Taurus M85

B

Bullrock

New member
I think I just bought a NIB Taurus M85 with a hard to find 3" brl. for $250.00. It is a pre-lock model and comes with really nice wood grips. I won't know if I'm the winning bid until morning but whatdaya think. Good deal, bad deal, OK deal...???

The devil made me bid!!! Dam!!! :eek:
 
pics

do you have any pics of the M85. It sounds pretty good especially if you like the looks of it as is, (Meaning your darn good at dressing up guns with grips that complement it.) :D , love ta see it..
 
Decent price. I paid almost that for a 2" CH model back in 1994. Mine does best with 148 gr LWC ammo. The only trouble I've ever had with it was with some PMC.
 
Davy

I stole this pic from the auction web site. I did win, not that I wanted to. I couldn't lay off because of the price. I was the only one who bid on this thing.
I can't wait to get this and shine the S out of it!!! :D

Here Tis
attachment.php
 
Last edited:
I have had a ss model w/3" barrel around 15 years now. It's been a real good revolver that has caused no problems.
 
Looks like a fine little revolver.

I have two of the 85CH Stainless DAO 2 inch guns. Bought them at a gunshow in Gainesville Fl about 10 years back, with the idea that when one wore out, I would have another. Still shooting the first one, so I guess you could say I am more than pleased with the Taurus.
 
I think you'll really like the 3" barrel. Except for deep cover or pocket carry (non-holster carry), IMO, the 3" barrel is the best compromise length for a J or K frame revolver in terms of balance, practical concealability and recoil control in combat situations. In N or L frame configurations, I prefer the hard to find 5" barrel.

I've got a 3" barreled S&W Model 60 with adjustable sights in .38 Special (a similar set-up to your Taurus 85, excepting finish and sights) tha tI feel makes the best "trail" gun (hiking, camping, fishing companion)ever. Plus, you got yours at a darn good price. Can't lose deal!
 
dgludwig

Thank you! I also just bought this SW66, 2 1/2" barrel, .357, that I am now carrying. I don't know yet what I'm gonna do with my M85. Maybe look at it awhile, then take it to the range... :D

attachment.php
 
Last edited:
M85ul

Bought an M85 Ultra-Light this week in box. Paid $299. 2" barrel. Hoping the aluminum frame could handle +P .38 loads. Anyone know if it will? I've read somewhere where they said after 100 rounds of +P, it will wear out?

I think it's rated fro +P but not sure.

Bill
 
wrcraw1965

I don't keep track of rounds, but I would guess I have put has at least 50 rounds of +p through my 85UL since April. Maybe 60 or 70. The rest were .38Spl. There is no evidence, at least with this gun, that the end is near. It still has an excellent bore, tight lock-up, and smooth action.
attachment.php
 
"Bullrock"

Good to hear that!

I've read this someplace, and also my Hodgdon Powder handloading booklet states that the +P loads are not to be used in small frame or aluminum frame pieces.

Just don't know if it's a bunch of liability BS on their part, or if there is really merit in what they are advising.

I'm going to check Taurus's website and see what they say about it as well.

Just got back from Taurus's website. The M85UL is rated for +P "Duty Use"! Whatever this means, exactly is unclear? I'm taking this to mean that it's ok to use +P as defence ammo, but not for lengthy target shooting sessions of 100s of rounds, etc. Wish I knew of someone who has really pumped some quantity of +P through this revolver. I find it kind of strange that Taurus would give it a +P rating and then say it's good for "duty use"? Like it's o.k. to an extent, but beyond that you could have problems! How am I supposed to know when it's been too many +Ps fired, etc? After, the damage is done or what? Why even manufacture a .38 today that's not able to handle +P all day long?

Like the piece, but a little disappointed in its ambiguity... Should have gotten the all titanium, possibly.

Thanks,

Bill
 
I paid $300 for a CH85 and a 3" M85 package deal about 5 years ago.
I like the CH but I really prefer the 3" for the little bit longer sight plane and better feel and balance

I got a deal because there was some strange corrosion on both guns
A little toothpaste clened it up like new.
 
Bullrock

Did some more studying of the Taurus Ultra-Lights.

Interestingly, it looks like there are basically three variations of "lightweights".

There is an "Ultra-Light Titanium", the "Ultra-Light" like ours, and a total "Titanium".

The lower cost UL (ours) has an "alloy" (aluminum) frame and barrel wrap over the barrel liner.

The mixed UL + Titanium (which happens to be +P rated with no mention of "duty use") still uses the same alloy frame, but the cylinder and the barrel wrap is titanium.

The total titanium has a titanium frame + cylinder and barrel, etc.

Bottom line - looks like the only difference between the UL and the UL with titanium is the cylinder and outer barrel with the frames being the same.

Ours (UL) has a standard steel cylinder which is strong enough for +P, just not as light as the titanium cylinder. So basically, we have the same piece as the mixed ULT, just with a heavier standard steel cylinder. The outer barrel shouldn't make alot of difference considering ours (UL) has a stainless steel liner in it, which is strong.

My fear was that the frame wouldn't take the +P's extra power being that it's "alloy" rather than steel, but like I said the mixed UL + Titanium model doesn't mention the "+P for duty use" comment, yet has the same frame! It must be a marketing tool.

Unless the titanium cylinder holds up better than the tried and true steel cylinder ours has, the two are functionaly the same except for the weight savings on the pricier cylinder. Of course a standard steel cylinder shouldn't prematurely "wear out" with an extral 100 fps in +P. It might go all at once though, and blow apart, but it wouldn't be some gradual degredation. If it had a possibility of "blowing apart" with a +P, then Taurus would have never even mentioned ANY, or even limited use of +P for this UL model.

Other than some big difference in their short 2" barrels, I don't see any practical difference in their strengths. It was a weight savings above all for the higher priced ULT, and the only way left to improve on the standard UL was to lighten the cylinder and maybe get a few grams out of the barrel with titanium.

Afterall, you can't make the cylinder out of aluminum to save additional weight, but apparently beginning with the aluminum frame must have been o.k. for both models.

I feel more confident now to go ahead and put some +P through it now.

Bill
 
joab

Sounds like you got a good deal. I thought I may have paid a little on the high side for my 85UL, but it was an "unfired" piece in factory box with all paperwork, and it's a newer one with the safety keylock, etc.

I did get a good deal to make up for it though on an excellent, like new condition, Ruger Security Six .357 for $229. Pachyderm grips on it too.

That was a good deal. It's very nice, mid to late 80s. Perfect condition, accurate as heck! Didn't even have a cylinder travel line around it yet, until I started playing with it.

It had a little oxidation on the rubber grips. Used toothpaste and toothbrush as well to scub it off. Grips same as new now! Checkering crisp, no wear, etc.

Bill
 
I was looking at a UL just Saterday it was well over $229.
Still thinking of getting one but the next snub I get will have to have a concealed or shrouded hammer.
Still shopping.

I'm a pawn shop/used gun shopper.
Why not let other people take the depreciation when a little toothpaste can make it shine like new
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top