Comparison Question J Frame vs. Taurus 85

R

Rhetorician

Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2013
Messages
281
Reaction score
54
Location
West Tennessee
Hello to all:

I am probably going to buy a new snub nosed 38 special. It is down to the Smith J Frame 637 and the Taurus Model 85. My question is this (and this may NOT BE the correct place to ask it?): Initially, which has the best "trigger pull?"

I am trying to compare apples to apples as far as weight, external hammer, number of shots, etc.

Please describe in detail if possible.

Thanks all.:D
 
While some will say Taurus is not a bad revolver, it is certainly sub-par with S&W, and whatever the difference in price, it would not be enough to make me buy the Taurus. Since it's a snubbie, I gather it's gonna be a carry gun. I would not carry a Taurus as a defensive weapon. And I've owned a couple. But they were strictly range toys and bought when every dollar I had was spoken for.
 
I own both a Model 36 and a Taurus 605 and while the M36 is my first choice , the 605 is reliable , accurate , and well made. JMO
 
A Taurus is a good truck gun. But as a revolver to carry everyday would not be my choice.
I have owned over the years six brand new Taurus revolvers and pistols and three didn't work out of the box.
But surprisingly there customer service is excellent, they are very quick to resolve the problem.
 
I owned 2 Taurus snubbies and both had to go back to factory. Will never waste my money on another one. You get what you pay for.
 
My success rate on getting a new Taurus, including the 85 or 85UL, to function properly right-out-of-the-box is around 60%. Most of the issues are machining errors/messes and cylinder binding. The BTCG can be much too tight, the recoil shield out of square, or so poorly machined that gouges and burrs have to be polished out/off. If you're a pretty good home-spun gunsmith, you can make a new Taurus more reliable. Even the Taurus fans on their forum recommend the first thing to do is to take the gun apart and clean-out the cosmoline and mill-shavings. You can make a good gun out of one, but you can't do much to the trigger. The hammer-spring is easy to change, but Taurus replaced most of the trigger components you would find in a S&W with one long spring and a rod anchored in the frame. Wolf sells replacement trigger springs with a disclaimer that they don't guarantee them to work....more-or-less. One generally has to cut/adjust one to make it fit.

Yes....they do have a lifetime warranty, but you may find yourself dealing with the people in Miami on a constant basis for a long time and be waiting for your gun in the mail back-n-forth. It's the most unorganized group I have ever dealt with. My advice is....if you plan to get a Taurus, get an older model 85. They seem to be pretty good guns on a more regular basis. Taurus is more of a marketing company than a firearms company. I tried as hard as I possibly could to make their line-up a success. I failed and gave-up. Unless you know how to tweak a gun....don't waste your time buying a new Taurus.
 
I have a Taurus 605 that I would not trade for the world, even a S&W snub. But I also have a 686 that I think I will keep also. I carry the 605 everyday. Had a 85 , not bad, but 605 better. Jim
 
A Taurus 85 was the first small revolver that I ever owned. Later when I bought my first S&W I decided that the Taurus needed to go. It worked, and was reliable, but the fit and finish and feel, as well as the trigger, were not in the same class as the S&W. I ended up giving it to my son-in-law since he would not buy a gun and relied on a baseball bat to keep my daughter and grandchildren safe and the Taurus was certainly better than a stick of wood! I say, go with the S&W.
 
If this is for CCW, How much is your life worth to you?

I know mine is for sure worth the extra $200 or so to get a much better quality made and dependable firearm. Taurus uses inferior materials and they take short cuts on parts fitting. I had once considered buying a Taurus as my first revolver a few years back as I knew nothing about revolvers, but after doing lots of research and asking a lot of experts questions on the subject(Massad Ayoob, Grant Cunningham, Rob Pincus to name a few) I decided Taurus was out as a sensible choice for a self-defense weapon. I once called Taurus customer service after reading that you shouldn't dry fire their revolvers and they told me not to dry fire it because the firing pin might break. S&W & Ruger on the other hand both say dry fire away.
Outside of Brazil, I have never heard of any police departments issuing any type of Taurus sidearm. When cops still carried revolvers, almost all of them carried Smith & Wesson. Look at what self-defense experts who carry revolvers as back-ups or primaries and S&W is their overwhelming choice. That speaks volumes. The only other choice other than S&W that I would even consider is a Ruger.
 
For defensive carry I would buy and trust a used S&W J Frame before a new Taurus any day of the week. New to new gun, there is still no choice, The S&W is a vastly superior, reliable gun and well worth any difference in cost.
 
Last edited:
IMO THERE IS NO COMPARRISON

ONE is the original, the other made it's bones (& still does) copying & cloning S&W. Guns in general, but especially for s/d is no place to pinch pennies.
 
I had two Taurus snubbies; one was perfect and had a great trigger. The other couldn't fire a full cylinder of five rounds. I think your odds are better with S&W; less chance of getting a loser.
 
Bought an all SS Taurus 85 a couple of months ago.......it would fire only 99% of the time.......it had a light primer strike on one round out of every 100. I no longer have it, and I plan to never have another. Right now, I'm sticking with a single stack 9mm/45 ACP for CCW. All my dependable revolvers are bordering on "too large" for comfortable concealed carry, except my M60. The M60 has become a safe queen due to it's age and condition....
 
Taurus (somehow) has two features that are actually an improvement over the current S&W production revolvers. The cylinder is locked to the yoke-barrel with an internal lock-ring. You can knock it off in a home-made jig, but it won't simply slide off. End-shake seems to be a non-issue. Taurus employs the in-the-hammer ILS (administrator...not bashing the ILS), which is butt-simple and almost unnoticeable. I've never heard of one failing. It's a shame that S&W could not have beat Taurus to the punch on this ILS and we would not have all the whining we have today concerning that feature. Some time ago, I read a blurb that indicated Smith had approached Taurus to gain the rights to the Taurus cylinder retention system and failed. True-or-not....I don't know.

IMHO, these are two features that make the Taurus design somewhat superior. It's a shame they can't consistently build a gun that's reliable right-out-of-the-box.
 
My LGS stopped carrying Taurus over a year ago due to lack of QC. To me, there is no comparison between a J-frame and a Taurus knock off.
 
Not to upset any satisfied Taurus owners as I'm sure they are some good guns out there, but I don't foresee me owning one.
I've seen some QC issues with reported customer service which was lacking.
 
At one point in time I owned three different j frames (sadly they are gone now). All the j frames had heavy but smooth double action triggers if that makes any sense, and all had very light crisp single action triggers.

I have fired three different Taurus 85s. One had a respectable trigger in both DA and SA but not as good as a S&W. It also was a reliable gun. The other two Taurus revolvers where not reliable and had excessively heavy and gritty triggers.
 
As a former FFL (80-90's) I saw my share of both.

Oddly, a run of Taurus 85's, blued and stainless only, no locks, no Ultralites, and the only "option" was the 85 CH (concealed hammer) in the late 1980's were equal to and sometimes better (fit, finish, accuracy, trigger, etc.) than many J-frames from the same time period.

That said, I never had to return a J-frame to the factory for anything.

Out of 25+ Taurus snubs sold in a 10-year period, 2-3 had serious issues all related to timing and or poor lock-up.
 
Daniel W. said:
If this is for CCW, How much is your life worth to you?
...
Click to expand...
I certainly agree.

Occasionally, I will hear an "X brand" (insert name of a HIGH quality handgun manufacturer, eg. S&W, etc.) owner and shooter say, "Yeah, I bought this "Z brand" (insert name of LOW quality handgun manufacturer) for CCW (or vehicle, etc. carry) because if I ever have to use it, it will probably be kept by authorities for a long time or I may not get it back and I don't want to lose my high quality handgun."

Well, duh. IF I ever have to use a handgun, I want it to be the best handgun I can find/afford. IF it saves my life, do I care if my more expensive quality handgun is tied up for months, years, or forever? NO!

Now this is not to say I'm opposed to less expensive, lesser quality firearms. One must act within one's budget.

But as a general rule, I would rather save until I can afford the better handgun. And that is a pretty big statement from a guy like me as I'm a classic "champagne taste with a beer pocketbook" kind of guy!

This concept applies to many things. Like optics. I once (or twice)purchased a 'lesser quality' optic (thinking it would be 'good enough'), only to be very unhappy with it and sell/trade it at a big loss to purchase quality optics. Like they say, "Buy once, cry once."

Having said all of that, whatever make/model/caliber one purchases, one should spend time with it - shoot it plenty and become proficient with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Question on Scandium J frame revolvers.
Replies
9
Views
753
TheTinMan
T
P
Issues with new J-frame vs older ones.
2
Replies
31
Views
1K
xtrtsqrt11
X
G
S&W 500 8 3/8" vs. Taurus Raging hunter 6.75"
Replies
6
Views
805
Ga.BuckBuster
G
flundertaker
J Frame Grips
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
ltgem612
L
F
J Frame Ultra Carry Question
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
nyeti
N

Latest posts

Back
Top