Taurus 85

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Taurus 85 is smaller and lighter than the M380.

No, it is mostly identical to the model 85, but with a shortened cylinder and frame to match. It would be lighter then a model 85 so long as both were made with the same materials in the various parts. In particular, a Titanium version of the M380 might be both interesting and practical.

I see your point that an even smaller revolver than the 85 View could be made designed around the shorter 380 ACP, but here are the comparisons of the two revolvers as they are now:

Taurus 85VTA
Caliber: .38 Special
Barrel: 1.41 in
Length: 5.67 in
Height: 3.5 in
Weight: 9.0 oz
Capacity: 5 Rounds

Taurus M380
Caliber: .380 ACP
Barrel: 1.75 in
Length: 5.95 in
Height: 4.80 in
Weight: 15.5 oz
Capacity: 5 Rounds
 
Taurus is a hit and miss product but I doubt anymore than what we've seen from many of the other gunmakers over the last 30-40 years.
Small guns are in demand and some have demanded a very high price a while those that snap into a belt buckle and shoot a poor round for defense could truly be called gimmicky so might a Titanium S&W with a laser in 22 mag. How about the gimmick of the 410 revolver? They seem to still be selling.
It's been pointed out that there are some ultralight 357's that can be punishing to shoot.
Plastics have come a long way regarding strength and I can remember goggles back in the late 70's that claimed to be able to stop shotgun pellets so the side panel would be of little concern to me.
I doubt I'll trade one for my 380 anytime soon though.
 
I see your point that an even smaller revolver than the 85 View could be made designed around the shorter 380 ACP, but here are the comparisons of the two revolvers as they are now:

You are making an oranges to apples comparison. Check the weight on a regular model (unmodified) model 85 or 85 Lightweight against the M380.

Just for grins, back in the dark past when Colt still made hand-ejector revolvers they had two models (Police Positive and Police Positive Special) that were identical in all respects except the PP had a shorter cylinder and matching frame then the PPS that had a longer cylinder and frame. The difference in weight was 2 1/2 oz.

The .38 Special cartridge was designed to hold (21 grains) of black powder. Today the capacity of that round (and therefore overall length) is much more then is necessary.

With smokeless powder a shorter cartridge would offer equal performance, and be easier to load and fully eject - while at the same time offer less weight with a shorter cylinder and barrel.
 
Taurus 85B2FS
Caliber: .38 Special
Barrel: 2.0 in
Length: 6.5 in
Height: 4.28 in
Weight: 21.0 oz
Capacity: 5 Rounds

Taurus 85B2ULFS (Ultralite)
Caliber: .38 Special
Barrel: 2.0 in
Length: 6.5 in
Height: 4.28 in
Weight: 17.0 oz
Capacity: 5 Rounds
 
aI find it to be fuction over form. It looks like a great gun for what it's intended purpose is and hard to beat.

I give Taurus credit for making this product. They are one of the few who are actually making a truly concealment oriented firearm that has both adequate power and is comfortable to carry not a range gun with big sloppy "ergo" grips and a fat frame.

You can actually carry this thing all day comfortably at that weight and due it's design under some pretty thin clothing. At 6 feet away it won't matter if it's not a 50 yard range tack driver and will do quite well for what it's made to do.

I also happen to like the side window it makes for a more thorough function check.

Polymers from what I understand especially those used in the gun industry are very strong and I happen to like the use of a clear see through polymer side plate.

I do not see a side plate as making any frame stronger. It's just a removable plate to access parts and any gun that relies on one for reinforment must have a flexy quirky frame to begin with but I don't know of any revolver that does (don't throw any weird exceptions at me please.)

The see through side plate is asthetics that I happen to like and will make very little difference to the rapist or home invader that gets shot with it.

People whine about the lack of truly concealment oriented guns on the market and then complain when one is made.

I think this one is well thought out in reality and does a really good job in judging what compromises have to be made to reach the goal this revolver was meant to fulfill. So forget your fat "ergo grips" if you don't want the world to see your bulge under thin clothes, forget about your picky unrealistic craving for pea shooter recoil in a small effective adequate power concealment oriented gun that does not weigh 2 lbs, it's still more managable than shooting an earshattering, eyeblinding, wrist warping, heavy on weight .357 snub nose revolver which by the may must be a real challenge to reaquire your sight picture after wasting so much powder into thin air at night.

If you a want a light small gun with the ergos optimized for concealment fat frame autos required to accomodate double stack magazines are not quite what I would have in mind either.

I recall an ad by what I consider one of the only true pocket pistol (not a fat bulgemaking double stacker) makers left and they were quite right in saying no one makes a true pocket pistol these days like they do. They are still holding that market but this Taurus does come closer than most with equal or more power, reliability, and managability than than a true .380 pocket pistol.

I give it a big thumbs up finally a modern day concealment oriented firearm being made in a concealment oriented firearm hostile political climate with a market full of people who are ignorant of it's purpose and advantages.

I feel bad for the treatment Taurus is getting here for attempting to lead a horse to some good drinking water.
 
Last edited:
Well you're opportunity has arrived.... :uhoh: :evil:

See post #30. ;)

Then come back and tell us how everything worked out. :D
 
I would but I live in a city where you are proclaimed an evil heretic and burned at the stake if you even dare think of trying to legally own a firearm
 
I think one in 9x23 Winchester would be nice. More power than .38 special and could use a shorter cylinder.
 
No I belive Taurus got it right NO +P .38 special ammunition only standard .38 special.

That sounds like what would be proper in small light weight concealable such as this one just using common sense alone.
 
I've had a Taurus M85 since 1990. The old ones were as good as a S@W 36. Not sure about the new one's. The one in the video looks like a gimmick. She could sell me a washer and dryer though. You need stainless or carbon steel for a snub. Otherwise it's just a shade better than a machete.
 
Last edited:
While I'm not knocking the original 85 but this one makes no sense to me ,I wouldn't even give it a second look
 
Last edited:
Very lightweight very concealable gun chambered in a respectable self defense caliber.

What doesn't make sense?
 
Ok, so this one has been calling my name for a while. i just love small guns. I picked it up today. It is very small and very light. The fit and finish look pretty good to me. The grip felt to me very similar to the stock grips on the NAA Mini Magnums. I had no trouble holding it and holding onto it while firing. It actually felt kind of comfortable in my hand, no doubt the result of shooting NAA's for many years now. The trigger pull is long and hard but smooth. It reminded me of the trigger pull on a smith and wesson 351. in other words the type of trigger pull you would expect on a 22 double action. i shot 50 rounds of wadcutter out to 15 yards. as expected the further out the larger the spread. at 3 yards it was tight. all in all im happy with it so far. I will be using wadcutters in it. with the light weight and small size it seems to me to call for it. I have no interest in beating up my hands.
 

Attachments

  • 1031040029.jpg
    1031040029.jpg
    93.6 KB · Views: 41
  • 1031040030.jpg
    1031040030.jpg
    96.5 KB · Views: 47
Looks too small and too light. One of the things I like about J-frame sized guns is that although they don't hold as much ammunition as a comparable semi-auto, there are a lot of grips that I can try to get one that fits my largish hands well. A light .38 Special can be a lot to hang on to, but good grips make a lot of difference. With that little Taurus, you are giving that up. In practical size, I don't think a S&W J Frame like the 442 really gives anything up.
 
Can't speak for Taurus quality, but the old Rossi my brother has seems like a very well made gun. I wouldn't reject a gun just because it's a Taurus. I've sent S&W's and Rugers in for warranty service before...
 
I really like it. Designed with concealability as a priority while still being practical for personal defense.

It is not designed to be a buldging compromise between a full size and a true concealable.

It is designed to carried with the least burden (light weight) unoticed until needed to be a potent surprise for predators who present an immediate danger to the carrier and/or his/her family or others .... you get the picture.

It looks like it does that quite well.

Another thing to consider is that for people with very small hands this can be a great long awaited design although the reason for the small grip is primarily to facilitate concealment.
 
Last edited:
They had issues with the Lexan see-through plate (just like everyone predicted), but they are replacing the Lexan plate with a standard metal side-plate for 2015 and the non-see-through View (which won't be called the View) will be back in the lineup for 2015.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top