Opinion of Taurus?

[Skans]

Interesting poll. From what I could gather, slightly more people who actually owned a Taurus were neutral to out-right not liking their Taurus gun than those who owned and liked their Taurus. Looks like quite a number of people participated in this poll too.

If this were a broader based poll of all Taurus owners and even 20% responded "neutral" or "bad experience", I wouldn't have anything to do with owning one. That's way too much negative to be ignored.

 

[srt 10 jimbo]

Yet I have 4 0f them that all work great. Most of these taurus bashers dont have or never had one either.

 

[predecessor]

If... 20% responded "neutral" or "bad experience", I wouldn't have anything to do with owning one. That's way too much negative to be ignored.

Semi-Free country so you are welcome to not purchase a gun from a manufacturer based on whatever criteria you wish. However, I think your formula for decision making is composed of small-mindedness and insecurity.

How did you purchase a vehicle without the 81% approval rating of your peers? You certainly do not vote in state or federal elections or practice religion -- the list of things you should exclude from your life based on the poll of popular opinion goes on and on...

 

[Mikeyboy]

Kel-Tecs are a much better deal, IMO. The P32 may be rough around the edges compared to the PT22/25, but at half the weight, and more potent caliber, the KT is a better choice for concealed carry. For that matter, in roughly that same price range, you can get a PF9, which is only slightly heaver than the PT22/25, but will do ya a whole lot more good if need be.

Don't get me wrong, I like the size, weight, and caliber of the Kel Tec, but the gun was never built to last. Yet for some reason Kel Tec gets more respect than Taurus. I have been a long time Kel Tec owner, and most of us KT heads have no problems sending a gun back to the factory for service when the frame crack after 1,000 rounds, yet for some reason if a Taurus PT22 does the same thing after shooting 5,000 rounds thru it, "It's Junk !!! As soon as it comes back from the factory I'm selling it!!! " Its just funny.

As to the PT22, its the same size as a P32 just thicker and 2 to 3 ounces heavier loaded. The Pf9 is bigger and weighs +18oz. I would not pick a PT22 for self defense pocket carry, but with all the DAO pocket guns out there in expensive and hard to find .380, the PT22 would make a good trainer.

Pf9, P11 and P3At (the P32 is very slightly smaller than the P3at)

With what is going on in the world and with the current adminstration, we might not have the luxury of sending in a broken pistol for warranty service.

 

[Skans]

Semi-Free country so you are welcome to not purchase a gun from a manufacturer based on whatever criteria you wish. However, I think your formula for decision making is composed of small-mindedness and insecurity.

I owned a Taurus and it broke. Now, this can happen with any gun, I know, but the poll seems to indicate that more than just a tiny handfull of people have had problems with their Taurus guns. FWIW, I've shot more rounds through my Jennings-22 without it breaking than I did my Taurus PT-99 before it broke.

Do you really think that we are all making this up? We're not! I have absolutely nothing to gain by doing so. There is a significant number of people that have had problems with their Taurus guns. FWIW, their PT1911 seems like a nice gun, and I would consider purchasing one. It it wasn't for my bad experience with Taurus, and the bad experiences expressed by others, which indicates to me that this is an ongoing problem to some degree, I'd consider purchasing one.

Now, I own an EAA 10mm. After purchasing it I read one account on here about frames cracking. If I had read that before buying my EAA 10mm, I might have checked it out more before making the purchase. As it is, that gun has so far been an excelent firarm for me. So, yes, I do think that looking for failure trends in certain manufacturers and/or model of pistols is helpful. That's about the best thing these forums can provide.

 

[predecessor]

I owned a Taurus and it broke...

Now this, is a valid criteria for decision making.

If it wasn't...for the bad experiences expressed by others...

This, not so much.

Do you really think that we are all making this up? We're not!"

I don't think you are making up your bad experience with your Taurus PT-99. I also don't think that folks who might have had a bad experience with a corrupt politician are making that up either. But I don't not choose to support another political candidate based on that one experience with an individual from that party either.

If I have one bad experience with a particular make and model of a vehicle or any product, I chalk that up to owning a lemon.

Again, I was criticizing the idea that things should be anathema based on popular opinion.

You don't want a Taurus because you had a bad experience with one particular model, I can live with. Not buying one because 20% of folks in a "poll" don't like them is silly.

 

[srt 10 jimbo]

I got a pt101, pt-709, 738tcp and a pt 1911. So going by what some people heard, 2 of them are broke! Ya'll Taurus Bashers are a riot.

 

[Skans]

I guess then, that there is no sense in us reporting problems we've personally experienced with particular firearms - because no matter what percentage of us report a "problem", it just doesn't matter. We are just out to bash that particular manufacturer.

Personally, I now do search for problems people have had with a make/model of firearm before I commit to purchasing one. I'll read the comments and yes, they could influence my decision after conduciting some research.

 

[srt 10 jimbo]

I had a Smith and Wesson revolver that broke. Dont see me bashing them though. I've had other pistols that had problems too. If you have one that was truly bad fine, get it fixed or get another one or get something else. my Smith broke in 1982. I have not gotten another one. my choice, but I dont bash them. If you went out and got a brand new gun (any brand). your kind of proud of it at you share it with everyone on the forum, you dont wanna here someone telling you it's garbage. AH forget about it, Think I'll stick to the rifle forums, at least they got better things to do then bash each others guns all day.

 

[Dragon55]

I've only owned 1 Taurus. PT100 in .40 Easily have over 3000 rds thru it.

Only problem I had was a cracked grip(from my own clumsiness). I called Taurus and received new grips and screws in 3 days. ..... no charge

I guess I am the exception to the rule based on what I've read here.

 

[Skans]

I had a Smith and Wesson revolver that broke. Dont see me bashing them though

How many times have I seen someone on this forum warn others not to purchase: Jennings, Lorcin, Bryco, Jimenez? Why do you think people warn others about these guns? Just because they just want to "bash" someone who just purchased one?

Personally, I want people to write candidly about guns that have broken on them. A car that breaks down at an inoportune time is a PITA. But a gun that breaks, or fails to work properly at a bad time can be a death sentence.

Where else am I going to find accurate reports of breakages on various firearms? Gun dealers? The Rifleman? Gun Manufacturers' website?

This isn't about bashing people for buying Gun-X or Rifle-Y. It's about passing along important information to those that may be in the market for a good reliable gun.

If you have one that was truly bad fine, get it fixed or get another one or get something else.

Just as a point of information. My Taurus couldn't be fixed 100%. Maybe I should have just send it back to Taurus and gotten a new one - my mistake. The frame rails were marred pretty badly. I got it fixed the best that I could, it worked, I did trade it and moved on - took about a $250bath on that gun, which had less than 1000 rounds through it. As it was, it took my gunsmith several attempts to obtain a locking block from Taurus that was in spec enough for him to fit to the gun. He had to send the part back a couple of times - showed me the part. It was sloppily cast and still had excess metal hanging off of it from the casting process. It took me about 6 months before I got my gun back in working order. It was just an all around bad experience.

 

[Ace_Breaker]

Hey Skans, don't worry about it. Taurus lovers smell blood and they'll do this every time if given the opportunity. They bought cheap and want to convince themselves that they did right by buying one. They are not top tier quality guns and anyone who thinks they are has either lack of knowledge or just don't know what they are talking about. I've been down this road many times. It's easier to make the comment and try not to worry about their bashing responses. Gun shops, LEO, competition shooters, etc., all seem to get it. Who made these Taurus lovers all knowing anyways?

 

[predecessor]

This isn't about bashing people for buying Gun-X or Rifle-Y. It's about passing along important information to those that may be in the market for a good reliable gun.

I don't think anyone has a problem with others posting about problems they have personally experienced with a particular model of firearm that they own or have owned. Go to EVERY manufacturers web forum and you will find satisfied and unsatisfied owners speaking about problems they have had with specific pistols.

While I can't speak for the rest, I tire quickly of the posters who convey hearsay about a manufacturer and "wisdom" regarding specific firearms they have no personal experience with because they once had a bad experience with another model of that manufacturer.

It's like saying "Stay away from anything Walther or Sig because their current .22's are of mediocre build quality."

Or don't buy a Colt because of their 2000 polymer pistol... the list goes on.

 

[Skans]

Points well taken, Ace and Predecessor. Thanks.

 

[dav]

I can't really participate in the poll, yet. I just bought a used Taurus M82 revolver but have not fired it yet.

I had a need for a .38 Spc revolver, under 44 oz., that would see very limited use and never be carried (home defense only). What I really wanted to get was a Smith & Wesson M&P pre-model 10 at 30 oz. (from way before the new M&P designation). Availability locally? Approximately 0. Other options? Ruger, $400 (used, local, 40 oz) or Taurus, $200 (PPT FTF 36 oz).

I opted for the Taurus at 1/2 price. I consider it a gamble due to all the naysaying I see on the boards, but I was able to check it out before buying it (although not fire it). Tolerances are very good. Dry-fire functioning is very good. Looks and feels good.

I think it is going to be just fine. Should be live firing tomorrow.
.

 

[gyvel]

I stated earlier that I thought Taurus' products were ok, but that there were better guns available.

I am basing that statement on my experiences as a gunsmith in Miami in the 80's. Many Tauruses came across my bench, but no more than any other make. (In those days, the majority of Taurus products coming into the U.S. were revolvers; The autos were relatively new.)

My general take was that the overall fit and finish were not quite up to the standards of comparable American or European arms, particularly with the internal workings. On the other hand, I was impressed by some simple engineering innovations that I felt were an improvement over, for example, a comparable Smith & Wesson revolver.

I would take a Taurus over a Rossi and I would definitely take a Taurus over any pot metal gun, but also, as I stated earlier, there are better guns to be had, but there are many that are much worse.