Revolvers

Status
Not open for further replies.

0ne3

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2014
Messages
177
I, do not want to sound stupid, I am trying to learn. If I can remember some say they do not like Taurus revolvers , because of the way the crane is made, and some thing about the lock up. Isn't the crane the hinge that the cylinder swings out on? What is the differnce the way outher revolvers are made, they all look the same to me. Thank You for the in put. I, think most is missing my point. I DO NOT want you to bash, just tell me the differnce in the revolvers and what to look for, and how to do it. Thnaks
 
Last edited:
I, do not want to sound stupid, I am trying to learn. If I can remember some say they do not like Taurus revolvers , because of the way the crane is made, and some thing about the lock up. Isn't the crane the hinge that the cylinder swings out on? What is the differnce the way outher revolvers are made, they all look the same to me.

I purchased a brand new Taurus double action stainless revolver in 1999. It was basically their clone of the Smith & Wesson Model 63. However, it was similar ONLY in appearance. The trigger pull weight was nearly 15 pounds. The cylinder bolt wore a deep groove in the cylinder after a few hundred gentle rounds. I sent it back to the factory (because they have a "lifetime guarantee"). The stainless alloy in the cylinder was obviously not correct because it had the deepest groove worn into it that I have EVER seen on any revolver before or after. The factory's response? They installed an even stronger spring and shipped back to me. The deep cylinder groove was still there! The new spring was strong enough to spin the cylinder alright...but the groove was fighting all the way around each revolution...and getting deeper with each cycle of the revolver. I sold it cheap and washed my hands. Now I will tell you the most important bit of advice: Friends don't let friends buy a Taurus!
 
I won't bash a company just to bash it. There are many shooters who own Taurus revolvers and are very happy. There are also many who are not. I have not dealt with their CS but most reports are bad. I personally would not but one but many who have are happy.

Taurus used to be a lot less expensive than other revolvers. Since that is no longer true why not buy a Ruger or S&W?
 
Yes, the crane is the swing-out part that the cylinder is on. That particular part isn't where I've had my Taurus troubles, but I wouldn't be surprised to hear that someone had. Taurus seems to have a problem with quality control in that poorly machined stuff will slip through. There are good ones that run forever, and then there are some that have various sorts of failures. I had a 605 (snubnose .357) in which the cylinder pin would bind forward under recoil, even with .38s. It went back for repair and came back with the same exact problem.
 
The Taurus revolvers I've owned, maybe a dozen or so, have all been at least good guns. Three or four have been excellent, BUT I only buy used, and I "cherry pick." Even the ones I wouldn't rate as high, it's only been because the finish wasn't as nice as some other manufacturers.

I've never had to use their customer service, so I know nothing about that.
 
I have seen many a taurus come across the bench for repairs. I was thankful it was not my money that had been spent! I seen multiple of the following: Hardening concerns, poor fit. erratic spring weights, incorrectly bored cylinders, seized internal parts on new guns. The single most horrifying thing I ran across was a new in the box raging judge in 454. This was owned buy a shooting buddy. First range visit, the brass had to pounded out of the cylinder with a punch.Upon inspection, the middle of the cases were so bulged, I don't know how they didn't rupture or split. This was a new gun, with factory ammo. Phone calls and sent in for warranty repair. 14 months later, the gun returned. Cylinder replaced but not fitted properly. Binds on rotation and out of time. For a full refund, an attorney drafted letter, sent registered will work wonders. Never with my money and never recommended by me.
 
I went to a gun show once looking for a carry gun for a friend of mine (his wife was getting her CCW permit and didn't like using any of his small semi-autos to qualify with). I checked out a lot of Taurus, Charter Arms, Rossi, and S&W J frame size revolvers for fit, function, and overall initial quality. My conclusion: for the money S&W had the best quality of all the different brands I looked at. Went with a Model 638 with a 2.5" barrel and it has worked perfectly for her for a number of years now.
 
This question comes up frequently. Some posters say they have had numerous Taurus revolvers and none of them had problems. Some say that most of the ones they have ever seen were junk.

I have owned around ten and only had trouble with one. They fixed it for free. Most of mine have had stiff triggers. A few were extremely good. IMHO the ones from the late 1980's until maybe the very early 90's seem to be some of the best. You rolls your dice and you takes your chances.

The worst handgun I ever owned was a Sig. Go figure.
 
I service a lot of revolvers, and I'm a big revolver nut, so I've had a lot of opportunities to work on, test fire, tune up, hunt with, carry, you name it with Taurus revolvers.

While I am a happy owner of Taurus all-steel revolvers, there are particular issues you will see. There are inherent design issues for all models, so don't take this list as anything which should really deter you from owning a Taurus revolver, with the exception of the Ultralight models, as I'll explain below.

There are a lot of rumors and hyper-sensationalization floating around the internet about poor machining quality, inconsistent metallurgy, etc. Most often, these are either exaggerated claims of a normal failure issue which can happen with any mass produced brand, or propagation of rumor without any real evidence. Thoroughly use or abuse any revolver and you'll run it loose, and eventually out of time. No brand is immune to that. I also have NEVER experienced poor customer service from Taurus, alternatively, I have always experienced fantastic service, both for personal firearms I have needed repaired, or factory warranty repair/replace issues for customers. They're a little less apt to send out free parts than Ruger might be, but I find them more prone to share freely than S&W. You can look at the revolver itself, or even simply look at its pricetag and tell which models will wear out faster than others - a $280 Taurus or cheaper Rossi or Charter shouldn't be expected to last as long as a $550 Ruger, firearms do have a service life. Of course, much of this is driven by the fact many Taurus models are effectively a Brazilian knock off of S&W models, which many S&W fanboys don't appreciate. Largely, it's just popular to bash on Taurus.

Some of the specific Taurus revolver issues:

1) For their non-steel revolvers, i.e. the Ultralight models, they use a hardened steel bushing around the firing pin and the main pin to protect the softer alloy parts. These particular bushings have been notorious for improper metallurgy vs. their design (too hard/brittle & too thin), with a relatively high rate of brittle fractures, locking up the cylinder, or seizing the firing pin. So the Alloy frame Taurus revolvers, for their intended defensive purposes, are a 100% no-go in my book. I own a couple 85 Ultralights, but after having as many broken bushings come in, I will not carry to protect my life, and recommend against them entirely. Too great of risk. I DO, however, fully trust my non-alloy, all-steel taurus revolvers with my life.

2) The Taurus crane itself isn't necessarily weak, but the main cylinder pin - or rather main tube - is a thin walled tube, very prone to galling, gouging, cracking, etc. The cylinder bushings riding on the main tube are also a weakness in design - not for immediate and catastrophic failure, but for premature wear. There have been specific metallurgical issues in the past which exacerbated this relatively wear prone design. This isn't really a major issue, they simply loosen up faster over use and develop a bit of end shake. But it's a revolver, it's going to have SOME endshake and lateral displacement, AND it does have a forcing cone to ensure alignment of the chamber to the bore upon firing. Nobody likes slop, and everybody likes bashing sloppy revolvers, and a Taurus WILL loosen up faster, but it's very rare they completely go out of spec, AND Taurus will replace/repair them when and if they do. Use it or abuse it, it'll wear out, no matter what is stamped on the side. There are many models out there in which the crane will warp/twist/bend much more easily than the Taurus's.

3) I'm not hugely in love with the locking bolt design, which is the same as the S&W. It's serviceable, but I prefer the solid piece design of a Ruger over the bent leg design of the Taurus & S&W revolvers. I've only ever seen ONE break in a Taurus, and I have seen as many broken/worn/peened bolts in Rugers and S&W's, but it's something which makes me itch a little when shooting high volume, high speed with Taurus & S&W revolvers, which doesn't make me itch when shooting Rugers.

I also have experienced it's very popular for gunshops to lack favor, and even speak poorly, of Taurus firearms. Part of the issue there is Taurus has a VERY inconsistent supply chain. It's common to hear a shop claim "we'd sell more of them, but we just can't get them." Many of the models showing available on the Taurus website as "current production" haven't actually been produced in years. They're still in the catalog, still showing as an option for production, but they just don't make them. That's frustrating for gunsellers because we just can't get a reliable supply, and if there ever IS a warranty repair or replacement issue, you might not be able to get the part or a replacement of the same model since they're not actually in production.

Overall, the products are good for the money. I own several Taurus revolvers, and I do recommend them for budget minded customers and students in my firearms classes. Taurus service is good as well. They do, however, get a terrible reputation online.
 
I have bought one Taurus revolver all steel model 85 and it has been a good one. It gets shot enough to make sure it functions fine and at times carried a lot. Finish for a blued gun has held up well so far. I like both the single and double action trigger for it's intended use. It was new when bought, paid $300 plus tax. I give it a close inspection when purchased and after firing and don't regret the purchase.
 
I have three Taurus revolvers. The first, a 66 purchased new in 1987, shoots well and solid, but the ejector rod sleeve worked loose after several years, locking the cylinder shut. Easy fix; push in the rod with a tool, open the cylinder, and tighten the sleeve (using Loc-Tite if desired.) Also, the cylinder lockup, while still tight enough to prevent shake or misalignment, is looser than most others. I shot a LOT of .357 Magnum ammo through it when I first got it.

The second is a newer 94 stainless (.22LR.) It was purchased new in 2014, but it was probably a year before I got it to the range. It shoots remarkably accurately, requiring no sight adjustments. But, its cylinder chamber walls are too snug; empty shells are very hard to extract, requiring a rap on the tip of the rod with a tool to get them out. It will one day go back to the mother ship, maybe next time I have business in Miami.

The third is a Model 85, stainless, with the three-inch barrel, made in 1995, and purchased this past spring. I cannot say enough good about this one. Tight lockup, smooth shooting, and well-balanced in the hand, it's a truly satisfying handgun.

I also bought an old Rossi 68 in a pawn shop today. It passed the lockup and alignment checks well in the store, but a slow NICS kept me from taking it home today, as I could not stay and wait.

Incidentally, a friend recently inherited a six-inch Model 66, and asked me to check it out, handing it to me last night. I took a quick look at it today. It locks up tighter than my 66 does, but the trigger/hammer assembly seems grittier than mine does, as if something is dragging in it. It really needs a good cleaning, though.
 
The older Taurus revolvers were not bad at all - I sold and did action jobs on a lot of them in the late 80s/early 90s. They were kind of rough and gritty inside but that was an easy fix. Apparently the newer ones are not built to the same standard. If you can find an older one that has not been abused - consider it. Or look at older S&W revolvers. The newer guns are made to sell at a price point with almost no regard to quality or usable lifespan. I would tend to agree with everything Varminterror posted. One of the biggest problems I see is this insane desire so many people have with believing they must use the hottest flamethrower +P loads in their guns. Standard loads work just fine.
 
Last edited:
I have owned quite a few Taurus guns and they aren't as bad as people make them out to be. I know people that bash Taurus guns even though they've never owned one. I guess it's fashionable to bash them. I can say that I have never had a horrible Taurus gun(the horrible guns I have owned have been the Kel Tec P11 and a Smith & Wesson Sigma 9mm). They've all shot well and have given me trouble free performance. Face it, if Taurus guns were as bad as the Internet said they were, they would not be in business anymore.

With this being said I would not carry a Taurus for CCW or use one as a HD gun(I demand almost supreme reliability and Taurus might not give me that), but they make great range guns(the majority of what I own). I am currently on the look out for a Model 608 in stainless, why, because 8 shots of .357 Magnum would be cool.

I have owned the following Taurus guns.
Raging Bull 44
Model 66 6" 6 shot.
(2) PT1911
PT111 G2
PT92AFS

I currently own:
Model 66 6" 7 shot
Model 94
 
I've owned 2 Taurus revolvers. Neither were bad, but I did get light strikes on the .22 revolver which made it a no-go for my purposes of trail carry for which I bought it. I had a Pubic Defender Poly that was pretty cool, but just too much thump for a light gun.

Taurus just doesn't do it for me regarding fit and finish. I'm a Ruger guy, but I'm not made of money. I know everyone has their budget limits, and I do understand that for some folks $299 is the MAXIMUM they have to spend on a gun. For me, when it come to revolvers, I feel a lot better spending $550 on the Ruger. There are just too many mechanical pieces to a revolver to risk a failure. Plus, Ruger seems to have a reputation for really going the extra mile for their customers.

So, my carry gun is Ruger GP100. However, if I were looking at an inexpensive revolver to toss in a drawer or tool box, I think I would look pretty hard at the RIA models over what Taurus is selling for these days.
 
A couple of years ago I had this conversation with the manager of a LGS. He said that it had gotten to the point that the only new Taurus handguns that he would stock was the TCP and the PT1911. He also said that the QC was totally non existent. That you could order 5 of the same gun and get 1 great gun, 3 decent guns and 1 total junker ( his words, not mine ).
 
Taurus used to be a lot less expensive than other revolvers. Since that is no longer true why not buy a Ruger or S&W?

While I am happy with my Taurus revolver (a 4" model 82) I agree with this statement.
I got mine as a police trade in for only $199 at a local shop.

I did have to have some work done on it shortly after getting it.

For the prices they're getting now, buy a Ruger. Just my opinion.
A new stainless Taurus .357 mag (model 66) is $500 at Buds. Not worth that much.
 
The older Taurus revolvers were not bad at all - I sold and did action jobs on a lot of them in the late 80s/early 90s. They were kind of rough and gritty inside but that was an easy fix. Apparently the newer ones are not built to the same standard. If you can find an older one that has not been abused - consider it. Or look at older S&W revolvers. The newer guns are made to sell at a price point with almost no regard to quality or usable lifespan. I would tend to agree with everything Varminterror posted. One of the biggest problems I see is this insane desire so many people have with believing they must use the hottest flamethrower +P loads in their guns. Standard loads work just fine.

That's something I should have added. ALL of the Taurus revolvers I owned were "older" ones from the 80's, maybe one or two from the early 90's. They were so old most of them wouldn't even show up on the serial number tracker on the Taurus website. They're fairly easy to identify by the wooden factory grips. I've never owned one with factory rubber so I can't say anything about them, but I've never been impressed enough to buy one.

BTW. The wooded oversize "target" grip that Taurus put on some of their guns back then is the most comfortable grip I've ever had on ANY handgun. They're sort of like a Smith & Wesson target grip that someone rounded off and slimmed down. Great grips. I wish I still had the Model 65 they were on, but I was going through a personal "economic downturn" and some things were expendable.
 
I got a 605, 357 3 inch, I bought new in 05. Just cause I wanted a 3 inch. It is fantastic, reliable, and accurate. It have put it through some marathon pratice sessions and nary a glitch. As it is the least expensive 357 I own it does truck duty and weekend carry around the property. It has held up well. It came with 3 grips. A small wooden one and 2 rubber, one smooth target, and one grippy cc type. The wood one won daily duty.
For serious social work, I defer to my 1911, or CZ 75.
 
I decided to take a chance on a used one today. It was an 85 Ultralight with a 2" barrel. Used and returned as the "owner" decided she wanted a semi-auto. Had only seven rounds thru it. I got the other 43 in a box with the gun for $275. Just bought it for fun or maybe to throw in my pocket when going for a walk in the woods. I have a 9mm Shield for a carry gun and do not plan on replacing it as it is accurate and dependable.
 
My Taurus 85 Ultralight in 38 special was a bust. Gun continually"locks up" before firing five rounds. Tried two different types of factory ammo with the same result. Gun will be going back to my LGS on Tuesday. That will be my LAST Taurus!!! I will stick with Smith's and Rugers!
 
Nearly half a century ago while teaching at the police academy, some of the classes coming through had Taurus revolvers. They were cheap so I guess that's the reason. They were also more prevalent among the game warden types, it seemed. Those things were atrocious, heavy, gritty dbl pulls and even when cocked the pull was heavy and actually forced the hammer back another 1/5" or so. They were usually loaned a S&W, Ruger or Colt so they could qualify.

Fast forward a few decades and major changes. Quality control was orders of magnitude better and they became fine shooters. The last one I handled was a .44spl 4" a friend owned. This was maybe 12 years ago, + or -. I was sorely tempted to buy it from him. It was tight, good trigger and accurate. Haven't handled one since but Taurus did eventually build some nice revolvers.
 
It's nice to read a thread about Taurus revolvers that's informative and lacking the usual Taurus haters. Well done guys.
 
The 1911 clone and the Beretta 92 fs clone are the only two I know of that aren't too bad, the rest of their line , well I will never own one, there are too many better choice to make, it will cost you a little more, but will be worth it if your life depends on it, Taurus has a bad rap for for too many reason, enough for me to pay attention, IMHO...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top