ammo. Second one was a plain 85 that blew up in my hand on the seventh round. Inspection by a competent gunsmith showed it had no forcing cone. Took months and the threat of legal action to get them to stand behind it.
In fairness, I have no experience with the newer ones but I'm not going to tempt fate again. Meanwhile, I wish the OP and his family luck with and safe use of his Taurus collection.

__________________
Dave

Taurus as a whole fills a niche market.

If you shoot seldom: buy a Taurus.
If you don't care how heavy or gritty your trigger pull is: buy a Taurus.
If you are looking at it as from a great distance: buy a Taurus.
If you are broke: you probably shouldn't be buying guns.
Simply put, if you aren't a firearm guy, I'm sure a Taurus is fine for you.

If you are an avid shooter? S&W
If you appreciate innate quality and performance? S&W
If you appreciate quality craftsmanship up close and personal? S&W

If you can afford a Taurus, just save for a bit longer and buy a smith instead. The price point is REALLY negligible when considering the difference in quality.

For this to be true would require that more than half of all Taurus products be defective and require factory service.

I guess I'm lucky since of the numerous Taurus revolvers I've owned and used none of them were defective in any way.

I've owned and shot the h eck out of S&Ws and Tauruses, and they all work equally as well except for my Shield 45 PC which had shorts in the polymer frame as well a recoil assembly that broke in two on a basically new gun... There are also several recent youtube videos and forum post from S&W owners who claim to have had bad CS or had quality issues. The running theme is to look for later S&W revolvers because QC is currently hit or miss and this is coming from a S&W themed forum... It gets worse on other forums...

What are you basing your claims that a Taurus firearms will only serves those who seldomly shoot? No, the trigger isn't competition or target shooting ready, but it's more then good enough and adequate for self defense...

Heh. I don't have anything to say about folks that don't like Taurus... I hate Glocks. I've had several Taurus and Rossis over the years, and I haven't had an issue with any of them, other than the difficulty of getting extra magazines. .22s, .38s, 9s, and .44s have all performed flawlessly. Would I do a "1000-round" something or other with one? No, but I wouldn't with any other firearm, either.
I even have a Taurus 905 on the way right now. Why? I thought about having one of my 640s converted by TK for months, maybe years, but could never justify spending around $300 for the conversion. For $350, I got the 905, ready to go when it gets here. I don't expect to have any problems with it, but if I do, it's not like I screwed up one of my S&Ws.
As the interneters are fond of saying: YMMV. Maybe they were thinking of Taurus when they came up with that. It certainly seems to apply!

Then that is what you should do. God gave us freedom of choice we should rejoice, and use it.

A smart man learns from his mistakes. A wise man learns from the mistakes of others.

I've never owned a Taurus, but I have friends who did. One had a warranty nightmare. Another bought a 24/7 that wouldn't get through a magazine - any magazine. Yet, another had a revolver back and forth to Taurus as it wouldn't keep time.

I have a long time buddy who owned a LGS (he retired) and was a one time Taurus stocking dealer and he wouldn't stock nor take a Taurus in on trade. He said they weren't worth the risk or the trouble of getting a lemon.

Their experiences and advice were/are enough for me.

To be fair, I do have a friend who loves his 1911 clone.

__________________
Thread Killer.

I won't buy a ford because some of my friends have had issues with them. I also consult them before buying toilet paper.

It really is a difficult subject with many angles to consider
Do cheap knock offs hurt the consumer by manufacturers having to lower their quality to compete?
Should we even support manufacturers that operate that way?
Do we not want, especially when talking about firearms, manufacturers producing the highest quality product possible?
I go to gun shows and see so many plastic fantastic guns from companies I've never heard of, and I feel the firearms industry is all about producing the most at the cheapest price possible. Quality is out the window. It's hard to sell a gun for $900 when there is a whole table of look alike ones for 1/2 that price.
But then we complain about quality and post pics of the not so perfect guns all over the web.
What if S&w spent one hour more, per gun , during the assembly process to make sure every single gun was perfect? It would probably raise the price about $50 per gun. But how can they do that and still compete with the knock offs?

I'm sure your friends told you, "Walkingwolf, I bought this *** from a less than reputable manufacturer, their customer service is less than helpful and their warranty is meaningless, but I recommend you buy from them!" You realize How silly that sounds, right.


I'm sure you do.

__________________
Thread Killer.

I have owned, used and enjoyed a PT1911 for 6 years now. I am well pleased with it and need no validation.

__________________
Music/Sports/Beer fan

The problem is that the overwhelming majority of reports and reviews on CURRENT Taurus models from people with actual experience are saying that their happy and their examples have been perfect; yet whenever they report their personal experiences, you'll have several people flock over to tell them how they'd would never buy it and how inadequate the brand/model is... How it's best to buy something else.. How only broke people buy said brand...

I base my claim off the fact that S&W makes a more refined firearm, for the gun guy (or gal) that KNOWS firearms. Period. Argue if you want, but you are in the wrong place if you want support from other members; this is the S&W forum...

Operating as a range master for a several years has only strengthened my conviction. I've seen twice as many Taurus owners leaving the range unhappy than I have seen Smith owners leaving unhappy; easily.

It's as simple as this, Smith and Wesson CURRENTLY make better revolvers and better semi-autos than Taurus.

No? Start naming police departments that outfit their officers with Taurus weapons to defend themselves with. Lmao. It doesn't even look right as a write it.... when you are done with that start naming police departments that outfit themselves with the S&W m&p line... we are going to be here for a while.

You can lie to yourself about Taurus if you want, but you are doing people that have little gun knowledge a great disservice.

I've never owned a Colt, but I have friends who did.
I've never owned a Ruger, but I have friends who did.
I've never owned a Walther, but I have friends who did.
I've never owned a Smith & Wesson, but I have friends who did.
I've never owned a Sig Sauer, but I have friends who did.
I've never owned a Springfield, but I have friends who did.
I've never owned a Korth, but I have friends who did.

Their experiences and advice were/are enough for me.

Yawn

I'd be happy to accept your challenge, so long as you're willing to pay for the ammo, that is.

But seriously, Why?

I can't think of any realistic scenario in which I would need to fire 2000 rounds without cleaning/lubricating any firearm.

Honestly, a firearm that can fire 2000 rounds without being cleaned or lubed has just slightly more practical usefulness than a Glock which can continue functioning flawlessly after being dropped from a Helicopter or baked in an oven.

Don't get me wrong, any firearm that can fire 2000 rounds without a hitch despite being completely neglected is impressive, as is a firearm that can survive being dropped from a Helicopter or baked in an oven, but personally I'm content to carry a firearm that will function just fine under ordinary circumstances and just clean/lube it after each trip to the range and avoid dropping it from a Helicopter or baking it in an oven.

My personal experience, from all the reports on the web, what I've seen at the range, and frim the 50 or so handguns from $200-$1000+ is that Taurus sends lead down range with no more problems than other companies. Sure, the other company's firearms might look better, have nicer finishes, and more bells and whistles; however, they all do what they're made to do...

So Glock and Sigs are better than S&W right? Last I check, most L.E. have started to drop S&W autos. I'm not sure that many if any at all militaries carry the S&W Military and police handguns. Glock, Sig, CZ, etc run that market, so if that's what you're bashing your puchases on, then why buy S&Ws period? Furthermore, I'm not sure of any military or police outfit that carry Rugers, XD's, etc... Using your logic, I guess they're all **** as well huh?

Let's not forget how a Taurus Slim outperformed a S&W and others in a Single Stack shootout as well...https://youtu.be/hAo1SONz7Ao What's your excuse about that one?

I can afford a just about any gun I want. I'm not a fanboy of any. I like guns whether it be a $200 one that works or a $1000 that works. My experience and the 1st hand experiences I'm seeing from others just isn't matching the hate that those who claim they won't buy a Taurus... All these Taurus guns are having issues, yet I continue to see positive first hand reveiws like the OP's, and a bunch of condescending bashing from those who refuse to buy a Taurus..

And your point is, what? That you ignore the advice and experiences of your friends? If that's the case, good for you!

*I couldn't help but notice you chose to ignore my examples and reasoning.

__________________
Thread Killer.

I could tell just from the hilarious title of the thread that this was gonna be a real humdinger!

Seriously, a Taurus isn't worth the physical space it would occupy in my house. It satisfies literally zero criteria I have for a firearm.

But, if it works for you, great!

Good for them.

And... It's the internet, everybody has an opinion.

__________________
Thread Killer.

It's funny that I just had this same debate defending S&W revolvers and autos on othet forums.. On the AKFiles, members where bashing M&Ps because of the accuracy issues they had, because no militaries weren't really carrying them, because police departments were dumping them, and because they've seen them break down or a friend of a friend seen them break down, etc, etc... Now the same arguments against S&W are being used against Taurus.. [Edit] I forgot to add how bad the M&P trigger is. That's on of their favorites that's usually brought up in every M&P thread outside of this forum...

Then on TheHighRoad and a couple of other forums, the consensus is that Ruger revolvers are better because Smith have QC and CS issues, barrels are canted, nubs (or whatever you call it) inside the barrel, revolvers going out of time, dead triggers, the internal lock issue, the screwed in side plate is inferior, so on and so on... That because of the lock and other issues, they'll never buy another S&W... Now here, some of the same type for bashing is being used against Taurus revolvers...

At least Taurus isn't alone when it comes to being bashed...