Quote:
Posts you'll never see -
"All the S&W pistols I've ever shot were crap"
"All the Ruger pistols I've ever shot were crap"
|
All of the Colt automatics I have owned (bought new) have had faults that had to be addressed. Notice I did not say: "All...crap", because that is an ambiguous generalization.
Quote:
|
The mere fact that you see a BUNCH of posts, on any forum, saying they thought the Taurus was crap is significant.
|
No it is not..."crap" is ambiguous (look the word up). Aside from that, you seem to ignore the fact that there are many people who report no problem with the Tauruses they own, so "all" is an over-statement. Example:
Quote:
|
I've never owned a "new" Taurus. I've owned several of them from the late 70's thru the 80's; I've got a Model 96, 22 now. I've always found them to be good, solid, reliable guns.
|
Quote:
|
Each one of those posters could go into detail if quizzed further.
|
They should not need to be "quizzed". The details are what makes the difference between nebulous (look up nebulous), opinion and useful facts.
Quote:
|
And they may have in other threads. But it's pointless. If someone thinks it's crap, they think it's crap.
|
Why should we care what someone "thinks"? Many "someones" thought the world was flat at one time.
Quote:
|
No amount of "here's why most of the people who've held them think they're crap" will mitigate those bad opinions.
|
If they do not offer why, then it could have been because they did not not like the way their hand fit the grip, or the color, or something else as equally subjective (look up subjective).
Quote:
|
It's obviously not just cosmetic, as they are nearly exact copies of the better guns.
|
No one said it was.
Quote:
|
It's obviously not an occasional fluke off the production line. If it is, then they've got a REALLY poor production line to let so many flukes through.
|
Are you still talking about Taurus, or are you referring to Colt?
Quote:
|
Even the best of Taurus reviews always seem to include spoilers like "Not bad at all for the money I saved".
|
Creative and subjective (did you look up subjective yet?) journalism not necessarily reflective of the quality of the gun (in other words, do you believe everything you read?).
I will repeat it again. Ambiguous, nebulous, generalizations about the quality of any firearm, sans (look up sans), examples are not only the mark of poor communications skills, but calls into question the wisdom of taking what the person has stated seriously.
Nevertheless, if someone could
collect actual data on the failure rates on Taurus handguns compared to Colt and S&W, Charter Arms, Walther, Sig, Glock, Et. al. (look up Et. al.), and the Taurus data shows clearly that it is statistically significantly more likely to have issues that cause it to fail than the others, I will then state that they are crap...in some instances.
