Katrina made me do it! I bought a Raging Bull

B

Bigoledude

New member
Just about all of my guns were lost under the 13 feet of the nastiest salty, sewage and slop that hurricane Katrina pushed into my house. I did have fine guns; Brownings, Bennellis, Colt, Rugers, S&Ws, Remington, Weatherby, Freedom Arms etc...

I'm now retired and money is a lot tighter than it was in the years when I accumulated all my guns. My homeowners insurance paid me for everything that was destroyed ABOVE the water line. That water line was 3 feet up in my attic. So, not even my attic contents were covered.

Now, I am trying to buy a few guns that my 4 sons and I can afford. My twin sons bought me a Marlin 1894 in .44 mag. Man, I had a blast with that little lever gun at the range! I bought a Taurus Raging Bull in .44 mag. And, I ordered a Charter Bulldog in .44 special.

Then, I found this website. It seems that there are many folks here who really hate Taurus. It's got me concerned. We will put many many rounds through the .44 "MAG" guns at the range and hunting the large Russian boars we have down here.

I'm also planning to shoot the Marlin a lot. My question is; Do ya'll think the Raging Bull will hold up to the thousands of rounds we will put through it?
 
My personal opinion on this is that Taurus gets a lot of hate TODAY , due to their making high quality guns at affordable prices . So when those who put them down , having bought other brands , have to justify the purchase at higher prices and that usually includes putting the cheaper Taurus guns down.

The Raging Bulls are very solid guns. If you got a good one it should hold up for a long time. If not , send it in and they'll work it over like it was custom tuned by a gunsmith.

If I'm not mistaken , all Taurus products are now made with CNC and the Taurus' facility is one of the most state of the art today. They didn't get the ISO 9001 designation because they make junk. They've also pioneered many 1sts in the industry that have other manufacturers scurrying to copy them.

Finally , their warranty is second to none too.

I wouldn't hesitate to buy a Raging Bull.
 
When you look at DA .44 mags on the market, your choices are:

Smith 29/629 - Damn that bad lock! And, it's light. That makes recoil worse for really big loads.

Ruger redhawk/superredhawk - redhawk triggers are not popular. They get ripped on a lot (I like mine, BTW). And the SRH is fugly.

Taurus Raging Bull/Tracker/Smith copy - Smith copy is made as cheaply as possible, sharing a lot of the taurus faults with other models as the 94. The tracker is extremely light and holds 5 rounds rather than six. The titanium frame is strong, but recoil on that light gun is heavy. Raging Bull is an original taurus design that they pulled off very well. The only thing I would change is the grips. Nice and heavy, solid construction and 6 shot capacity.

I have a 5.5" redhawk in .44 that I like a lot. The only guns from taurus I will buy after my mod94 purchase are the original designs such as tracker and raging bull. I want an 8" raging bull in .44, one of these days.

I think you did just fine.
 
I have no qualms with Taurus on this end.

15 years ago I did, but these days I think Taurus revolvers are every bit as good as S&W's.
 
Conspiracy theory?

Petre writes "My personal opinion on this is that Taurus gets a lot of hate TODAY , due to their making high quality guns at affordable prices . So when those who put them down , having bought other brands , have to justify the purchase at higher prices and that usually includes putting the cheaper Taurus guns down."

Terms like "high quality and affordable are very subjective. I disagree with you on this point. My first gun was a Taurus, and I liked it a lot. It was a Model 99. It was reliable, accurate etc. Of course, it was also basically a Beretta. But Taurus reliability has been spotty all along. I have had several guns that were complete lemons.

IMHO, Taurus gets "hate" from me, anyway, because they have very poor QC.

Not that they don't serve a niche market. But they are not making better guns cheaper. They make cheap guns cheaper. I feel just fine about buying a quality product and paying more. You get what you pay for.

Anyway, Happy New Year

Shooter429
 
I agree their QC can be an issue ... but please explain to me how their guns are made cheap?

Titanium isn't cheap.

Stainless steels used are of the same ballistic grade to my knowledge as everyone else.

They're all being made with computer aid now to very tight tolerances.

Are their grips cheaper? Maybe they cut corners factory porting their barrels ?

Is the Tarus security locking system somehow inferior to others?

Do you think they're making guns with say ... cheaper springs , weaker firing pins or what ???

The newest pistols are even using Heinie sights as standard now , which many consider among the BEST. The recent review of their forthcoming 1911 was quite good crediting Taurus with making a hand fitted gun that had $2100 in quality features for a MSRP of $599-619.

I've yet to see one poorly finished. Their bead blasted finish on every one I've seen is flawless. Blued or polished the same.

So please tell me ... how are they making a "cheap" gun compared to what others are doing? What parts are cutting corners to save money?

This is what I'm saying about criticism about Taurus products. IMO it's not really substantiated.

As for QC ... here is where I might agree with you. Every Taurus I've ever handled that had a problem .... of TODAY'S models ... not the older flawed ones of 10 years ago .... had a problem that could easily be fixed with a good cleaning or adjustment. Especially with the revolvers.

Lifetime warranty on their guns says it all ... they know the parts themselves are all up to snuff. 9 times outta 10 when they get sent back ... they get cleaned internally and maybe adjusted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top