Taurus Firearm Forum banner

1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Is the Taurus Judge a good combat handgun? I can see a use for it in close quarters combat situations but I would think anywhere past 7 yds it would loose to much of a pattern to be a useful in stopping a threat. Keep in mind I'm talking about using the 4-10 rounds and have no experience with this firearm. If I was going to load it with 45's I would buy a pistol that was made just for 45 ammo. I'm not bashing the gun i think its a good gun just would know like to if is good for tactical situations.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
21,438 Posts
Hang in there they're a bunch of people that own them and I keep looking at a couple of models. Great wilderness gun for sure or truck/car gun.
 

·
Member Emeritus 1946-2018
Joined
·
35,996 Posts
The .45 Colt ammo used in a Judge would be a man-stopper out further than 7 yards; and imagine that the longer the barrel, the greater the accuracy.

I carry my Judge Ultralight concealed underneath a jacket when I'm not carrying my 740 Slim. I feel most confident with it.




Is it as suited for a tactical combat handgun compared to a 24/7 OSS or a PT92? No.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
64 Posts
Honestly, I see the Judge as more of a fun range toy than a self-defense, carry or tactical firearm. About the best practical use I could see for it would be as a snake gun, using 410 rounds. That's not to say it couldn't be used for self-defense, not at all - just that in my opinion that is not the purpose it's best suited for, and as MilProGuy said, there are many better options for a combat handgun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,223 Posts
I have to take exception to the "toy" description, but it is a fun gun to shoot. It is true that it's not a "combat" handgun, but if I knew I was going into combat, I would want something larger than a handgun anyway.
It is, however, a very good "I don't know what I'm going to meet" gun. Chambered with 6, it's an impressive snake gun. Mix in 000 and 45LC at 7 yards it's pretty impressive.
Is it perfect? No. But it's a good compromise until I can load up like what's his name in the Matrix.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,798 Posts
I don't know what you mean by a combat handgun. Is it good for military, or police probably not. For home defense I think it works very well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29,842 Posts
Welcome aboard from Florida the "GunShine"state.

It'll work just fine for self defense.

No man would deliberately go into combat armed with just a side arm.

A battle rifle at best, a repeating shotgun at least.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,781 Posts
Unless one is active duty military, or Police, "combat" is a term usually referring to confrontations occurring at less that seven FEET, in low-light conditions, against unarmored assailants(s), typically giving frontal shots. That's also the usual "self-defense scenario", according to the FBI research and statistics.

Under those conditions, the Judge is as good as anything else.

Where do we envision shots over 21 feet happening in civilian circumstances? If the distance is greater than that, many states would require that you attempt to break contact. Common sense would, as well. Of course, if you are a known associate of a street gang in the barrios of LA, or ride with Biker Gangs on drug runs, you may need a little more substantial armament, and armor.

It's actually kind of funny. We routinely disparage calibers as "not being enough", now we're disparaging guns with the capacity to use large calibers as being "not accurate enough". Then, we also talk about "too big to conceal", or "too much recoil". Is there ANYTHING that isn't "too much to somebody"?

As for the "If I was going to load it with 45's I would buy a pistol that was made just for 45 ammo." comment, then why buy a .357 Magnum, and use it with .38 Specials for self-defense? Last time that I looked, the vast majority of guns chambered in .45 Long Colt were easily as large as the Judge.

No, I wouldn't consider the Judge sufficient to patrol the hinterlands of Afghanistan with. Then again, there isn't a pistol made that would suffice for that.

As mentioned, all too many scenarios where the Judge is envisioned to fail are also scenarios that, if acted upon, would result in the user visiting his or her assailants in the Big House. From a cell-block just down the hall. While it's "fun" to see ourselves outfitted to Walter Mitty our way through the criminal hordes, it ain't gonna' happen in real life.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
I guess it depends what your definition of "Combat" is? The Judge is a good camp, woods, close range defense weapon that is a lot of fun to shoot but there are far better semi auto pistols with higher capacity mags than the 5 shots from the Judge, not to mention faster reloading that would be a much better choice for "Combat".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
246 Posts
Combat/Tactical? I just don't know about that, Self-Defense yes. As I've heard other say, the Judge is good for "social work" and yes also makes a great camping/hiking gun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31,687 Posts
I think for revolvers, a combat revolver is relegated to 6 or more shots.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31,687 Posts
A 1911 with 8 or more shots obviously qualifies for a combat pistol and has a 5" barrel, so that would be my standard.

For revolvers, I think 6 shot minimum and 4" barrel minimum would be my standard for calling a combat weapon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,781 Posts
With all of the snub-nose revolvers carried as back-up by police and security, six shots isn't going to be a standard. They usually only have five. The various Freedom Arms big-bores are also five shots, and they certainly would prove good stoppers, as well.

There is absolutely no definition of a Combat revolver in existence. A six-shot, 4", revolver was a "duty" gun for many police departments. Highway Patrols back then, though, tended towards 6" revolvers. During WWII, revolvers were carried by fliers, pay-roll people, some OSS, and so on. Not all of them were 4", either. Yet, they saw "combat" under varied conditions.

The reason that there is no accepted definition of a combat revolver is simple. Nobody ever expected, after oh, about 1890, to use a revolver instead of a rifle, in combat.

Combat weapons aren't usually small, concealable, guns. The emphasis is upon reliability, durability, accuracy, and ease of handling. As they are normally worn openly, they can be larger, with better sights. Nobody tries to CCW their M4.

I'm thinking that a definition of the word combat needs to be agreed upon BEFORE deciding how a particular gun fits that niche.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31,687 Posts
With all of the snub-nose revolvers carried as back-up by police and security, six shots isn't going to be a standard. They usually only have five. The various Freedom Arms big-bores are also five shots, and they certainly would prove good stoppers, as well.

There is absolutely no definition of a Combat revolver in existence. A six-shot, 4", revolver was a "duty" gun for many police departments. Highway Patrols back then, though, tended towards 6" revolvers. During WWII, revolvers were carried by fliers, pay-roll people, some OSS, and so on. Not all of them were 4", either. Yet, they saw "combat" under varied conditions.

The reason that there is no accepted definition of a combat revolver is simple. Nobody ever expected, after oh, about 1890, to use a revolver instead of a rifle, in combat.

Combat weapons aren't usually small, concealable, guns. The emphasis is upon reliability, durability, accuracy, and ease of handling. As they are normally worn openly, they can be larger, with better sights. Nobody tries to CCW their M4.

I'm thinking that a definition of the word combat needs to be agreed upon BEFORE deciding how a particular gun fits that niche.
Thanks Norm, I was just going by Smith & Wesson's definition back when they were naming their guns Combat Masterpiece. I don't think any of their 5 shot snubs ever got the designation. I consider back up 5 shot, snubbies as back ups, not combat revolvers.

I would consider combat as an action where a battle rifle was the primary weapon and the sidearm as the secondary. 4" is what I would consider the minimum length barrel for a combat revolver side arm, not the entire standard. In the sense of the word Combat, I also consider how quickly a weapon can be reloaded with either speed loaders or magazines. I guess they make speed loaders for a Judge if you are shooting .45 Colts only, but then I would just have a revolver that shot .45 Colt and six or more rounds if one is made.

While technically combat can be considered one on one and involve no firearms, or even classic arms like swords or bludgeoning devices, I would consider today combat to mean expectancy of more than one attacker and at varying ranges. In that context, the sidearm you carry for when you have to put down your battle rifle because it jammed or you ran out of rifle ammo has to have more consideration than just the diameter of the bore. In that context, I would take a high cap 5" 9mm with a magazine over a 5 shot revolver. I think that may be why our Military uses them instead of the Judge.

It is also true that for actual combat situations, semi-auto sidearms have been the primary consideration for most armies since WW1.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,152 Posts
You would have to define the type of combat.
Open battlefield, long distance, suppressive fire and sniper type stuff, no way, the Judge is out of its league.

In the anti-carjacking role and at average house room or personal defense distances is where the judge shines, giving everything from a babies fist sized hole from buckshot at close distance to a basketball size pattern at 21' with most buck and pdx type loads.

Lets not forget the .45lc can make for a good size leakage problem on a bad guy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Qwiks draw

·
Registered
Joined
·
246 Posts
Name is just a name...yeah I have an old K-22 and while it's an extremely fine target pistol and certainly a "Masterpiece" but "Combat" ??? not so sure that I would take a .22 to war :).

Plus, unless your a partisan or rebel, I believe it's against the Geneva convention :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
536 Posts
Now for my two cents. The Judge and similar revolvers were made with home and self defense in mind, not combat. Could it be used for that? I suppose so but why would you want to when there are much better options available to you? In the end, it's up to you what you get but I wouldn't pick a Judge for that.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
32,481 Posts
I look at this way. Letting a lot of projectiles loose close in where you might be able to control things a bit better makes sense to use the Judge and other guns like it at 7 yards or so and under where the .410 rounds are concerned. Maybe a bit further out.

If any of the multiple projectiles hit others or something you would not have a need to destroy or want to you are liable for all the consequences that follow. Death,crippling another or doing physical damage to anything or anyone are real world conseqeunces. Ooops doesn't get it. I'm just trying to make peope aware of the problems is all that can and do happen in the real world.

The further out the shooting takes place the wider and more area the many projectiles will spread out to hit other things.

With a single projectile for each shot you have a bit more control. Once the projectiles leave the gun you cannot recall them.

This is not written in stone and there are exceptions to all this, but the results of loosing many projectiles that one cannot recall can cause problems afterwards for all concerned.

I do recommend that for most occasions that the .45 Colt rounds be used. Yes, there are exceptions.

But a 5 shot .45 Colt revolver is nothing to sneeze at. Neither are the shotshell payloads. It's just that the various projectile loads have some limitations and I am asking that those limitations be realistically assessed.

One good reason that Taurus may not rerelease the Taurus 455 or any 5 shot .45 revolvers is that they are already dedicated for the most part towards the Judge and any improvements that might come down the pike later.

The reason I like the Judge concept as a 5 rounder is that it is more manageable in theory over the N framed sized or bigger S&W Governor. There are various large numbers of the Judge where it can be used for CCW carry or carry in a vehicle.

Problem is that there have been only a few saves by the Judge and very limited feedback on the results of those saves.

I'm sure that more data will come in time. I say a prayer for those who wind up having to defend themselves(God forbid it happens) will be safe and that a good end to the situation will be the end result.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,781 Posts
"I would consider today combat to mean expectancy of more than one attacker and at varying ranges. In that context, the sidearm you carry for when you have to put down your battle rifle because it jammed or you ran out of rifle ammo has to have more consideration than just the diameter of the bore. In that context, I would take a high cap 5" 9mm with a magazine over a 5 shot revolver."

I do not believe that this was the direction taken by the OP. I'm also not too sure where the average homeowner, CCW carrier, or even Police is going to be where they will have BOTH a "combat revolver" and a Battle Rifle.

In such a situation, my back up would be some form of 1911, and in .45 ACP. Although I am growing fond of my FNP-45.

As for barrel length. Today's combat rigs are already crowded with mag pouches, radios, combat dressings, spare batteries, knives, sun glasses, and a host of other things. The addition of a hand-gun is going to present problems in location, access, and general availability. If you must use a revolver, a 3" barrel makes it just that much easier. This was also found back when a lot of men carried guns, and rode in cars. There, the 3" barrel made it noticeably more comfortable, and gave easier access. The difference in velocity is also minimal.

The militarization of our police, and, to a certain extent, our CCW licensees, has added terms and phrases to the lexicon that really don't belong there. Combat weapons were traditionally considered the realm of the military. Law enforcement, police, security, and like words were more usually associated with civilian use of firearms.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,163 Posts
If it's a battlefield full of bears and feral hogs, the Judge would be a good "combat" gun. But as far as a normal everyday situation gun, it's a good "self defense" gun. Especially with the chambers filled with 5 rounds of buckshot or PDX1's. But a "combat" gun in my opinion would be something shooting a more capacity that 5-7 rounds and a more ability as a distance weapon. But then again, those .45 LC's can reach out and touch someone should the need arise. Luckily gun fights don't tend to happen like TV and movies, otherwise guns would come with unlimited ammo and we would all be special forces grade snipers.
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top