Taurus handguns.

[hemiram]

Yes, that's normal in a surprising amount of handguns. Put a beretta next to it and it WILL do the same unless it's been worked over. Been there, done that, sold my berettas.

I've never had a single problem with a Beretta gun, ever. They were all very accurate and most importantly at all, reliable. My Taurus experiences have been both very good and very bad. My first gun was a Taurus .38, a Model 83, which had several serious issues out of the box, and Taurus never fixed the main one, a severely messed up barrel that would lead so severely that the lead had to be driven out of it. My next Taurus was an 809, it was great feeling and had good accuracy, but was unreliable. Taurus never solved that problem. My next one was/is a PT111 G2, a great little gun! Going on 1500 rounds now, with one hangup on the third shot. probably due to my finger riding the slide. I have another PT111 G2, but I haven't shot it yet. I want to try another 809, but there are others I want more.

 

[chicharrones]

I have only two Taurus guns. An 85UL and a TCP732, both bought new. Unfortunately, I had to fix both of them myself to get them to work correctly. But, they work good after the fixes and have for years, so I'm not getting rid of them any time soon.

Taurus is not alone in that regard. I've had to fix other brand new guns from other makers. Ruger and Zastava are two that come to mind. It's frustrating no matter who makes it.

 

[stchman]

Everyone here makes good points. I currently have 4 Taurus handguns, they all fall into the category of "range toys". I have experienced no problems with any Taurus I have owned.

With their less than 100% reputation, I might not be prompted to use them as a "save my life" gun, but guns that fall into that category comprise a small amount in my collection. As fun guns to shoot, they do the job just fine.

 

[jeepnik]

What does this mean?


The old Tauri were quite decent. I have a really nice late '80s PT92.

First, I agree the old Tauri are good, my wife carries one. It means that, as in many products folks will buy a brand name only even though another brands product can be as good and sometimes better.

 

[Kendal Black]

My impression is that Taurus quality control is not up to the standard you would expect from a company that sells guns that cost a lot more than Tauruses. I don't find it surprising. It may be that the company gets a little bit of a raw deal over it. The Internet tends to be an echo chamber that exaggerates problems, because people are more likely to go on at length about bad experiences than neutral ones like "Bought a Taurus. Works okay for what I paid."

I have a pre-Taurus-International 82 that is so old it has the hammer-mounted firing pin. I do not have much money in it. It does not work as smoothly as a S&W, but it does work. I bought it, used, as a knock-around, tackle box type of gun because I like .38's and the price was right.

A buddy has a Taurus PT101 on which the rear sight broke, an example of the QC issues I am talking about.

Based just on hanging out and talking to people, I get the impression that the Taurus horror stories are fewer than the "yeah, it's okay" reports. When they screw up, though, they really do, as you can see from some old threads here and the recent huge recall over safety issues.

 

[stiab]

I see a LOT of bashing of Taurus handguns and I don't know where it comes from.

I have a FFL friend who runs a shop out of a building behind his house. He sold this Taurus nib along with a box of American Eagle ammo, guy brought it back the next day, happened within the first mag he said...



Edited to add: I actually held this gun (and parts) in my hands, and took the picture outside the gun shop to get some sunlight.

 

[Kendal Black]

I have a FFL friend who runs a shop out of a building behind his house. He sold this Taurus nib along with a box of American Eagle ammo, guy brought it back the next day, happened within the first mag he said...



Edited to add: I actually held this gun (and parts) in my hands, and took the picture outside the gun shop to get some sunlight.

That's quite an impressive failure!

 

[RX-79G]

And not one explained away with the usual excuses. CNC steel and Injection molded plastic parts are very, very consistent.

 

[JN01]

Three out of three Taurus revolvers I've owned had serious problems.

My (Taurus owned) Rossi M92 works great.

One out of four odds aren't too good. I won't take a chance on another Taurus to save a couple bucks when there are plenty of other makers out there with comparable products.

 

[Dragon breath]

I have had Taurus guns that worked perfectly (m66, m85) and guns that were junk even after being returned to Florida a couple of times ( 738 and a 809). The real problem with Taurus is the lack of QC. The worst example that I have heard of was from the gun shop that shipped the guns back to Taurus for me. They said they had a raging bull .454 that came out of the box with a 44 magnum cylinder installed in it. A guy bought it and brought it back a hour later asking what the trick to loading it was, because he couldn't get the ammo into the cylinder.

 

[Ed Ames]

I have a FFL friend who runs a shop out of a building behind his house. He sold this Taurus nib along with a box of American Eagle ammo, guy brought it back the next day, happened within the first mag he said...

View attachment 754372

Edited to add: I actually held this gun (and parts) in my hands, and took the picture outside the gun shop to get some sunlight.

So they read the "no returns" printed on the receipt and decided to social engineer an exception by putting the dust cover end of the frame in a vice and leaning on the grip to deliberately breaking it?

I am speculating about what caused that damage, of course, but it doesn't look like your typical firing-caused failure.

What was the "official story"?

 

[jmace57]

I have recently purchased two older, but unfired Taurii. A PT92AF and a PT58SS (I think). Both function fine. The 92 is accurate, but the 58 shoots all over the place.

 

[RX-79G]

So they read the "no returns" printed on the receipt and decided to social engineer an exception by putting the dust cover end of the frame in a vice and leaning on the grip to deliberately breaking it?

I am speculating about what caused that damage, of course, but it doesn't look like your typical firing-caused failure.

What was the "official story"?

Does it count if the frame was already cracking before it went into the vice?

 

[Ed Ames]

Does it count if the frame was already cracking before it went into the vice?

Depends on why it was cracking. If someone was doing one of those silly "drive my pickup over it" "tests" I don't know if I can count that as a quality issue.

I don't know the story. I do know that there are people who will do really silly things and then deny any responsibility when the expected happens. I can't see someone taking delivery of a gun with cracks of that sort, and normal use isn't going to put cracks in what appear to be unstressed areas of the grip. So I am left not being nearly as convinced as I would be if the bottom of the chamber was blown out or something.

 

[RX-79G]

Well, it does appear that the slotted recess that Taurus uses for the locking block is a weak spot because of the wall thickness.

Compare to how much material is around the Glock locking block:

 

[Tallball]

I have had something like 9 out of 10 that were good. They fixed the other one, though it took two tries. Most have been functional, but so-so triggers. A few have been very good.

 

[walnut1704]

I think it comes mostly from a known issue with some of the earlier PT111's that developed frame cracks.

There's good reason to ignore the sheer volume of complaints. I read so many that clearly say they never owned one, and never would, purely because of what they read on the Interwebs. To me that's invalid.

Consider that Taurus sells one heck of a lot of guns. Not surprising given their price-point. The current "settlement" covers almost one MILLION guns. That's just some models. Add up all the stories you can find on the Interwebs. Only count personal experience, and don't double count each often-repeated story across multiple forums. I guarantee you that you can't find enough to equal 1% of their likely production.

In any manufacturing operation the difference between success and bankruptcy is measured in single percentage points on product returns. Reading the criticisms some seem to imply it's a 50/50 chance of getting a "good one". They'd be long gone if they had a 50% return rate. They'd be gone if they had a 10% return rate.

I've had half a dozen. I haven't had any more trouble with them than any other brand. I've sent back two. One was fixed and returned in two weeks. The other was replaced and it took four months. Customer service is inconsistent. From my own experience and from others it seems the U.S. made guns (TP 738 and the small .22/.25's) tend to get repaired quickly as do the revolvers. Where you run into delays seems to be mostly with Brazil made autos other than the 92.

 

[Gottcha]

Just recently bought a PT111 G2 after knowing Taurus reputation but Its hard to find a bad review on it even from some Taurus skeptical reviewers. So far I have a hundred rounds of mixed ammo and no failures and have tested the safeties of the handgun out at the range and everything works great.

On a side note a Mossberg 500 12 ga. has the most reliable reviews and should go bang every time! I bought one that didn't it had light primer strikes that caused FTF. It turned out to be an overly stiff firing pin return spring that i replaced and it works flawlessly ever since probably 700+ rounds.

 

[Mike J]

My only Taurus is a PT 111 G2. It works fine. I am not in love with the trigger. I just had to spend some time with it & get used to how & where it breaks. The blued finish is not ideal for a carry gun but Johnson's Paste Wax helps take care of that.
is
I have read Taurus horror stories & reports of wonderful Taurus guns. I believe the truth is somewhere in the middle. There would not be horror stories if someone wasn't having problems. I suspect some models are more prone to problems than others. The little PT 111 G2 is a bargain for the $200 plus shipping & FFL transfer fee (about $226 total) I paid for it.

 

[RecoilRob]

Considering the usual Taurus pricing being lower than Smith or other semi-comparable guns I don't mind needing to tinker with one a bit to make it work properly. The 24/7 45 ACP seemed to be a nice gun and worked with one of the mags, but the other 4 were sketchy and this proved to be a problem with the followers.

We worked on them a bit and combined with others on the Taurus Owners forum came up with a decent solution that cured all of mine and let them hold the full compliment of ammo and function the way they're supposed to. Now why Taurus couldn't produce them in the first place is another discussion. They actually went through several iterations trying to fix them...which does put the finger on the engineering staff being kind of inept or the production team not interpreting the prints correctly.

Anyhow....I've had to tinker with a few Tauri over the years but afterwards they were stellar performers and totally satisfied with them. I feel sorry for 'consumers' of all persuasions who are stuck with the 'as delivered' goods be it firearms, motorcycles or whatever as they're playing Russian Roulette with whether they'll get a good one or not. For those mechanically inclined we have a much, much better chance of either getting a good one or making it into one. As long as they give me all the parts..I'm happy. Most of my issues with Tauri have been extra metal being on things from the manufacturing processes that needed removing and not anything major regarding design or materials.

 

[HankR]

I'm a huge Ruger fan despite having had to send one of my own and one of a friend's Rugers back to the factory. I've shipped a (pre-Remington) Marlin back to the mother ship, and I'd buy another in a heartbeat (subject to money and "need"). I've owned one Kimber and could never get it to run right with anything other than one particular Kimber-supplied mag.

I've owned several Taurus (.22 lr) revolvers and between me and close friends probably half a dozen Taurus semi autos. All have functioned fine.

I still think Ruger and Marlin make a better quality product than Taurus, but wouldn't hesitate to recommend either to friends. My brother was recently looking for a small 9, thought a Keltec or Taurus would be a preferable price point, but he was liking the Ruger LC9s. Looking at them side by side, the Ruger fit was much better, and it felt to be of better quality than the Keltec, for about $100 more. My brother is leaning towards the Ruger, and I do think it'd be a better gun. The Keltec might need a fluff-n-buff and a trip back to the factory, but would end up being reliable.

I think WestKentucky and Ed Ames nailed it. If I buy the $220 Keltec and expect Seecamp quality I'm going to be disappointed. If I go into it realizing that I am rolling the dice and that I might need to mess with it, I'll probably be OK. I was much more disappointed in the Kimber than I would have been with an RIA or Taurus behaving similarly--Kimber was billed as a better gun, and I paid more so as to not have to mess with it.

 

[stiab]

So they read the "no returns" printed on the receipt and decided to social engineer an exception by putting the dust cover end of the frame in a vice and leaning on the grip to deliberately breaking it?

The gun was returned and Taurus replaced it sight unseen. My buddy the FFL called them and they said to return it and shipped him a replacement immediately. As to the vice theory, there were no compression marks on the dust cover, it certainly did not appear to have been in a vice unless it was padded.

 

[MedWheeler]

I have five. Two have had issues. The first, a 66 purchased in 1987, had the ejector rod sleeve work loose after several years, locking the cylinder shut. Easy fix, just tighten it. The second, a model 94, purchased in 2014, has chambers that are too tight, making fired brass difficult to eject. It needs to go back to Taurus to correct that; I just haven't gotten around to it.

My PT-22 and PT-25, both made in the mid-1990s, have been flawless. I also have a model 85 3-inch, in stainless steel, which is a downright handsome piece, and quite pleasant on the range. It was made in 1995 and, admittedly, I haven't fired a lot through it, as I've only had it a few months.

 

[Omaha-BeenGlockin]

Have 2 Tauri purchased in the last year or so new----no problems with either in terms of accuracy or function---605 and PT111 G2

Now for being ugly is another story.

 

[Ed Ames]

The gun was returned and Taurus replaced it sight unseen. My buddy the FFL called them and they said to return it and shipped him a replacement immediately.

And what did your buddy do with the replacement?

It is a $10 part. It costs Taurus more to do the paperwork than to make one. Of course they will replace it unless they have rock solid evidence of abuse, which they won't have.

As to the vice theory, there were no compression marks on the dust cover, it certainly did not appear to have been in a vice unless it was padded.

Shrug. I don't know what actually happened. I know that the damage looks unusual compared to what I normally see, and there isn't a clear cause of failure. That doesn't mean it wasn't a manufacturing or design defect... or that it was. You offered a theory that states it was a manufacturing issue. I offered an alternative. I have no personal interest (meaning I don't benefit either way) in which is correct.

Taurus, as a general statement, doesn't make firearms that excite me. Other than shooting a few at the range, my entire experience is handling them in gun stores and owning a PT-145. I once came close to buying one of their tripple-lock .454casull revolvers but decided that that week's gun should be a semi-auto.