why do people talk bad about taurus?

[Smokewagon]

Why do people talk bad about Taurus?

One word.

Ignorance.

[Loaded GOOSE]

Like the old saying "its better to be quiet and thought to be ignorant, then to speak and remove all doubt"

[Crusty]

I own gun brands from "Sears" to Springfield Armory. I used to own a Kimber. The name of the biggest POS I owned started with a "K". Any manufacture can slip and produce a rotten apple. The people who think everything else that company made is a POS are displaying their ignorance. My favorite gun at the moment is my PT92. I had some problems with it at first, but Taurus made it right.

[Doubletap189]

Taurus and Savage, best guns on the market and very cost effective

[rodfair]

Taurus and Savage, best guns on the market and very cost effective

Proud to say: those are the only ones I own!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Sorry! Forgot my Henry!

[Asbestostongue]

I think that it has everything to do with peoples insecurity. We tend to put down someone else's stuff so that we can feel better about the fact that we just spent a lot of money on a gun that is functionally not any better than someones cheaper gun. We (humans) tend to be an insecure bunch.

[JR]

GlockTalk, like Arf.com, has gained a reputation for obnoxiousness and rumor-mongering. If it were people that they were talking about, they'd be called racists.

[stecker]

I have 4 Tauri and 2 Kel-tecs, and I have never had a problem with any of them that were the "gun's fault". Every issue that I have ever had have been due operator error, operator laziness, or crappy ammo.

I have fired between 20-25 different handguns including Sig, Kimber, Glock, S&W, RIA, Para, Kahr, Taurus, and Kel-Tec. My new OSS 45 is with out a doubt the best polymer framed (and possibly the best period when you figure in that it was less than $400) handgun I have fired. I only have 200 rounds through it, but I have only had it 2 days. My PT145 and PT92 both have somewhere between 5,000 and 7,000 worry free rounds through them.

[pecos bill]

I just read through this thread and I find a bit of "gun snobbery" going on. I've been involved with guns for 50 years or so and reloading 25 or so and I'm something of a history buff.

There is a lot to what you all say about why "people" bad mouth Taurus because of "gun snobbery" but some comes from the fact that the gun industry and users in particular or very hide bound. They resist anything new or different. When Glock was first introduced here there were screams of "I wouldn't have a plastic gun for love nor money" check how many "plastic" guns are on sale these days. Same with stainless steel and synthetic stocked rifles.

Now, it wasn't that many years ago that all Taurus guns were cheap copies of S&W's and Beretta's. The quality, smoothness of action, fit and finish were iffy at best and terrible at worst. I would not have recommended any Taurus at that time. Of course there was a time when I wouldn't have recommended a Python either. I guess it was 15 or so years ago there was a major improvement in the entire Taurus line and these problems were corrected. The fit and finish and action smoothness are now on a par with any other manufacturer. Unfortunately overall quality consistency still leaves something lacking but is improving. Now I will and do recommend them.

Third point and I'm done: remember if it's on the internet you know it's true!

And to answer a question that's certain to come up: I own Kimbers, S&W's, Beretta's, Colts, and others including a Taurus TCP. (I did have to work with that a little. Part of that consistency I mentioned.)

Rant over, Pecos

[Laker]

Personally I hope the Taurus bashing continues. That leaves a better selection for us. I've worked with the public for many years. People never cease to amaze me with their ignorance.