I don't think anybody is trying to claim that all Taurus guns are POS. That's a straw man.
I think several of us are claiming that the lemon rate from Taurus is significantly higher than the rate from most of the popular major manufacturers. Note that if the general lemon rate is 2%, and Taurus is at 8% (arbitrary numbers) that on the one hand, most Taurus guns would be just fine, but on the other they would have a lemon rate 4x that of the general rate.
Point being, it's very possible to argue that Taurus can make a lot of good guns, while still having a much higher rate of problem guns than is the norm.
Once again, it's not about price. I've heard of Kimbers arriving with untreated white steel barrels, with rust spots on barrels in NIB guns. I've had FTRB issues with a Les Baer (which I am pretty sure are due to the oversized thumb safety design; low thumb, I tend to engage the safety inadvertently - high thumb, I'm pretty sure my thumb rides the slide too much - so I am switching to a mil-spec thumb safety to see what effect that has).
The rusted barrel issue is bad; there is really no excuse for that. But the thumb safety issue isn't as big a deal, in my book, because it's a feature that many competitors - who prefer a high thumb and practice it all the time - prefer, but that doesn't work for me. And it's a mod that is known, over a broad spectrum of 1911 makes, to sometimes cause exactly this problem. (Especially for people like me, with extra long fingers and thumbs.)
So yes, higher priced guns can have issues, too. I don't think anybody is denying that. Nor is anybody denying that shooter physiology can have an impact. (For another example, my hands are too long for me to get a grip on skinny J-frame grips, or the original skinny SP101 grip; I have to use slightly oversized grips. BUT again, my hands are not in the range most designers plan on for general fit.)
And, again, I have some lower price guns, too - primarily used.
I had a friend ask me just the other day to recommend a home defense handgun in the $300 range. I told him that generally speaking, I don't recommend particular models for people, because a lot of factors go into what will work for a given person. I suggested he check out corneredcat.com for a good review of handgun selection factors. I even said just come on out to my place, and I'll let you try an assortment so you can figure out what you like.
But he kept asking what I, personally, would look for at $300. I told him that, for me - and not meaning for him - I would grab a police trade in S&W K frame or 3rd Gen S&W auto from someplace like J&G Sales.
In a new gun, sub-$300, I might consider something like a Kel-Tech P32, simply because it will fit a niche that nothing else at that price will fit; but I'm fairly big, and can conceal a K or 3rd Gen under most conditions, so...
In your case, you have a Taurus that works well. That's great. A lot of people do. I, personally, would not suggest that you get rid of it or take it out of your carry rotation. It's working.
But based on observations about the relative odds of a poor performer; and based on horror stories about the experiences of those who have actually needed to use CS; I can't endorse the new products for people who ask me "What gun should I buy?" And I won't roll the dice on one for myself.
(Speaking of CS, Beretta has a very poor CS/Warranty reputation, but in 17 years of owning various Berettas, I've never had to find out about that. Nothing has ever failed, in any way. Not with military issued guns that looked all beaten up, and not with the four I've owned, nor the several that have belonged to friends of mine.
A gunsmith friend is a huge fan of Springfield Armory, because in his experience they not only have great CS and warranty support, but they support people who are not original owners.
My experiences with S&W CS have been mostly good, the only complaint being that in one case, with a gun I'd bought used, they didn't offer to send a shipping label.)
You get the idea.
I think several of us are claiming that the lemon rate from Taurus is significantly higher than the rate from most of the popular major manufacturers. Note that if the general lemon rate is 2%, and Taurus is at 8% (arbitrary numbers) that on the one hand, most Taurus guns would be just fine, but on the other they would have a lemon rate 4x that of the general rate.
Point being, it's very possible to argue that Taurus can make a lot of good guns, while still having a much higher rate of problem guns than is the norm.
Once again, it's not about price. I've heard of Kimbers arriving with untreated white steel barrels, with rust spots on barrels in NIB guns. I've had FTRB issues with a Les Baer (which I am pretty sure are due to the oversized thumb safety design; low thumb, I tend to engage the safety inadvertently - high thumb, I'm pretty sure my thumb rides the slide too much - so I am switching to a mil-spec thumb safety to see what effect that has).
The rusted barrel issue is bad; there is really no excuse for that. But the thumb safety issue isn't as big a deal, in my book, because it's a feature that many competitors - who prefer a high thumb and practice it all the time - prefer, but that doesn't work for me. And it's a mod that is known, over a broad spectrum of 1911 makes, to sometimes cause exactly this problem. (Especially for people like me, with extra long fingers and thumbs.)
So yes, higher priced guns can have issues, too. I don't think anybody is denying that. Nor is anybody denying that shooter physiology can have an impact. (For another example, my hands are too long for me to get a grip on skinny J-frame grips, or the original skinny SP101 grip; I have to use slightly oversized grips. BUT again, my hands are not in the range most designers plan on for general fit.)
And, again, I have some lower price guns, too - primarily used.
I had a friend ask me just the other day to recommend a home defense handgun in the $300 range. I told him that generally speaking, I don't recommend particular models for people, because a lot of factors go into what will work for a given person. I suggested he check out corneredcat.com for a good review of handgun selection factors. I even said just come on out to my place, and I'll let you try an assortment so you can figure out what you like.
But he kept asking what I, personally, would look for at $300. I told him that, for me - and not meaning for him - I would grab a police trade in S&W K frame or 3rd Gen S&W auto from someplace like J&G Sales.
In a new gun, sub-$300, I might consider something like a Kel-Tech P32, simply because it will fit a niche that nothing else at that price will fit; but I'm fairly big, and can conceal a K or 3rd Gen under most conditions, so...
In your case, you have a Taurus that works well. That's great. A lot of people do. I, personally, would not suggest that you get rid of it or take it out of your carry rotation. It's working.
But based on observations about the relative odds of a poor performer; and based on horror stories about the experiences of those who have actually needed to use CS; I can't endorse the new products for people who ask me "What gun should I buy?" And I won't roll the dice on one for myself.
(Speaking of CS, Beretta has a very poor CS/Warranty reputation, but in 17 years of owning various Berettas, I've never had to find out about that. Nothing has ever failed, in any way. Not with military issued guns that looked all beaten up, and not with the four I've owned, nor the several that have belonged to friends of mine.
A gunsmith friend is a huge fan of Springfield Armory, because in his experience they not only have great CS and warranty support, but they support people who are not original owners.
My experiences with S&W CS have been mostly good, the only complaint being that in one case, with a gun I'd bought used, they didn't offer to send a shipping label.)
You get the idea.
), but this is the most intelligently conducted one I have seen so far 
. I can only speak to mine (92, PT22/25, 24/7 G2 Tactical 9) and they have been as reliable as my Rugers, Smith's and Beretta’s). The two that I usually compare for my own evaluation are the Taurus 92 with the Beretta and likewise with my PT22/25 and my Bobcat models. In my case, I cannot say buy the Taurus "equivalent" hands-down because they are better guns--However, I like the Taurus 92 because of the safety location (and 12 years ago when I purchased it was when they were substantially cheaper which is no longer true) and the PT-22/25's because I got incredible steal like deals on them and I am one of those mouse-gun nuts. Yet, they all keep pace with their respective Italian equivalents stride for stride (as someone previously mentioned my Taurus mouse-guns are a bit more sensitive with the ammo then the Bobcat's). And the 24/7 Tacical is a beast that will feed everything in sight and run all day long (I know this was submitted in the USSOCOM testing that was eventually shelved--Brazilian SF carry this particular model and I can see why—it actually appears more durable IMO than the 92).
I did not pose a question. I simply disagreed with your opinion. My point is, location in the world is irrelevant to making a legitimate assessment of quality and performance...those criteria are not dependent on plant location in the world.