[kannonfyre]

How similar are the S&W model 66 and the Taurus Model 66?

If a NIB S&W Model 66 costs 50% more than an early 1990s NIB Taurus model 66 would the Taurus be a better buy?

What problems if any have you guys encountered with your Taurus 66s? Anything more serious than screws becoming loose?

Also, does the Model 669 offer any advantages over the 66? Lasltly, can I assume that early 90s tauri were assembled using forged and not MIM parts? Would they be of better quality to present day guns using MIM components?

 

[Steelheart]

This sounds very similar to another thread you started. I think most of your questions were likely answered there.

http://www.taurusarmed.net/forums/index.php?topic=1098.0

Also, we are likely to be just slightly biased towards the Taurus guns as this IS a Taurus forum.

You could try http://www.smith-wessonforum.com/ as well.

Steelheart

 

[NativeTexan]

In my biased opinion (I owned a M19, the blued version of the M66 S&W), I think the Taurus is a better, stronger, more accurate gun. The newer ones have the transfer bar trigger which is very smooth and even the older ones use a floating firing pin which I prefer since I've had hammer mounted ones break.

Both my M66 Tauri are more accurate with .38 special loads than that 19 was and I appreciate that. My 4" Taurus is a genuine 1" five shot at 25 yards shooter with wadcutters. They're all about equal with .357 loads. The Taurus does NOT have the flat on the bottom of the forcing cone that the Smith does. the Smith is known for cracking the forcing cone in that area and I've seen that happen on a M10 before (a .38 special K frame). I'm convinced that the Taurus's forcing cone is stronger. I've seen Taurus guns that have fired many, many rounds of hot loads and were not loose. The Smith was noted for getting loose if hot loads were exclusively used in it. However, I must say that I've never seen a loose M19 or M66, well, not worn out, that was done in an unreasonably short time. I think those stories were from police arsenals where those guns were fired daily with many hundreds of rounds. I don't think the K frame is weak enough that I'd have to worry about wearing one out in my lifetime. I think the K frame's advantages in weight far outweigh any lack of strength when compared to L frames or the GP100 for carry. I don't really care much for the heavier GP100 or L frame guns. I like an easy to carry revolver.

Suit yourself, but I'm very happy with my M66 Taurus revolvers and have no worries that the K frame Smiths have been discontinued. You can't buy a K frame new anymore and I'd MUCH rather have a new M66 Taurus than a used K frame. If I can get a deal on a used stainless M66 in the future, I'll add it to the arsenal and have one in blue, nickel, and stainless. I gave $180 for my 3" older M66 and $200 for the 4" newer one. You can hardly buy a BARREL for a K frame Smith for that kind of money. Even a clapped out old used M66 Smith would run you $400 down here at a gun show. To me, it's just a no brainer. I've owned and fired both and the Tauri I own are better shooting guns, so why would I swoon for another Smith? I still have my old M10 for my Smith and Wesson fix, and that old gun, built in the early 60s, was made at the zenith of Smith and Wesson craftsmanship. Modern Smiths, IMHO, don't compare.

 

[NativeTexan]

Also, does the Model 669 offer any advantages over the 66? Lasltly, can I assume that early 90s tauri were assembled using forged and not MIM parts? Would they be of better quality to present day guns using MIM components?

I have a M85UL bought in 1996 or 97 that does not have MIM parts. I think late 90s is when they started builting with MIM technology. I don't see the MIM stuff as a problem except for the revolver smith. MIM parts are impossible to clean up, get as smooth in the sear, as a forged part. However, I don't know that I've ever heard of an MIM part breaking or failing for some structural reason. I wouldn't worry about that either with Taurus or Smith. To tell if it has MIM parts, look at the trigger. If the trigger has a trough in the back of it, a groove, it's MIM. If the trigger is solid at the rear, it's forged.

The 669 is a heavier gun and should theoretically be stronger (as in L frame vs K frame) than a M66. I prefer the 66 for carry, personally, but they're both good shootin' guns.

 

[powerkicker]

I've owned several examples of S&W and Taurus products and in all sincerity, I must confess that my S&W's have always been better performers and are generally better finished too. I only buy Taurus when they offer something I can't get anywhere else.

 

[NativeTexan]

This topic has been throughly discussed.