Taurus Question

Status
Not open for further replies.
You can find legitimate problems on the web about Taurus...as well as Ruger, Glock, Beretta and so on. For the most part though, all make good guns.

Taurus seems to attract a lot of negative comments based one what somebody "read" on the net and the stories just grow.

Beretta has been though that as well although not so much on the web since it is several years ago. Remember the slide breaking issue? It was actually a very rare thing using Nato ammo. Well, if you listened to all the BS stories at the gun shop you would think that slides breaking was a daily occurrence because some guy "knew a guy who knew a guy...".
 
Remember, this forum is not made up of your typical pool of gun owners. We're exceptionally picky about things. I doubt that the average gun owner would make a big deal about the firearm problems I mentioned above. But to me, I expected better.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

A member of this forum came here for information prior to purchase.

That makes him a cut above your usual gun counter fodder who look merely at caliber and price tag. The Taurus "looks" like the Smith but it's $200 less. Hey, sell me that one!

That customer may take it out and shoot it a bit, maybe find a cylinder that doesn't extract smoothly or a lot of lead spatter between the cylinder and forcing cone... and he'll just keep the gun thinking "well, that's the way it is."

A member here, though, knows (or ought to know) that type of malfunction is not acceptable and to not put up with that level of quality in a firearm.

So, among the more discriminating crowd, Taurii have a poorer reputation because the level of lay-acceptable defects are higher in their guns and we don't want even that level of defect.

Frankly, the Taurus defenders annoy me in two ways:

1. They're typically very early in their gun owning careers and don't have much for disposable income. They buy a Taurus and want to say it's as good as a Smith/Ruger/Colt and use cool phrases like "fit and finish were excellent" and practice their acronyms while saying "POA was equal to POI for every shot."

As evidence... I offer my initial post when I got my Taurus 94 back in 2005:
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=186434&highlight=Taurus+94

I had enthusiasm for the gun and tried to drum up conversation about it and elevate its status from hi-point or jennings.

2. A pro-Taurus owner will defend a Taurus as a good choice to a fellow member here if the member is new, but not if the member appears to be an experienced gun owner.

If it isn't good enough for an experienced gun owner, how is it possibly acceptable to use as a novice and build your expectations for guns for the rest of your life based on that one weapon?

Taurii may be just fine for Fudds and non-shooters, but folks who come here tend to be shooters. They expect better than "barely good enough" as a baseline standard, and they deserve better. Even the novices.

One member floating around here has a fantastic sig line: Quality is remembered long after the price is forgotten. Or something like that.

The extra $100 for a Ruger or $200 for a Smith is a no-brainer. Anyone cutting corners on quality over the cost of 4 boxes of revolver ammo isn't thinking clearly in my book.
 
Frankly, the Taurus defenders annoy me in two ways:

1. They're typically very early in their gun owning careers and don't have much for disposable income. They buy a Taurus and want to say it's as good as a Smith/Ruger/Colt and use cool phrases like "fit and finish were excellent" and practice their acronyms while saying "POA was equal to POI for every shot."

As evidence... I offer my initial post when I got my Taurus 94 back in 2005:
Click to expand...

Been there...done that...

Also, there are at least a couple of posts here citing numbers, that would seem to be something more than just a "fair share" of clunkers. I've not had my S&W, Ruger, or Glock firearms require even a single trip back to the range (and I've owned multiples of those also). My Tauri had over a 50% failure rate with a variety of models from a variety of dealers. I should mention that all were purchased NIB.

I really don't like to come across as a Taurus "hater". They serve their purpose as stated above in that they fill a price niche, if you're willing to take a chance. Honestly, my only reason for posting in some of these threads is to warn people off of a brand that I think is problematic at best, and one that they can definitely move up from for another $50 to $100. On the used market I've bought S&W for the price of a Taurus.
 
Last edited:
As a Taurus owner(it is the only handgun I own, but far from the only one I've shot regularly) I can say they're not all that bad. Would I buy one again? Maybe if I got a great deal on one. I believe the big problem with Taurus guns aren't their designs(because they tend to "borrow" them from other companies), but their metallurgy. I won't go as far as to say they use Lorcin quality pot metals, but something is lackluster on their metal end. The only problem I've ever had with my Taurus, which is a 9mm PT24/7 Pro, is a broken disassembly latch(there's that metallurgy issue). I had the honor of dealing with their customer service, and one lost disassembly latch and three weeks to a month later, I had a brand new one on my pistol.

Moral of the story: Sometimes you get what you pay for. Sometimes cost is more of an issue. I'd say skip the Taurus, unless you really, really want one.
 
Well after reading through this thread I guess something's very, very wrong with my two Tauruses - they work. Guess I should listen to the detractors and throw them in the trash. After all what do I know, just a Vietnam vet with over 40 years of shooting experience with many fine guns. And while I'm at it I should dump my WASR 10, too. People say it's not worthy either.
 
...must be lucky....

Well, I know someone who has 3 Taurus pistols & 1 Taurus revolver, and they all work wonderfully well. My friend must be either incredibly lucky or just using magical bullets--which is probably a good thing, because I have heard that their customer service is poor, and that sometimes what one receives at the local FFL is not what exactly what Taurus advertised to be in the package [:barf:].--Patrice
 
Taurii may be just fine for Fudds and non-shooters, but folks who come here tend to be shooters.
Click to expand...

Thanks for calling all Taurus owners on this forum "Fudds and non-shooters." Course, your opinion must be valid, as you have 4000+ posts! Obviously you're much more experienced than the rest of us. Yep, you're no doubt a real "shooter." An elite member of the "discriminating" crowd. I often run into other members of that crowd at the local gun shops. They're the ones who do all the talking. :rolleyes:
 
My Taurus guns have been fine

all that I have owned have been wheel guns, but I put many rounds through them and had no issues, most have been sold now for more "expensive" guns but we enjoyed them while we had them
 
I have a Taurus PT1911 that had a bad barrel out of the box. Sent it back and it was repaired. Now it shoots was well as a kimber or spring field. I dont think I could get a better gun with going to 2 or 3 times the money I have in it. And Yes the turn around time on the repairs is a joke. It took about 10 weeks.
 
On a recent thread by riggins_83, twenty-five persons on this forum voted the following in a Taurus poll:

Horrible experiences! Would never.. ever.. touch one again.

In reality, that's not many persons. They are, however, a vocal group
Click to expand...

Also, from that same poll:

Own or owned one, loved it - 73 votes (out of 250)
Own or owned one, pretty neutral view of them - 40 votes (out of 250)
Never owned one, don't like them - 27 votes (out of 250)
Never owned one, pretty neutral view of them - 34 votes (out of 250).
 
Well after reading through this thread I guess something's very, very wrong with my two Tauruses - they work. Guess I should listen to the detractors and throw them in the trash.
Click to expand...

I've never understood this kind of response to the Taurus threads. Everyone is just sharing their experience. Yours has been good...enjoy your guns, and don't let others experience depress you so (or cause you to question your service to your country).;)

Oh I forgot to mention, My first two Taurus guns were pretty good, but it was downhill from there. Maybe 2 is the magic number.

Philosophical question to ponder, why is it that you just never see this kind of thread about say SIG, H&K, Glock, or S&W. Yes, you may see a rare negative thread but in general you just don't see this phenomenon with any kind of consistency. Yes the Glock is blocky, and there may be issues with the 40 cal, but you just never see a consistent pattern of anyone knocking their reliability. Even the old standard Taurus 85 gets it's fair amount of bad press (my 85 was problematic). Just can't believe the whole Taurus is questionable thing is just the power of the Internet. 4 of of 7 bad ones is saying something IMO.
 
Last edited:
I've had 1 Taurus, a M85 bought NIB. It seized up around the 200 round mark. I sold it, learned a valuable (and costly) lesson about Taurus.

It was my first, and certainly my last, Taurus.
 
I have a taurus 905, which is the snub nose 9mm revolver. it "works" but when i point it at paper 7 yards away, and shoot, i have no idea where the bullet goes. tumbling bullets
 
Well after reading through this thread I guess something's very, very wrong with my two Tauruses - they work. Guess I should listen to the detractors and throw them in the trash. After all what do I know, just a Vietnam vet with over 40 years of shooting experience with many fine guns. And while I'm at it I should dump my WASR 10, too. People say it's not worthy either.
Click to expand...

I've never understood this kind of response to the Taurus threads. Everyone is just sharing their experience. Yours has been good...enjoy your guns, and don't let others experience depress you so (or cause you to question your service to your country)...
Click to expand...

Doug, thanks for the concern but I was just being sarcastic. I'll keep shooting Taurus until my own prove me wrong! Not a fanboy either, I love my Colt 1911, S&Ws, Rugers and any well designed firearm. Heck, I'm even hanging on to my HD DVD player though the world says toss it in the trash before it collapses in a pile of dust! :D
 
http://www.chuckhawks.com/smith-wesson_dark.htm That's Chuck Hawks one of the modt respected gun writers in the world.Taurus outsells Glock, S&W, Ruger. Most are made in the Beretta factory which they purchased some years ago. They kept the Beretta engineers and smiths. Spent $20,000,000 for the latest CNC machinery. Their barrels and slides are forged 4140 stainless.There is no pot metal in them, the only ones they copied are their 1911's and 92's under license from Colt and Beretta.Until recently no gun maker had a s/a d/a trigger system.So much for no innovation.When you are exporting 600,000 handguns, 1/2 to the US there will be a few lemons.http://www.taurusarmed.net/forums/index.php?topic=22505.0 This is the complaints section on Taurusarmed.net not sponsored by Taurus. Feel free to browse, it covers two years of complaints,covering about 500,000 handguns shipped to the US. If you discount 45acp magazines a known design defect, most of the problems are self inflicted by the owners.Mostly failure to clean before firing, although there are some funny ones like the guy who made up some black powder cartridges and was amazed they damaged his pistol, or others who cleaned their guns with ammonia based cleaners and also were amazed when their blueing washed off.The most popular seems to be , light firing pin strikes, that cured themselves when the firing pin channel was properly cleaned.Doh! I have a dozen guns all of different manufacturers and only one went back for repairs, a Century build made with used parts.I had another that broke three times in the first 100 rounds, but Kahr-auto ordnance didn't warrant their guns at the time.I took a $200 loss on that one, even though my gunsmith assured me that his heat treatment of the firing pin would last.
Thompson.jpg
When it would fire it wouldn't cycle the action, the two recoil springs were 3/4" too long.This was a $1000 carbine with no warranty..My S&W 686 jammed up after firing a dozen +p rounds and switching to magnums, took a dowel and a hammer to get the magnum cases out of the cylinder.The one time I had to discharge one of my guns in a situation, it was a Davis $50 22mag derringer.It was my backup, but my 45 was in my waistband in the small of my back and the derringer was in my hand in my pocket.This was truly a case of of a moron bringing a knife to a gunfight. But a bullet whizzing by his head , made him realize the error of his ways, he dropped the knife and began begging for his life. I had no intention of shooting the retard, but then again I wasn't going to let him continue his charge with a knife in his hand.
 
1. They're typically very early in their gun owning careers and don't have much for disposable income.
Click to expand...
Wow, I guess I don't fit that mold. I have been shooting since 1948. Own S&W, Colt, Ruger, Taurus & SA. I can afford to buy what I want (within reason:)). Just so happens my PT945 has been extremely reliable. I have no real allegiance to any brand. My only emotional attachment is to my pre-70 Colt 1911 that was a gift from my wife in 1966. And that's not because it is a Colt...just because it was a gift.

Having said that, it is apparent that Taurus has too many reports of bad customer relations, and too many QC related problems. But they do have some good designs, and many are very reliable. It is also true that there is a segment of gun owners that just cannot stand a gun lower cost than their own that performs well. I remember the same comments about Ruger compared to Colt Woodsman when I purchased my .22 standard new for $37.50.:)
 
Doug, thanks for the concern but I was just being sarcastic.
Click to expand...

I know, I couldn't resist being a bit sarcastic myself. Thanks for handling it so well.:) I'd don't blame you for keeping what works.
 
1. They're typically very early in their gun owning careers and don't have much for disposable income.
Click to expand...

One more comment on the above statement. I find the opposite. In general I find older shooters like myself are less passionate about certain brands than the young shooters. I think that's because when you have a lot of shooting years you have probably had failures without about every brand.

If one of your guns has never failed, then you have probably not been shooting enough.:D
 
Last edited:
Excellent comments Lashlarue and Madmag!

Madmag, a lot of kids think older guys like us don't shoot anymore or use outdated equipment that just isn't tacticool. Good to see you stay on top of your game!

(I also had people joke about my Ruger 22lr years ago. Too cheap, too ugly.. Don't hear much of that these days though.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top