View Full Version : Taurus Reputation, lets get it straight.

February 12, 2006, 01:21 PM
I talked to a gunshop owner about taurus, because I am considering getting the 24/7 pro in 40. He said 10 years ago they had small cracks showing up in their millenium line of pistols, they honored their warrenty, changed their materials and did not have a problem again. So why do people think Taurus is so bad? I mean Glock just got banned from the Portland police for falling apart, yet Glock is still "super amazing good, perfect gun." What does everyone have against Taurus. I have been very happy with my 24/7 9mm, great gun. Is there more to the Taurus story then just their millienium line of pistols ten years ago?

February 12, 2006, 01:42 PM
Here's a little article that was written by Charles Cutshaw that was featured in American Handgunner back in 2002. I think it speaks volumes and I think the criticism that gets laid on Taurus time and again is unfounded bias.

Since the writing of this article , all Taurus has done is improve their lines even further. I personally won't limit myself to any brand and Taurus has 3 places in my collection and soon will have 4 with the introduction of their 1911 ... right beside my Smith & Wessons , Springfields Armory , Colt , Beretta , Remington , Iver Johnson , Ruger and any other's I might get in the future.

Taurus today: The bull is loose!
With a whole new center of semiautomatics, the "revolver company" from Brazil has quietly reinvented itself with a new focus on self-defense pistols loaded with features and quality

American Handgunner, May, 2002 by Charles Cutshaw

If there is any truth to the old adage, "Variety is the spice of life," Forjas Taurus of Brazil--"Taurus Forge" in Portuguese--is serving up some pretty spicy firearms salsa. One has only to glance over the company's catalog to see an almost overwhelming variety of pistols and revolvers. If a handgunner cannot find a Taurus handgun that suits his purposes, the gun probably just doesn't exist.

Moreover, for those who have not kept track of handgun developments over the last several years, Taurus has become one, of the most innovative firearm companies in the world, regularly introducing award winning new models that owe nothing to any other manufacturer.

Taurus revolvers have set the pace in wheelgun modernization, with the introduction of new designs such as 7 and 8-shot 357 Magnum revolvers. Other Taurus innovations include the company's Raging Bull and Raging Hornet series and an integral safety lock.

But our focus here is on the company's pistols, which are every bit as innovative as their revolvers. Before we look over Taurus pistols, a bit of company history is in order.

Taurus began life in 1939 as a small tool and die manufacturer in Porto Alegre, Brazil and has continued to grow ever since. The company produced its first revolver in 1941, a .38 Special that combined features from both Colt and Smith & Wesson designs of the time. The company expanded its revolver market throughout South America in the 1940s, 19850s and into the 1960s.

Taurus' first U.S. venture took place in 1968, but the effort was relatively half-hearted and Taurus was only marginally successful, largely because its revolvers were seen as cheap foreign imitations of other manufacturers' designs and the Taurus guns of the time were of marginal quality.

A turning point came in 1970, when Bangor Punta, owner of Smith & Wesson at the time, bought Taurus. It is a popular misconception that Taurus was once owned by S&W; the two companies were part of the Bangor Punta conglomerate and there was a great deal of information sharing that migrated both ways during the seven years that the two handgun makers were part of the same organization.

Taurus was purchased outright by its present owners in 1977. One of the new owners' first goals was to improve the overall quality of Taurus products, while -maintaining reasonable prices. The new owners also undertook a vigorous expansion program.

The association with Bangor Punta was largely responsible for the similarity of Taurus and S&W designs of the time. Today's revolvers still bear a superficial resemblance to Smiths, but Taurus has made many modifications and improvements to its original designs and today's revolvers owe very little to any other manufacturer.

In fact, Taurus ingenuity and the company's innovative designs have won several major awards in recent years, including the Shooting Industry Academy of Excellence's "Manufacturer of the Year," an accolade many view as the organization's highest award.

Pistol Business

Taurus entered into the pistol business almost by chance. In 1974, Beretta won a major pistol contract for the Brazilian military. Part of the contract stipulated that Beretta manufacture the pistols in Brazil and employ Brazilian labor. Accordingly, Beretta constructed a large plant in Sao Paulo and when the contract expired in 1980, Beretta sold the entire facility to Taurus, including all technical data, tooling and machinery.

In one fell swoop, Taurus was in the pistol business. While the Beretta factory continued to manufacture Beretta-type pistols under the Taurus name, the Brazilian company set out to redesign the pistols for improved performance and ergonomics. The result was the Taurus PT 92 series.

At first glance, the Taurus PT 92 and PT 99 appear to be simple Beretta 92 clones, but while similar, the PTs are functionally different than the Beretta product. Beretta 92 and Taurus PT 92 parts will not interchange, not even magazines.

While the Beretta 92 series pistols are excellent handguns, they lack several features that many pistol users find attractive. The most significant change undertaken by Taurus engineers was redesigning the fire control mechanism and moving the selector switch from the slide down to the pistol's frame, where most shooters feel it belongs.

The ambidextrous Taurus selector switch is right next to the shooter's thumb and can be accessed without changing one's grip on the pistol. The uppermost position is "safe," while the first notch down is "fire." Pressing the selector switch down beyond the "fire" position safely drops the hammer.

This ingenious design not only makes the Taurus PT 92 more ergonomically friendly, but enables the gun to be carried in the classic cocked-and-locked Condition One. This is widely accepted as the fastest carry mode for getting a pistol into action and also eliminates the need to transition from a double- to single-action grip after the first shot. Most shooters also prefer the wider grip grooves on the Taurus slide over the thin ones of the Beretta.

The PT 92 comes with fixed sights as standard. With adjustable sights, the pistol is redesignated PT 99. In .40 S&W caliber, the pistol's designation becomes PT 100 with fixed sights, PT 101 with adjustable sights. The PT 92/99 and PT 100/101 are available in either blue or polished stainless steel. Frames of all Taurus pistols are hammer-forged alloy.

Like most other Taurus pistols, the PT 92/99 and PT 100/101 are available in blue or stainless "special edition" versions with gold highlights on controls and screws and either rosewood or mother of pearl grips. The blue/black "high grade" option is designated "Black Gold" by Taurus, while the stainless version with mother of pearl grips is termed "Platinum and Pearl." These "high grade" pistols are available throughout the Taurus product line and appeal to those who want a little something special for purchase as presentation pieces.

While not for everyone, the Taurus special editions are yet another example of the company's innovative outside-the-box thinking that offers products that appeal to a wide variety of potential customers and markets.

Serious Pursuit

Taurus began seriously pursuing the U.S. firearms market in 1982, when the company's U.S. facility was established in Miami, Fla. Within two years, Taurus had established a beachhead in the American market and in 1984 broke new ground by offering its unprecedented lifetime warranty on all its firearms.

Simply stated, if a Taurus firearm ever fails for any reason, the company will repair or replace it. Period. This 17-year-old policy still stands to this day and has only recently been matched by another manufacturer.

February 12, 2006, 01:43 PM
U.S. production of some handguns was begun in 1992, when Taurus established its PT 22 production line in Miami. The identically sized PT 25 in .25 ACP caliber followed this compact .22 LR handgun in 1994. Both of these small handguns make extensive use of the most modern production technology, including metal injection molding (MIM) and computer numerically controlled (CNC) machining.

Without going into lengthy explanations of the technologies involved, both CNC and MIM production methods ensure the highest possible quality and precision while lowering production costs.

Like virtually all Taurus pistols, the diminutive PT 22 and PT 25 are available in a variety of finishes and levels of embellishment, from plain vanilla to exotic special editions. Both of these smallest Taurus pistols are blowback operated and double-action only. Loading is via a tip-up barrel.

Carry Gun Market

Taurus entered the medium-frame pistol field in 1992 with its PT940 pistol that is virtually of ideal size for concealed carry or plainclothes law enforcement use with a 4" barrel and 10 round capacity magazine. Early pistols had higher capacity magazines, but fell victim to the ill-advised Brady Bill of 1994, which had no effect whatsoever on crime, but did deprive the law-abiding from owning magazines of more than 10 rounds capacity.

The PT940 continues to be one of Taurus' best selling pistols. Like other pistols in the 900 series-- those pistols beginning with a 9 in their designation-- the PT940 can safely be carried in Condition One, cocked-and-locked.

The firing pin in these pistols is physically blocked unless the trigger is pulled to the rear. As with other Taurus pistols, all 900 series handguns have a hammer forged alloy frame and come equipped with a visible and tactile loaded chamber indicator.

In 1994, Taurus moved into the .45 ACP medium-frame pistol market with its PT945. The Commander-sized PT945 features a loaded chamber indicator in addition to Taurus' proprietary security system, which was the first in the industry to be integrated into the design of the handgun itself. There are no bulky locks, cables, or other external objects necessary to secure the handgun-- child-safing the gun is accomplished via a simple key.

The PT945 is virtually 100 percent reliable right out of the box. It isn't necessary to take the pistol to a gunsmith to have the ramp polished or the chamber throated to make it feed all types of ammunition. The PT945 feeds everything from ball to semiwadcutters without malfunction. In preparation for this article, we fired literally hundreds of rounds through several PT945s without a single stoppage.

Because of its compact size, any version of the PT945 line makes for an ideal carry pistol. For the 1911 aficionado, the grip angle of the PT945 is virtually identical to that of the venerable 1911 and the manual of arms is the same when the pistol is carried cocked-and-locked, despite the PT945's DA/SA option. We prefer to carry the PT945 in this mode, just like a 1911.

In 1997 came the introduction of the PT9ll and PT938 in 9x19 and 9xl7mm (.380 ACP), respectively. Both pistols are similar in appearance, but are functionally quite different. The PT911 is a compact locked breech 9mm while the PT938 is blowback operated.

The PT938 is also marginally smaller than the PT911 in both length and height. While the PT911 is available in Taurus' many different levels of finish, the PT938 is available only in blue or polished stainless. In our experience, we have found the PT911 to be a very durable and accurate pistol. The little PT911 has gone over 3,000 rounds as of the time this is written without a single stoppage that can be attributed to the pistol. The most recent member of Taurus' PT900 family is the .357 SIG PT957, introduced in 1999.

Millennium Series

The latest Taurus family of pistols is the Millennium series, announced in 1998. The Millennium series is notable for its extremely compact size that almost literally fits in the palm of one's hand coupled with serious self-defense calibers, ranging up to .45 ACP.

The first in the Millennium series were the 9mm PT111 and .380 ACP PT138. These little pistols set the pattern for all the others in the family.

All Millennium Series pistols have an ingeniously designed polymer grip that is unlike any other. Instead of molding the steel rails into a polymer frame like others, Taurus incorporated a unitary steel "frame" that fits into, and is held in, the polymer grip by two hefty pins. This small "frame" is the serially numbered component of the pistol. Thus, the slide, barrel, or the entire grip can be replaced if necessary without going through a FFL dealer.

Millennium pistols are all DA-only and striker fired. The pistols incorporate a transfer bar and sear that retracts the striker and then drops the sear down out of the way at the end of its travel to release the striker. Each also is equipped with a loaded chamber indicator and the integral Taurus security system.

All Millennium pistols carry a full 10 rounds. The .40 S&W Millennium was added to the line in 1999. The most recent Millennium pistols are the PT132 and landmark PT145, which joined the family in 2001. The latter pistol is a signal achievement of firearm design and engineering, placing 10 manstopping rounds of .45 ACP into a pistol that is more compact than most 9mm handguns.

Taurus has come a very long way from its beginnings as essentially an imitator of other firm's designs. While some Taurus pistols still bear resemblance to the originals, most have been improved to the point where they are acknowledged to be superior to the pistols upon which the Taurus design was based. Moreover, Taurus long ago ceased imitating others.

By out-of-the-box thinking and quality engineering, Taurus now is a leading innovator of firearms technology. The firm's motto, "Affordable Quality" is not an advertising term, but a fact.

What does the future hold? The Millennium series is going to be improved upon in 2002 with a line of compact pistols that are even more advanced than the current line. There are other new developments in the works that promise to rock the firearms industry with pistols unlike any others.

The company is guarding this secret very closely, but some major and very pleasant surprises are enroute from Brazil. Taurus is definitely not resting on its laurels, but is moving forward with the same intensity that has made it one of the most innovative and competitive firearms companies in history

February 12, 2006, 01:47 PM
All signs point to the company turning it around. I'm very interested in thier 1911. Had some read bad expereinces about 7-8 years ago but heh. I've got a 10 year expiration date on grudges. Couple years down the line I'll be able to pick up their PT1911. :D

February 12, 2006, 03:41 PM
At this point it seems as though there is nothing to "turn around"...
Seems as though it's been taken care of and quality firearms are being produced! Thats the reason my first will be a Taurus 24/7

model 25
February 12, 2006, 03:51 PM
Guns must have a history of working for their intended purpose. New guns don't always work well so if you like them wait till they get a history of running well. Let the other guy throw away his money to find out if it's junk.

I will give you an example. H&K came out with the Compact series telling us it is the answer for those that are serious. It is being discontinued for a newer better model after what? a very short time of use. Heck I have never seen a bad Compact and the damn guns shoot real straight yet I have heard of safety problems with them.

I was going to buy one in 45acp but won't now.

Smith has their Sigma series (copy of Glock) and this is their baby. Today it is replaced by their new PD model. Same crap in a new package.

Glock just improves on their guns and have a history of doing well. Their 45 must suck because the police are dumping them and Glock knows it sucks cause they came out with the GAP 45. You as a buyer better keep up if you value a buck.


February 12, 2006, 04:00 PM
I've had two
A model 85 that I never have had a problem with and carry a lot with crimson trace grips. Fine snubbie. :)

The other was a Millenium 145 (not the Pro)
the gun functioned just fine but the trigger was not very good. My gunsmith said it was'nt the trigger but the plastic bushing that was the problem. Sold it. :(

I do want to see the new Tracker in 10MM.:D

February 12, 2006, 04:57 PM
Taurus are good guns. I know that they use to have problems back in the days but presently Taurus is making better quality guns and they are creeping fast. Their some stainless models that looks real smooth and unique. They also have many variety models from semi to revolvers. If you want to limit yourself from the Taurus line, it is totally okay. However, you will be missing out. If you are a gun lover, you should learn to love even the ones you don't like, that's a true gun person.

February 12, 2006, 05:24 PM
I have read here that the early Milleniums had frame cracking problems and that Taurus tried to weasel by saying they considered that a cosmetic flaw or something. Not saying it's true, that's what I recall reading, here or even perhaps on another forum. If true, that wasn't good.

Taurus is definitely a competitive and innovative company, and a supporter of gun rights.

I do not think their quality control and durability are yet up to the standard of the top makers. Of the 5 Tauruses I have owned, 3 have had problems with functioning or ultimate durability.

Bought an M85CH ported in 1996, actually probably put a couple of thousand rounds through it, I trusted it, carried it hiking and as a car gun, but it broke its cylinder pin at one point and ultimately broke its hammer. I was shooting +P's through it for awhile and that may have contributed. I never got to see what happened inside at the end; my gunsmith told me he couldn't help, just ship it back to Taurus and they would take care of it. They did, replacing my 8-year old M85 with a new one.

Bought a nearly-new M85T ported that had light firing pin hits immediately; the nice dealer let me trade back the next day for a Ruger. That dealer did not seem surprised that Taurus revolvers had functioning problems, and definitely recommended Ruger or S&W.

My latest, a PT145 Mil Pro, feeds and fires fine after a few hundred rounds, but had a bad mag catch initially. Taurus fixed it, but it's a pain to ship a new gun in right away, spending $40 on shipping because of the rip-off shipping companies.

I would buy another Taurus and will likely start carrying my PT145 assuming no further problems arise soon. But when I think of Glocks and Rugers, and Smith revolvers I have owned, I would say Taurus still has a way to go.

February 12, 2006, 05:28 PM
I have two and absolutely love them both. My Mod 85 UL is my daily BUG and my primary off-duty carry piece. I also have a PT 145 Mill Pro that is my truck gun and occasional carry piece. The workmanship on both is outstanding and they function flawlessly. Taurus consitently keeps places on my wish list and with their economical prices they are normally the first wishes fulfilled.

February 12, 2006, 05:48 PM
You aint lyin SCCop ... they are constantly coming out with stuff that keeps me going back for more.

I can't wait to get my hands on their version of the 1911 and if I ever find one I'm gonna buy their discontinued and massively overbuilt Raging Hornet It's really too bad that gun didn't sell well , because it might have been the best handgun ever made for that caliber.

February 12, 2006, 06:01 PM
I have no qualms about buying, shooting or even carrying Taurus firearms.

February 12, 2006, 06:17 PM
Just bought another Taurus 9mm on Friday. Shot it yesterday and it shoots great. It is the older model without a decocker. Very happy camper.....


February 12, 2006, 06:30 PM
I have two taurus products, the Millenium pro 9mm my wife carries, and the 605 357 5 shot snub which I carry. I have total faith in both these weapons that should they be called upon, they will both funtion correctly. I wouldn't give one to my wife if I had any doubts. :eek:

February 12, 2006, 07:41 PM
I've had a PT-99 for well over 15 years and never had a problem with it. I've loaned it out, beat it up, shot junk ammo with it and literally shot the finish off it and it just keeps going. I'm actually considering sending it to the factory to be gone through just because I figure something has got to be about to break. I've owned a Colt and a Springfield both that I wish were as good as my old Taurus and I too will be buying a PT-1911. My opinion....good guns from a good company for a good price

Springfield XD40 Man
February 12, 2006, 08:06 PM
I currently have a Taurus Millenium Pro in 40 caliber. As far as I am concerned, this is an awesome pistol. Mine fits my hand like a glove, is accurate, and 100% reliable. I also like the way it looks, visually appealing. This will be my carry gun when I get my CCW permit.:D As for the Taurus reputation being questionable, that was in the very beginning. My dad has a Taurus 24/7 and I also have a Taurus Tracker 357 magnum, these are both great guns. I think within the last 10 years, Taurus has been making some damn good guns. For the money, Taurus is the best value out there. :D I'm a Taurus customer for life.:)

February 12, 2006, 08:19 PM
Springfield XD40 Man ... I agree . Taurus has done nothing to deter me. My Tracker 627 is a blast to shoot . SOLID as a rock and reliable. I have a good 1000-1500 rounds through it and it's never failed to fire ... and the cylinder hasn't fallen out yet. :p

February 12, 2006, 08:39 PM
I mean Glock just got banned from the Portland police for falling apart, yet Glock is still "super amazing good, perfect gun."

Actually, the police force replaced their Glock 21's with 9mm Glocks. They did not dump Glock altogether. I believe other Police departments (LA?) have had problems with Glock 21's. That doesn't mean their whole line is bad.

The same could be said for Taurus. I have considered getting one of their revolvers, but up to this point have not done so. As for their semi-autos, I have not heard good things about them. Some of it might just be hearsay or opinions formed back-in-the-day during some Taurus QC problems. However, until they have a proven record of reliability I will stay away from them. Plus I looked closely at the PT 92 and was not impressed with it. It rattled if I shook it slightly, and seemed to be of poor quality in general.

February 12, 2006, 09:03 PM
There seems to be a fobia of most internationally produced items....and some warrant that kind of fobia. But the international community has made changes to compete with the quality of some of the american manufacturers and firearms are in that category.

10 years ago you could not have given me a Taurus product and today I own three. Two revolvers and a semi auto and they all have worked flawlessly since their purchase with many rounds through them. I agree with the 'Buy American" campaign but hey.....a quality product is a quality product.

February 14, 2006, 08:08 AM
I think Taurus makes quality products.
My gripe about my Millenium .45 was that Taurus would never admit they had problems with the design.
They did fix it under warranty though.

The article above may be factual, but I got stopped after a few paragraphs.
Beretta 92 and Taurus PT 92 parts will not interchange, not even magazines.

Did anybody else catch that?
Taurus and Beretta mags do interchange. Not sure where he got his info.
Looks like a good article overall though.

I got my wife an 85UL for CCW.
Got my daughter a bobbed hammer blue steel .38 from Taurus.

February 14, 2006, 09:40 AM
I own 2 Taurus pistols,love them and never had any problems with any of them. The only problem I know about is Taurus's customer service is not the best.

Mike Irwin
February 14, 2006, 09:54 AM
I've said it here a number of times...

20 years ago Taurus quality was a complete and total crapshoot.

You couldn't have paid me to take one of their guns.

Their quality has come a tremendous distance in 20 years, though.

I truly believe that people who are down on them now are mainly those who formed a valid opinion based on their products of 20 years ago, and haven't re-examined things since.

February 14, 2006, 10:22 AM
There have been a surprising number of "Taurus Lifetime Warranty is Useless" threads posted on TFL in the last year. Do a search.

They all follow the same story: Gun doesn't work, gun sent in, looooonnnng wait, gun returned and still doesn't work, repeat.

The Millenium guns might have been fixed, but how about the Ti revolvers that heat themselves closed?

Individual guns might be great, but I've heard too many warranty horror stories to risk it. S&W revolvers aren't that much pricier, and there are so many excellent autos available that I don't see the attraction.

February 14, 2006, 12:28 PM
Handy ... IMO many of those threads were HIGHLY suspect to say the least. But believe what you want ... I personally like to experience it not believe heresay , conjecture and tall stories.

So far my experience with Taurus has been as good or better than that of every other manufacturer.

February 14, 2006, 01:01 PM
I bought a Taurus PT92 in the early 1980's. It's been shot regularly since then, with no problems. I bought a PT101 in the late 90's, and it also has been a great weapon. So has my PT-58, my PT22, my Model 66, and my Model 94s, 941, and my Stainless Model 85. I shot my Model 85 CH loose using nothing but +P loads. It took six weeks for Taurus to rebuild it, and return it. This was before the days of $40 shipping, so I missed that.

All in all, I've had less trouble with Taurus than I have had with HK, Sig, and S&W.

I do remember when the Taurus revolver was imported by Interarms in 1981. It was rough, and had strange grips, with a trigger pull only an attorney could love.

The Taurus semi-autos never had a lot of problems. By the way, a Taurus mag will work in a Beretta IIRC, but not vice-versa. Or maybe it's the other way around, I'd have to look.:)

February 14, 2006, 02:25 PM
Beretta and Taurus mags are not compatible. Their mag button holes are in different spots. Their heel release mags for the 92 were the same.

Petre, believe whatever you want. I've never seen a thread on this forum claiming an HK or Glock got sent back, then returned with the same old problems. Why do you think the only "suspect" threads are about Taurus? Are we all protecting Glock?:rolleyes:

February 14, 2006, 02:39 PM
to answer the original post, what gives me pause about taurus is that (although they seem to be making strides recently) a lot of their guns are modeled off other manufacturer's models, but less expensive. in that vein, i'll admit, you do have to pay for a brand name. but i've generally found you get what you pay for in most things. i'll search for deals but i know there's no free lunch.

February 14, 2006, 02:57 PM
I pulled this off of the Militia forum, and it's as I remember.

"Actually the mags WILL interchange. But you have to make one modification.

The Beretta mags have a single mag catch hole.

The Taurus has two. One on each side. If you take a file and CAREFULLY create the second hole they are fully interchangable between the two. I've got a friend who has one and got a good deal on Beretta mags and that's what he did to get them to seat properly."

Accordingly, Taurus mags WILL fit, unaltered, in a Beretta 92F. The Beretta mags need the notch added to operate in a Taurus PT92.:)

Hard Ball
February 14, 2006, 03:01 PM
I do not know about the Portland PD but the New York City PD has had severe problems with 9mm Glocks.

February 14, 2006, 03:12 PM
Beretta and Taurus modified their guns for button releases independantly.

It isn't the number of holes, it is the placement and size of them. They are located differently, and the Taurus one is larger.

Look for yourself:



There is a reason Mecgar, Promag and USA don't make a mag that fits both guns, despite the simplicity of doing so. It isn't a conspiracy.

February 14, 2006, 04:09 PM
I don't know when the change was made, so you are correct. My Taurus PT92, as I posted, is an earlier, pre-decocker, model, and the mags interchanged readily after the notch on the Beretta mag was added. The original Beretta 92F could, and did, use unaltered PT92 mags.

Sorry for the mix-up. They DO appear to be identically placed, based on the mag side-folds, though. The base plate is also different. :)

February 14, 2006, 04:19 PM
Actually, Beretta went to a button when they went from 92S to 92SB. The Taurus 92 is based on the pre-S 92, and retains the safety configuration from that model.

February 14, 2006, 04:39 PM
I don't particularly have anything against Taurus but my personal experience with them makes me not willing to buy another gun from them. Over the years I have bought 6 Taurus revos all NIB, one 38 special, the other 5 38/357!

Three were just terrific performers. The other three all had major problems (remember these are NIB guns) out of the box that required each gun to be sent back to the factory to be fixed. Now the problems really started.

Each gun took on the average from 6 to 10 weeks to be returned the first time and two of those were not fully repaired. This required that these two had to be sent back to be repaired again (remember these started out as NIB guns) and dealing with Taurus Customer Service (really non Customer Service) was really difficult.

So, while I do not have anyting particularly against Taurus I just won't take the time nor the risk to have to deal with them again. Life is too doggone short and there are other fine firearms choices that don't come with the possible trouble.

February 14, 2006, 08:14 PM
It would seem that older Taurus handguns had more reliability and quality issues than their newer ones. My Dad has a Model 66 Revolver and has had no problems with it.

February 14, 2006, 08:23 PM
i had a pt92 in 9mm had it for about 6 years. first 200 rounds i shot i had a number of jams but after running about 2 to 3 hunderd rounds it never jamed again. it was for me not to accurit. i could shot my friend glock17 much better even though i had never held one. but all in all i thought it was a good gun just not one i would buy again. the aluminum frame showed a lot of wear kinda fast IMO.

February 15, 2006, 01:16 PM
Simply put, the PT-92 is a world class gun and I stake my life on it. We have a PT-25 that we love as well for a BUG.


February 15, 2006, 08:47 PM
Had three taurus pistols

PT92: Fair gun... Very reliable and accurate, but made out of cheap cast parts. I ordered a non-rail version (as they had advertised on their website), but I got a railed one. After receiving it I called Taurus and was told that they dont produce a non-railed version. I regret not having purchased a berreta for a bit more $.

Model 85: Cylinder locked up and continued to do so after returning twice. I traded it off.

PT22: Barrel lock lever broke while shooting; pistol blew apart injuring my 12 year old son's hand. I melted it down.

Taurus has the greatest warrenty in the business, but the warrenty won't save my life when the doo-doo hits the fan.

Thanks, but I'll pass on ANY Taurus firearm

February 16, 2006, 09:46 AM
Some of these anti-Taurus post smell of BS.


February 16, 2006, 10:18 AM
PT22: Barrel lock lever broke while shooting; pistol blew apart injuring my 12 year old son's hand. I melted it down.

I assume you sued Taurus for your son's injuries before destroying your evidence, correct?

February 16, 2006, 10:27 AM
Right. How about "Any and all anti-Taurus post smells of BS"?

Everyone who likes Taurus is telling the straight story.

Anyone who has problems with Taurus is a liar.

Feel better now?

February 16, 2006, 10:39 AM
Personally I have no doubt some have had a problem with Taurus products ... same as I have had problems with S&W and Colt.

February 16, 2006, 10:43 AM
Handy, you know as well as I that some of these posts are BS. That being said, there are lemons in every mass production of ANYTHING.


February 16, 2006, 10:48 AM
Of course there are. Who has more, HK or Taurus? Who takes care of them better?

That's the point.

February 16, 2006, 11:21 AM
I can't speak for HK as they are too pricey for me and nor can I speak of Taurus' CS as I have never had to send a gun back.

February 16, 2006, 11:24 AM
So why don't we let the posts by people with problems speak for the matter?

There are consistantly more posts about Taurus problems and warrantee headaches than several other brands. Are you arguing that this is a conspiracy against Taurus, or just sampling error?

February 16, 2006, 11:24 AM
So why don't we let the posts by people with problems speak for the matter?

There are consistantly more posts about Taurus problems and warrantee headaches than several other brands. Are you arguing that this is a conspiracy against Taurus, or just sampling error?

February 16, 2006, 11:43 AM
There are more complaints about chevy's than mercedes as well based purely on volume. Survey HK vs Taurus owners relative to volume only and see what you come up with (keep in mind I have no problem with HK's other than I can not afford them).


February 16, 2006, 12:02 PM
This is the argument made about Glock, but it doesn't work with Taurus. Taurus, despite the price, is not a more common gun than any of the brands it could be negatively compared against.

Want a direct comparison? Look at the Beretta 92. There are more of these in the US than the Taurus, but Beretta complaints in general are much lower (practically non-existant). And when something does go wrong, their service is almost instantaneous.

I've said this before: Why should a warrantee department have months of backlog? My Beretta 87 had the sight dot off center. I had the gun back with a new slide in a week.

February 16, 2006, 12:04 PM
Do you really think there are more HK owners vs. Taurus owners in the US? I would be interested in where I could find stats on this.


February 16, 2006, 12:14 PM
I don't know about HK, but HK only makes autos, and has 6 pages of listings on Gunsamerica.com. Taurus makes autos and revolvers, but the combined listings for both are only 9 pages. Beretta also has 9 pages of listings, and they are mostly autos as well. Ruger's autos take up 6 pages, with wheel guns bringing the total to 20 pages of handguns for sale.

I'm taking it for granted that such a big sale/resale market board represents the market in general. If you're willing to accept that, would you say Taurus has the same, fewer or more reported difficulties on this board than either HK, Beretta or Ruger?

February 16, 2006, 12:20 PM
Gunsamerica.com is not indicative of the nation as a whole--I am going to do some research on this matter and see what I come up with.


February 16, 2006, 12:24 PM
Good luck. I've found corporate stats impossible to find.

I used gunsamerica as an example because there is no reason to assume that one brand has any more reason to be listed there than another. Like a poll, it is a random snapshot of what internet using gun owners are buying and selling. Not science, but nor is observing complaints on a forum.

February 16, 2006, 12:43 PM
Don't worry about it. A lot of the problems posted for ANY brand tend to be "my friend" stories.

Part of the problem lies in the fact that firearms tend to last many a year. During that time, they may be shot a little, or a lot, and used or abused. I'm a bit of a skeptic that all of the "problem" weapons were, in fact, new, or just new to the poster. There is a post in revolvers about a GP-100. It was bought as used, and the seller was happy with the weapon, until he called Ruger and found out that it was made in 1993. He then felt that he had been ripped-off. Should he have any problems with the weapon, his fault, Ruger's fault, or the previous owner's, you can bet that we'll hear all about how the weapon is a POS. Then, one of his Internet "friends" will use his post to generate opinions.

I also saw a thread here where the number of a particular brand of weapon that were for sale was used to segue into the brand's reliability. After all, there were "So Many" for sale on the Gun Boards, and at shows.

Just above the number of weapons for sale is used in a diametrically opposite manner.

Inspect the weapon before buying it. Clean it, lube it, and shoot it. If there's a problem, return it for Warranty. I still haven't gotten my Sig back, and it's been three weeks now. Go figure.:)

February 16, 2006, 04:08 PM
JR !!! Surely you jest! You mean to tell me turn around wasn't 3 days ?!? OH THE HORROR ! :eek:


Handy's a pure hater ... plain and simple ... so much so that he looked for corporate stats to try and back his bashing :D

Take anything Handy says about Taurus with a grain of salt. His agenda is quite clear.

February 16, 2006, 04:24 PM
His agenda is quite clear.

So is yours.

He has an opinion, so do you, so do I.

I'm not quite understanding why you are defending Taurus so vehemently. If they are good guns, their reputation would speak for itself. Herein lies the problem.

February 16, 2006, 04:39 PM
I like most all guns 625 ... I am defending against claims made that are unsubstantiated.

In threads where guys simply want to talk about the new Taurus 1911 , Handy seems to find his way in and starts his bashing right off. Quite frankly , it's annoying.

I do the same thing with other brands ... cause like I said ... I like em all.

If you think that shows I have an agenda .. than maybe you should look up the definition of it.

February 16, 2006, 04:44 PM
Your problem, Petre, is you can't tell discussion from "bashing".

My comments in the 1911 thread were mainly about what the frame is made of. An aluminum frame isn't a bad thing, so I fail to see how talking about that is "bashing".

I'm always flattered when some new guy shows up and pigeon holes me or some other member. I'm a "hater". Right. Whatever.

February 16, 2006, 06:57 PM
I think that a large part of the problem is that people like to talk in absolute terms in regard to any gun --- either it's the greatest thing since sliced bred or it's compleate junk read most any thread here and you will see this ---
The truth is most often somewhere in the middle despite passonate views to the contrary.

I don't think that anyone here is suggesting that the Tarus 1911 will not be a servicable go at a 1911, however the glowing pie in the sky it's a 1.5k gun for 600 bucks review offends many of our sensablities as we know better than to believe this from a gun rag or maker hance the reason for the debate and pointing out that this is more than likely not the case.

February 16, 2006, 06:57 PM
I think that a large part of the problem is that people like to talk in absolute terms in regard to any gun --- either it's the greatest thing since sliced bred or it's compleate junk read most any thread here and you will see this ---
The truth is most often somewhere in the middle despite passonate views to the contrary.

I don't think that anyone here is suggesting that the Tarus 1911 will not be a servicable go at a 1911, however the glowing pie in the sky it's a 1.5k gun for 600 bucks review offends many of our sensablities as we know better than to believe this from a gun rag or maker hance the reason for the debate and pointing out that this is more than likely not the case.

February 16, 2006, 08:51 PM
The gentleman asked:

"So why do people think Taurus is so bad?"

As a reminder, here was my reply to his question:

Had three taurus pistols

PT92: Fair gun... Very reliable and accurate, but made out of cheap cast parts. I ordered a non-rail version (as they had advertised on their website), but I got a railed one. After receiving it I called Taurus and was told that they dont produce a non-railed version. I regret not having purchased a berreta for a bit more $.

Model 85: Cylinder locked up and continued to do so after returning twice. I traded it off.

PT22: Barrel lock lever broke while shooting; pistol blew apart injuring my 12 year old son's hand. I melted it down.

I honstly answered.... No Bashing, No BS, just the truth. You have the right to believe me or not.
And no... I wasn't going to be sue happy over my son's bruised hand. That type of behaivior doesn'y fit my value system.
I hope that the failures that I have experienced don't happen to you when your life depends on a pistol being reliable.
I respect your to your opinion.
My opinion is this: Taurus handguns are a POS!!!

February 16, 2006, 09:27 PM
I can't understand why some people beleive that only their perception is reality. We all have different experiences in life. Some experience are good, some are bad. When a question (like the one asked) is adressed to a forum, you can bet that both good and bad experiences will surface. If my experience doesn't match yours, too bad, grow up!!!
If some of you want to justify to yourselves (and the rest of the world) why you purchased one of the least expensive pistols on the market, and you're in denial of the widespread quality issues associated with Taurus firearms, God bless you... but you won't impress any of us who have spent decades learning about handguns, and who have first hand experience withTaurus' poor quality, workmanship, and design .
Here is some advise for anyone considering the purchase of a Taurus firearm. Save your money up (for another year if neccesary) to buy a quality firearm. It took me thirty years to learn this!!!

February 16, 2006, 10:44 PM
First person Taurus experence.
Purchased a Mod 431 44 sp revolver from a friend. He purchased the gun new in 2000. I was with him most times he shot it and I liked it's accuracy. In double action it only went Bang 4 out of 5 trigger pulls. Sent the gun back to Taurus and got it back yesterday-approx 3 week turnaround including shipping. They replaced the hammer- I haven't been to the range to try it yet.

Purchased a 45 acp tracker revolver in 2005. It only fired 1-2 out of 5 in DA mode. Returned it and got a new one. This one works fine in DA mode. It is picky in chambering ammo. Ball works fine but some Win JHP's only let 60% of 2 boxes chamber – Tight throat?

I like Taurus's inovation and response to the consumer market. However it seems their quality control is not World class.

Garand Illusion
February 16, 2006, 11:06 PM
The sherriff's department my father in law worked for moved away from Glocks because they had too many problems with them. And Glock is a well respected name.

I only own one Taurus (an excellent snubby) and would buy another if it was what I wanted.

February 17, 2006, 07:03 AM
I will admit that 10-15 years ago I saw Taurus as simply a "Me Too"

I compared their "clones" to the 92F and S&W and was never impressed enough with them to buy one simply to "save a little money"

Despite not having a lot of money at the time:D

In the last few years they have been a lot more innovative, but I have still not been that impressed with any of their offerings (personal preference)

And I have bought lots of diffferent pistols simply because I was intrigued enough to "give them a try"

And I was always a little put off by seeing more than one review where the subject Taurus pistol/revolver malfunctioned during the review/testing.

I mean....if they can't get one sample right...shouldn't I be concerned with day to day production models:confused:

The gunwriters made all the standard excuses that they do to keep their advertisers happy..but with most gun rags...I assume they only even bother to mention the more serious "issues"

February 17, 2006, 09:46 AM
You mean to tell me after your friend has problems(1 in 5 misfiring) with his taurus, You go out and snatch one up? and have the SAME problem...Strange

February 17, 2006, 11:21 AM
Flaman- I agree with you whole-heartedly. Everything we talk about is based on personal experience.

I bought a Glock 22 7 years ago and it was a 2 year old gun to start. I have fired countless boxes of ammo through it and not a hitch (although I don't care for the recoil on the weapon). Now the next person may talk about having one that he fired 100 rounds through and it "fell" apart. I would disagree based on my experience that Glock is a good gun but he may not. It doesn't matter because someone may find that once in a lifetime firearm that gets them through everything they put it through and another may buy the same exact weapon and it doesn't suit them.

As to the orginal post. I have had friends with Taurus pistols and them have been mediocre for them and based on thier issues I have chosen not to purchase one. I may buy a revolver someday but not with out test riding someone elses first.

Springfield XD40 Man
February 17, 2006, 11:46 AM
Like I said before, I'd put my taurus mil pro 40 up against any gun, any day of the week, blocks.....I mean glock's included.:p My taurus tracker 357 has been awesome 4 years running, I'd put it up against a smith or ruger any day. I've yet to experience a -CENSORED--CENSORED--CENSORED--CENSORED- in the Taurus line. My dad had a pt-101 40 and it was a great gun, he traded it for the 24/7 due to its more modern design. I'm sure their are some turds out there, you guys can bash them all you want, I think their guns offer a tremendous value. Until I experience a major problem with one of their guns, I'm a taurus customer and happy.:p

PS.....I saved $200 over the glock buying the mil pro 40, I'm thrilled with it.:D

February 17, 2006, 12:00 PM
One factor you also have to account for are people's strangely apologetic attitudes towards things they've already spent their money on.

Take this TFLer's account of his Taurus revolver:
At the range on my tighter revolvers I wipe these surfaces off every 40-50 rounds because they will start to bind up.

Many people would take issue with a defense revolver binding after 40 rounds, but this person actually goes on to admire the tightness that lead to the binding problem as a positive.

People do have a measurable tendency to defend products they've already bought. Advertisers know this and take advantage of it. So it always strikes me as funny when someone who likes brand X insists that the only people who would ever exaggerate a product's pros or cons would be a detractor, when psychologically, the opposite is much more likely.

February 17, 2006, 12:25 PM
The quote is useless, as it doesn't specifically mention the type of revolver used, or if this is a necessity for proper action, or anything else. Please allow us the courtesy of the source.

In this thread alone, we've seen that ANY brand of weapon can malfunction. Following the logic presented, we should all be carrying knives.

Cheddar, reread the post you commented on. He bought the buddy's revolver, not a different one. It's not clear if the weapon always malfunctioned, or started malfunctioning after he got it.

The problem with threads such as this is that we do end up with so many unusual opinions of whatever product there is. Run over to Glock Talk, or the Sig Forum, and look at the gunsmith questions. They apparently are afflicted with the same diseases as the rest of the manufacturers.

Too many opinions are the result of "the forum said", and have zero factual data to support them.:)

February 17, 2006, 01:01 PM
Handy ... you're becoming a cyber stalker and chief word nit picker around here that's REAL good at taking things out of context :D

That quote sounds like one I made a while back.

It covers ANY revolver I have from Smith, Ruger or Taurus.

When the tolerance between the barrel and cylinder is real tight (We're talking .003 - .002 or less , the residue left on the end of the cylinder WILL start to bind against the barrel ... especially with cheaper dirty ammo.

To prevent this I wipe the face of the cylinder every 40 - 50 rounds at the range. That's not saying it's binding at that point , but I'm making sure things stay ultra smooth. Some people scratch their heads and send their "defective" gun in for repair :confused:

If this is a bad thing , well .... I'm gonna keep buying bad guns.

You go ahead and buy the ones that have greater tolerances and never start to bind from this. :D

And ... what's trigger pull mean again ? ... oh yeah , according to you it means pulling the trigger :D

BTW - You must be one seriously paranoid dude if you think you're gonna be caught in a gunfight firing 40-50 rounds from your revolver ... either that or a drug dealer worried about a Nicaraguan death squad coming to get ya :D

February 18, 2006, 12:14 AM
Problems with Glocks, Sigs, Berettas, Colts, CZs, Kimbers, Walthers and so forth are because "there are going to be some issues from time to time in all mass produced products......."

Problems with a Taurus, no matter how far or few between, are because "they are cheap pieces of junk and that's why they cost less.........."

As the owner and regular shooter of one Beretta, two Sigs, one Springfield, one Walther, two CZ's, one Ruger, two S&W's (pre treason), and so forth - I can honestly say that any of my three (soon to be four) Tauruses would be among the very last to ever leave my collection. I have only had two brands of pistol which have yet been absolutely 100% reliable under all circumstances and they are named Taurus and CZ. My jamomatic Glock must have been one of those aforementioned rare anomolies in mass production. Perhaps all three of my Tauruses are anomolies as well in that they work perfectly and are tight and well designed. Perhaps my friend's 100% perfect functioning Taurus 92 is an anomoly as well, and maybe his $600 Beretta 92 that needed to go back to Beretta twice before he sold it was an anomoly as well.

Springfield XD40 Man
February 18, 2006, 01:54 AM
Based on my dad's experience with an S&W 4006 in 40, I'll never own one. The thing jammed every third round for three consecutive clips. He went back to the dealer, got his money back, has never owned one since. I had a Ruger P-94 a couple years ago, decent pistol, but just didn't care for it. The trigger was sloppy, I couldn't get it to be accurate, it was bulky and heavy, and I knew there were better guns out there. In 2002, I traded the Ruger for a springfield xd 40, best decision I ever made.:D These are two negative experiences we've had with guns other than taurus, I think all of them have some turds out there. I recently traded a firestar m-40 for a taurus mil pro 40. The Firestar was an ok gun, but it was steel, heavy, single action, and only held 6 rounds in the mag. The mil pro is polymer frame, much lighter, superior ergonomics, and holds 10 rounds in the mag, once again it was the best decision I made to trade off the firestar.

February 18, 2006, 09:40 AM
There are plenty of us here old enough to remember when Taurus was a small Brazilian -CENSORED--CENSORED--CENSORED--CENSORED- factory. Comparable to Rossi today.

Yes, they've made great strides in improving their quality, and I own three myself, but....legacies linger. They're still somewhat inconsistent, and just yesterday I saw a [brand new] small DA revolver with a crane so poorly fit that the cylinder wobbled when out of the frame.

No way would I rate them a Tier I mfg. No objective person could place their DA revolvers on the same quality level as S&W, for example. Maybe 80-90% as good.

They make a decent product (most of the time) at a low price point.

February 18, 2006, 08:48 PM
I own 2. A PT-22 which has been great. I also own a PT-92 which was sent back twice for accuracy related problems. Accuracy is now acceptable, but still low right. I realize there will be occasional problems with any gun, but I expect the problem to be fixed the first time it is returned.

February 19, 2006, 01:01 AM
The way I look at it is this: Taurus is the "Hyundai" of the firearms industry. They started out as garbage and stayed that way for quite some time, surviving only on the fact they were inexpensive and had great warranties. Then, eventually they both somewhat improved but still remain decent values. They both copied their more expensive competition, but neither can be truly compared to the quality of the products they cloned.

Springfield XD40 Man
February 19, 2006, 01:18 AM
Show me another gun maker that has a line-up like Taurus. The taurus 2005 catalog is pretty impressive in terms of their number of guns and configurations. That I will give them props on. Taurus does have a bad rap from many years ago, spotty quality issues. I feel that they are rapidly improving, guns like the 24/7 and mil-pro are catching people's attention. With their prices and warranty, they are attracting customers. I have a tracker 357 and a mil-pro 40, both have been outstanding guns, the price was hard to beat too. Just my two cents worth.:D

February 19, 2006, 11:20 AM
This thread is up to four pages now. I notice that all too many posters who dislike Taurus, base it on older models, or friends models, or just dislike them, without providing any information of experience with them.

We have people asking why someone seems so protective of Taurus, accusing them of agenda, or of attempting to justify their purchase. Yet, these same people have no problem pointing out flaws in these weapons, real, or imagined. Are they to also be accused of having an agenda? Perhaps they are the ones attempting to justify spending so much money on products that are only in their minds better?

It's human nature to respond when someone tells you, in so many words, that you're mistaken. BOTH are opinions until some statistical evidence is provided. Why are those who denigrate products so incensed when others dispute their claims? Post count has nothing to do with opinions worth.:)

February 19, 2006, 11:35 AM
I went back and read his post again...
He says his friend bought gun A, had 1 in 5 misfires. He then bought the gun A from his friend.

Then, went and bought gun B. Had SAME issues with gun B.

That is the way I interpret(sp?). It would be nice if he could clarify...

February 19, 2006, 11:42 AM
If a buddy of mine bought a gun that misfired consistently and he wanted to sell it to me , I'd have to ask him if he still wanted to be my friend. :mad:


February 19, 2006, 11:44 AM
I notice that all too many posters who dislike Taurus, base it on older models, or friends models, or just dislike them, without providing any information of experience with themAnd then there were these posters who had first person experience, many of them in just the last couple of years:I also own a PT-92 which was sent back twice for accuracy related problems. Accuracy is now acceptable, but still low right. I realize there will be occasional problems with any gun, but I expect the problem to be fixed the first time it is returned.They're still somewhat inconsistent, and just yesterday I saw a [brand new] small DA revolver with a crane so poorly fit that the cylinder wobbled when out of the frame.Purchased a 45 acp tracker revolver in 2005. It only fired 1-2 out of 5 in DA mode. Returned it and got a new one. This one works fine in DA mode. It is picky in chambering ammo. Ball works fine but some Win JHP's only let 60% of 2 boxes chamber – Tight throat?Cylinder locked up and continued to do so after returning twice. I traded it off.PT22: Barrel lock lever broke while shooting; pistol blew apart injuring my 12 year old son's hand. Bought a nearly-new M85T ported that had light firing pin hits immediately; the nice dealer let me trade back the next day for a Ruger.My latest, a PT145 Mil Pro, feeds and fires fine after a few hundred rounds, but had a bad mag catch initially.My gripe about my Millenium .45 was that Taurus would never admit they had problems with the design. They did fix it under warranty though.
Three were just terrific performers. The other three all had major problems (remember these are NIB guns) out of the box that required each gun to be sent back to the factory to be fixed. Now the problems really started.These are only from THIS thread.

February 19, 2006, 12:51 PM
So, in four pages, nine people had problems with a weapon. This on a thread DEVOTED to just that. At least ONE of the weapons was used, too. One was returned for accuracy problems, but no other explanation was involved. Another was an unknown Model that wasn't in someones hands, and should have been returned by the dealer. Man alive, they're just falling out of the sky, aren't they?

I also note that many of these could have been from sometime a while back, as they had no years to reference.

In my collection, I currently own a PT92, a PT101, a PT58, a PT22, a couple of Model 94s, a Model 941, a Model 66, a Model 82, and two Model 85s. The least fired has in excess of 2000 rounds through it. Most average around 5000-7000, except for the PT92, which has over 10,000 through it. The only one of these that has seen Taurus for warranty was one of the 85s. I shot it loose using thousands of +P and +P+ loads. Taurus, in 6 weeks, rebuilt it completely, and returned it. This was in the early 1990's. The PT92 and PT58 are both pre-decocker models, as well.

It's hard to believe that I just got lucky all of those times. I inspect the arm prior to buying it, field strip it, clean and lube, then head to the range. I did notice that my PT92 likes 115 gr. ammo over the now popular 124 gr. ammo, though.

I also have S&W, Sig, HK, Ruger, CZ, and so on, in my collection. Sig hasn't proven reliable, and HK isn't accurate for the price that I paid. I've also had brand-new S&W revolvers fail on the first round. I'm not about to accuse Sig of building poor weapons because I've had a couple that were a problem, nor HK or S&W, but you'd think, at those prices, they would have better R&D, and QC.

As I said, if we were to avoid buying weapons that others posted had failed them, or their friends, we'd all be carrying knives.:)

February 19, 2006, 04:56 PM
I agree completely JR47, well put.

February 19, 2006, 06:55 PM
Handy: I would say some of those quotes may not be the most accurate...

February 19, 2006, 07:56 PM
Why? Are you accusing your fellows of lying about their own experiences?

February 19, 2006, 08:31 PM
I've owned 7 Taurus' in the last two years and had problems with 4 of them. Can't say that about any other brand I've owned.

I kept giving them another chance, no more. I'll not own any more Taurus'.

February 19, 2006, 09:01 PM
What's all the fuss about? If you like 'em, buy 'em. If you don't, don't. I really don't know why people get all torqued over brand loyalty. Taurus guys get miffed when non-Taurus guys say negative things about Taurus guns. Hell, I got Cheddar all cheesed (pun intended) on another thread when I jokingly said get 9mm instead of .40 S&W and use the money you save to buy a better gun.

No one told him to go with 9mm instead of .40 S&W, and use the money he saved to buy a better gun! :eek: :D

And I was just pointing out that no one had said it already, given the general negative comments regarding Taurus I see posted.

Who really cares what the other guy shoots or thinks? This is the great Ford vs Chevy debate, without pictures of Calvin pi$$ing on the other brand of gun. If I got upset every time someone said Glock is ugly, those would be the only threads I would have time to post to.

I own my guns to have fun and to defend me, not so I can defend them to some yo-yo on the internet, who I don't know, and who's credentials I cannot qualify.

Oh, and by the way, Chevy rules!!!

February 19, 2006, 09:12 PM
Oh, and by the way, Chevy rules!!!
If Chevy rules then why don't military and LE agencies buy them or put them on their list of preferred cruisers??? :) ;) :o :D

Just joking - I had to say it.:rolleyes:

February 19, 2006, 09:22 PM
I just knew that would draw some fire...

By the way, who won that race in Florida today...:D

And what does the defending champion drive...:D

I'm sure there's more fire on the way!!!

Springfield XD40 Man
February 19, 2006, 09:53 PM
There is some heavy duty taurus bashing going on next door in the revolver forum, idiots claiming the entire Taurus line of guns is junk, based on one experience. For every bad experience with a taurus gun, there are two good ones.:D

February 19, 2006, 10:06 PM
So 1/3 of Taurus guns are bad?

By the way, read up on the forum rules. I doubt "idiots" is a respectful way to refer to other members.

February 19, 2006, 10:48 PM
1 in 3 are good? That's still better than I'd give them credit for!

Springfield XD40 Man
February 19, 2006, 11:05 PM
Handy, take a chill pill.:p Maybe "idiots" was a strong term, should have just said "people". Let the taurus bashing continue.:rolleyes:

February 19, 2006, 11:08 PM
It's not a "strong term", it is a direct violation of the forum rules, which are taken pretty seriously.

February 19, 2006, 11:13 PM
"Cheesing off" cheddar was good, tho.

February 19, 2006, 11:21 PM
All of you folks that are passionate about Taurus firearms, and waxing eloquent about the wonderful improvements of the Taurus product line within the last decade or so, please go right on buying them by the numbers.

Warranty repair work is another opportunity for manufacturers to learn how to improve their products ... and perhaps it might be fair to speculate that the more opportunity they have to perform warranty repair, the faster they may learn. :p ;)

February 19, 2006, 11:31 PM
I currently own four Taurus revolvers and have owned about three or four more

I bought my first around '87, when they were supposedly crap guns, and my last about a year ago

To date here are the problems I have had with them

A CH85, after about eight years of having 50 to 100 rounds a week shot through it, had a broken firing pin spring.
Gun still fires the firing pin doesn't retract on it's own.

A used 83 had a hair trigger. A look inside showed that a previous owner had tweaked it.

The CH 85, with one particular brand of ammo, would bind up with hotter loads.
The recoil would pull the bullets out just enough to interfere with the cylinder rotation. I'm told that this is not uncommon with snubs.

That's it.
If these guns are such garbage then how did I get so lucky so many times for so many years?

February 20, 2006, 08:38 AM
SSDD, there are a number of posters here who just bash everything. I sometimes wonder if they even own a handgun. Others just like to argue, siezing on semantics, or spelling, to drift away from the point of the thread.

For what it's worth, I've owned three Sig pistols. One has a cracked slide at just about 100 rounds, and the second developed a sear problem at about 1000 rounds. Ever shot a full-auto P226? The third, a P220, has been flawless. All of these were bought new. To follow Handy's quote above, that would mean that 2/3 of all Sig pistols were faulty from the factory.

I've had accuracy problems with an HK USP that required an entire new top end, and also a P7M8 that the cocking mechanism failed at about the 400 round mark. Both were repaired in four weeks. That, then, would mean that 100% of HK arms are faulty from the factory?

These were ALL high-end weapons. Unfortunately, they were also early production pieces, except for the P220. It would appear that they suffer the same production ramp-up problems of everyone else. Why they should be given a pass when production errors occur, while less expensive arms are held to a higher standard, escapes me. If anything, a single example of a problem in a $1000 weapon should be inexcusable.

February 20, 2006, 08:55 PM
The weapons of different types of calibers and styles I have owned that have been completely reliable:


Ruger GP100s


Springfield XDs

S&W 686

S&W 66

S&W 19

Of these I kept the SW19 and the Glock 19. The S&W 19 is an heirloom so I kept it. The other revolvers put too much shock into my arthritic hands to shoot much. The HKs were too big. Glocks fit my hand better so the XD were sold to get money to pick up the Glocks. So, I've owned several I don't own anymore that I don't bash, because they were 100% reliable.

I owned a Taurus PT92 that was completely reliable, better shooter than the Beretta. It was just too big for me. It's the Taurus revolvers I've had problems with.

March 23, 2006, 06:29 PM
My "beef" with Taurus is as follows:

1. The billboard size "Raging Bull" on the side. I just find this to be unappealing to look at, especially in the SS. Blued, not as bad though.
2 The grips. Please adopt Hogue monogrips Taurus! Comfortable and they look better in my opinion. Or at least lose that red...
3. Resale. S&W and Ruger just seem to hold their resale better than Taurus, at least around here. I can spend less than $200 more for a Smith or Ruger.

Now with all of that being said, I don't doubt that I'll buy a Taurus at some point, add some hogue grips and see how she shoots!

March 23, 2006, 07:25 PM
I would like to get a Raging Bull and a Taurus 1911 but I can't tolerate that writing on the side.

To be fair they are not the only ones doing it.

Company pride is a good thing but there comes a point where it is just vulgar

March 23, 2006, 07:46 PM
taurus is a good gun for the money they have had some problems but not with all there line quality is there but they are not made as well like sigs or glocks i had recently purchased a pt24/7 pro 9mm with the heine sight the gun had fired with no ftf or fte but i was not please with accuracy it was shooting low and far left i no i could have taped the rear sight over to adjust to zero in but being as fussy as i am i trded it for a glock g19 9mm took my lose went to the range set up a hostage sil and went for my first head shoot bullseye took my second shoot at the bullseye and there it went very accurate never looked back or missed the taurus other then its bi tone looks since then i purchased the glock 36 45acp took to the range and same results very accurate goes where i am looking

March 23, 2006, 08:47 PM
Taurus, CZ, Ruger and Sig are the only major brands of guns I have owned that have never had any problems with tons of shooting (not counting both my totally reliable Makarovs). I own three Tauruses and have had no issues with them other than the trigger on my 92 leaves something to be desired. My 24/7 and Millenium are very accurate and my two favorite guns in my collection which still includes two Sigs, a Beretta and some other supposedly 'high end' guns. Had a Glock jam-o-matic lemon, a Beretta that could not stop breaking parts, and many, many, many other brands over the years all with at least some minor issues. But if it costs over $500 it is a "normal manufacturing defect inherent in all mechanical devices" and if it cost less than $500 it is "you get what you pay for." I do or have owned handguns from Glock, Beretta, S&W, Steyr, Para, Springfield Armory, CZ, Ruger, Walther, Sig, Kel-Tec, HK, and more I am sure I have forgotten or just don't want to remember. I have no idea what the past state of quality with Taurus was pre-2003 when I bought my first one, a 92, but my 92, 24/7, and Millenium Pro have all had the crap shot out of them and have been 100% relaible and have held up very well. I would trust a Taurus with my life. I do trust a Taurus with my life. And while I am doing that I have in the safe two Sigs, a Betetta, a CZ, a Ruger, and formerly had a Glock, Steyr, and HK that sat home in the safe.

March 23, 2006, 09:07 PM
I own two Taurus pistols at present.

I bought a used stainless 24/7 in 9mm and have not had any problems with it at all(500 rounds or so). Some day it will be traded in on a 24/7 pro because I've decided I don't really like the DAO trigger.

I bought a new PT911 that decided to become a DAO gun after approximately 100 rounds. Since I bought it through Davidson's, I got a replacement gun within about two days, which so far has been reliable. Had I spent weeks waiting for Taurus to repair the gun, I might be singing a different tune.

April 1, 2006, 02:21 PM
I have a PT145 Millenium Pro. It has been absolutely reilable since I opened the box. I use it for CCW - that says enough. btw - I traded a Glock for it, and I'm not looking back ;-)

April 1, 2006, 03:33 PM
After much research (a lot of it on this forum), I bought my first semi and it was a PT111SS. I liked the size (weight, grip, width), capacity (12+1), the fact it was DAO (being a revolver guy) and the price ($340 w/tax). I've put about 400 rounds through it. At around the 200 round mark I had a slight "hiccup" where the slide wouldn't go fully forward on the first round of a new magazine. It happened 3 times. I now believe the problem was "user error" and that I might not a) have been inserting the mag fully or b) wasn't pulling the slide all of the way back before releasing. Since I paid attention to those things, the last 150 rounds have been flawless. Also, I have never experienced a FTF ot FTE.

April 1, 2006, 03:42 PM
What does everyone have against Taurus.

Cheap crap... :barf: :barf: :barf: :barf: :barf: :barf:

Other than that...

Springfield XD40 Man
April 1, 2006, 04:27 PM
Hey varoadking, I'll put my Taurus MIL-PRO up against any other pistol out there, bar none.:p I'm extremely pleased with the performance of this gun, best value for the money in my opinion. You can voice educated opinions, fine with me, but dont go labeling Taurus "crap" across the board. Just for the record, I looked at both the XD sub-compact and the MIL-PRO for my carry gun, I bought the MIL-PRO for its better ergonomics and the way it fit my hand.

April 1, 2006, 05:01 PM
What gets me is when people assume you got the Taurus because you financially lacked the ability to get something else. "Save just another $$$ and you could get a blah blah blah." I don't want anything else for carry. I owned a Glock and IT WAS CRAP! I owned an HK which had the trigger break in half. I still own a Beretta 92 compact but it has had issues. I like the XD but do not want a single action with no manual safety for concealed carrying. Nothing else of what I own, have owned, or have borrowed has been as relaible, accurate, and concealable as my PT111. My Sig 229 is nice but a lot bulkier, heavier and not as accurate as my PT111. The slide-frame fit on my Mil-Pro is better than on either of the Sigs I own as well (not that that really matters in terms of reliability but worth mentioning).

Enough with all the "Tauruses aren't as well made as xxxxxx" garbage. I've worked in manufacturing my entire adult professional life and would really like someone to actually articulate a verifiable fact-based argument as to why the Taureses are not as well made as the Sigs, Berettas, Glocks, HK's etc... You just throw that out there with no basis and that is the only "crap" I see around here. Where is your evidence? Don't give me this "I heard from a guy who had a Taurus that he had a problem ..................." unless the next time someone asks about a Glock, HK, or Beretta you tell them you heard from a guy who had a Glock jamomatic, an HK that had a critical piece break for no good reason, and a Beretta that made two trips back to the factory to fix something that never should have been allowed to get out in the first place. Why is it these people's memories seem to go in a big hurry when it comes to problems with some brands and not others. Reminds me of the liberal mentality where they dismiss everything, no matter how reasonable and factual, that does not further their particular agenda. Give me some scientific evidence here.

I can buy ANY gun I want for carry. I own a lot of guns. I do a lot of shooting. I chose to buy a PT111 and am thoroughly happy with it. I am also thoroughly happy with the other Taurus firearms I own. I do not have any brand loyalty. If it is crap you will hear about it. I too will put my Mil-Pro up as well against anything else out there.

April 1, 2006, 06:12 PM
Amen Bedula. Some people are just biased haters period. I am a Taurus owner as well as an HK owner. I did have a problem with my PT-145 (pre-pro) but I sent it back to Taurus and it was repaired completely, (they even replaced some parts that weren't affected), and returned in 2 weeks! Since then it has been 100% reliable. I love my Taurus, and the customer service for me was great! My PT-145 rides beside me every day. :cool:

April 1, 2006, 07:56 PM
My problem with many Taurus critics is the 3rd party information they use to set themselves up as authorities. For instance, " In 1996 my best buddy bought a Taurus and his second time at the range it blew up in his hand, causing severe brain damage. So I'm never going to buy any of that Taurus crap. As soon as my best buddy gets out of the hospital he's going to take out a second mortgage and by a good gun."

I own several automatics including my PT92. It is not the best made automatic I own. It didn't cost as much as my HK, Beretta or Sig. It is very accutate, reliable, attractive and fun to shoot. I have also owned a Mil-Pro, a very nice carry gun.

I can say the same thing about my Taurus 689. It's a beautiful piece, reliable and fun to shoot. I didn't pay anything near what I paid for my Smiths (29-2, 686-6, 586-7) or my Colt Python, Trooper and Lawman.

With every Taurus I've owned I have received the value I paid for it. Edsel didn't recover from the lemons it made in the 50's. I expect the losses were gobbled up by Ford. But Taurus, to its credit, doesn't have a Ford, and it did recover from the lemons of years gone by.

Judging by todays standards Taurus is a good value for the money. If you want a better gun, get a loan and buy a Kimber, HK or Sig.

Nice article Petre. I've previously posted allot of that information.

There are folks who have had bad experiences with Taurus in years gone by. I can understand their anger at the pain and financial loss they have experienced. But it is the year of our Lord 2006 and it would not be fair if I didn't purchase my PT-92 because of something someone wrote about in 1996 and made it sound like it was the case today. Would it???

April 1, 2006, 09:23 PM
" In 1996 my best buddy bought a Taurus and his second time at the range it blew up in his hand, causing severe brain damage. "

Haha, well said, and Amen to that. I'm fairly objective here--- I don't own a Taurus, nor do I love or hate them. Yet I notice that most of the people who praise Taurus actually own or have owned one....and about half of those who "bash" the brand are operating off 3rd party sources.....

People seem to forget that the Raging Bull and Model 608 have had very few problems, if any, reported on this forum, and I can state that first hand after using the "Search" function and reading the first two pages of information that appeared from each query.

There should be a rule in this thread: unless you have actually OWNED a Taurus, ie had the paperwork in YOUR name, you are not qualified to provide an objective review of the weapon.

April 1, 2006, 10:34 PM
Come now, that would make it hard for our "experts" to tell one and all how bad "_____________" (put brand in here) is. I often wonder, after listening to the same people on everything from pistols, revolvers, and even rifles, if they even own a gun. They don't seem to like anything.

April 2, 2006, 09:33 AM
Thanks Bullrock .

As of today I own 12 firearms of various manufacture and 3 are Taurus.

My next purchase will be a Taurus 1911. If it turns out to be anywhere near the reliability or quality of the 3 I currently own I will be very VERY happy.

The 3 I own have all performed flawlessly.

April 23, 2006, 07:55 PM
I currently own and have owned several Taurus handguns, both semi automatic and revolvers. These have all been of fairly recent manufacture (past 3 years or so) and are all excellent in quality, function and appearance. I have had the PT1911 on order since it's introduction at Shotshow 05. During this time the release date has changed over and over again. Taurus needs no apologies for the quality of their product but their ability to publish release dates leaves alot to be desired. Be that as it may, they make a good gun..

here's my PT 100ss. (40 S&W)


April 24, 2006, 06:22 PM
Cheap crap...

Other than that...

Can't argue with evidence that persuasive, now can you? If you have nothing of substance, speak in vague terms, innuendo, & hyperbole to confuse the issue. :p

April 24, 2006, 08:06 PM
Proud owner of both a PT-92&25.


April 24, 2006, 08:10 PM
Can't argue with evidence that persuasive, now can you? If you have nothing of substance, speak in vague terms, innuendo, & hyperbole to confuse the issue.

Nope...just the facts.

Plenty of fence sitters here with the "Taurus is a good gun for the money" line. There are damned few good guns around under the $400.00 price point, with Makarov's being the most notable exception.

Taurus is a bargain basement brick that sells on price point alone. Period. Unless, of course, you are drawn to gold accents...then it's a real top of the line piece. They will continue to make this cheap crap as long as people buy it.

Add $200.00 to the price and see how many they sell. Not a one.

It's OK...enjoy it, it's yours. I simply won't own one and think they are cheap crap. :barf: Cheap being the operative word. Well, maybe crap is the operative word in this case...

He asked...I answered. Don't like it...don't ask...

Springfield XD40 Man
April 25, 2006, 12:42 AM
You go right ahead and spend the extra $200 for a glock, springfield, baretta, whatever it might be. Those guns are no better than my mil-pro, they are not worth the extra price tag in my opinion. Using your logic, no one should have any reason to buy a new chevy malibu, everyone should just pony up and buy a mercedes. What does the mercedes have over the malibu, not much other than a bunch of luxury techno gadgets, its still 4 tires, 4 seats, and a motor.:p Not everyone wants to plop down $500-600 for a gun, I believe based on owning THREE taurus gun's, they are excellent quality for a good price. If you can't respect that roadking, thats your perogative, but I take offense at your bashing Taurus owners who are proud of their guns, saying they own junk.

Compared to my Springfield XD, which I love, the Taurus MIL-PRO will hang right there with it. So far its been just as reliable, just as accurate, and just as comfortable as my XD. In my opinion, they are on an equal plane, but the XD's price is $150 higher.:p

April 25, 2006, 09:14 AM
Quote: Using your logic, no one should have any reason to buy a new chevy malibu,

That is correct there is no reason for anyone to ever buy a Chevy Malibu, when there are way better choices.

If you only own and drive Malibu's, it would be hard for you to say, there is nothing better!!!

April 25, 2006, 09:31 AM
Add $200.00 to the price and see how many they sell. Not a one.

If Taurus was selling their guns for $200 more than they are now, they would add improvments and do more marketing. What improvments? Maybe a fancier glock-type "tennifer" finish instead of standard blue. Maybe their guns would gun with 3 magazines instead of 2. Other improvments I can't think of because I don't manufacture firearms. More marketing? $200 per gun is a lot of money, it would be easy for them to give law enforcement agencies steep discounts. That way Joe mall-ninja could say: "the police use Taurus, therefore, Taurus is the best gun ever."

You want to call Tuarus cheap, that is fine. There prices are substantially lower than other manufacturers. Calling a gun crap because it is substantially lower than other guns is an argument that has no merit. You can keep saying it all day long, but that doesn't make it true. Yes you are entitled to your meritless opinion.

Bottom line: Taurus competes in the inexpensive pistol market, and does a great job at it. Why do they do a great job? Their guns represent a great value for the price charged. Why are they a great value? They are reliable, they have good egronomics, and people like them.

April 25, 2006, 10:53 AM
Nope...just the facts.

Varaodking, you are hilarious. You said "just the facts", but then what follows in your post is no less than 5 paragraphs completely devoid of ONE SINGLE FACT to support your assertion that Tauri are junk. Nothing but hot air. Do you actually have a FACT, since you alleged that you do?

People are NOT saying (by and large) as you allege that they are, that "Taurus is good for the money". They are alleging that "Taurus is good, period!" The fact that they are also less money is icing on the cake. But YOU are the one who is adamant that they are junk. So could you please give us a concrete verifiable fact from your experience to back that up, since I and many others have given you first-hand experience - many many facts to back up that they are high quality, those facts being testimonial after testimonial that "I have some/many and they work and run great, are solidly built, and have given me no trouble whatsover". Those are FACTS - something which you don't seem to possess.

And of course, one of the people who claim catastrophic failure, Flaman, still has yet to answer my question posed to him on page 2 of thread, in my post #39:

I assume you sued Taurus for your son's injuries before destroying your evidence, correct?

in response to his claim:

PT22: Barrel lock lever broke while shooting; pistol blew apart injuring my 12 year old son's hand. I melted it down.

I don't know why he has not answered, but I wish he would tell us.

April 25, 2006, 11:32 AM
You go right ahead and spend the extra $200 for a glock, springfield, baretta, whatever it might be. Those guns are no better than my mil-pro, they are not worth the extra price tag in my opinion.I think Taurus makes pretty good guns, but lets leave Berettas out this they're great guns and are worth every penny :D

April 25, 2006, 12:15 PM
Taurus PT-145 here. (Pre-Pro even!) I have handguns ranging from Hi-Points, to HK & the FN 5.7. They all have their pros & cons I guess, since no man-made mechanical device is perfect. But, I bought the PT-145 used for $275 looking about 95%. Sent in to Taurus once, and they replaced the trigger and spring without complaint. They sent it back to me in less than two weeks FREE! 720 rounds later, not a hiccup. A pleasure to shoot and a very comfortable way to hold 11 rounds of .45 in my hand. Rides with me every day loaded with Gold Dot HP. Great gun, great customer service! I also plan to add the new Taurus 1911SS to my collection as soon as one can be had. The Thunderbolt .45LC pump rifle is looking pretty interesting too. :cool: