i can only make a VERY biased reply to this thread, because the 3 revolvers i own, along with with semi-auto EDC and my 357 lever-action, are all Taurus Products manufactured and purchased in the last 5 years. At this time i cannot say for sure the round counts of any of my Taurus firearms, just that the lever has likely the highest with the semi-auto and the ".357mag Poly-Protector" trailing close behind. All of these have AT LEAST 2000 rounds a piece, which i understand is not alot, but since these are either "role-specific" firearms or just the fact that i haven't owned some very long, they aren't exactly the type of guns i am doing mag dumps every trip to the range. I do have a Taurus 85, it's pretty much what most would call the "standard" Taurus .38spl, from a good many years back. My stepfather just gave it to me when he picked up his Beretta semi-auto a few weeks back, but he cannot recall the exact purchase date, just that it may have been in the late eighties and outside of the occasional range trip with friends he did not shoot it much. This 85 is over 95% still, despite being holstered in his center-console for a couple decades, i found that to be pretty impressive. I wish i had more time behind these, what i surmise, fine pistols that very much exceed the value that I put into them. I have yet needed to call Taurus so i have no comment to their CS or standing behind their warranties. I have never needed a part or a part repaired on my Taurus firearms, but time will tell, but eventually any firearm will wear out a moving part.
Knowing i am still in the infant stage with most of the Taurus guns,i will do my best to give a non-biased opinion on the quality of Taurus, comparing only to my limited experience with several other brands. I'll start with my favorite, the .357 M92 lever-action: not just my fav Taurus, quite possibly my favorite rifle in my safe period, tough call, but this has been a silk smooth extremely reliable action, out-of-the-box. I ordered from Taurus through distributor to get the 24" round barrel in stainless, it's a freaking beauty, undeniable. Upon opening the action and exposing the internals, yes i agree with alot of bad reviews, that they look pretty darn rough, especially on the sides of the bolt, at least the polished the ins-outs of the lever/lugs/gates etc. just that danged bolt is stupid rough, and i admit it can be a pretty big turn off. It has ZERO effect on the function of the rifle, this thing is crazy reliable with a huge versatile array of projectiles, but it's the principle that kinda makes you wonder. If you built a rifle for public consumption, and paid attention to detail/aesthetics of every last piece and in the end you had what most would consider a very handsome rifle, but you noticed when racking the bolt you see an inch thick slab of steel come out with the most horrific, jagged cuts that get exposed for all the eye to see.........wouldn't you dang well make sure the next rifle you did would have that piece taken to the belt-sander before assembly? I find that very strange, because it's such a simple procedure, yet t's constantly complained about by just about every Rossi 92 buyers review ever, and it's pretty much a free and no hassle fix, not to mention quick. Small things like that make you wonder about the pride, or lack thereof, that's instilled into the company as a whole when NOBODY down the line stands up and puts their foot down to get this quick fix done.....................sorry, but it's just plain weird.......
Now i will speak to, what i believe to be, my highest quality Taurus. This is also my newest Taurus and is the Model 82B4 "Homeland Security"....i know, it's a little hokey, but a fine revolver. This is a HUGE revolver for being only a .38+P, which to me is the appeal of it as well. I have shot many Rugers, Smiths and whatevers and have to say there are not a whole lot of triggers out there that have a DA as good as this thing and very few that have a better one. Now i am not going to say i have never shot a top-o-the-line bobbed smith that wasn't better and glided like silk, but lets take cost into account when it's relevant. Note again, this is a large frame revolver (K-ish) with a flawless finish and beautiful, IN MY OPINION, streamlined lines. The barrels rifling looks laser cut with no jigs/jags anywhere to be seen, flawless rounded crown that blends seamlessly in and around the front of the barrel, cylinders that had the extra time taken to be honed properly after the rough cuts, a cylinder gap that is immeasurable to the eye and just "okay" quality engravings. to me this revolver serves no purpose to anyone outside of the range, and am pretty disappointed that i am staring down a fixed frame sight. make that VERY disappointed, but again we need to look at the costs, and with the infinite threads of undeserved Taurus bashing on every google search, it's not likely even if Taurus made the holy grail of target revolvers, that many folks are going to wait in line to pony up nearly a grand for a Taurus whether it's worth it or not. Outside of the non-adjustable sights i am unbelievably pleased and even surprised at the quality and attention that is apparent almost immediately after fondling this particular model. A- overall, points off for sights and the "no-swell" rubber grip. A+++ for exceptional value at under $450 for a real competitor to the known "quality" pistol-smiths.
On to the worst of the collection. When i say worst i am talking quality in terms of fit/finish/QC and not the execution of the firearm itself, which if i thought was poor it wouldn't be my wife's EDC. I'm talking about the Taurus 605POLY. This design appears to be modeled as close as possible from the Taurus 85 which most would see as a utility revolver with a CC implied role. The 605 takes the popular design and only builds a steel cage around the cylinder housing and puts inside a polymer framed body with a decently thick barrel insert to make a lighter CC revolver capable of full-house .357mag in a pistol that comes in less weight than the steel .38spl. This revolver did everything it could not to pay too much attention to small details. It has a slightly larger than normal cylinder gap, a plastic end-cap the pops in and out to cover the crane screw that will eventually pop-off and disappear, rough-cut chambers that make for sticky extraction with the mildest loads out there, likely the shallowest grooved rifling i've ever sen outside of a Nerf gun and finally a metal front sight with a red fiber-optic insert which will come out sooner that the crane screw cover. This gun sounds pretty terrible right? Well, it's not. It's actually surprisingly accurate and even somewhat tolerable for a couple cylinder of the magnums here and there. It hasn't hick-upped for us once, as an owner for over three years and, a low guess, of 1500+ rounds of various powered am mos, this particular revolver is still my wife's favorite and the one she shoots the most accurately, really it TAUGHT her to shoot efficiently. As she went through various semi-autos, struggling all the way, her confidence/motivation and interest in the sport was fading quickly. we didn't know at first that the mousey 9's were a poor choice for newb's, but from the first round out of the barrel she has been able to control the weapon unlike she ever was with a semi despite weeks of practicing. I also like this gun, it has an armor tough body that doesn't scratch/dent/ding/discolor and is very easy to conceal in a pocket. Despite the rough and shallow rifling, i also have been able to master the accuracy of this little blaster. The body is a slightly fatter, but lighter, than the steel revolvers and for some reason that lends well to it's comfort. the grip fits my hand very well and is likely what makes me slightly loathe the , much nicer, 82B4's grips. I personally just have a slight discomfort with a five shot EDC and i don't believe tactical revolver reloads is practical in ANY real-world defense situation. If i was, i would likely carry this exact gun, pocket-carry, as my EDC. It's a utility gun and it does exactly what it needs to for a price tag that is embarrassingly low. C+ for wobbly front sight, rough cylinders, shallow rifling A+++ for reliability and value and bringing another affordable usable firearm to the masses.
i could talk about the others, but pretty sure this post has already become annoyingly long, like so many of my wordy posts of late, this pretty much gives the examples of Taurus quality from high/mid/low, note the price tags generally already give away these trade secrets. And although i could go for days about how anyone who doesn't buy a Taurus G2 is missing one of the greatest values in semi-auto pistol history, that wasn't really the question......
I dont quite trust the taurus 941 yet. I want to see more of a track record. 