Taurus Firearm Forum banner
1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hello,

I've got an older, 1992, Model 689.

My understanding is that when the trigger is pulled, the hammer falls, strikes a transfer bar which moves forward and hits the firing pin.

Is this correct?

If it is correct, can damage result from dry firing this kind of set-up on the Model 689?

In their manuals, Taurus advises against dry firing it's revolvers. Why?

Except for their rimfire revolvers, both Ruger and S&W say dry firing their revolvers is okay.

I wonder why dry firing is okay with the Ruger and S&W revolvers but not Taurus revolvers.

Anybody know?

Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
380 Posts
Yes, it is a transfer bar system as you describe.

All I can think of is overtravel of the firing pin and extra wear on the firing pin, firing pin spring and or firing pin channel. Maybe the firing pin is tapered and the overtravel, because of not hitting a primer, can make some kind of contact with the firing pin channel causing extra wear.

I bought my made in January 1992 Stainless 6 inch 689 in 1992 and have done a fair amount of dry firing without snap caps and have had no problems. I would advise to buy snap caps if I were to train and use the 689 in dry firing scenarios. Mine gets very little use. I get it out every few months and wipe her down and invariably snap a couple off, but total dry fire count probably is less than two or three hundred at most in 27 years or so.

It has a sweet double action and almost hair trigger single action right out of the factory that has never been touched. Feels as good as many Smith & Wesson's that have had work on them and feels better than most of any brand being produced today. Definitely finger off the trigger in single action mode until aimed down range and ready to fire. I have touched it off a couple times before wanting to while almost ready to fire. Funnily they were some of my best shots of the day!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
513 Posts
Hello,

I've got an older, 1992, Model 689.

My understanding is that when the trigger is pulled, the hammer falls, strikes a transfer bar which moves forward and hits the firing pin.

Is this correct?

If it is correct, can damage result from dry firing this kind of set-up on the Model 689?

In their manuals, Taurus advises against dry firing it's revolvers. Why?

Except for their rimfire revolvers, both Ruger and S&W say dry firing their revolvers is okay.

I wonder why dry firing is okay with the Ruger and S&W revolvers but not Taurus revolvers.

Anybody know?

Thanks.
Not for sure.

Taurus' FAQ page now says, "OK to dryfire anything except the .22s." Their current revolver manual says "22. SAFETY FIRST: Dry firing is bad for this firearm, whether the hammer block
is engaged or not.", which is kind of curious, since Taurus revolvers haven't had hammer blocks for a long time.

My first Taurus was a late 80s vintage Model 66. I dry fired that freely for about years. Right around Y2K the firing pin got mashed into unusability. Two subsequent firing pin springs also got, eventually, into the same state. That gun's long gone, but at this point I wonder if there wasn't a firing pin problem.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
23,203 Posts
I would expect any revolver made in the 90s that has a transfer bar system to be fine for dry firing. So I'm kind of surprised by lee n. field's experience.

I'd say put snap caps in it and have at it!
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
Top