Taurus Reliability - Actual Numbers

Status
Not open for further replies.
Unanimous

ms6852,

That model is indeed a wonderful gun both aesthetically speaking as well as functionality wise. It's the one Taurus model (92/99) that seems to have very few critics.

-Cheers
 
So, I went back to the store and after putting the Ruger and some Tauruses back in my hand, noticed that the action on the Taurus was considerably stiffer, and the parts slid around fairly roughly. I opened them up and put the Ruger LCR along side the Taurus 605 and I could visually see the difference in machining quality. In the Taurus, the ends of the cylinder and the face of the ejector were so rough I could see the tool marks and feel the ridges with my fingernail like I was scraping it on sandpaper. On the Ruger, everything was smooth and polished as it should be and the action was very smooth.

Between that and the ability to change the front sights, I bought the Ruger that day. I still might buy one of those Taurus Protectors some day when I have a little more expendable cash, though.
 
The Ruger should work fine, although my only two firearms ever needing to be returned were from Ruger. Still, a fine brand!

OP, thanks for being objective in making your decision. That was the most reasonable post I've seen on Taurus. Although, it did mean that I had to hear the "regulars" telling their oft told tales. :)
 
Same story: fluff and buff cheaper stuff, or shut it up and throw big bucks.:eek: My Models 431, 66, PT 22, and older 82 are reliable, accurate, and dependable. The same goes for Rugers, AR 15's, Stoegers, and most mil surp. stuff. -7-

 
Last edited:
I've owned three Taurus guns - all purchased new. On one the cylinder locked up after only 75 rounds. The dealer took it back and I've been buying Rugers ever since.

So for me Taurus had a one-third failure rate.
 
I've owned 3. Every one I owned broke, physically, not just a failure, broken. My first Taurus, a 85 stainless broke internally on the first day I owned it. I took it back to the shop and they replaced it. The second had a spring or something internal break and had to be sent back for repairs with less than 100 rounds through it. I sold it vowing never to get another. I finally decided to try one last time with a PT145, the latest generation. It had parts flying off on the first range visit. Accuracy and reliability were also very poor. Go ahead continue to try to save a buck Tauri lovers, you can have them. I just hope it works for you when you need it most. All that has been said and there are many who just don't seem to get the fact that they are a lower quality handgun. I've never had the same problems with Hk, Sig, Glock, CZ, and a few others. 3 strikes and Tauri is out. And here is a handclap for those who bought a substandard handgun and it seems to work for you flawlessly. Report back when you've put several thousand rounds through the gun and see how you feel about them.
 
Maybe some more research needs to be done?
Is failure model specific? I have a pt 24 7 pro cds and have never had a problem with it. It's well broken in and isn't a safe queen. I actually trust it enough to use as one of my carry guns...
 
I'll always spend a bit extra for a brand that's more recognizable with a more proven record.

It's why I'll never own a Kia or a brand-X fridge or a $10 wal-mart pocket knife or a Taurus firearm.

Some folks will, I won't. Which is fine. Go capitalism!

That probably means I'm the much-dreaded brand snob, but that's okay. And not necessarily true. Check out my two Rugers. Inexpensive, unrefined, rugged as anything, never a failure to be found! :)
 
Got a Taurus 85 and it would bind-up. Took it back and got a J Frame. Had a Total Titanium .45 Colt from Taurus and it work well. 50/50 - about the same chance I'd get another Taurus.
 
I see a lot of Taurus bashing going on in forums, and that's not to say that a certain amount isn't justified... I've never owned a Taurus, haven't even shot one before. However the amount that goes on (as others have said) seems suspiciously high for a company that's still in business. As a prospective buyer, the amount of worthless noise surrounding the brand is staggering, and more than a little annoying. But, is it justified?
Click to expand...

Yes, it's justified.

I've been a member of several gun forums for the last few years and I've read too many tales of woe from unhappy Taurus customers not to believe them.

Wait, save a few more dollars and purchase a handgun from a manufacturer with a good reputation for quality.

Good luck. :)
 
I can only go by 'personal' experience and my Tauri products have been reliable out of the box (PT-22, PT-25, PT-92 and 24/7 OSS). Granted the mouse guns have both seen just a cumulative total of 5-700 rounds and the .22 likes HV ammo (.25acp about breaks me). However, the 9mm workhorses have seen exponentially more and eaten anything I fed them. I do not judge a potential procurement of anything unless I have direct feedback via a gun rental/range or friends of whom I can try out various different models of which I am considering. I have heard people rant on literally every gun vendor out there (Taurus included) but I generally reach the conclusion that there are lemons in every lot of every product made by man across the board. Not to advocate other boards, but go to any vendor forum and you will find people complaining about bad experiences (actual 'first-hand' accounts). Just to reiterate, this is not just a firearms related issue/proclivity but also washers, dryers, cell phones, tablets etc...

Happy Birthday America!
 
Well, no doubt the internet drastically amplifies small rates of real failures as well as just plain rumors with firearms.

Take the Beretta 92. From what I've read, Beretta has sold over 1 million of these pistols to the US military since it was adopted.

In the beginning, there was a relative weakness in the locking block design that could cause it to fail when you ran *lots* of +P rounds through it... earlier than it might be expected to (no block design will last forever).

There were apparently some failures with the slide flying off, and at least one person was hit with a slide, maybe more. Beretta upgraded the design long ago though (maybe 20 years ago?), and as far as one can tell, it may have been a very small number of actual incident of flying slides in the first place. This is one of the most prolific handguns in history.

Yet, until this day, "experts" on the internet will tell you to avoid buying a Beretta 92 because the locking block will break and they are dangerous.
 
CarbineCaleb,

Great example as that is one of the most 'notorious' and recent cases of an actual problem that was 'over-embellished' (IMO) beyond belief...Primarily by critics of the basic, fundamental U.S. decision to transition away from JMB's ingenious 1911 or likewise similar critics that felt SIG should have received the contract etc...By the way, I think both of those camps have a certain and undeniable degree of validity to their respective arguments. Nevertheless, the adoption of the 92 has become the legend of 'Internet Folklore' and is the subject of controversy now some thirty years later.

-Cheers
 
CarbineCaleb said:
Well, no doubt the internet drastically amplifies small rates of real failures as well as just plain rumors with firearms.

Take the Beretta 92. From what I've read, Beretta has sold over 1 million of these pistols to the US military since it was adopted.

In the beginning, there was a relative weakness in the locking block design that could cause it to fail when you ran *lots* of +P rounds through it... earlier than it might be expected to (no block design will last forever).

There were apparently some failures with the slide flying off, and at least one person was hit with a slide, maybe more. Beretta upgraded the design long ago though (maybe 20 years ago?), and as far as one can tell, it may have been a very small number of actual incident of flying slides in the first place. This is one of the most prolific handguns in history.

Yet, until this day, "experts" on the internet will tell you to avoid buying a Beretta 92 because the locking block will break and they are dangerous.
Click to expand...

Even though my post was anti-Taurus (which I stand by) this is undeniably true.
 
I have owned 2 Taurus guns one was a 357 revolver the second was a PT 1911. I Had to send the 1911 back twice, once because failure to go to battery half the time. The second time while firing the gun the safety falls off and every time I fired the gun I was hit in the face by hot powder residue. The revolver I had no problems with other than I didn't like a 6" barrel. I have heard both good and bad things about the company and there customer service. I don't go around bashing them I just don't but them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top