To Taurus or not no Taurus...

[Floki]

The prices in Smiths and Ruger .357 have really gone up. Im not the biggest Taurus fan in the world but their .357 offerings are budget friendly. What say ye?

 

[Kneedeep87]

The only guy I know that had a Taurus had the seer fail and shot through his hand. He had his hand in front of the gun which is obviously on him but it was determined the parts actually failed and he had a lawsuit. Not sure of the outcome and this was a semiauto and I think they're bread and butter is revolvers. That's all I can give you. Hope it helps.

 

[Bugzilla]

Only Taurus I have is the Spectrum (380). Had it a couple years and only about 100 rounds through it. No issues, seems less quality than my Ruger LCP but again the Spectrum is a budget gun. Both are a different class than my Smith Highway Patrolman 357 so not a good comparison with the exception that if their budget Spectrum has been OK so one could assume their budget friendly 357 should also be ok.

 

[DadSmith]

The prices in Smiths and Ruger .357 have really gone up. Im not the biggest Taurus fan in the world but their .357 offerings are budget friendly. What say ye?

I've had a Taurus Model 44 6.5" for around 30 years. Over 2000 rds through it not one problem.

 

[Squirt239]

Depends on model. I have one from the early days that I adore. I had to do a significant amount of tuning, but it's a good pistol now.

 

[92FSTech]

I've owned both a Taurus Model 44 (.44 Mag) and a Model 605 (.357 Mag snubby). Both of them had timing issues, to the degree that the gun would occasionally fail to fire, and the firing pin would leave visible marks on the case head, instead of on the primer. When they did fire, they would often shave lead.

I got rid of both of them. I gave them a second chance, and they failed me again. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. I know some folks are happy with theirs, but I'll never own another. I'm a Ruger and S&W guy now, and much happier for it.

 

[NyleRN]

Save up a little more and at least get the GP100. It'll be cheaper in the long run. If you get the Taurus you'll think more times than not that you wished you'd bought the Ruger or Smith. Then you'll have to fund a buyer and you'll probably take a hit.

 

[DadSmith]

Ruger GP100 357 Mag 6' 6-Round Black Hogue Monogrip 1704

<p>Ruger® GP100® double-action revolvers are among the most comfortable shooting revolvers. Their rugged, medium-sized frame and cushioned grip system permit repeated firings with minimal shooter fatigue. Easy on the hand and budget, all GP100 revolvers boast solid steel sidewalls (no...

familyfirearms.com

There is a GP100 for $699 I'd go with this myself. I've heard that modern Taurus revolvers do not have the same quality as older revolvers like my model 44.

Ruger 1702 GP100 Standard 357 Mag 4.20' 6 Round Black Hogue Monogrip Blued

<p>Ruger's GP100 revolver features a triple-locking cylinder that is locked into the frame at the front, rear and bottom for more positive alignment and dependable operation. Its patented transfer bar mechanism provides an unparalleled measure of security, while the integrated sub-assemblies...

thecastlearms.com

This is a 4" $655

 

[rooster]

I’ve had this thought many times, ruger, glock, S&w are all brands most people will stake their life on. Taurus is a little iffy in the quality department. I’ve got 40 year old rugers and 5 year old rugers that I have never regretted.

Ruger and S&W are the gold standard of revolver quality.

the only gun I’ve regretted buying was a SD9V but that’s another story

 

[1nderbeard]

I used to have an older Taurus 38, which I sold to my brother. Neither he nor I have ever had any issues with it.

I agree with what's been said above. I think revolvers are good, but I'd pick a Ruger or S&W first.

 

[Tombs]

You get what you pay for...

With so few companies making competent revolvers anymore, I really wouldn't wander down to the bottom of the list with my hard earned money.

I've not been very impressed with S&W for a number of years either. I'd honestly just get a ruger. But if I was in the market I'd probably check out the kimber revolvers and see if they're any good.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

For what purpose? How much do you realistically intend to shoot it over your ownership of it? If you have to send it back to Taurus for warranty work, how much of a bother is that to you?

 

[roscott]

Take a look at used Ruger Service Six or Security Six. Used to be able to find them for very decent prices, and they are built like tanks.

With that said, I have had good luck with an older Taurus revolver, and bad luck with any of their semi autos I’ve been around.

 

[Leo]

When I worked at the shop, we quit handling taurus because of the hassle and expense of warranty. They did seem to fix them, not fast, but eventually. For the shop it was a lose lose, the margins are thin at the lower price, The additional work eats any profit up. No matter what you do the customer is not happy, and you lose any potential future sales to that customer. Not all of them needed warranty, but enough that it was a loosing line. I don't remember ever sending a Ruger back.
Save your money and get the better one.

 

[bcod151]

I vote spend the extra amount on ruger over Taurus. I found the taurus I owned to not match up in quality. Nothing major wrong or anything like that it wouldn't be a loss if you got a Taurus I personally would just spend the extra unless its a deal you can't pass up of course.

 

[Cameramonkey]

Another cautionary tale about them. Back when BGF had a range, I ran into my neighbor lady and her adult daughter. She was getting in her car as I was getting out. We were both surprised to see each other.

Since she saw me there she asked if I was a "gun guy". I laughed and said "very much so". So she had me look at her Taurus 38 revolver. (Im sure suggested to her by the guy behind the counter because she's a woman ) She was having trouble cycling the cylinders.

I verified it was empty and tried it. Sure enough it was harder than normal to pull, and would occasionally hang up. When I looked at the teeth on the cylinder they were beat all to hell. Worse than any revolver of any age Ive seen. I told her to contact them for warranty work.

And now that I think about it, we never spoke about it again. I need to go over and ask how that turned out. We talk every week or so across the fence this time of year, but its just never come up.

 

[700 LTR 223]

All the DA revolvers I own in 357 are Smith's. Owned a Ruger GP100 that was also a nice revolver. If I had no 357s I would most likely still get a Smith or maybe a Ruger GP100.

The only Taurus I own or have ever owned is my Taurus 96 22lr revolver. Definitely styled after the Smith 17. It shoots remarkably well and has pretty decent fit and finish.

 

[ancjr]

Only shot one Taurus... a .460... Heavy as a lead brick... had remarkably light recoil (for its caliber) and 0 muzzle flip... Shot a Ruger GP100 in .357 years ago and thought it was a very nice firearm for the price.

 

[BugI02]

My experience is limited only to Taurus semi-autos, specifically the PT series, but it might contain a nugget of useful information

I started buying Tauruses for the PT38 because it was a non-1911 platform for 38 super. I liked the way they shot and on the advice of collectors whose opinion I valued I bought only used and made before 2006. What I was told was when the fear of an impending Democrat win in 2008 began to take hold, and gun sales took off, Taurus began to value production quantity over quality and the drive to fill market demand resulted in some poorly made production

I would expect this same problem would have also infiltrated revolver production, so my advice would be to buy used if you buy at all. There used to be good information directly from Taurus about production dates with a serial number look-up, and anybody worth dealing with on Gunbroker or similar would post a lot of pics and you could get the serial number directly. Now there is a disconnect and the only info available is a letter/number chart that will eventually yield the month and year of production

I have PTs in many available calibers and they have all been reliable and pleasant to shoot with no warranty issues and I know folks who have had a similar experience with their revolvers in mainstream calibers like 38, 357 and 44 provided they were produced before the frenzy. I don't know anyone who went for the fringe stuff like .410 capable revolvers so can't speak to those

 

[Floki]

all good advice, think I'll save for a Ruger!