i have looked at two handguns at my local gun store, i am wondering about the taurus 94 or s&w 22a. both are new the 22a is all black with 4inch barrel at $300 otd. the taurus is stainless at $350 otd. i haven't owned either one and which would be the best deal? i am looking for something to carry in the woods hiking, for a just in case gun. now before someone says a bigger caliber, i have decided on a 22 cause coyote's or strays dogs are going to be my biggest threat where i'm going on private property and a 22 is what i've decided on. these are the only two are the only one's in stock now. thanks

That 94 will have a stout trigger. For some, it can be a deal breaker.

I don't own either, but I fired a 941 (.22 mag, 2" barrel) - agree with Cranky - stout trigger in DA, but nice in SA. It was nice little gun. One I shot was rental at my range - the screw holding the cylinder release was loose. Friend works there - he tightened screw up - the release was still a little sloppy - he said that's cause it is a Taurus, not a Smith. I'm not badmouthing Taurus (I have a full stainless Judge). If I bought another Taurus, I would not buy any alloy frame (eg., the Ultralite 941) - reason is when I was at another gun shop, guy was looking at Smith and Taurus .38 revolvers. Salesman told him for the few $$ more, buy Smith because many / most alloy frame Taurus they sold came back due to loose lock up / timing. I asked about stainless frames - he said no problem.

You said Smith "22a" - this one ? - but I don't find a 4" barrel:
Product: Model 22A
Not a "pocket pistol"

If this is the 22A, looks a little cumbersome to me.

If you ever consider .22 mag, think twice - ammo costs nearly what 9mm does.

I have both and i like both.

I put a spring kit in the taurus so my boy could shoot it easily. I get a few misfires, but enjoy it a lot. I have a 7" 22a and I like it a lot as well. I dont care for the shorter barrel lengths. I like the balance of a 6" barreled gun. I put a dot sight on the 22A and use it for punching paper at 25yds. I use the taurus for puching paper as well but with the factory sights. I would not want a 4" barrel, but that is a personal preferance. I have seen folks that shoot a 4" barrel very well.

so which one if ya'll were getting one, which would be the better deal at the price that they are at? i just need a 22 but want the best deal for the money, thanks.

Neither, for me. I'd get the M&P .22. I haven't shot one but it's 12+1 and the same size as the compacts.

The 22a is made for target shooting and the 94 is a plinker. The M&P would seem to be a little more robustly built. Other options are Ruger SR22, LCR .22, Walther P22, etc.

That's if I were to carry a .22, which I wouldn't. I wouldn't trust a .22 against a coyote or large dog, especially if rabid or protecting young. That may be just me.

Take your time, find the right gun for you. Good luck and keep us informed!

__________________
645, 457s

I think it really comes down to what one you like better. I like stainless wheelguns. IMHO the stainless Taurus would be more rugged. I would buy that to carry around in the woods. you might want a spring kit and a couple speed loaders for it. What one do you like better ? Either is a decent firearm. I would buy one, save up and buy the other one later on. I never get tired of my .22s You can also read up on them on rimfirecentral.com A lot of people will badmouth the Taurus name, but I like mine a lot.

thanks for the help, i like a wheel gun in everything when i can get them but the prices are getting high. i was priced a ruger sr22 but he had to order it but at $389+tax i thought can't go that much for a 22. i'm on a fixed income and i've saved over a year to get to $350. i'm gonna get something soon, i'll let ya'll know and post pics.

I suggest you take a hard look at the 22A "Talo limited edition" for sale in the classifieds. I saw one at a local steel match, and was pretty impressed.

I've had a 22A since the first month they came out. Great sights, very good trigger and will devour anything. A great little gun.

__________________
Always bet on stupidity.

I have the 22A and I love it. Small issues at first but now it is a solid gun and VERY accurate. My vote is for the Smith. The Taurus is not that great of a trigger and they had many problems with the 94. The 22A has a Weaver base on it to mount optics if you like.

Attached Images

	22a 4.jpg (150.5 KB, 22 views)
	22a 5.jpg (223.9 KB, 16 views)

I've owned both and there is no way in heck I will ever waste my money on a taurus again! Not only do they have to go back often many times for the same thing because they ether don't fix it or don't fix it right, they refuse to pay shipping on a brand new gun. Every taurus I have owned has had to go back, none of my Colts, Rugers, or S&W have ever had to go back!

I had a Taurus 94 some years ago. The ONLY issue I had with it was the heavy double-action trigger. I even sent it back to Taurus and they returned it to me quickly but I did not feel any improvement.

The fit and finish were excellent and the single-action trigger was great but the DA was always too stiff for any kind of accuracy. It was very accurate shooting SA and never any reliability issues. I no longer own it. I currently own a S+W model 18 and my recolection is the Taurus was slightly smaller and lighter with 9-shots vs. 6 in the S+W. Seems like it would be a good choice for what you are looking for. You may get lucky with the DA trigger on yours or just stick to single action.

I have no experience with the 22a

talo 22a speedgun.jpg




wantmoresmiths,
I wonder if the talo 22a you saw was mine? I shoot steel in Pa.

Heavy DA trigger and from what I read about the 94 is that they can have a lot of issues. It was why I bought the Taurus 990 tracker over the 94. I also own the 22a and it is more accurate than I am and I have had 0 issues with it (or my Taurus).

If it were me I would go with the 22a and buy with the saved cash another magazine or 2.

You get 2-10 round mags with the 22A and its a great gun for the money. Like any gun at that price range they sometimes have had a few issues but Smith does stand behind them extremely well. They are a excellent sport shooter gun for the price as I also have owned one as well but dealt in for a 41. I would not have sold it for anything else except for a 46 which I also happen to have as well.

If your only choice is one of the two firearms you mentioned I would definitely go with the Smith. I have a 4" 22A and it is a very accurate gun. The only two down sides I have is if the one you are looking at has just the two scalloped notches in the slide it is very hard to rack the slide, it has practically no grip and due to the design you kinda have to do it funny. I recently bought a spare slide that has three ridges as well as the scalloped edges and it seems to charge much easier. i am gonna take it even one step further and send it to a man on GB and E-bay that offers to attach a small charging handle. This leads me to the other down side, if you do not clean it real well after every outing it does develop some extracting problems. For mine it seems if I do not keep her real clean it gets a little fussy. I do not own a Taurus 94 but I do own two Taurus firearms that are completely useless and have been sitting broken in my safe for several years now, customer service is among the worse of any firearm company I have dealt with. So my advise is go with the Smith, great gun and great service.

__________________
Quando Omni Flunkus Moratati

The 22A is a good gun.

Attached Images

2012-08-19_13-35-11_406.jpg (107.2 KB, 14 views)

+1 on the 22A. I've had one for over 8 years and would not part with it. Accurate, easy takedown for cleaning and a pleasure to shoot.
Mine devours Federal Target Grade Performance ammo with 100% regularity.

__________________
Si vis pacem, para bellum