Taurus 94 - 22lr thoughts

Status
Not open for further replies.

357smallbore

Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2015
Messages
865
Location
Leavenworth KS
I am looking to buy a 98% Taurus 94 in 4in barrel. It looks unfired. It was manf in 1992. Anyone have experience with these? All I plan on doing is plinking with it. Price is $350.
 
I recently purchased one. Not sure of the vintage. I've only had it to the range once. It shot very well but it did bind up quickly. About 60 rounds in it started to hang up. It was nearly like new when I got it and I never cleaned it before shooting so I'm not going to pass judgement yet. Over all it seems to be a decent value though.
 
I had one for a few years. It functioned just fine, but the DA trigger was very stiff.
 
I have a 6" mid 90's model 94. Its an excellent shooter once you get past the aforementioned heavy DA trigger. I shoot it SA any time I'm shooting for accuracy. It's DA is heavy but smooth so it's less accurate than shooting SA but by no means is the accuracy horrendous.
 
I had one a few years ago and when I cleaned it the whole cylinder/crane assembly fell out. It just didn't seem well made and as stated by others the trigger was quite heavy. I didn't like it and traded it for a 617. Much happier now. YMMV.
 
I have found that the Tauri rimfires I have examined had very high firing pins to be able to hit rimfire primers in a basically center fire frame. This requires a very stiff spring to give the trigger the required energy to hit the firing pin which is just grazed. When I replaced the springs to lighten the trigger pull, the revolver just clicked.
 
Heavier than usual trigger for a DA rim fire revolver. I almost bought one but that trigger was a real deal breaker. It was only $300. The blued/black version with 4" barrel. The same shop had a Smith Model 17 to compare the trigger against so I got a good comparison. Passed on the Taurus but they wanted too much for the Model 17 $850.

I waited and hunted around for awhile and found another Model 17 for $550.
 
I've had two of them. The first was from around 1989 and I remember enjoying it. Bought it as a bedside for my then-wife to keep when I was on the job overnight (one month out of every three.) I let her keep it when we divorced in 1996.

Bought another one, in stainless, in 2014, but it was a couple of years before I got around to shooting it. It shoots remarkably well to aim. However, the chambers don't like to readily give up the empty brass (live rounds slide in and out easily.) Haven't done anything to try to rectify this yet. Otherwise, it's a solid shooter.

Taurus used a lower-mass hammer on these guns than, for example, Smith and Wesson did for their M63 series. That light weight means more force is needed to insure reliable ignition, so the Taurus mainspring is stiff, resulting in a heavier trigger pull. In my opinion, the Taurus hammer is maybe a millimeter or two too short, too. Combined with that heavy spring, that makes thumb-cocking harder than it should be.
 
Last edited:
All the above plus
Parts are hard to come by, especially firing pin, and you will need them sooner or later. Better to buy a current model.
Jmho
 
I have owned a lot of 22 revolvers... a dozen or more The majority of them were terrible, mostly due to awful triggers.

My K22 is awesome. There is probably something about using a medium-sized frame that allows the trigger pull to be superior.

I have owned a couple of Single Six 22's. My previous one and current one both have had great triggers and decent sights. My cheaper SA 22's have not been as good.

My Charter Arms is decent. It's not target grade, but it will shoot as well as I can aim it. The trigger is pretty good.

The rest were bad. Apparently it's hard to make a rimfire revolver that is both reliable and accurate.

If I were able to turn back time and do it again (not that I would want to), I would haunt GunBroker and buy a K22 - or whatever its model number is - and a Single Six that were maybe finish-challenged but were mechanically sound. My Charter Arms is not bad. The rest were terrible.


I won this K22 from the 1950's on GB because the finish is worn and it has incorrect grips. It took me several months of haunting GB, but I got it for a bid of around $400. It has as good a trigger as any of my other excellent S&W revolvers. In my experience it is the best 22 revolver you will find, and it's well worth some time and patience to get one.


The Single Six has a smaller grip and its sights are a little smaller, but in single-action shooting it is comparable to a good Smith. I gave my first one to my BiL when he was terminally ill. This one I got from GB for a $123 bid because the finish was messed up and it lacked a $20 cylinder pin/spring. It is a great shooter.


The Charter Arms has the typical cap-gun cheap trigger. It has small fixed sights. But it is inexpensive, easy to find new or used, and actually shoots decently. I have only had mine out to the range a few times, but the trigger isn't bad at all and it will shoot as well as I will.
 
Last edited:
I have one I bought new in 1997. It shoots great and I have used it to train many new shooters on revolvers.
I have probably put more than 30,000 rounds through mine, most were shot by people I taught to shoot or by my children who loved this revolver.
I have never had any issue with it. The trigger on it is great in both double and single action.
Yesterday I had it out and shot 100 rounds of CCI SV with zero issues. Its very accurate and designed specifically for the .22lr round so it holds nine shots.
Get it you will love it.
 
Every post about .22lr revolvers here seems to have a chorus of folks who have the same problems with all of them no matter the brand.
1 The trigger pull is heavy and terrible compared to X other revolvers I own.
2. The Trigger /Cylinder binds and is hard to pull after x rounds.
3. The empties are hard to eject...
4. Misfires that then fire on the second strike

The solution may be that some do not understand the peculiar issues of the .22lr round which is an old Heeled Bullet design.
The bullet is on the outside of the case unlike more modern ammo designs where the bullet sits inside the case.

The heeled design means that as the gun gets hot and is not cleaned it may become harder to seat the round fully, that can cause the trigger to be harder to pull and the cylinder/ trigger to Bind. This is because the case head/ rim is dragging on the recoil shield, since it is not full seated causing problem 1 & 2. The answer? clean the charge holes with a brush.

The cylinder charge holes get accumulated bullet residue because of the design, and that makes the rounds hard to seat and hard to eject. Causing problem 3 and possibly 1 and 2.

One of my Smith rimfires a model 34 has the hard ejection problem, a worn reamer at the S&W factory cause the holes to be very tight on this gun, causing problems 1,2,and 3.

Issue 4 can also be cause by a round that is not fully seated due to the crud/ heeled bullet challenge, hammer blow 1 fully seats the round hammer blow 2 fires said round.

Others can exhibit the issues after a few hundred rounds with no proper thorough cleaning.
 
Last edited:
I wouldnt pay more than $200 for one. Mine works and is accurate but its a piece of junk.
 
My experience with 22 revolvers (I have had a bunch of them) is the cylinders like to kept a little wet/lubed. This gets rid of the hard to seat, hard to eject and occasional misfire from the round not being seated deep enough. Right in line with that is they need to be cleaned more often.
To the OP I'd pick it up if it passed a revolver inspection.
 
I just cleaned the one I recently picked up. When I opened the side plate I found it was cleaner than I expected. However it was not lubricated. After some oil on the internals the trigger feels 100% better. Much smoother and consistent from pull to pull.
 
Master Blaster writes:

Every post about .22lr revolvers here seems to have a chorus of folks who have the same problems with all of them no matter the brand.
1 The trigger pull is heavy and terrible compared to X other revolvers I own.
2. The Trigger /Cylinder binds and is hard to pull after x rounds.
3. The empties are hard to eject...
4. Misfires that then fire on the second strike...


When I mentioned my "hard to extract" issue, I failed to point out that it happens with the first nine rounds fired, and did from the very first nine rounds. It does not require dozens and dozens to "crud up" anything first. Also, the issue is not coupled with a "hard to seat" one; unfired rounds rattle loosely in their chambers and fall readily out if the cylinder is opened and dumped (using the ejector rod isn't necessary.) It may be that the chamber diameters are too great, allowing fired cases to "swell" into place. I haven't bothered to send the gun back to Taurus because I enjoy having it around.

My previous M94 didn't have these qualities, and neither do either of my Heritage Rough Rider guns. I have yet to try my S&W M63 and my Ruger NMSS.
 
I have the 4” stainless (matte) 94 and 941(polished .22 Mag) Taurus revolvers, along with a single six convertible and SW .22 Lr 17 and 317.

The Taurus front sight on the 94 is thin and the plain black adj rear make them hard to see-use indoors. The 941 has a red insert and white outline rear so it’s easier to see-use. The 317 has a hi-viz front V rear so finding the front is a breeze, and the 17 has a target style front blade rear so that’s really crisp.

Both have fair to good SA pulls, but somewhat heavy DA pulls. The 17 is much better in this arena. 317 is also a bit heavy.

The grips are factory wood on the Taurus, which fit well and look good. They fill enough hand to work pretty well, without being bulky or a blah synthetic.

They shoot ok; the groups aren’t match worthy but they’ll put a 40 gr slug into a squirrel or rabbit at any range I’m confident enough to shoot one at with a 4” revolver.

There isn’t the panache of a Smith or Colt rimfire in these guns, nor is there the fine fit, finish and trigger feel, but they work well enough for me.

If you can talk the seller down a bit that gun would be a decent buy...

Stay safe!
 
Last edited:
If all you plan to use it for is plinking, I implore you to go single action. I always enjoy shooting single actions more at the range than I do double actions and with rimfire it's just the better way to go. I too wanted a double action .22 revolver for a while and waited for Ruger to make a 3 inch LCRx in .22 and after I read reviews of it, I decided $450 for it wasn't a fair price.

But if you are set on a DA/SA .22 revolver, the LCRx is worth the extra $100 over the Taurus 94 IMO. Nothing really against the 94, just better guns for not much more money.
 
If all you plan to use it for is plinking, I implore you to go single action. I always enjoy shooting single actions more at the range than I do double actions and with rimfire it's just the better way to go.

You, of course, can always fire a da revolver in the sa mode if you so choose. Not possible vice-versa.
 
"I too wanted a double action .22 revolver for a while and waited for Ruger to make a 3 inch LCRx in .22 and after I read reviews of it, I decided $450 for it wasn't a fair price."

Mine was horrible. I thought it would solve my wanting a shorter barreled 22lr revolver with decent sights issue. I was wrong. I couldn't shoot it worth squat, and I am not a terrible shooter.
 
"I too wanted a double action .22 revolver for a while and waited for Ruger to make a 3 inch LCRx in .22 and after I read reviews of it, I decided $450 for it wasn't a fair price."

Mine was horrible. I thought it would solve my wanting a shorter barreled 22lr revolver with decent sights issue. I was wrong. I couldn't shoot it worth squat, and I am not a terrible shooter.
Was it the weight of the gun being an issue or the trigger? Near every review had an issue with the gun being so light it would wander on target.

I wonder if the 3" LCRx .357 has had similar complains about it? Given it's steel, it should have more heft to it. Also, I didn't hear about such issues with the 3" .38 LCRx when it came out and that's also an aluminum frame like the .22 is.
 
You, of course, can always fire a da revolver in the sa mode if you so choose. Not possible vice-versa.
I know that, but I find single actions easier to cock the hammer and fire. The thing is the DA pull of rimfire revolvers is always so heavy that I just don't bother using it. Absent any serious defensive use intentions for the revolver, if it's just plinking only, the DA is a wasted feature.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top