Lets Be Honest Here!

[Patton21]

Ok guys,

I have heard a lot of talk about how great HK and Sig and Glock are. And yet I hear a lot about how bad Taurus and other manufacturers are. What is the deal here? Is this gun snobbery? My Taurus 24/7 has not malfunctioned at all. My buddy who just bought a Sig 229 has had 2 FTE out of 500 rounds. Therefore my gun is better than his? No, I dont think so, but why do people bring down well made cheaper guns and say Sig is so great when they have problems just like everyone else?

[garrettwc]

I don't think it's snobbery.

Every manufacturer can have some bad stuff get through into the market. Some have a higher percentage of problems and are perceived as lower quality. May not be true of every one, but enough to where they get a reputation.

[shotgunner427]

all the taurus handguns that i have use have been good shooters with minimal failures..if any
they have really come around as far as quality in the past couple of years.
While i wont trade in my HK for one i will definitely save a space in my safe for a couple of them
dont listen to hearsay...pick one up and use it, then make your own decision. :)

[FatBoy]

I have never shot a newer Taurus auto. I did fire one of the older 9mm (92 knock off IIRC) and it seemed "cheap". I understand the newer lines are a very reliable gun @ a reasonable price. I wouldn't hesitate to buy one for SD if I needed another gun.

For that matter I shot my first Sig last year (226) and I was not all that impressed. It had a few jams, but I'll chalk that up to some crappy ammo that someone had. Ran fine w/ the S&B I had. Groups were on average larger then my 92D. I would still like to add one to my "collection", but it's far down on my list.

FB

[Tomcat1066]

I think every company makes some dogs from time to time, and that's what people base their opinion on. I don't think there is a single brand that everyone can reach an agreement on about whether or not they make a decent gun. Any gun, from HK to High Point, will have people saying "good gun" and other people saying "stay away".

Basically, if your Taurus works well for you, wonderful. I handled a PT92 a while back and if I had the cash, that puppy would be here right now :(

Instead, some one esle got to take it home. Oh well, you snooze you loose.

Tom

[Glock 31]

You see it's like this. People become dedicated to whichever type of firearm suits their particular fancy. So much so it almost becomes a religion (worship Glock). They praise their own guns because to them, THEY KNOW, it is the best firearm out there, (worship Glock). Just like some people I know, KNOW, that 1911's are the only gun if you want quality. (worship Glock).

But we all really know that we will all be damned if we do not put our faith in the almighty Glock.

Joking aside, it's kind of like a wife. When you find the one that's right for you, well you KNOW, there is no other to compare.:cool:

[r.w. schrack]

Alot of people can only afford a certain amount for a weapon, thats one reason I never make comments about what is being shot. Some people have never fired a Sig or H&K but are always bad mouthing them. I happen to Love Sigs, owned an H&K, which was one of the worst weapons I have ever owned. At the range you see some real junk and the owners are proud as punch of them. I think us Sig owners are just all assumed to be snobs just cause we can afford Sigs.

[Hard Ball]

When the SIG P210 was the Swiss Army service pistol they test fired standard production pistols 100,000 rounds with no malfunctions or parts failures, Barrels were changed every 10,000 rounds. At the end of a test sreies the pistols were iwithin specifcation for issue to troops.

[H&K4Life]

Corvette or Ferrari......Mustang or Comaro...Yankees or Soxs...Bears or Steelers

The debate rages on. At least I will say this. At least Glock guys can admit that they are perverted and derranged Glockalcholics who love their guns. Sig guys usually have some historic viewpoint and innundate the masses with stats that the ordinary joe just does not care about.:)

[Handy]

If you were able to search and count all the SPECIFIC problems people have had with different gun brands, adjusted for sales numbers, you would find that Taurus does indeed have more problems than Sig.

It isn't snobbery to observe a statistic. Taurus does make some good guns, but other brands make good guns more often.

[Mikeyboy]

I still think the best two Semi auto guns for the price are the Taurus PT92 and the CZ-52, and I could buy both for the cost of one new HK or SIG. Honestly I'm not a name brand guy, I buy what I know is reliable and what I can afford. I'm the same with automobiles. I can't see paying over $40000 for a car and I can't see paying over $800 for a handgun. I buy Ford and Toyotas others by Lincoln and Lexus.

[DennisD]

"Corvette or Ferrari......Mustang or Comaro...Yankees or Soxs...Bears or Steelers"

How about Harley vs any other large bike manufacturer! Although much improved in the last 15 years (debatable to some) Harleys are still the most troublesome. Yes, I know from where I speak. I’ve had 15 different bikes and that includes 2 Harleys. I currently have an 06 FLHRI in addition to 4 other bikes but I don’t worship Harley like some people. I’ve got a friend with a sportster trike that blows oil out the air cleaner bad enough that it coats the side of the bike on longer rides. The dealerships answer; “Sportsters all blow oil”. The friend accepts this because she is one of the Harley worshipers. Would she accept it if it were a Jap bike? What do you think? My point is: It is all perceived value. Whatever makes you happy!

[HappyGunner]

I read a lot of people's comments about how poor Kimbers preform.:rolleyes: Well I only know that my Kimbers all three of them 3" 4"&5" all preform really well. So who care's what others think?;)

[ozzy1038]

It may be snobbery from some. But in actuality it comes down to cost.
If you have a gun that costs half as much as the other one i.e. taurus/sig.
Then most likely the higher priced one is of higher quality. My friend had a Taurus Pistol and had tins of problems with it, but it was used when he bought it. I own a Taurus M44 and love it. I think Taurus makes great revolvers. I dont know if I will ever buy one of their autos or not. I have too many other guns on my "must have" list to even think about it right now.

But then again who's to say. The XD cost less than the Glock but is as good if not better than the Glock. JMO and subjective. To each their own. If you like it and it works for you, f**k what everyone else thinks. Hell, I own a Jennings! One of the crappiest guns ever made. It's so bad the bullets tumble/keyhole. Might as well be a smoothbore :)

[Marky]

I guess people are just trying to hit the perfect middle of the road. As with guns and anything else in this world (but we'll talk guns, considering....) what i've personally found is if one would pick a middle-of-the road gun they will probally be OK, usually the most bang-for-the buck will come in the middle. I personally, for my money anyway i dont see whats wrong w/a GOOD copy, i.e. Tarus revolvers, OK fine, the Smith will wear-out in 300yrs. and the Tarus will last only 200. Im not putting down people who have the cheeze to get any gun they want because i would do the same if/when possible but i just dont have the means, but to stay on target (gun related) the middle-o-da-road will usually be fine. see ya

[Marky]

I hope this is on the subject but i forgot to mention that because of what i had to thru to buy a SIG i dont plan on buying another one, at least off of them, i mean i'd buy a used one from someone i guess. They have a direct-dealer policy and you cant just walk into any gun shop and order one of thier products cause the dealer must be set-up with them. if your shop doesnt want to buy a whole display case full of them they dont want to mess w/them. Check it out and you will find that im correct. see ya

[Ares45]

just like everything else - you get what you pay for.

Other than than that, it's like computers - 98% of the time it's operator error (or lack of proper maintanance). The vast majority of stoppages are user induced, not platform related. I would use the term equipment related but that would include ammo, which is sometimes to blame. Ammo falls into the operator error catagory, since the operator didn't take the time to proof it in his/her weapon.

[Pistolenschutze]

And yet I hear a lot about how bad Taurus and other manufacturers are.

Not from me! ;) I think the Taurus firearms are excellent buys, especially their revolvers. Like others here have commented though, you tend to get what you pay for. While functionality with the Taurus is quite good indeed, they are not as finely finished as, say, the S&W revolvers. So, yeah, I suppose there is a bit of snobbery involved when you get down to it, or put another way, perhaps pride of ownership would be a better phrase. A little four banger Neon will get you from place to place quite well, but a Hummer will do it in style. :D

[WESHOOT2]

It's gun snobbery.

[varoadking]

It is, in many cases, the voice of experience...

[OkieCruffler]

Alot of times it's just scrotal driven snobbery. If you paid 8 bills for a pistol, you don't want anyone not to know how much better it is than a 300buck POS. BUT, alot of the Taurus bashing comes from the past mistakes of Taurus. I have 3 of them, I carry one, the wife carries one, I trust the ones I own completely. They have been purposely abused and have not failed. But as much as I want one, I'll wait until a few thousand people buy their new 1911 to make sure there aren't any bugs before I put my money down on one.

[Eric Larsen]

Well Ive owned them all.......er, most of them anyway. Ill break it down like this.....those who dont agree with me, well...in time you will. :D

MOST Complaints about certain guns on the NET, are based on reading gun rags/internet threads/his brothers uncles dogs neighbors hairdresser told him the gun was crap...he read it somewhere!
Some are actually based on owning/shooting/carrying the gun and most of those are either operator induced or mag related problems.
Very few problems are actual viable and traceable to the model/make of the gun but they do exist and all makers suffer from this situation....ALL MAKERS!

H&K does make a better overall quality of gun than Taurus! That is fact...but it costs twice as much and that does have something to do with it.

Sig, Kimber, STI, S&W, Glock, HK, CZ, Browning and so on all have their own following of devoted followers........the more cult like followings are probably HK, Sig and Glock.....cant say why but they are more on the snobbish side of things for a FEW of the owners of those moreso than the others.

Everyone makes good guns.......and all makers have problems. Taurus will tell you the frames on the first PT145's are crap and tell you......let us fix it.
Glock tried to hide the fact their "E" series guns needed work.......

So which is the better gun company in your eyes..............???????????????

Shoot well.

[larvatus]

When the SIG P210 was the Swiss Army service pistol they test fired standard production pistols 100,000 rounds with no malfunctions or parts failures, Barrels were changed every 10,000 rounds. At the end of a test sreies the pistols were iwithin specifcation for issue to troops.Do you have a reference documenting this test?

[Marky]

A lot of it i think is that the SIG's are just kinda on top at the present, and a couple of yrs. from now they will probally be de-throned by something else. I remember seeing a show on the History chanell about the Secret-Service and on the show they stated that most of the ss guys were using sig's and i bet thier sales went up shortly after that, there is a new-in-case P239 9mm upstairs right now awating my sons return from the military, its un-fired cause its for him and him shooting the first round out of it is similar to a ''religious experence'' to him, he's a real gun nut, possibly worse than me even, but its a different looking gun tho, i mean its got a bobbed hammer, or spurless or whatever they are calling it this week, and the trigger looks like its a solid piece of steele and smooth, but i know one thing i dont like about it and thats a hard feeling grip, i dont care for that personally. but all-in-all i dont see how a cz-75 can be beat by anyone, hell sig even closed in on thier design somewhat, w/the short op rod design. see ya

[Handy]

Marky, what's a "short op rod design"?

The CZ-75 traces its lineage back to the Sig 210. The CZs are nice guns, but suffer from weak firing pin stop and are heavier than a similar sized alloy framed Sig. That would be how I'd say they could be beat.

[JR47]

Could someone point us in the directions of the statistics on handgun failures by brand? Or was this another "interpretation"? I'd love to see them.

The Taurus PT92 isn't a Beretta Clone, it WAS the original Beretta Model 92, pre-US Army tests. They were built by Beretta, on Beretta machinery, in a plant in Brazil, for thr Brazilian military. Rather than compete against existing plants, at the conclusion of the contract, the machinery was sold to Taurus.

Face it, the vast majority of lower priced brands produce weapons that are affordable, and do everything that the pricier brands do. What good will a 1/2 MOA pistol do in the hands of a 4MOA shooter, that a cheaper 2 MOA weapon won't? If all of us were Master Class shooters, then we'd be worried about that last little bit of accuracy, or reliability in extreme conditions.:)

[Handy]

JR,

There have been many design changes since the factory left Beretta control over 20 years ago. In that time, the tooling has certainly been changed, tolerence control may or may not remain Beretta standard, and the materials may have changed to outside Beretta specifications.

The Taurus 92 is a good pistol, and some of its parts are as good or better than Berettas. But saying they're equivalent after all this time is frankly misleading. Whether they still are or aren't has little to do with the events of 20 years earlier.