warningshot
New member
Actual Numbers?
When I earned a 'F' in Algebra class nobody asked if I had 39% or a 32.002% average.
When I earned a 'F' in Algebra class nobody asked if I had 39% or a 32.002% average.
Taurus Reliability - Actual Numbers
- Thread starter xanadrew
- Start date
- Status
"...Sorry your PT22 had problems. They are particularly finicky with certain kinds of ammo, nothing over about 1400 fps and nothing over a 40 grain bullet. I believe Taurus publishes that in their manual as well.
Key holing is often caused by too slow a twist rate for bullet weight and length, and because the PT22s are particularly finicky on ammo, that could also explain the FTF, and light primer strikes. So, ammo is crucial with PT22s. Exactly which ammo did you say you used? Perhaps with the Beretta you selected a model that has a design that also handles a wider range of ammo selections. Just a hunch..."
I was in a 22lr phase at that time, and shot several thousand rounds....CCI MiniMags, Blazer, Federal, Aguila...and I was shooting them in several different platforms. None of the other firearms had so much as a misfire, and the PT22 is the ONLY firearm in 50yrs of shooting that keyholed...and it was doing it with all the different types of ammo I used. There was no visible flaw which might cause it.
The addition of a plastic buffer on the Taurus was no doubt an attempt to compensate for poor slide metallurgy, as indicated by the fact that the Beretta does not need it.
Taurus does a fine job of making firearms that LOOK good. They will not be getting any more of my money.
Key holing is often caused by too slow a twist rate for bullet weight and length, and because the PT22s are particularly finicky on ammo, that could also explain the FTF, and light primer strikes. So, ammo is crucial with PT22s. Exactly which ammo did you say you used? Perhaps with the Beretta you selected a model that has a design that also handles a wider range of ammo selections. Just a hunch..."
I was in a 22lr phase at that time, and shot several thousand rounds....CCI MiniMags, Blazer, Federal, Aguila...and I was shooting them in several different platforms. None of the other firearms had so much as a misfire, and the PT22 is the ONLY firearm in 50yrs of shooting that keyholed...and it was doing it with all the different types of ammo I used. There was no visible flaw which might cause it.
The addition of a plastic buffer on the Taurus was no doubt an attempt to compensate for poor slide metallurgy, as indicated by the fact that the Beretta does not need it.
Taurus does a fine job of making firearms that LOOK good. They will not be getting any more of my money.
"The addition of a plastic buffer on the Taurus was no doubt an attempt to compensate for poor slide metallurgy, as indicated by the fact that the Beretta does not need it."
The disadvantage we all have with respect to ALL these customer service departments, and asking them questions with regard to our complaints, especially when we notice that a repair has come back with a design change, is that they DO NOT answer questions if you call them.
If I have a problem with a firearm, generally I am able to examine it throughly to the extent that I am often able to remedy the issue by thinking it through.
The problem is, the CS departments are very reluctant to discuss much of anything, even if you do call them, and try to reach some understanding, or obtain an explanation, if nothing more than to gain some knowledge that might easily remedy an issue without sending it back.
The same thing happened to me with Smith & Wesson Customer Service when the M&P40C had 5 misfires, and jammed several times, and that was brand new, right out of the box. Of course, in this day of considerable liability, I suppose I can't blame any of them for playing it close to the vest. We live in a sometimes frustrating period in history with respect to getting "the truth" about anything.
The cost of liability and litigation is astronomical...
The disadvantage we all have with respect to ALL these customer service departments, and asking them questions with regard to our complaints, especially when we notice that a repair has come back with a design change, is that they DO NOT answer questions if you call them.
If I have a problem with a firearm, generally I am able to examine it throughly to the extent that I am often able to remedy the issue by thinking it through.
The problem is, the CS departments are very reluctant to discuss much of anything, even if you do call them, and try to reach some understanding, or obtain an explanation, if nothing more than to gain some knowledge that might easily remedy an issue without sending it back.
The same thing happened to me with Smith & Wesson Customer Service when the M&P40C had 5 misfires, and jammed several times, and that was brand new, right out of the box. Of course, in this day of considerable liability, I suppose I can't blame any of them for playing it close to the vest. We live in a sometimes frustrating period in history with respect to getting "the truth" about anything.
The cost of liability and litigation is astronomical...
Last edited:
Stevie-Ray
New member
Meh, 50/50 for me. I have a Taurus PT-22 that I'll never give up. Well made, perfectly reliable, lots of fun. Then I had a PT-111 Millenium that I learned to hate. Touchy mag release that dropped the mag in my off-hand far too often, and not accurate enough for my tastes. Replaced it with a G26 and it totally outclassed it in ever way except girth. It was one of only 2 guns I've sold.
Can't speak to the PT-111 (I have got to fire one and quit procrastinating) but I have a couple of PT-22's and one PT-25 and I agree with your synopsis--I also have a Beretta Bobcat 21A in .22lr and I can confidently say go with the Taurus if money is a key factor (heck, if your patience you can find one approx. $190 OTD absent FFL perhaps, even a nickel plated one at that). If money is not the key variable, I would choose my 21A as it is just a tad smaller in my pocket.
-Cheers
I believe there are basically two things that contribute to most modern day polymer firearms receiving complaints. I believe they are mostly issues that are ergonomic to the shooter, or ammo incompatibility related.
I believe that because Taurus is quite a bit less expensive, they are purchased by a disproportionate number of novice shooters, often poor, as in little money to spend, compared to the more expensive brands.
Novices are not experienced enough to thoroughly evaluate a firearm for proper function, nor are they patient enough in determining just exactly what is causing their problems. They are quick to make assumptions about how a firearm should react, even though they have no experience to accurately assess what's going on.
My apologies to you that are wealthy, highly experienced, and have purchased Taurus firearms and still had problems. You are the minority in a sea of novices. You are not the source of the bogus complaints. But, IMHO, they are.
In my own case, with respect to the mag release button inadvertently releasing on my Taurus PT140, it was "MY" thumb that was hitting the button. That is not a defect, but rather a design that is contrary to my grip of the firearm, and resulting from my own stubborn refusal to modify my grip of the firearm to accommodate the mag release button.
Being of the impatient group, I was ready to dismiss the PT140 myself, and join the ranks of "dis-satisfied" Taurus bashers. But, the ergonomics of the PT140 is absolute heaven, and has no equal. And, that caused me to spend a little more time with the firearm, and to give it my thorough consideration, evaluating all aspects, not only it's performance, but comparing it's range of features as well.
Because my Taurus PT140 has been so dependable, the function so consistent with respect to no FTE, no FTF, over 1200 rounds through it so far, and because they are feature rich, rather than dismiss it over the mag release button issue, I opted to simply move the mag release to the opposite side of the frame. It was a very simply fix, and it took less than two minutes.
It has never inadvertently released a magazine since, which is conclusive evidence that my problem with the mag release was induced by the shooter (me), and not a defect in the firearm.
When I compare all the numerous "pros" against the few "cons" with respect to the overall performance of the Taurus PT140, it is exceptional, or at least on par, in comparison to other models that are $150 more expensive.
I believe that because Taurus is quite a bit less expensive, they are purchased by a disproportionate number of novice shooters, often poor, as in little money to spend, compared to the more expensive brands.
Novices are not experienced enough to thoroughly evaluate a firearm for proper function, nor are they patient enough in determining just exactly what is causing their problems. They are quick to make assumptions about how a firearm should react, even though they have no experience to accurately assess what's going on.
My apologies to you that are wealthy, highly experienced, and have purchased Taurus firearms and still had problems. You are the minority in a sea of novices. You are not the source of the bogus complaints. But, IMHO, they are.
In my own case, with respect to the mag release button inadvertently releasing on my Taurus PT140, it was "MY" thumb that was hitting the button. That is not a defect, but rather a design that is contrary to my grip of the firearm, and resulting from my own stubborn refusal to modify my grip of the firearm to accommodate the mag release button.
Being of the impatient group, I was ready to dismiss the PT140 myself, and join the ranks of "dis-satisfied" Taurus bashers. But, the ergonomics of the PT140 is absolute heaven, and has no equal. And, that caused me to spend a little more time with the firearm, and to give it my thorough consideration, evaluating all aspects, not only it's performance, but comparing it's range of features as well.
Because my Taurus PT140 has been so dependable, the function so consistent with respect to no FTE, no FTF, over 1200 rounds through it so far, and because they are feature rich, rather than dismiss it over the mag release button issue, I opted to simply move the mag release to the opposite side of the frame. It was a very simply fix, and it took less than two minutes.
It has never inadvertently released a magazine since, which is conclusive evidence that my problem with the mag release was induced by the shooter (me), and not a defect in the firearm.
When I compare all the numerous "pros" against the few "cons" with respect to the overall performance of the Taurus PT140, it is exceptional, or at least on par, in comparison to other models that are $150 more expensive.
Last edited:
Quizcat,
Coincidentally, I was speaking along these very same lines with the range-master just last week. Honestly, more than half the people I see at the range are indeed 'novices' and IMO would be FAR better off with a revolver--they are just looking for a simple self-defense gun and are not like most of us "gun-nuts" found in the forum whereby they have a natural interest or curiosity in firearms.
Very well said.
-Cheers
Coincidentally, I was speaking along these very same lines with the range-master just last week. Honestly, more than half the people I see at the range are indeed 'novices' and IMO would be FAR better off with a revolver--they are just looking for a simple self-defense gun and are not like most of us "gun-nuts" found in the forum whereby they have a natural interest or curiosity in firearms.
Very well said.
-Cheers
I think they are feature rich compared to most other brands, they have an excellent warranty, not just to the original purchaser, but for the LIFE OF THE FIREARM.
It would seem to me, having earned ISO compliance over 12 years ago, that their processes by now, 2012, have been improved over time, and those processes incrementally audited for compliance by a very demanding third party (ISO), known for ensuring manufacturing excellence without favor. ISO compliance is no cake walk. ISO also includes QC, so I don't buy the accusation that their QC is any less rigorous than the rest of them.
No, it's not that the quality of Taurus' product is any less, just that statistically, the quality of their customers leaves something to be desired, IMHO. A higher percentage of poorer, less sophisticated, novice customers results in more returns, and a statistically higher number of complaints. It is really just that simple.
Anyone with an engineering background can pull the Taurus product apart, analyze it, and conclude that the engineering and workmanship, within the polymer product, is just as good as any of the polymer firearms offered by the elite brands in the same categories, with respect to reliability, ie: FTF, FTE, etc...
It's difficult to demonstrate with the series of photos I posted, but if you compare the quality of internal construction in person, and the design of various models and brands as I have, as I attempted to illustrate in the photos, there simply is no substandard aspect to the Taurus design. There are a few areas where the Taurus product may not be quite as durable inside compared to some of the more expensive brands. But, those areas are not critical function areas where you would experience sudden issues of reliability. Yes, you may have to replace the firearm sooner than you would replace a more expensive brand, perhaps in 20 years instead of 30 years. But, the Taurus "design" is not going to fail you with any greater degree of statistical likelihood than all the rest of them out there with respect to a sudden need for Self Defense, and it will do so at literally 1/3 the cost of some brands.
And, in some respects, what may be construed by some as lacking in the Taurus design, based on my own assessment of the internal workings with respect to longevity of durability, those differences may actually be contributing to certain attributes in the Taurus that are missing from other brands (ie: the trade off-weight for example).
I have issued this challenge before with respect to the polymer handguns, not the steel products, polymer only. If someone can point directly to where the design of the Taurus polymer products are substandard in comparison to brands that are three times more expensive, not just horror stories, but actually provide design engineering justification for your conclusions, I am all ears.
I am totally open to replacing my Taurus with one of the more expensive brands. I am not biased against the other brands, nor am I a blind advocate for Taurus. I have evaluated the Taurus design from a totally non-biased perspective, sometimes even having a more more critical eye for the Taurus design compared to the other brands.
But, I honestly can't find one single issue with respect to "design" of the Taurus that all the rest of them don't equally endure.
It would seem to me, having earned ISO compliance over 12 years ago, that their processes by now, 2012, have been improved over time, and those processes incrementally audited for compliance by a very demanding third party (ISO), known for ensuring manufacturing excellence without favor. ISO compliance is no cake walk. ISO also includes QC, so I don't buy the accusation that their QC is any less rigorous than the rest of them.
No, it's not that the quality of Taurus' product is any less, just that statistically, the quality of their customers leaves something to be desired, IMHO. A higher percentage of poorer, less sophisticated, novice customers results in more returns, and a statistically higher number of complaints. It is really just that simple.
Anyone with an engineering background can pull the Taurus product apart, analyze it, and conclude that the engineering and workmanship, within the polymer product, is just as good as any of the polymer firearms offered by the elite brands in the same categories, with respect to reliability, ie: FTF, FTE, etc...
It's difficult to demonstrate with the series of photos I posted, but if you compare the quality of internal construction in person, and the design of various models and brands as I have, as I attempted to illustrate in the photos, there simply is no substandard aspect to the Taurus design. There are a few areas where the Taurus product may not be quite as durable inside compared to some of the more expensive brands. But, those areas are not critical function areas where you would experience sudden issues of reliability. Yes, you may have to replace the firearm sooner than you would replace a more expensive brand, perhaps in 20 years instead of 30 years. But, the Taurus "design" is not going to fail you with any greater degree of statistical likelihood than all the rest of them out there with respect to a sudden need for Self Defense, and it will do so at literally 1/3 the cost of some brands.
And, in some respects, what may be construed by some as lacking in the Taurus design, based on my own assessment of the internal workings with respect to longevity of durability, those differences may actually be contributing to certain attributes in the Taurus that are missing from other brands (ie: the trade off-weight for example).
I have issued this challenge before with respect to the polymer handguns, not the steel products, polymer only. If someone can point directly to where the design of the Taurus polymer products are substandard in comparison to brands that are three times more expensive, not just horror stories, but actually provide design engineering justification for your conclusions, I am all ears.
I am totally open to replacing my Taurus with one of the more expensive brands. I am not biased against the other brands, nor am I a blind advocate for Taurus. I have evaluated the Taurus design from a totally non-biased perspective, sometimes even having a more more critical eye for the Taurus design compared to the other brands.
But, I honestly can't find one single issue with respect to "design" of the Taurus that all the rest of them don't equally endure.
Last edited:
I have a friend with a Taurus revolver. Her husband bought it as a present for her. She has been at the range three times with the gun and things got progressively worse. Cylinder lockup. Hard to extract .357 and some difficulty with .38 spl.
Last week I met her over at the indoor range and brought a Ruger Service Six that I bought from a range officer two years ago. That gun has about 3000 rounds through it. I also brought a Ruger Redhawk.
I bought a box of 38 spl, a box of .357 magnum and a box of .44 mag factory loads. I also had some .44 special as well as some .44 magnum handloads.
I let her shoot all of it and she really liked the .44 special as well as the 38special.
Her Taurus is curently back for service and I do not know what they will find.
I let her pick which gun to keep until hers gets back. She chose the Service Six.
Her sons also shoot and when they dryfired and handled the Ruger. . .hands down, they prefer the Ruger over the Taurus.
I don't know what the outcome will be, but we will meet up at the outdoor range on Friday and she will bring the Ruger. Her husband should also be there. He shoots quite a bit and we will get his take on the Ruger versus the Taurus.
Should be an interesting day. I am glad that Taurus has a good warranty on their firearms, but it seems like there is a lot to be desired in the build quality. Sometimes you get a really good one and sometimes you do not.
From the extensive posts on this forum about the brand, I would have to say I would not buy one.
YMMV.
Last week I met her over at the indoor range and brought a Ruger Service Six that I bought from a range officer two years ago. That gun has about 3000 rounds through it. I also brought a Ruger Redhawk.
I bought a box of 38 spl, a box of .357 magnum and a box of .44 mag factory loads. I also had some .44 special as well as some .44 magnum handloads.
I let her shoot all of it and she really liked the .44 special as well as the 38special.
Her Taurus is curently back for service and I do not know what they will find.
I let her pick which gun to keep until hers gets back. She chose the Service Six.
Her sons also shoot and when they dryfired and handled the Ruger. . .hands down, they prefer the Ruger over the Taurus.
I don't know what the outcome will be, but we will meet up at the outdoor range on Friday and she will bring the Ruger. Her husband should also be there. He shoots quite a bit and we will get his take on the Ruger versus the Taurus.
Should be an interesting day. I am glad that Taurus has a good warranty on their firearms, but it seems like there is a lot to be desired in the build quality. Sometimes you get a really good one and sometimes you do not.
From the extensive posts on this forum about the brand, I would have to say I would not buy one.
YMMV.
There is no comparison. The Ruger Revolver quality is superior to the Taurus, IMHO. But, it is, after all, at least twice the price. What are the ammo recommendations for the Taurus? That is often the source of many, many issues with all firearms, not just Taurus. I know that Taurus is frequently specific about FPS and bullet weight in their semi-autos, as it relates to twist...not sure about their revolvers.
Taurus castings are made in Brazil. A number of their polymer handguns are essentially manufactured in Florida. Some specifically say manufactured in the USA. The PT2011s, the PT24/7 GS, the PT22, the PT25, the PT738, the PT740, PT809, Model 92, are made in the USA, just outside Miami, Florida. They are manufactured in a "state of the art" manufacturing facility, one that I have personally visited...you could almost eat off the floor it is so pristine.
My PT140 was made in Brazil, and many of their revolvers are still made in Brazil, as are their 1911s. But, a few of their revolvers are made here. Taurus is manufacturing their .44 Model 405 in Florida for example. The wildly popular "JUDGE" is manufactured in Florida.
Did you know that most of the Springfield Armory 1911s are manufactured in Brazil? Springfield Armory is widely held as one of the highest quality 1911s you can buy, most of them made in Brazil.
So, a blanket criticism, just because some of their product is made in Brazil, doesn't justify a bias with respect to quality or reliability, not these days. And, coming from a manufacturing engineering background, it pains me to say it with respect to the decline of US manufacturing as it compares to the rest of the world. But, we are not the bastion of expertise we once were in the World. It kills me to admit it, but facts are facts.
I'm afraid the politics of the day have given most of our manufacturing secrets and our intellectual property, developed over the last 150 years, away to foreign governments, some of them hostile. Foreign corporations have absorbed our proprietary manufacturing expertise through numerous joint ventures we've engaged in over the last 25 years. As a result, it is the US work force that lacks the skilled labor as a result of the shift of manufacturing to other countries, to the extent that our capabilities have been severely curtailed with respect to our being equipped to dominate manufacturing quality in the world, with very few exceptions, ie: aircraft, and to a certain extent, still firearms.
I'm afraid we've probably forever sealed our fate with respect to regaining the dominance the US once enjoyed. With respect to our occupying a superior position of manufacturing dominance in the world, I do not see that kind of former dominance returning to the USA in my lifetime.
My PT140 was made in Brazil, and many of their revolvers are still made in Brazil, as are their 1911s. But, a few of their revolvers are made here. Taurus is manufacturing their .44 Model 405 in Florida for example. The wildly popular "JUDGE" is manufactured in Florida.
Did you know that most of the Springfield Armory 1911s are manufactured in Brazil? Springfield Armory is widely held as one of the highest quality 1911s you can buy, most of them made in Brazil.
So, a blanket criticism, just because some of their product is made in Brazil, doesn't justify a bias with respect to quality or reliability, not these days. And, coming from a manufacturing engineering background, it pains me to say it with respect to the decline of US manufacturing as it compares to the rest of the world. But, we are not the bastion of expertise we once were in the World. It kills me to admit it, but facts are facts.
I'm afraid the politics of the day have given most of our manufacturing secrets and our intellectual property, developed over the last 150 years, away to foreign governments, some of them hostile. Foreign corporations have absorbed our proprietary manufacturing expertise through numerous joint ventures we've engaged in over the last 25 years. As a result, it is the US work force that lacks the skilled labor as a result of the shift of manufacturing to other countries, to the extent that our capabilities have been severely curtailed with respect to our being equipped to dominate manufacturing quality in the world, with very few exceptions, ie: aircraft, and to a certain extent, still firearms.
I'm afraid we've probably forever sealed our fate with respect to regaining the dominance the US once enjoyed. With respect to our occupying a superior position of manufacturing dominance in the world, I do not see that kind of former dominance returning to the USA in my lifetime.
Last edited:
Quizcat, you keep talking about analysis of your PT-140. Problem is, that's a sample size of one.
You can disassemble it, reverse engineer it, do what you want with it - but it's still a sample size of one. It tells you nothing about QC, overall engineering quality, or anything else.
Meanwhile, you had to reverse the direction of the mag release because of "your grip," yet you think this is a shooter issue, not a design issue. Unless your grip or hand shape fall outside of statistical norms, that is very much a design issue.
Now, if your hands or fingers fall outside the middle part of the bell curve, that might change things. In an automotive example, I have somewhat short legs, and a very long torso. I mostly drive pickups or SUVs, because most cars are not designed for my upper body height - I either have to lean the seats too far back for comfort, or deal with my head either touching the roof-liner all the time, or hitting it over every speed bump. So, I drive only a certain subset of vehicles.
But, if my 5'8" wife, who falls well within statistical norms, doesn't have good headroom in a car, it's probably not designed very well.
This has nothing to do with the skill of the driver; the passenger compartment either has dimensions suitable to a normal range of body types, or it does not.
So, going back to guns, if your hands aren't abnormal, then your PT-140 had a design flaw. Period.
You can disassemble it, reverse engineer it, do what you want with it - but it's still a sample size of one. It tells you nothing about QC, overall engineering quality, or anything else.
Meanwhile, you had to reverse the direction of the mag release because of "your grip," yet you think this is a shooter issue, not a design issue. Unless your grip or hand shape fall outside of statistical norms, that is very much a design issue.
Now, if your hands or fingers fall outside the middle part of the bell curve, that might change things. In an automotive example, I have somewhat short legs, and a very long torso. I mostly drive pickups or SUVs, because most cars are not designed for my upper body height - I either have to lean the seats too far back for comfort, or deal with my head either touching the roof-liner all the time, or hitting it over every speed bump. So, I drive only a certain subset of vehicles.
But, if my 5'8" wife, who falls well within statistical norms, doesn't have good headroom in a car, it's probably not designed very well.
This has nothing to do with the skill of the driver; the passenger compartment either has dimensions suitable to a normal range of body types, or it does not.
So, going back to guns, if your hands aren't abnormal, then your PT-140 had a design flaw. Period.
No, you're right, I do consider it a design flaw, but one that is specific to me, and not one that diminishes my positive experiences with the firearm, nor one that effects it's reliability.
My point is, it is still superior to all the rest of them, design flaw and all. Besides, they ALL have their design flaws, and they all vary with respect to ergonomics. That's why so many models are now marketed with back straps. It is literally impossible for them to design one frame to fit all shooters.
I suspect the design of the PT140 could be improved to appeal to a wider variety of shooters, but I'm not throwing out the baby with the bath water over such a minor issue, one that I've resolved without so much as a second thought.
I also replaced the Heine sights with Williams Fire Sights. I just didn't like the Heine Straight Eights, and prefer the standard sight picture. I also like adjustable sights for range practice, whereas the Heine Straight Eights are set in the dovetail, and have no vertical adjustment. But, just because the sights that were on the firearm are not my preference, I don't consider that a defect, but merely something to be dealt with to enhance my shooting performance, and my comfort level. I liked the PT140 so much compared to other models that it was worth spending the time with the firearm to enhance it.
I don't advocate that everyone would find the PT140 preferable because I realize that everybody has different criteria. But, having a different criteria to meet, and having a firearm fail that expectation with respect to features, isn't really a defect. I consider a defect to be FTE, FTF, grip discomfort, etc...and not something that I can modify to enhance my satisfaction.
As for my isolating my comments to one Taurus model, I can only afford to compare so many models. But, I have examined the internal mechanisms of a number of Taurus polymers, and determined them to be consistently good quality with respect to design.
I believe the 24/7 G2 is an excellent design, and it may even be superior to the PT140 in many respects. I have even considered it to replace the PT140, along with my consideration of the M&P40C. But, I still prefer the PT140 due to a very minor, but important, feature not inherent in either the 24/7 G2 or the M&P40C. Specifically, those models both lack the pinky finger support that is included in the PT140 design, included without effecting the size and weight. That is just one factor with respect to ergonomics that has, so far, disqualified the other models as eligible replacements for the PT140 for concealed carry.
I have a number of different polymer models in my collection, many more than most gun owners will ever see, and I am poorer for it. I can only vouch for the fact that the PT140 has won-out over the rest of them, based on the criteria I assign for concealed carry. And, those criteria are specific to my own criteria for concealed carry, and may not apply to everyone, or to those that are strictly range shooters.
I am not saying that Taurus is far superior to all the other brands with respect to quality and durability, only that they endure an undeserved, disproportionate level of criticism based on my own experiences and analysis of various other models in comparison.
If you factor in the price, which should be the least of our considerations for concealed carry, they are indeed superior to many other brands.
My point is, it is still superior to all the rest of them, design flaw and all. Besides, they ALL have their design flaws, and they all vary with respect to ergonomics. That's why so many models are now marketed with back straps. It is literally impossible for them to design one frame to fit all shooters.
I suspect the design of the PT140 could be improved to appeal to a wider variety of shooters, but I'm not throwing out the baby with the bath water over such a minor issue, one that I've resolved without so much as a second thought.
I also replaced the Heine sights with Williams Fire Sights. I just didn't like the Heine Straight Eights, and prefer the standard sight picture. I also like adjustable sights for range practice, whereas the Heine Straight Eights are set in the dovetail, and have no vertical adjustment. But, just because the sights that were on the firearm are not my preference, I don't consider that a defect, but merely something to be dealt with to enhance my shooting performance, and my comfort level. I liked the PT140 so much compared to other models that it was worth spending the time with the firearm to enhance it.
I don't advocate that everyone would find the PT140 preferable because I realize that everybody has different criteria. But, having a different criteria to meet, and having a firearm fail that expectation with respect to features, isn't really a defect. I consider a defect to be FTE, FTF, grip discomfort, etc...and not something that I can modify to enhance my satisfaction.
As for my isolating my comments to one Taurus model, I can only afford to compare so many models. But, I have examined the internal mechanisms of a number of Taurus polymers, and determined them to be consistently good quality with respect to design.
I believe the 24/7 G2 is an excellent design, and it may even be superior to the PT140 in many respects. I have even considered it to replace the PT140, along with my consideration of the M&P40C. But, I still prefer the PT140 due to a very minor, but important, feature not inherent in either the 24/7 G2 or the M&P40C. Specifically, those models both lack the pinky finger support that is included in the PT140 design, included without effecting the size and weight. That is just one factor with respect to ergonomics that has, so far, disqualified the other models as eligible replacements for the PT140 for concealed carry.
I have a number of different polymer models in my collection, many more than most gun owners will ever see, and I am poorer for it. I can only vouch for the fact that the PT140 has won-out over the rest of them, based on the criteria I assign for concealed carry. And, those criteria are specific to my own criteria for concealed carry, and may not apply to everyone, or to those that are strictly range shooters.
I am not saying that Taurus is far superior to all the other brands with respect to quality and durability, only that they endure an undeserved, disproportionate level of criticism based on my own experiences and analysis of various other models in comparison.
If you factor in the price, which should be the least of our considerations for concealed carry, they are indeed superior to many other brands.
Last edited:
Stevie-Ray
New member
In MY case it was MY thumb that was hitting the button as well. I was NOT going to change my grip as it was my natural grip. Nor was I going to change the button to the other side of the frame. Nor was I going to file off some of the protruding button as another here did, which seemed to work for him. These are all end user fixes for too light a spring which IS a design defect. I have many handguns with the mag release in the same place and NEVER had an issue with any of them. And I'm not even addressing the underwhelming performance which was the main reason I sold my PT-111.
Bottom line, the PT-111 was NOT for me. They're not for everybody, same as any gun.
@ PT-22
My LGS has one of those PT-22's for $189.99, I seen them at shows for $210.
From personally experience, I never had a problem with my Taurus 94 and looking to buy another Taurus 22 cal revolver some day.
I know a few guys who own Taurus, they have had problems with theirs[semi-autos] My LGS says they get a hand full of returns of the Taurus semi autos, he said its semi autos that are "trash".
Revolvers made by Taurus don't have as many returns are the semi autos he said.
My LGS has one of those PT-22's for $189.99, I seen them at shows for $210.
From personally experience, I never had a problem with my Taurus 94 and looking to buy another Taurus 22 cal revolver some day.
I know a few guys who own Taurus, they have had problems with theirs[semi-autos] My LGS says they get a hand full of returns of the Taurus semi autos, he said its semi autos that are "trash".
Revolvers made by Taurus don't have as many returns are the semi autos he said.
I experimented with thumb position, and found that I could shoot the gun all day long without releasing the mag inadvertently by very slightly altering my thumb position. Actually, the universally recommended thumb positioning taught to me by some police training instructors had me shooting the gun without incident. But, my natural thumb position was contrary to that, and more comfortable for me than the proper positioning of the thumbs.
The PT140 has a fantastic overall ergonomic grip, apparently perfectly anatomically suited to my hand, which in my book, totally cancels out my having to have the mag release on the left side.
I would rather shoot under self defense circumstances with the benefit of the PT140s grip more than not, and because it has a stellar reliability factor and accuracy, even compared to other supposedly better quality and more expensive models I have personally tested.
But, rather than my having to have the presence of mind to alter my natural thumb position under the stress of battle, I decided that changing the location of the mag release was preferable. Miraculously, I never experienced another inadvertent release after switching the mag release button to the opposite side of the frame. The location of the mag release has been very easy to get used to, and more importantly, in the heat of battle, it does not interrupt my ability to react.
Consider that if I am reloading a magazine in a fire fight, I have already emptied the PT140 of (10) rounds of 40S&W at the aggressor. The PT140 has a mag capacity that is already quite a bit more than what is offered by most other manufacturers of SD firearms of that caliber within the same class. So, my response to the aggressor using the PT140, versus most other models, is considerably more aggressive.
By depressing the magazine on the right side of the frame with my right middle finger, versus with my thumb on the left side of the frame, I have found that it actually positions the firearm in a more advantageous position for dropping the magazine, and reloading the magazine from my left side.
Like I said, I changed the sights too, but I would not consider a manufacturer "trash" because I don't like the Heine Straight Eights. They aren't trash. They are designed for close combat self defense, and they are pretty decent quality. But, they just aren't my cup of tea. Some shooters love them. I don't like them, but Taurus isn't trash because they put them on the PT140.
Case in point with respect to anatomical design, there are several models out there that are manufactured by well known high quality manufacturers. These guns cause you to bleed from the web of your hand after a relatively short amount of time at the range. Nobody accuses those elite manufacturers of being trash, but the blood still flows none the less.
The PT140 has a fantastic overall ergonomic grip, apparently perfectly anatomically suited to my hand, which in my book, totally cancels out my having to have the mag release on the left side.
I would rather shoot under self defense circumstances with the benefit of the PT140s grip more than not, and because it has a stellar reliability factor and accuracy, even compared to other supposedly better quality and more expensive models I have personally tested.
But, rather than my having to have the presence of mind to alter my natural thumb position under the stress of battle, I decided that changing the location of the mag release was preferable. Miraculously, I never experienced another inadvertent release after switching the mag release button to the opposite side of the frame. The location of the mag release has been very easy to get used to, and more importantly, in the heat of battle, it does not interrupt my ability to react.
Consider that if I am reloading a magazine in a fire fight, I have already emptied the PT140 of (10) rounds of 40S&W at the aggressor. The PT140 has a mag capacity that is already quite a bit more than what is offered by most other manufacturers of SD firearms of that caliber within the same class. So, my response to the aggressor using the PT140, versus most other models, is considerably more aggressive.
By depressing the magazine on the right side of the frame with my right middle finger, versus with my thumb on the left side of the frame, I have found that it actually positions the firearm in a more advantageous position for dropping the magazine, and reloading the magazine from my left side.
Like I said, I changed the sights too, but I would not consider a manufacturer "trash" because I don't like the Heine Straight Eights. They aren't trash. They are designed for close combat self defense, and they are pretty decent quality. But, they just aren't my cup of tea. Some shooters love them. I don't like them, but Taurus isn't trash because they put them on the PT140.
Case in point with respect to anatomical design, there are several models out there that are manufactured by well known high quality manufacturers. These guns cause you to bleed from the web of your hand after a relatively short amount of time at the range. Nobody accuses those elite manufacturers of being trash, but the blood still flows none the less.
Last edited:
With respect to the bashers, they can't specifically describe exactly why they are supposed "trash." Ask them that question, and see the blank stare you get back. They always come up with some generalized broad brush baloney, with nothing whatsoever to qualify their criticisms.
I know a LGS that says that the revolvers are trash, and the semi autos are fine. Go figure...
I finally stopped listening to them, and started to open them up myself to cut through all the bias, and take a first hand look, so I could make an educated first hand assessment.
I know a LGS that says that the revolvers are trash, and the semi autos are fine. Go figure...
I finally stopped listening to them, and started to open them up myself to cut through all the bias, and take a first hand look, so I could make an educated first hand assessment.
Last edited:
- Status