Iíve had 12 Taurus Revolvers. I think they are very good.
Iíve had 12 Taurus Revolvers. I think they are very good.
I’ve had and have several Taurus handguns, mostly revolvers. I’ve had cylinder screws fall out ant it took a couple months to replace. I’ve also had a 44Mag’s frame “stretch” from normal use -no super hot loads. Checked with Taurus and sent it back for repair which took a minute to get back. I’ve also helped people with their revolvers that “locked up” with live rounds in the cylinder.
They’re inexpensive guns built on licenses from the likes of Beretta and Smith. As a general rule they’re good guns that lack the fit and finish of their parent guns. There are times the metals are sub-par but those are extremely rare.
I do on occasion use the 44 for hunting, but won’t use it as a bear defense gun, I have a G20 and 40 for that.
I sell guns at a large retail store. If a customer is looking for a revolver I will show them all I have including the Taurus models.
I own a Taurus revolver and have had zero issues.
What gets me is that some of the other gun guys I work with will bad mouth the Taurus right off the get go to the customer.
I believe that the customer should make up his or her mind based on what I recommend and and what suits their purpose, either price or function.
I had one customer bring a very old Taurus revolver that he had inherited and had a bad lock up timing.
Taurus repaired it free of charge and did it with quick turn around.
I guess it's like trucks.
If I own a Chevy and you got a Ford then you got a piece of crap. Or if it is not a Sig then it's a piece of crap too...
Same thing about the Hi points too.
Yeah, they are big, heavy, ugly, poor finish and cheap, but they will run too.
My 1989 4" Blued Taurus Model 66 is what I want in my hand when it comes to 'Life or Death'.
Double Actions, two Colt, five Charter, four Ruger, three S&W, and two Taurus. So I have others to experience. I am not a hardcore revolver guy like my son, but I like my Taurus, a 605 bought new in 2003 0r 2004, ATI Grip stocks, and a used 99 vintage Model 66, a stainless 4" seven shooter, square butt wood stocks. I have not shot the 66 much, maybe 100 rounds, but it seems good to me.
It was a good thing we don't post under our real names because some of the die hard FANBOYS, and I do mean SUPER FANBOYS, started attacking me with a vengeance I couldn't believe. If they knew my name and address I'm sure a few would have come knocking on my door for such heresy.
They couldn't accept the fact that a Glock, any Glock could possibly have a problem of the magnitude I was describing. It certainly couldn't be the gun, it had to be me because I don't know the hole in my backside from the one in my head. One of the most vocal fanboys got banned because it was so bad.
The technician at Glock who worked on the gun replaced just about everything in it. When I asked him how or why it was like that he said, "Sometimes even with us, an occasional gun just gets past quality control and in the hands of a buyer that shouldn't have been approved. We're really sorry."
It can occur with any manufacturer. CA-CA just happens. I've not had one problem with the Taurus revolvers that I own. (856UL and 605) On the other hand, my brother has a much older Taurus 9mm that was terrible. He retired it and got a Ruger LC9s pro before the EC9s came out. It's the nature of guns I guess.
LOL, I sometimes have to remind the Glock worshipers that Jesus did not come from Austria, Hitler did.
QA is an elusive target. I once worked for a General who was the Army's Expert on TQM (Total Quality Management), as such I had to read most of the QA writings of the time. I still use Demming's TQM teachings to find my way through dealing with bureaucracies. Bottomline is QA must be constant and continual, yet many places relax once they reach their QA goal, or achieve certification. Alabama Football is one of the few places where I rarely see them relax in pursuit of QA, even when coming off a national championship. That is one reason I love to read/hear Coach Saban's thoughts on the process and leadership. Every time they raise the bar, it becomes the new standard, not a peak.
As such, I can tell you that I sent back to Ruger a SR-40C because the safety broke. The gunsmith working on it told me that there were defective parts in that gun that the factory had recorded as removed from inventory over a year earlier. He was mystified as to how the part got in that series gun, and went over the gun in detail to see if there were any other defective parts in it. (If they found any more, they did not tell me.) I like the gun I got back and have not had a problem with it since.
I have a Rock River Arms .458 SOCOM upper that I had to send back because it was having issues chambering rounds. As it turned out, chamber reamers on the SOCOM are pretty short lived, and my .458 SOCOM barrel was reamed by a reamer that should have been pulled, consequently it left chatter marks in the chamber, and that barrel should never have gotten out of the factory. RRA is known for their QA, yet this one got through several inspections without notice. They re-reamed the barrel chamber with a new reamer, polished it and then returned it to me.
I don't get mad when something is not right, but I do pay attention to how the maker reacts these problems and corrects them. Failure Analysis is an important part of any QA program. You can not fix something if you don't know why it broke. Yet, many companies never perform failure analysis due to cost, so you can not expect them to get batter. And I know some QA people consider a return rate acceptable if it does not exceed the cost of fixing the problem.
Long time Taurus hand gun owner.
Own 85’s, 617, 94, 605, 627 Tracker, and 3 PT 92’s.
Own high end brands too, however 85 UL’s are daily carries.
Never a problem.
I see my Taurus’s like the difference between a Ford and a Lincoln. Both work and achieve same objective!
Cause sometimes they do.