It was a question, not a statement. What's the point of only
asking people that own them and like them, or people that have never owned one? The people that have owned (or still own) a Taurus, but didn't like them, is a pretty sizable group of people to be ignoring. But... ignorance is bliss.
More than half a dozen firearms, that I have owned or been directly
For starters -
A .357 revolver that blew its barrel off with the first shot. (It had been over-torqued and cracked at the factory.)
A .38 Special revolver that unscrewed its barrel with 4 shots fired. (Under-torqued.)
A .357 revolver that had its timing so far off, it was striking the extreme edge of the cartridge primers and splitting bullets on the forcing cone. (Complete lack of quality control.)
A PT-138 that might
let you get 2 shots off, before jamming, if you were very lucky - and that was only when light firing pin strikes were letting it fire at all. (Stupid design, and no quality control.)
A post-Taurus Rossi 62 "Gallery" that A) would barely feed and never eject, and B) fired any time the action closed. (Cheap parts, and no quality control. Before Rossi was eaten by Taurus, the 62s were good rifles.)
Out of just those 5, four of them had serious
And, of course, their "customer service" is an absolute joke.
One of the above posters covered their repairs well...
"If you get a bad one from the factory it's anyone's guess whether they will ever fix it properly."