Taurus Firearm Forum banner

1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,760 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I was going to ask this same thing on a S&W board and can only imagine the kind of response I would get.

First off, this isn't which one is better kind of question at all and I could care less as to that line of thinking.

I'm just curious why S&W chose to stop making them while Taurus is still at it in both blued steel and stainless. There is all sorts of back and forth over the S&W Model 19 and 66 with the flat milled spot at the bottom of the barrel. Too many hot and heavy loads, improper cleaning, whatever, I have heard it all as reasons they stopped making them. They went to a two part barrel with a liner that didn't have this flat spot but I have to agree that while the system works... I won't own one... Then the L frame came out with a slightly larger beefier frame and didn't need the flat spot. They kept up sales of the magnum k frames for a while but they all slowly but surely got the axe.

So is the Taurus medium frame more like the S&W L frame? I have a Taurus older model 66 coming to me soon so I will take pics of it when I pick her up, but I'm just curious how Taurus is still pumping out the medium frame magnums when S&W axed theirs in favor of the L frame.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,241 Posts
I'd love to see the response to this on the S&W forum!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,363 Posts
I have never done an analysis or comparison of the two. I know that internally they are pretty different. Although Smith and Taurus shared some intellectual property while they were held by the same parent company, I don't think it resulted in blue print copies of the firearms, especially internally, they do have some similar looking models. I doubt they share the same design, manufacturing or metallurgy. I do remember hearing about durability of the Smith K frame models. I have never heard much about durability issues with the Taurus Model 65/66 they seem to be some of the "bread and butter" medium frame Tauruses in their stable of revolvers. I would be curious to see responses from those more expert in both models. Congrat's on the model 66! I do know I would not hesitate to purchase a 65/66:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34,138 Posts
One reason may be price point. The Taurus revolver is about a third the cost of the S&W. That I'm sure creates a better market response to the sale of the product, especially since the interest in revolvers has tapered off some over the last 10 - 15 years.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
35,116 Posts
I have a real soft spot for the model 65 S&W, because it was my first gun I ever bought. I found it in a pawn shop in Dallas for $200 and shot the living heck out of it. I traded it later, ironically for a Taurus 689, but I loved that 65 so much I had to have another, and it's in my safe.

My impression, from having owned both and fired both alot, is that the Taurus is somewhere between a Smith K and L frame. Not exactly as sturdy as an L frame, but not as petite as a K frame either. I always worried a bit when shooting off full power 357 magnum loads in my model 65 Smith, because I was afraid I was going to break something. Never did, but I think the lack of an underlug always made me wonder exactly how sturdy the gun was. The Taurus, on the other hand, I never worried about it at all. It was pretty solid and I never even thought about all of the high powered rounds I was putting downrange.

So thats what I think, for what it's worth. I really enjoy both guns but honestly I think the Taurus would probably hold up longer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31,697 Posts
For a period of 15 years or more, when police departments retired the model 10's for the model's 65, 66 and 19, there were a tremendous amount of these revolvers placed into service. As departments went from revolvers to 9mm, a fair amount of those retired revolvers went out of service and eventually on shelves in gun shops, many departments allowed the officers to buy their retired handgun for personal use.

About the only ones I see very often in a gun shop any more are the ones sold by older retired policemen who are no longer able to shoot and sell them when they need some money. Some have no one to leave them to.

Long story, but to get to the point, S & W knew at the time of the switchovers, those models would compete with any new same model revolvers, and the full underlugs came into vogue as well as 7 shot revolvers to differentiate the older models and dangle a carrot so to speak for the new models.

I have a 66 no dash which is a K Frame with a pinned barrel, recessed cylinder and the dayglow orange notch in the front sight. It had previously belonged to a retired police officer, although I think it was a personal gun and not a PD retread.

Here are the dates of the 66 and changes made

66 - no dash - introduced 1970.
66-1 - 1977, changed the gas ring from the yoke to the cylinder.
66-2 - 1982, eliminated pinned and recessed, slightly lengthened cylinder.
66-3 - 1986, new yoke retention system / radius stud package / hammer nose bushing / floating hand
66-4 - 1994, change rear sight leaf, drill and tap frame, introduce Hogue grips, change extractor.
66-5 - 1998, change in frame design: eliminate cylinder stop stud/eliminate serrated tangs/change to MIM hammer with floating firing pin/change internal lockwork.
66-6 - 2002, introduce internal lock.
2005 - discontinued.

The Model 66 enjoyed a run of 35 years, and the 65 and 19 probably enjoyed a similar run. It appears that the frame size change did not occur until 1998 with the 66-5
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,241 Posts
I've got a Smith & Wesson 65-2. I've shot a lot of .357 magnums through it and never felt it was to delicate to handle the round. I also have a 2.5 66 no dash, a 19-3 and a 586 no dash. They are all fantastic revolvers. I've never handled a Taurus 65. they sound like fine revolvers.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
32,481 Posts
S&W decided to do away with most of the K framed guns and started to pay a price for it. They put the 619 and 620 out there as "new and improved" versions.

The 619 and 620 are no more in the catalog and did not last long there .

The market wasn't there for the new versions. People trusted the older K framed guns and they had a good reputation.

The 619 and 620 had a barrel shroud that had to be removed properly for maintenance. If any little thing was not done right the gun was ruined.

Accuracy was not up to par with the M10s,19s, or 66s.

Most of the K frames made are considered "Classics" by S&W and cost more than the older models did.

Model 67s and 64s are still available and not as high priced as the "Classic" brethren.

617s are nice, but costly. Well worth the price according to those who have the 617s.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29,845 Posts
S&W's decision to drop the M65 and it's other mid framed magnums was purely an economic one (profits).

Some speculate it was solely a longevity question and the introduction of the "L-frame"; both of which have some validity.

But the bottom line is $$$.

People tend to repeat oft touted nega-tisms and perpetuate urban myths, as in the case of the Taurus line. Unfortunately the biggest offenders are those in the "50-70+" age group.

When we start dying off, the myth will too, and you'll see an increase in the popularity of this brand. A sad prediction, but I believe a true one.




 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top