Why all the Taurus hate?

[Cheapshooter]

A good
gun is like a savings bond, cheap guns are like toasters!

I've got a lot of "toasters", and a few "savings bonds". All my toasters work just fine for their purpose, range fun. They work just as well as my savings bonds. But I have no plans of trashing my toasters, or cashing in my savings bonds.
Then there's the Ford's, and Chevys. Reliable, and affordable. One or more of which I carry everyday!

When it comes to the internet, people love to hate. Then the mob mentality likes to pile on when there is blood in the water.

Without any personal experience, like with Hi-Point!

 

[WVsig]

Without any personal experience, like with Hi-Point!

Why would you assume that people have no personal experience with guns like Hi-Point or Taurus?

Most of the people in this thread have talked directly to their personal experience with Taurus products.

I think you are making an incorrect assumption about why people dislike Taurus guns.

 

[Cheapshooter]

Why would you assume that people have no personal experience with guns like Hi-Point or Taurus?

Because many, maybe most that pile on to be with the "cool kids" don't!
It was in reference to the previous post.

When it comes to the internet, people love to hate. Then the mob mentality likes to pile on when there is blood in the water.

A typical quote about Hi-Point, and could be equally applied to Taurus.

My "favorite" Hi-Point post read:

"They are no good unreliable inaccurate worthless junk and if I ever see one...."

 

[Evil Monkey]

In other words, a Taurus doesn't appreciate in value. It will never be worth more then at the actual moment you pay for it. From that point on, it will only go down in value.

True.

Taurus pistols, due to their history, and excess models/generations available, causes the handguns to loose value very quickly.

You buy it for $400, you want to sell it later for $300 and realize people can get used Glocks for that price. So now you're resentful for having to sell it for under $250.

 

[P5 Guy]

Not Hate

I don't know about all that posted above, but I'd rather buy something from an American Company if possible. That alone is worth putting out a couple dollars more.

 

[whip1]

I'd say the reputation is earned. Can all of the claims of shoddy QC be fake? Where there's smoke, there's fire. I'd rather spend a few extra dollars and get a quality firearm.

 

[Cheapshooter]

Can all of the claims of shoddy QC be fake?

No, but as mentioned before, there is a lot of piling on to be with the crowd. Even if one hasn't had any personal experience to base it on. Brought on in some part by the post before yours.

I don't know about all that posted above, but I'd rather buy something from an American Company if possible. That alone is worth putting out a couple dollars more.

I don't know about all that posted above, but I'd rather buy something from an American Company if possible. That alone is worth putting out a couple dollars more.

Yeah, like Glock!

P5 Guy
I have a G34, G19 and G26. If I had to choose one it would be the Glock 19

 

[Axelwik]

The first two Taurus' I had were fine. They were okay. The last two Taurus revolvers I bought failed to function properly. Like others have said, they're a crapshoot that I don't want to trust my life to.

Because of those failures I'll never buy another Taurus. Most of my handguns now are either Smith & Wesson or Ruger, with a few Springfield and Charter Arms sprinkled in.

If you buy a Taurus, as with any gun but especially a Taurus, put a lot of rounds through it to make sure it's completely reliable.

 

[Cheapshooter]

No gun companies release sales numbers, so there is no way to substantiate it, but could it be that there are so many more Taurus guns made than other brands that the amount of defective guns is also a lot higher.
Also, is part of the lower resale value to a glut on the market of Taurus guns, combined with the reputation. Deserved, or not.

 

[seeker_two]

I liked the Taurus of the 1990's. I had a PT-908 9mm that was the equal of any S&W 3906 or SIG 239....at half the price. I still have a 94 revolver that shoots well. The PT-92's were just as good as the Beretta cousins. And the CS department was better than any other major manufacturer.

But something happened at the turn of this century. As Taurus model choices & prices went up, quality control nosedived. I've seen new Taurus guns in stores that would have NEVER made it out of the factory in the '90's. CS also bombed heavily. It was like watching S&W back in the Bangor Punta days....or Colt during the same time period....or Remington today. I couldn't buy a Taurus now in good conscience even if I wanted to....and I really want to. Today, other companies have taken their place in the value market: Canik, Charter Arms, Kel-Tec, etc.

I hope Taurus makes a comeback like S&W did.....but it hasn't happened yet.

 

[T. O'Heir]

Taurus makes good, well-designed guns that are copies of other people's work AND their QC is poor. When they first came up here, long ago, the S&W copies still have tool marks on 'em.
They have a really bad record of customer service too. Far worse up here. That's more what the dislike of Taurus is about.
"...rather buy something from an American Company..." Most of which are owned by holding companies, only some of which are American owned, and operated by MBA's with zero interest in quality products.

 

[Kosh75287]

I've probably shot enough Taurus firearms to fill a good-sized car trunk. MOST of them were no worse than "OK" and a majority of them were very fine firearms.
I've shot 3 Beretta 92s and 6 of the Taurus clones. 4 of the 6 Taurus pistols shot and fed better than all 3 Berettas. One Taurus shot AS well, no better. The 6th one did not shoot as well, but showed obvious signs of abuse.

I owned a 3" barreled Taurus Bulldog .44 Special, and had to sell it to make rent. I've missed that thing ever since. When I try to find another, I either get sticker shock or they're not to be had, at all. This may not reflect the price non-appreciation of other models, but THIS model seems particularly dear to persons besides me.

I remember when Llama was turning out firearms with QC all over the place. Perhaps Taurus felt obliged to fill that role, after Llama's demise.

 

[bangerjim]

Why do people that do not even own a Tarus even have anything to say about this thread???????

Talk is cheap......BS is even cheaper.

Like I said, I have 5 of them and will buy more when the time comes. Excellent performance for what I do....target shooting.....NOT self defense.

 

[dahermit]

Deleted

 

[Mike Irwin]

I have a Taurus TP-22 that has been absolutely flawless for me over the years, as long as I use Winchester Wildcat ammo. It doesn't like CCI, which seems to have a harder brass.

I'm so confident in it that I've used it for a carry gun for years.

Friend of mine had a Taurus .22 revolver, first revolver he ever bought new (about 15 years ago, or the same time I bought my TP-22), and it was abysmal.

 

[dahermit]

deleted

 

[WVsig]

So, to answer the question, Are Taurus guns any worse than S&W or Colt, I can honestly answer, I do not know.

We do not have the hard data to tell you for certain but from my experience yes they are worse.

 

[saleen322]

I have owned two Tauruses and the quality control was not the best. The first was a 99 (sort of a copy of a 92 Beretta w/adj sights) and it was failing to to extract about 10% of the time. I looked at the brass and all had a bulge up in the top half of the case toward the case mouth. Looking at the barrel, you could see where there was a gouge in the chamber and firing the round caused the case bulging which created too much friction to extract. I sent the barrel back and Taurus replaced it for free and the pistol was fine after that. Point being had it been test fired and someone looked at the fired case, it would have never got out of the factory like that. The other was a revolver and it worked okay but always felt gritty in double action compared to my Smiths.

Bashing Taurus, no but I would hesitate to buy another one. However, never say never.

 

[dahermit]

deleted

 

[WVsig]

Having a background that included research and data analysis, I would hope you understand why it is that I am not comfortable with anecdotes instead of data. If my experience were to be taken at face value, Colt's would be just as bad as Taurus. Personal experiences are too subjective and too dependent upon single guns to be given credence. Collecting data and analysis would be much better.
__________________

Right but we don't have that so the next best thing to to compile the data we can which is from owners and users on forums like this.