Anyone have good or bad experiences with recently purchased Taurus revolvers? I've heard they used to be poor clones of Smith and Wessons, but that quality has gotten much better in the last 10 years. I'm looking for a .357 snub nose and am debating between S&W and Taurus. Any insights appreciated. ~ Hunter308

I have a 4" 357 that has always shot well and after a little tuning runs very smooth. I had a 6" 357 25 years ago and thought it was a descent gun then. I have M29's and 686's and still like the Taurus' just fine.

Perry

I have a Taurus 605 in 357 mag. (2") as well as a Taurus in 22mag (4"). Both go bang every time and I have had zero problems. DA trigger pull is quite heavy but that may be part of the price for going bang every time!
Peter.

I have never had a problem with my Taurus PT99AF, nor do I know anyone who has had a problem with their Taurus handguns (pistols or revolvers).

Taurus guns were originally manufactured on Beretta (pistols) and S&W (revolvers) tooling.

Some people claimed that Taurus' lifetime warranty indicated that they were somehow substandard or prone to breakage, a claim which is ludicrous on its face.

All manufacturers occasionally produce something that is problematic. Taurus is no exception.

George

quote:

Some people claimed that Taurus' lifetime warranty indicated that they were somehow substandard or prone to breakage

Then I guess Leupold scopes must really suck.

Same Taurus as Peter. Daily carry for the better part of 7 years now. Over a thousand rounds. My wife also had one but it was lost to a break in a few years ago. Hers was shot less but no problems with either one.

I don't have much experience with Taurus, but S&W quality has gone way downhill lately. Inside parts of new S&W's look like they're stamped out of tin cans, about what I would expect if I took apart a Daisy BB gun.

I have a Tracker in 41mag and it goes bang every time with any load I put through it, whether mid-range or full power. Never had a glitch.

I did have a snubbie a couple years ago that the sights were off on, but that was because the barrel was not alligned exactly. I believe it was screwed on a little tightly just a little bit which caused the front sight to be off.

i never thought much of taurus, but the last couple of years i believe their quality has come way way up.

Taurus recently came out with a full size 1911 style gun in SS in 45 and 38 Super. Have seen them advertized but not handled or shot one yet.
Certainly as a self defense gun they are fine, IMHO.
Peter.

i've got 1 of the 5 shot bobbed hammer 44 special revolvers.... i've shot 200++ rounds thru it, all sorts of home defense loads, shot capsules, and have yet to have any problems, other than rust... that was my fault.. shampoo and toothpaste leaking in my overnight bag...

I had a 669 for a while. Nice gun, probably should have kept it.

I keep hearing this fit and finish hoopla.
A friend had an OLD Taurus 32 long that must be 30-40 or more years old now and the fit and finish were as god as any S&W.

I shot a Taurus 431 with perfect fit and finish and lock work felt like a Colt.

Sometimes I think gun stories are like CO-OP stories . . . starting in fact and embellished as they go along in time

A co worker had a Smith 27 or 28, I forget . . .

Cylinder to barrel gap was 14 thousandths, Smith fixed it for free with apologies, does that mean Smiths have a big gap in their revolvers . . . no, sure did on at least one though.

Maybe I have been lucky and have seen only Good Taurus' too.

I have two of their older .44 Special 5-shot compact revolvers. My dad has one of them that he's having problems with and we're not sure yet if it's on particular chamber or not. The one that I have hasn't given any problems at all so far. I'm going to get the problem child back from him to see if it's anything minor.

Tracker .357 shoots wide to the left. Not able to adjust sights that far over. Was told it's not a warrenty coverd problem.

I have an older model 92. Cracked the locking block, Taurus fixed it but it took a couple of months. A friend had the same thing happen to his. This was over 15 years ago. Beretta's have the same problem with blocks cracking.

Also had one of their older "target" revolvers in 38spl. Accurate it was not. Sold it for over three times what I payed and was happy to get rid of it.

I've heard Taurus' quality has really improved over the past decade, but those early experiences kind of soured me to the Taurus name.

I have shooting S+W revolvers for over 50 years + have had excellent performance (with the older ones).I have been biased over the Taurus because of their past history (along the lines of a Garcia era Sako). I understand that the quality is now up to acceptable standards.Just for what it's worth,you might consider looking into a Charter Arms Bulldog in .44 SPL.I bought one years ago when they first came out because we were backpacking in the Big Bend area + it was the lightest piece with the most knockdown power available at that time.

I bought a pair of 38 super PT1911s, for some odd reason... Mainly, because I like 38 Super.

Both have significant machine errors, by modern standards. They run fine, but one has a pretty big burr on the firing pin stop, which makes assembly difficult, and one has a machining error on the slide rail. It doesn't affect the gun, but its surprising on a modern gun.

My Taurus revolver works quite well, but I have handled others which seemed very crude.

Honestly, I regret buying the PT1911s - the money difference between those, and a pair of 38 super Colts, wouldn't have been significant to me, and I would have some guns which could be sent off for custom work, etc.

They are a step up from Para, however - my Para SSP in 38 super wouldn't run, even after a trip back to Para.

Like Norman Conquest said the Charter Arms "Bulldog" is certainly a possibility, but they too have a history of varied and spotty quality control. One example I know the owner sent back to the factory before firing a shot. The barrel looked like it had fine thread and when a friend looked at it, he asked why it had such bad pits, had they failed to clean it after firing black powder. Just gual marks from the production.

The owner actually was so miffed he posted on the youtube video about the "Bulldog".

The replacement barrel is better and rumor is that 180 HPs in front of some Bullseye works pretty well.

Heck even S&W has had ownerships that affected their production quality in certain eras.

IF I carried a firearm, when I was fishing it would likely be a current production Bulldog in a plastic bag in the inside pocket of my fishing vest.

What Jimatcat said, plus one! Mine is the ported snubby in 45 Long Colt. Five of them is enough for anything I am likely to run up against. It is a bit better as a winter carry, but does not print as bad as my Para.

Rich

I SHOOT AND CARRY A357 MODEL 608 ALMOST EVERY DAY IN THE SWAMP SHOOTS GREAT AND ACCURATLY

If memory serves, and it does less and less as time goes by, the rear sight base on the Taurus goes halfway down the top strap ahead of the hammer toward the front of the cylinder.

I'm looking at my S&W Chief's Special, and the front screw that holds down the sight base is almost right at the gap between the cylinder and the barrel.

Theoretically, and again if memory serves, all else being equal the Taurus would be less prone to flame cutting.

It appears my memory may be fickle, but it didn't let me down.

Here's a Taurus:



Here's an S&W:



They're not the best pics, but I think you can see how much longer the rear sight base is on the Smith.