Why such negativity towards Taurus.?

Trying to condemn a brand by using a few examples is a common tactic of those who have set themselves up as experts. I have collected firearms for over 55 years. During that time, I've seen new guns from every manufacturer that should never have escaped the factory. That doesn't, however, mean that an entire brand should be judged by those examples.

I've actually had MUCH more warranty work performed by Colt, S&W, Sig, HK, Wilson, and Ruger than I have Taurus. With the exception of Ruger, all of the guns in question cost a large amount more than a comparable Taurus handgun. Therein lies the rub. Somehow, if a gun isn't above some mystical price line, any necessity for Warranty work is evidence of it being a POS. Above that price line, that somehow disappears. No matter how many unsuccessful trips a Kimber makes to the factory, it's all about "send it in again, they'll make it right".

My question has always been why people buy guns with obvious defects in the first place. Telling the world that your revolver has a canted barrel, to me, only shows ignorance on the part of the buyer. The same with finish issues, and other very obvious things. Then, to compound the problem, these are many of the same people who don't bother to clean the gun initially, nor lube it. Instead, they load up with the cheapest ammunition available, and start firing.

Worse, they expect gilt-edged accuracy from the gun. Trouble is, most don't possess the skills of a factory team shooter, or the abilities on the key-board of a gun writer.

THEN, the bad mouthing of the gun, and it's manufacturer, begins to anyone who will listen. Social station means nothing when discussing competency in a manual skill. Nor does the number of firearms possessed.

One might also expect to hear of more problems with new to shooting people, as well. They have unrealistic expectations of what firearms will do, and how to achieve that goal that they expect. My first handgun was an Iver Johnson .22 revolver. Trigger was hard, and the trigger movement was long. Sights were terrible, and the grips didn't fit my hands. This was in the 1950's, and the market of aftermarket accessories was in it's infancy.

Yet, after a few months practice, I was pretty good with that gun in the field.

Today, such a gun is somehow beneath many shooters. They expect Cadillac performance on a Yugo budget, and will kick, fuss, and whine until they get it. Today is the Golden Age of firearms. Our choices have never been greater, prices are easily less than the "classics" when adjusted for inflation, and quality has improved tremendously.

With the political climate and leadership, we may get to see just how expensive ownership may become. Should the Draconian, and ignorant, restrictions now being bandied about come into being, it won't take long for the gun snobs to be washed away.

In another (much younger) life, I was the service manager for a small boat dealer. We sold a few lines of boats, some pricey, some not as much. I was pretty young and thought that our boats were the best. Others might be OK, but wouldn't measure up to ours. Some I thought were downright junk and wouldn't hesitate to say so. I wouldn't have insulted someone's boat in front of them though.

When I got a few more years behind me and wanted to buy a boat, my thoughts turned somewhat. Perhaps some of the brands had improved over time or my perception changed.

I know I got a few sneers from some boat snobs. Some like the younger me, were young and didn't own a boat of any kind but were experts in their field.

The truth is folks often make uninformed statements. The reasons are probably as varied as the individuals - youth & inexperience, too lazy to become informed, crowd mentality, etc.

If you like your boat,car, gun, etc. and it works for you great. Enjoy and maintain your stuff & ignore the naysayers.

This link on this thread has a pretty good comparison of the Taurus PT-92 and the Beretta 92FS. The author states that the Beretta has a more expensive, more durable finish and a chromed barrel. If you shoot steel-cased surplus Eastern Bloc ammo, the chromed bore might be handy. The finish on a 20-year-old Beretta might be shinier than the finish on a 20-year-old Taurus. The Beretta should stand up to holster wear better, but if you can't wear it in a holster anyway, that probably makes little difference. If your PT-99 is used strictly for target shooting (I infer that you're forbidden to use it for self-defense) with good brass-cased ammo and given reasonable care, it should last as long as a Beretta.


Taurus has a lifetime warranty, but is there a Taurus repair center in Australia? If not, shipping your pistol off for repair could be expensive. Because the folks at Taurus don't want amateur gunsmiths like me fiddling with the internals of their guns, they refuse to sell some “restricted parts.” Of course, a Beretta part might be interchangeable.

All that said, I like my vintage 1985 PT-92 so much that I snagged another one a couple of weeks ago when Academy Sports put them on sale.

LAGERO said:

Excuse my misinformed ignorance. I guess I only heard about the long guns so I assumed that included pistols as well. Enjoy your Taurus!

Click to expand...

All good mate, not having a go at you. Statistics say we've actually got more guns now then there were before the buyback, more shooters coming into the sport and more owners having multiple firearms.
We are more broken into two camps, hunters and sports/target shooters. Though there is overlap with some doing both you'll find a lot only doing one thing.

We have youth shoots where young people are introduced into the sport, women shooters (though it's still really more a "blokey" pastime) my wife is a shooter and owns her own revolver.

There is ISSF matches IPSC and Western (Cowboy) matches though I don't think we have the quick draw comps you guys have. That's just handgun stuff, then there's the usual clay target matches, precision rifle shoots, there's collector shoots and military rifle (though not what you guys probably have) more vintage/classic bolt action stuff.

Home/self defense is not a legitimate reason for gun ownership here and it's something that gets dragged up every so often on our own shooting forums with (I'm guessing) maybe a 50/50 ratio of for and against. My perception is that there are much fewer in favour of concelled carry over here.