I am going to be teaching a friend to shoot, and I want to start her out on a .22 revolver. I am thinking about picking up a Taurus Model 94 with a 4 inch barrel to teach her, and anybody else that might want to learn. I was wondering if you think that the Taurus 94 is a good gun for teaching beginners.
Taurus Model 94
- Thread starter Matt King
- Start date
- Status
kahr404life
Member
I have one and I do not like it. The trigger sucks :banghead: (it is very hard and gritty even after I cleaned the inside out) and it is not very accurate with many, many different bullets (CCI .22 Raptors will shoot OK but thats about it). I thought about sending it to Taures for a trigger job but they do not offer that option for the M-94. I would not buy one if I were you and I would be ashamed (it really sucks) to sell mine to anyone.
Jim PHL
Member
Had one and sold it. Better than I expected fit and finish, very accurate with all ammo I tried and great single action trigger. However, the double action trigger pull was allways very heavy/stiff. I even sent it back to them, got it back pretty quick, too, but i'm not sure what, if anything, they did to it.
It may still work for your intended purpose. Good little gun that can be had for a good price if you are willing to put up with that double action trigger. Seems to be a common complaint on that model.
It may still work for your intended purpose. Good little gun that can be had for a good price if you are willing to put up with that double action trigger. Seems to be a common complaint on that model.
telomerase
Member
+1 to everyone's comments. The 94 DA trigger is AWFUL. Either get a decent revolver (and be aware that .22 revolvers have to have heavier springs to smack those rimfire primers) or use a Mark II or Buckmark auto, or a Beretta Cheetah, or practically anything but a 94.
borrowedtime69
Member
taurus 94 alternatives
i bought a taurus 94 for my wife two years ago. nice looking gun i guess. problems include, bad sights, if you barely touch the trigger with a breath of wind it unlocks the cylinder, and the accuracy leaves alot to be desired.
i might try to talk her into selling it to get a better handgun.
Despite the poor quality of the 94 i bought the Taurus 970 Tracker .22 LR 6 1/2" full underlug barreled, stainless steel 7 shot revovler... I love it!! it's quite a bit heavier than the 94 but it shoots better. they have a less expensive version thats blued.
if she's a smaller woman, you should try a Ruger Single six, see if the range near you has one for rent. i love my ruger SS, its a great single action and even my wife can shoot it well.
if you can find an old Ruger SP 101 .22 LR SA/DA revolver with adjustable sights, that might be a good deal.
To start out with a low cost gun, try a Heritage Rough Rider six gun. they come with barrels as short as 4.5 inches and have either standard western grips or birdhead grips.you can get one of these for between $95-$125.
Good luck, good shooting! -Eric
i bought a taurus 94 for my wife two years ago. nice looking gun i guess. problems include, bad sights, if you barely touch the trigger with a breath of wind it unlocks the cylinder, and the accuracy leaves alot to be desired.
i might try to talk her into selling it to get a better handgun.
Despite the poor quality of the 94 i bought the Taurus 970 Tracker .22 LR 6 1/2" full underlug barreled, stainless steel 7 shot revovler... I love it!! it's quite a bit heavier than the 94 but it shoots better. they have a less expensive version thats blued.
if she's a smaller woman, you should try a Ruger Single six, see if the range near you has one for rent. i love my ruger SS, its a great single action and even my wife can shoot it well.
if you can find an old Ruger SP 101 .22 LR SA/DA revolver with adjustable sights, that might be a good deal.
To start out with a low cost gun, try a Heritage Rough Rider six gun. they come with barrels as short as 4.5 inches and have either standard western grips or birdhead grips.you can get one of these for between $95-$125.
Good luck, good shooting! -Eric
cherryriver
Member
I, too, bought a 3" 94 for the purpose of teaching my new wife to shoot some years back. I had made a mistake with my first wife of forgetting that her smaller hands wouldn't work on a bigger gun and the 94 is definitely right-sized. I had no problem with the accuracy but the double-action is very bad, and instantly discouraging to a new shooter.
But then, that's the dilemma with an introduction gun. The small DA revolver is the easiest thing to teach with, because all of it's functions are plain to see from the outside. There's no mysterious internal stuff going on to think about.
On the other hand, mastering the DA trigger is a pretty big deal. Listen to the full-size auto folks who still pretty much agree that getting good with a Glock trigger is more work than a 1911 trigger. (I also understand that that conventional wisdom is no longer as total as it once was.) The DA wheelgun's even harder.
Here's how it actually turned out, years and many false starts later: she finally took a class and got going with a Smith 63 stainless Kit Gun with a decent, if not Python-class DA trigger, and then went on to the rimfire .22 1911 I thought I was building for myself (aluminum Commander frame, C&S trigger kit, Ciener target top end). Now, that's pretty much the only gun she'll shoot, and that includes the Glock 17 she thought she liked and I bought, and the Advantage Arms rimfire top end, which she might have liked if it ran at all reliably in her hands (it's rare to get six good ones in a mag full, for her. It does run pretty well for me, but... so what?)
In the end, the Smith J-frame with a worn-in or smoothed trigger still stands as my favorite basic trainer. Our 9-year old nephew is pretty happy with the 63 nowadays (but wishes it held ten instead of six).
The 94 is loaded with shot loads for occasional pest control without my really being too concerned about crudding up the barrel.
Bill
But then, that's the dilemma with an introduction gun. The small DA revolver is the easiest thing to teach with, because all of it's functions are plain to see from the outside. There's no mysterious internal stuff going on to think about.
On the other hand, mastering the DA trigger is a pretty big deal. Listen to the full-size auto folks who still pretty much agree that getting good with a Glock trigger is more work than a 1911 trigger. (I also understand that that conventional wisdom is no longer as total as it once was.) The DA wheelgun's even harder.
Here's how it actually turned out, years and many false starts later: she finally took a class and got going with a Smith 63 stainless Kit Gun with a decent, if not Python-class DA trigger, and then went on to the rimfire .22 1911 I thought I was building for myself (aluminum Commander frame, C&S trigger kit, Ciener target top end). Now, that's pretty much the only gun she'll shoot, and that includes the Glock 17 she thought she liked and I bought, and the Advantage Arms rimfire top end, which she might have liked if it ran at all reliably in her hands (it's rare to get six good ones in a mag full, for her. It does run pretty well for me, but... so what?)
In the end, the Smith J-frame with a worn-in or smoothed trigger still stands as my favorite basic trainer. Our 9-year old nephew is pretty happy with the 63 nowadays (but wishes it held ten instead of six).
The 94 is loaded with shot loads for occasional pest control without my really being too concerned about crudding up the barrel.
Bill
Last edited:
TallPine
Member
You know it's funny ... I have both the Rough Rider and the Single Six, and the RR has a really nice trigger while the SS trigger is awful - heavy and it creeps
Other than that of course, the RR is junk compared to the SS.I'm glad to find out about the Taurus Model 94, though ... I was thinking about getting one myself for cheap DA practice.
Now I wish I had gotten a .22 SP101 while they still made them.
wally
Member
Check the example you plan to buy carefully before buying. I got one with a good trigger and am very happy with it. I'll never sell it!
If you are willing to shoot SA only, the 94 will work fine even if you get one with a less than stellar DA trigger. The 94 holds 9 vs. 6 shots and is much easier to load and unload.
--wally.
If you are willing to shoot SA only, the 94 will work fine even if you get one with a less than stellar DA trigger. The 94 holds 9 vs. 6 shots and is much easier to load and unload.
--wally.
Master Blaster
Member
My 94 was purchased in 1997, pre hammer lock, its a 4", has a wonderful trigger pull in double or in single action. Mine is very accurate, and well balanced. Its the gun I use to introduce new shooters to firearms.
I haven't changed a thing on mine. When I tested out ammo for it I found that it shot the federal high velocity copper plated bulk pack ammo really well. Heavily waxed target ammo does not agreee with it at all. In fact the more expensive ammo like tenex or gold medal shoots very poorly.
Winchester Dynapoints, federal bulk pack copper plated or american eagle copper plated, shoot extremely well. Also federal champion high velocity non plated shoots great. If you are using remington bulk pack that is your problem the ammo.
Like a previous poster said you need to try several different types of .22lr ammo to see what it shoots best. Also to maintain reliability you need to clean the cylinder charge holes with a brush occaisionally, the design of the .22lr with a heeled bullet, causes build up in the cylinder, that can lead to the rounds not seating fully and you will then get misfires.
I haven't changed a thing on mine. When I tested out ammo for it I found that it shot the federal high velocity copper plated bulk pack ammo really well. Heavily waxed target ammo does not agreee with it at all. In fact the more expensive ammo like tenex or gold medal shoots very poorly.
Winchester Dynapoints, federal bulk pack copper plated or american eagle copper plated, shoot extremely well. Also federal champion high velocity non plated shoots great. If you are using remington bulk pack that is your problem the ammo.
Like a previous poster said you need to try several different types of .22lr ammo to see what it shoots best. Also to maintain reliability you need to clean the cylinder charge holes with a brush occaisionally, the design of the .22lr with a heeled bullet, causes build up in the cylinder, that can lead to the rounds not seating fully and you will then get misfires.
Apple a Day
Member
I looked all over the place for a range report on the Taurus 94 and couldn't find one. I bought one and did it myself, posted over at The Firing Line dot com. I hope it's okay to copy and paste from there. If it isn't and the mod's delete then you can go over there and do a quick search.
The short version is that for a beginner I'm going with a SA revolver loaded with .22 shorts. I have an old Heritage RR with fixed sights I'll use with new shooters. When I've used it before, especially with women, they've liked starting out with something very easy to cock and the cowboy style was non-threatening. At least with my 94 that wouldn't be the case. Take my limited experience for what it's worth.
There are two parts. Here goes:
PART I
"I bought a blued Taurus Model 94 .22 LR/L/Short 4" barrel last week at the Richmond Va. gun show for $229. I had been looking for a .22 revolver with adjustable sights as a range gun/plinker. Pickings were scarce for that category and the price was good so I decided to get one. There were two on the table and I checked both of them. The one I chose had a tighter lockup and seemed smoother.
Finish: nothing to write home about. Not fugly but not exactly pretty. It's a plinker not a barbeque gun so I really don't care. I own a model 66 and a model 85 from Taurus, both of which look nicer.
Ergonomics:It's a slim gun, which was unusual to my big paws but not unpleasant. Recoil is negligible. The trigger in single action is pretty good. In double action it's like trying to pick up a gorilla by his nostril... heavy. I am going to email Taurus and ask if there's a way to rig up an adjustable mainspring for it. If anyone has tried to clip a little off the mainspring and had success with it then, please, post directions. If not then I'll just continue using it in SA. The rubber grips were fair. I may look for some chunkier ones made of wood. The ejector was stiff and it took a little bit of force to eject the empties.
Accuracy: All shots were offhand and unsupported (no bench or sandbags so keep in mind that as a marksman I suck) I started out by taking a pen and making several baseball-sized circles on a bullseye target to have plenty of chances to sight the thing in. I popped through a couple of cylinders just to warm it up and check for reliability... more on that in a minute. Then I ran the target out to 21 feet and started firing 3,4, or 5 round groups and adjusting the sights. Holding a single point of aim the rounds clustered within an inch or so. After a few adjustments I could put them all in the circle with no problem. I think it will take some more adjusting to the sights to wring out the best accuracy and there were ammo issues... See below. I will also paint the front and rear sights different, bright colors to make them more visible.
Reliability: There were no mechanical issues but ammo made a difference. I started off shooting 50 rounds of the cheap Remington copper washed hypervelocity HP and it ran nicely. Then I broke out 100 rounds of the cheap uncoated lead Winchester X-somethingorother and by the time I got through about 75 strange things started to happen. the groups opened up appreciably and rounds started keyholing on the target. With the accuracy I figured I was getting fatigued (I'd fired some Makarov ammo before I started with the Taurus ) but the keyholing set of warning lights.
So, I broke out a pack of Remington and immediately the groups tightened and the keyholing stopped.
I figure the uncoated lead rounds smeared the barrel badly enough that subsequent rounds didn't engage the rifling and I was firing a .22 musket for a few minutes. The goopy lead rounds were swerving downrange like a Kennedy after a party weekend. Shooting the Remington cleared it back out. Not the brightest thing I've ever done, I admit. I've heard that you shouldn't mix jacketed and non-jacketed rounds without cleaning in between but with the "copper washed" roudns I didn't think there's be that much of a difference. You learn something every day. The Winchester rounds were soft enough that I'd also stopped shooting them in my Ruger MkII because they kept getting mangled as they fed from the magazine into the chamber, jamming halfway or not seating completely. You could see the crease on the lead nose where they'd hit the top of the chamber and deformed.
Comments: No more cheap Winchester lead .22 rounds for me. So, about 175 rounds and the only problem I had was ammo related. I got so involved with the ammo I don't feel I really got the sights down pat so I look forward to shooting it some more. Take my report for what it's worth."
PART II
"
I fired 250 rounds of Federal .22LR copper-washed, hollow point, high velocity ammo from Wal Mart in the 550 round cube. There was no noticable fouling as with the Winchester plain lead rounds last episode. The biggest pain with sighting in the Taurus 94 was the fact that the horizontal adjustments are accomplished with two screws rather than one. There is one screw on each side of the rear sight and when you loosen one you must tighten the other to "firm up" the rear sight.
Again, shots were made at only ~25 feet unsupported with two hands in a Weaver stance at an indoor range. I drew a series of circles and fired a few shots at each with adjustments in between. Here is a pic of a target (yes, I draw silly faces on them.)
http://thefiringline.com/forums/atta...4&d=1154349373
I also fired about the last 50 rounds double action. All of the previous shots had been fired single action but my thumb was getting tired. DA shots were HEAVY, a little low and a bit more spread out. I'm staying in SA for a while.
COMMENTS:
In the end I am sure that I can do better with accuracy with more practice.
I got a good price for the Taurus 94 but am thinking I may have held out for a while longer and spent more on a Ruger Single Six or something larger in the hand and with better sights.
I tried calling Taurus customer service and got disconnected twice, put on hold twice so long I gave up, and then called it a day. "
The short version is that for a beginner I'm going with a SA revolver loaded with .22 shorts. I have an old Heritage RR with fixed sights I'll use with new shooters. When I've used it before, especially with women, they've liked starting out with something very easy to cock and the cowboy style was non-threatening. At least with my 94 that wouldn't be the case. Take my limited experience for what it's worth.
There are two parts. Here goes:
PART I
"I bought a blued Taurus Model 94 .22 LR/L/Short 4" barrel last week at the Richmond Va. gun show for $229. I had been looking for a .22 revolver with adjustable sights as a range gun/plinker. Pickings were scarce for that category and the price was good so I decided to get one. There were two on the table and I checked both of them. The one I chose had a tighter lockup and seemed smoother.
Finish: nothing to write home about. Not fugly but not exactly pretty. It's a plinker not a barbeque gun so I really don't care. I own a model 66 and a model 85 from Taurus, both of which look nicer.
Ergonomics:It's a slim gun, which was unusual to my big paws but not unpleasant. Recoil is negligible. The trigger in single action is pretty good. In double action it's like trying to pick up a gorilla by his nostril... heavy. I am going to email Taurus and ask if there's a way to rig up an adjustable mainspring for it. If anyone has tried to clip a little off the mainspring and had success with it then, please, post directions. If not then I'll just continue using it in SA. The rubber grips were fair. I may look for some chunkier ones made of wood. The ejector was stiff and it took a little bit of force to eject the empties.
Accuracy: All shots were offhand and unsupported (no bench or sandbags so keep in mind that as a marksman I suck) I started out by taking a pen and making several baseball-sized circles on a bullseye target to have plenty of chances to sight the thing in. I popped through a couple of cylinders just to warm it up and check for reliability... more on that in a minute. Then I ran the target out to 21 feet and started firing 3,4, or 5 round groups and adjusting the sights. Holding a single point of aim the rounds clustered within an inch or so. After a few adjustments I could put them all in the circle with no problem. I think it will take some more adjusting to the sights to wring out the best accuracy and there were ammo issues... See below. I will also paint the front and rear sights different, bright colors to make them more visible.
Reliability: There were no mechanical issues but ammo made a difference. I started off shooting 50 rounds of the cheap Remington copper washed hypervelocity HP and it ran nicely. Then I broke out 100 rounds of the cheap uncoated lead Winchester X-somethingorother and by the time I got through about 75 strange things started to happen. the groups opened up appreciably and rounds started keyholing on the target. With the accuracy I figured I was getting fatigued (I'd fired some Makarov ammo before I started with the Taurus ) but the keyholing set of warning lights.
So, I broke out a pack of Remington and immediately the groups tightened and the keyholing stopped.
I figure the uncoated lead rounds smeared the barrel badly enough that subsequent rounds didn't engage the rifling and I was firing a .22 musket for a few minutes. The goopy lead rounds were swerving downrange like a Kennedy after a party weekend. Shooting the Remington cleared it back out. Not the brightest thing I've ever done, I admit. I've heard that you shouldn't mix jacketed and non-jacketed rounds without cleaning in between but with the "copper washed" roudns I didn't think there's be that much of a difference. You learn something every day. The Winchester rounds were soft enough that I'd also stopped shooting them in my Ruger MkII because they kept getting mangled as they fed from the magazine into the chamber, jamming halfway or not seating completely. You could see the crease on the lead nose where they'd hit the top of the chamber and deformed.
Comments: No more cheap Winchester lead .22 rounds for me. So, about 175 rounds and the only problem I had was ammo related. I got so involved with the ammo I don't feel I really got the sights down pat so I look forward to shooting it some more. Take my report for what it's worth."
PART II
"
I fired 250 rounds of Federal .22LR copper-washed, hollow point, high velocity ammo from Wal Mart in the 550 round cube. There was no noticable fouling as with the Winchester plain lead rounds last episode. The biggest pain with sighting in the Taurus 94 was the fact that the horizontal adjustments are accomplished with two screws rather than one. There is one screw on each side of the rear sight and when you loosen one you must tighten the other to "firm up" the rear sight.
Again, shots were made at only ~25 feet unsupported with two hands in a Weaver stance at an indoor range. I drew a series of circles and fired a few shots at each with adjustments in between. Here is a pic of a target (yes, I draw silly faces on them.)
http://thefiringline.com/forums/atta...4&d=1154349373
I also fired about the last 50 rounds double action. All of the previous shots had been fired single action but my thumb was getting tired. DA shots were HEAVY, a little low and a bit more spread out. I'm staying in SA for a while.
COMMENTS:
In the end I am sure that I can do better with accuracy with more practice.
I got a good price for the Taurus 94 but am thinking I may have held out for a while longer and spent more on a Ruger Single Six or something larger in the hand and with better sights.
I tried calling Taurus customer service and got disconnected twice, put on hold twice so long I gave up, and then called it a day. "
10-Ring
Member
Yes, absolutely yes! I have one & it may not be the best made gun on the block but it is a great teaching tool and ALOT of fun to shoot too!
- Status