Do you bash Taurus? And for why?

[Gaerek]

Just doing some simple math, assuming you got the ammo cheap (say $10 per box of 50), your 2000 round test, even though it's spread over several months, will cost you about $400. Keep in mind, that's a pretty cheap price for ammo, and I'd suspect this will cost closer to $500. I don't know the price of a PT809, but Bud's Gun Shop has them for about $350 each. You're looking at spending $750 just to see if a gun is worthy of being a backup gun. If you decide that gun isn't worthy, and you sell it or trade it in, that's 2k rounds of practice you put into a gun you aren't even going to use.

It seems to me it makes more sense from a financial and practical standpoint that you just pick up a G19 or G26 (or one of the dozens of other "proven" compact 9mm out there), which have a couple decades worth of other people testing, and you are essentially assured to have a good shooter for about $500. Sure, you'll probably go through 2k rounds eventually, but at least it will be through a gun you're almost certainly going to keep, and not one that you need to test first.

It's your money, so I won't tell you what to do. If you're doing this as a public service, well, thank you! I just wanted to comment that I didn't think it made much sense what you're doing. Of course, I am biased against Taurus, so that might have something to do with it.

EDIT: Re-read your second post on this, and saw you already have a G26, and would put it towards a G17 if it doesn't pass. Look at my second paragraph, and insert G17 in place of G19 or G26.

 

[StainlessSteel215]

Gaerek you are absolutely right from a financial standpoint and yes this is basically a test trial with a relatively new gun...so there is a risk involved. But, without this type of testing how do people make informed decisions?

Now, the gun has been out for about 2-3 years now and I did a TON of homework on it before I bought it. Read countless reviews, many were stellar. This gun has maintained a fairly consistent rep of being a quality gun in the 9mm series...specially for the price....and I'm testing it to be sure. I didnt buy a piece of crap just to trash it on YouTube & website forums and waste money, I dont have that type of disposable income. I typically burn through 1000-1500 rounds in 2 months so its just a little above my normal budget.

Additionally, I am not just sitting in front of 40 boxes of ammo and blasting it off hastily just to get through it. I am constantly improving my accuracy, learning new shooting techniques including FAST drills...and basically I love to shoot so this is a true labor of love. And...if it can be used as a learning tool for those after me than thats a great free service! Hopefully you can see the other end of the spectrum and understand there are huge benefits to this challenge, for myself and others.

So far, I LOVE this gun!

 

[Redhawk5.5+P+]

Additionally, I am not just sitting in front of 40 boxes of ammo and blasting it off hastily just to get through it. I am constantly improving my accuracy, learning new shooting techniques including FAST drills...and basically I love to shoot so this is a true labor of love. And...if it can be used as a learning tool for those after me than thats a great free service! Hopefully you can see the other end of the spectrum and understand there are huge benefits to this challenge, for myself and others.

I did the same thing with a S&W SW9VE Sigma. 2000 rounds later it still shoot great if not better. In the end though, I wish I'd have bought a Glock 17 or an S&W M&P9. I shoot those much better. TBS, the Sigma did make me a better shot. i hope so after 2K.

What if you get to the 1,999th round and it break's. You send in on your dime and wait, either they fix it, or replace it. Now what? You have $700-900 "wasted" in it. Now what, sell it?LOL

Have fun and good luck.

 

[StainlessSteel215]

Redhawk if that happens, I will throw the gun to the ground, shaking my fist and cursing at it....then I will unload a full mag on it with my Glock lol.

Dont jinx me, I honestly have high hopes for this Taurus!

 

[Gaerek]

I understand what you're doing. I guess it's just not something I would do. I'd rather spend that 2-3 months, and $500 of ammo working with a gun I will actually use, rather than one that is a "we'll see!" I'm sure the PT809 is a great gun. As you can read what I wrote earlier in the thready, I have reasons for not wanting to buy Taurus. I'll stick with the tried and trued, rather than the quote/unquote bargain buy.

As for your test, between my last post and this one, I did see you were putting the 2000 round test on youtube. Good on ya for the public service. I just don't have that kind of disposable income to use for something like that, lol. Though I did notice the little issue of the slide going forward with just inserting the mag. I don't know if that's working as intended. I'm sure it can make speed reloads faster, but it seems like there's a reason most manufacturers make sure the slides stay locked up until you want them closed. And something like that would be a deal breaker for me.

 

[Pilot]

I've had one Taurus. A second generation PT145 Milpro .45ACP. I found it functioned flawlessly, was way more accurate than it should have been, was well designed and nicely compact. I was going to carry it, but couldn't get used to the long DA pull, so I sold it. The third generation PT145 is DA/SA, and I may pick one up.

 

[StainlessSteel215]

Believe me guys, what you wrote makes sense and again there is a little risk involved...but its a calculated risk and I am optimistic for this gun.

Also, I think I already made a post on here somewhere that I am 1-1 right now with Taurus. Bought 2 revolvers in my lifetime....a 6" model 66 and an Ultralight .357 magnum. One turned into garbage and eventually the cylinder seized up on me (the model 66) while the other turned out to be one of the best snubby's I ever owned. I actually traded it towards my Glock26. I miss it, would have kept it if I had the money at the time.

So, I owe it to myself and anyone else who wants to see the results to put Taurus to the test once again. Now, obviously this is apples to oranges (semi vs revolver). I just REALLY want to see them improve by making a better name for themselves (kinda like Hyundai) and I think this gun finally nailed the mark.

We shall see....stay tuned....

 

[Microgunner]

Microgunner, how many of your buyers are also regular shooters? It's very possible that your problem rate is higher than you know, but that you have a lot of "put in drawer" or "put in glove box" or worse yet, "put in holster, untested" buyers.

Don't have a clue since we don't own a range, but, I'm sure that our clientèle will be about average as you might expect.

 

[p loader]

Originally posted by riggins_83

I've had Taurus owners talk about how they've shot a "ton of rounds" without issue only to find out they've fired a total of 300 rounds from a gun. Saying 300 rounds is high volume (without issues) is like calling a new car well built and believing 30,000 miles is high mileage.

Agree on that! I spoke to a guy at work who said he just ordered a TON OF AMMO for his new Taurus. I was like "really that's cool, how much?"

200 rounds.

 

[iraiam]

I voted for like through experience, but it's a little more complex than that. I have a Taurus PT92AF that I bought in maybe 199? Early 90's anyway, It has been a fantastic postol, I have fired thousands of rounds through it, and it looks it. It is every bit as accurate and dependable as my Beretta 92, and M9.

I bought a Taurus 44 magnum a few years ago because I thought my 1990 Redhawk needed to be replaced, I never got that new Taurus to shoot as good as my bone stock Ruger Redhawk. I wound up trading it off, I'm just glad I kept the old Ruger.

2 Other Taurus pistols I have owned were also very good, I didn't like the calibers I chose, so I did wind up trading them off, but I can't say it was because of the brand. My only bad experience with Taurus was the 8" .44 mag.

 

[thedudeabides]

I had a Taurus 1911. Was more finicky than my Kimber 1911. I honestly thought that 1911's were overhyped crap because of those two companies.

 

[armabill]

My son's: bent barrel
Mine: very light primer strikes

 

[A pause for the COZ]

I have a couple of them. I have a 327 mag revolver. I like it allot. Very accurate for a snubby. Although I will say it is not a GP100. Very heavy 100 gr 327 mag loads are hard on it.
But it cost a 3rd what a GP costs. I shoot stout enough
85gr xtp/2400 loads.It performs well enough.

Have a Taurus.380 auto. Has a wide chamber that shoots LEE 105 gr .358 swc real well.
Again its not a Colt Mustang and at about 1/4 of that cost it performs well enough.

Also have a Rossi ( Now owned by Taurus) M92 .357 mag lever gun.
I like this gun allot. The 1 in 30 twist does hamper it when it comes to heavier bullets. 158 gr at 50 yards is about it.
180 gr swc and you would be lucky to hit a 8 inch paper plate at 50 yards. They just wont stabilize at those weights.
I know I have tried for a year to get them to fly.
125 gr is the nitch for this gun I can make a big jagged hole with it at 100 yards. Again works well enough but is not a Marlin with a 1-16 twist for hogs And that is saying some thing because Marlin has went down the pooper since they got bought out.

I guess the moral for Taurus is " Works well enough" Wouldn't be the gun you would buy if you could buy the one you want. But they work well enough.So you can buy all the guns you want.
Believe me I have used and owned allot worse than Taurus.

 

[Rifleman1952]

I've purchased two Taurus revolvers; the 608, 8 shot 357 mag (which I liked) and the 922, 9 shot 22 revolver (which I didn't like). Both revolvers were exceedingly dirty new in the box. In fact I would have to say they were the dirtiest new handguns I have ever purchased. The 608 cleaned up well and worked well. I would recommend it to others. The 922 was purchased for my wife to get her into shooting. She hated it because the trigger pull was so stiff. She even had a difficult time cocking the hammer to fire in single action. Taurus customer service said it just needed to have a few hundred rounds fired through it and would loosen up. We tried that and it didn't help. I ended up just trading it in on another firearm. I have given the 608 to my son, who likes it very much and considers it his main "house gun". The general consensus, among the shooters I know, is that Taurus makes decent revolvers but their semi-autos tend to have problems.

 

[jasmith85]

I have never owned a Taurus but I did have a Rossi 357 snubby for a while. I barely shot 100 rounds through it the entire time I had it though. It was much more accurate than you would expect and seemed really well built, but I don't know how it would have lasted. I wouldn't bash Taurus since I haven't had a bad experience with them, but unless I found a really good deal I wouldn't buy one. I'll gladly give the extra $100 or so for a brand that gets much better reviews.

 

[FireForged]

I do not care for their semi auto pistols due to shotty quality control (IMO) but I do like their revolvers and espicially their circa 2000 model 85's

 

[Onward Allusion]

Your poll should have been separated into revolvers and pistols as there is a distinct difference, at least from my experience. Over the years, I've owned/ still own over a dozen Taurus revolvers and a half dozen Taurus pistols. Every one of the revolvers worked without fail. Every one of the pistols, with the exception of the PT92 had issues. Who knows - maybe I was lucky with revolvers and unlucky with pistols.

As a side bar, I recently picked up a Taurus 66 4" and a Rossi R971 4". Both are 357. The Rossi outshot the Taurus by a mile. Ironic as heck 'cause the Rossi was made on old Taurus equipment whereas the Taurus 66 was produced on new equipment.

Going back to the revolvers - the newer ones are a little rougher on the finish but no other issues. I would trust a Taurus revolver with my life. With a Taurus pistol, not so much. I don't have a single Taurus pistol.

 

[Frasier]

I don't bash Taurus, I just relate my bad experience with them and will never own another. Perhaps they should make them out of steel, instead of graham crackers.

 

[AUG]

I tell everyone that asks to avoid taurus. I base this on the fact that I know at least a dozen people that have purchased them only to experience problems and get screwed over by the not so "free" warranty that requires expensive shipping. This list of negatives is longer so if you are a taurus fan you might want to stop here.

They are cheap and tacky
they are very low quality
they are marketing gimmicks that appeal to old men ie the judge


Honestly no one would pay a S&W or Ruger price for a Taurus and there is a reason for that. They are not as good!

 

[wingspar]

Be sure and let us know how the gun is running after a few outings. I wish you the best.

I’ve had the Taurus PT 1911 a week now with 155 rounds thru it. While that probably isn’t enough to judge it in many peoples minds, it hasn’t missed a beat yet. Seems well built. Time will tell. Still in the “honeymoon” period.