taurus model 94

[PapaG]

On the other hand, I have a Taurus Tracker 17, blue, that is without a doubt the most accurate handgun I've ever owned...with 2-7X scope mounted it will do an honest sub MOA at 100 yards from the sandbags on a calm day. Good trigger, tight action, but not a small frame. It regularly bests my Contender match chambered bull barrel 22 and does it with any one of three manufacturer's loads.
I'm not anti Taurus, just anti bad Taurus. The 92s, large frame "Bulls" and a few others are quite fine firearms.

 

[MCgunner]

Don't know how they can copy Smith and do such a crappy job of it.

Yeah, I wouldn't want a copy of the Smith done right, would be a POS. I'll buy Taurus after a close inspection and save money, myself. Smith and Wesson charges twice the price for crappy QC.

I have 3 Taurus revolvers, two were bought used. All are fantastic. None are 94s, though. I have a few NAA .22 revolvers and a Rossi 511 kit gun. I like 'em, don't need another .22 revolver, though if I ever stumbled upon an old K22 for a good price, i'd be tempted.

 

[JR47]

I restricted my search from using either THR or TFL threads as there is a lot of crossover in those communities, as well as you can find those here lazy pants!

Speaking of lazy, how many of those posts concerned the same gun? Inquiring minds.

 

[Old Ranger]

I bought a Taurus 94 for my wife. I'm a pretty strong guy; and I could barely pull the trigger in double action - - - she couldn't budge it. Sloppy cylinder; Taurus doesn't make different pins - - - so you're stuck with what you get. She loved it anyway, so I took it to my gunsmith, who replaced the springs and polished eveything up: a beautiful, smooth DA pull and hair trigger single action. Now she really loves it. I put a Crimson Trace grip on it, sighted it in and she shoots ragged holes in targets. It is definitely accurate - - - dead accurate. I've found that most Taurus revolvers are.

However, Taurus springs suck. I've never owned one that didn't need a trigger job. I bought an 817 (seven rounds) last Summer. Rated + P, right. Remington 158 grain + P and Double Tap caused the cylinder to counter rotate slightly (bad ju-ju). Weak spring, bad lockup - - - too much vibration in the ultralite frame - - - not + P. I got it fixed too.

Taurus customer service is pretty awful; don't bother.

I've bought them because they're accurate and cheap. You can spend up to $800. on a Smith snubbie, ala 360PD; which also has a lousy trigger; which my gunsmith couldn't or wouldn't fix due to the materials involved. OR, you can buy a Taurus for $350, get a trigger job and shoot it til you wear it out - - - which happens; but it takes a while. I had a model 66 that I used for matches.

 

[crankyoldlady]

There is a well respected gunsmith who's website I keep up with. He recently blogged regarding his experience with Taurus revolvers. Some here may find it of interest.

http://heffronfirearmclassics.com/NEWSANDANNOUNCEMENTS.aspx

 

[snow]

I have a model 94 I bought back in 2009. I think the trigger sucks but it has been reliable up to this point. I must admit it has not seen a lot of use. I bought it as a night stand gun for my wife and only shoot it at the range on occasions. It has roughly 300-400 rounds through it but not one malfunction. The cylinder was very sticky at first but the more I shoot it the better it gets. It is accurate and i can hit what i aim at and so can she. I have shot stingers, velocitors, vipers round nose and hp out of it. So far I have seen no problem but I am looking for something a little more refined but this time I want it in 22mag. Thinking of a NEF.

 

[steven58]

I have personally experienced only 2 94s. Both 4" stainless and purchased several months apart in 2010.

The DA trigger pull on both were very heavy. One measured 18 lbs and the other was off the scale on my Timney Trigger Pull Gauge (tops out at 25 lbs). on the latter it's not binding or sticking. It really is so heavy that 11 yr old and 15 yr old girls could not pull the trigger single handed.

Single action broke at 9 and 12 lbs respectively and both took great effort to cock.

Currently one is back from a trigger job that improved it to a crisp 4 lb. single and smooth 9 lb. double. The revolver is reasonably accurate, say 3-5" at 25 yds. single action.

In my opinion the cost of the 94 + the mandatory trigger work puts it too close to the price of a S&W .22 kit gun for it to be worth buying the Taurus.

For the money I'd be looking for a used smith .22 on either a J or K frame.

 

[weregunner]

I do own a 94, a new one at that, and had the older model that was 20 years+ old.

The triggers were stiff, but using snap caps and 500-1000 repetitions smoothed things out on both of them.

Same thing for the 941 in .22WRM.

The 94 is my understudy gun for the other medium frame centerfire revolvers for when I need to get practice in. The budget rimfire rounds let me get in more practice than firing of many boxes of centerfire ammo.

Not that I do not practice with the bigger centerfire revolvers. I do. Just that I can fire the rimfire ammo,set my goals, and accomplish them, without sacrificing anything.

Here's the recalls on S&W:
Information
Handgun Safety Rules
Shooting Fundamentals
Model 22A Pistols Safety Recall
Model 22A Return Form
Walther PPK PPKS Safety Recall
Walther PPK/PPKS Return Form
i-Bolt Rifle Bolt Safety Recall
i-Bolt Rifle Return Form
i-Bolt Rifle Sear Engagement Pin Safety Recall
Performance Center Model 460 Safety Recall
SW1911 Safety Recall
SW1911 Return Form
Performance Center Model 329 Safety Recall

Yes sir, that is some S&W superiority there. :banghead:

 

[Maximumbob54]

I bought the 94 hoping it would be as great as my 605. The 605 has an amazing out of the box trigger and has had zero problems. The 94 has about a fifteen pound double action trigger pull if not more. In single action it is just fine and laser accurate with good ammo. It came dirt cheap so the pain is made up with the price. Maybe a new spring kit would make it better but it just isn’t a big deal to me.

 

[steven58]

Would be nice if Ruger made the LCR in rimfire with 4" bbl, DA/SA trigger and adjustable sights.

Might fill a niche for moderately priced DA rimfire revolvers...

 

[crstrode]

I've got a Taurus 94 stainless, 4-inch 9-shot revolver. I bought it brand new in 1990 and it has never given me a lick of trouble. As a matter of fact is it one of my favorite 22LR revolvers of all time.

I also have a Taurus model 85 (.38 special snubby) that I've had for at least 20 years - also not a lick of trouble.

Yes, I shoot them both.

Yes, I have other "higher quality guns" in many shape, size and configurations.

In my experience, Taurus makes a good value product.

There are more nay-sayers and haters on this website than any I have ever seen.
I was reading a thread earlier that asks what gun would you Never Buy. There is not a gun made that is not on that list!

 

[johnnylaw53]

I"m looking for a .22 revolver in doulble action so I have been keeping an eye on anything about the mod 94. It seem everyone say the tigger pull is very heavy. Does anyone hav a mod 94 and a s&w mod 642? The reason I asked is that what I carry for my CCW and I have read where lots of people say it have a heavy trigger pull so I would like to know how the mod 94 pull compare to the 642. thank you

be safe

 

[oldfool]

"do you guys think is it reliable and accurate"
No
"if any one owns it have you had any problems"
lots and lots of people who own them have had problems with them
"Is it also worth the money"
probably... er uh maybe.. it is pretty cheap
"or is the a better .22 lr revolver thats better quality thats not too much more"
costs not much more pretty much kills that notion


luck of the draw, you just might be lucky enough to get a Taurus 94 that doesn't have serious issues, but it is not a real good bet
if you are that lucky, they tend to shoot well enough in SA only mode (but the DA trigger will always be total crap, there is not much you can do about that, a new return spring, not main spring, helps very little, but nowhere near enough); if you really want really cheap and SA ONLY, even a Heritage Rough Rider with plastic sights will likely do as well

I own and love other Taurus revolvers
I do not and will not own a Taurus 94 (have handled some and have shot some of them)
dirty rotten shame - the Taurus 94 was supposed to imitate an OLD model 4" S&W 63 kit gun, and it is about $600 shy of accomplishing that
(back when Rossi was not owned by Taurus, their version was only ~$200 shy of that, but better than the Taurus 94)

PS
me, I LOVE "cheap and good"... just don't see much of it

 

[Petros]

Sure hope you found another brand of .22. The 94 4" I had would not go through one cylinder full without locking up. When it did fire, the bullets were key-holeing the targets. That was with 4 brands of ammo on hand. Took it back to store and got my money back. Then ponied up another 300 clams for a S&W 617 4". After shooting it, I did not feel so bad about the price because I was now having fun shooting instead of cursing. I have also had 2 other Taurus revolvers, model 85's in blue and stainless. They worked but the timing was set that the hammers would fall during or just before the cylinder latched (depending on what cylinder). Taurus in my opinion is a low end product. Petros

 

[steven58]

I just got the second 94 back from the smith. The single action is a decent 4 lb. break. The double action is much smoother and lighter at 8 lbs. Accuracy is 3-5" at 25 yds with 40 gr. Federal Champion HV.

Current cost $ 331 for the 94, $ 100 for the work = $431.00 Is it worth that much now? I doubt it.

If shot moderately and taken care of for 5-10 years I doubt this revolver would be worth $431.00

So, what if instead you got a new S&W 317 for $ 601.00?

http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/cPath/21_39_72/products_id/26286

or sniff around Gunbroker for S&W kit gun in the $400s?

under the same circumstances, in 5-10 years I think they would at least hold their value against inflation if not increase. In the meantime, you get to play with a much nicer toy.

YMMV

 

[skidder]

Why is it when people say something negative about Taurus they are "bashers" and "haters"? I have two Taurus revolvers, A tracker 22 and tracker 44. The tracker 22 has been a great gun for about 8 years now. I just purchased a 44 tracker (brand new 3/2/2011) and it was a pile of dung. I sent it back to taurus with a conversation and a letter and the gun arrived not fixed and in worse shape. It came back with tool marks and greasy dirt and fingerprints all over the gun. The only way I could tell it was mine (after cleaning the crap off it) was the serial number. When you have a date with their CS department you won't be skipping thru the tulips either.

fyi...... The hammer is not centered correctly (or bent) so there is a groove in the frame (top right), I don't know if taurus made this groove so the hammer wouldn't catch on the way down or if the hammer caused the groove. Either way, it still rubs in the groove on the way down. I have never fired the gun. My other major complaint is their were 13 rips in the rubber grip 9 of these tears go all the way through to the inside. They told me it would have a new grip when it got back, but it did not. Just dirty grease all over the original grip. I will never ship this gun back to those animals!!!

My Lovely Date with CS
I talked to them on the phone "politely" and a detailed letter was shipped in the box with the gun (as they had instructed). When the gun showed up at our door my wife was afraid to tell me what she saw (in the box) for fear of it ruining my day until I got home. She was right, I was furious. I used to stick up for taurus because of the success of my tracker 22, but I never called people with a bad experience "bashers" and "haters".

I'll tell you something if you think that taurus is all "marshmallow stars" and "moon pies" your gonna wake up one day to a nightmare!!!

 

[steven58]

The two 94s I have experienced belonged to a friend and a relative.

My .22 revolvers are a S&W K-17 and a Ruger Super Single Six.

I picked up the last 94 from the smith myself and we got to talking. He told me that when he opened it up it was filled with a mix of grease, metal chips and shavings as was the last one that he worked on for my friend. Although that one had less of the crunchy filling than this one did so in a way they are improving them! "More crunchy cream filling!" Now that's an advertisement

 

[skidder]

Thanks for making me laugh steven, maybe I was wrong about the "moon pies".

 

[Animal Mother]

I made the mistake of buying a Taurus, thinking I could get a good one or fix any minor problems that came along. I love a deal and some people might go so far as to call me cheap. I have a whole safe full of commie milsurps that are really good guns, so I'm not a gun snob. Long story short - I've gone through two Taurus rimfire revolvers, a 96 and a 94. They were never satisfactory either in fit or function. I broke down and followed the advice here on the forum spent a couple of hundred more and bought a used S&W K-22. I could not be any more happy with my Smith, it is a great gun. I used to think all the Taurus bashing was just an internet phenom, but I learned a painful if informative lesson. I will never buy another Taurus revolver. Do yourself a favor, spend a little more and get a Smith, if your time and aggravation are worth anything, you will not regret it.

 

[JR47]

The mythical "used S&W" is becoming harder and harder to find at reasonable prices. Look around before you send someone out on a wild goose chase.

I have a pair of 94's, both 4", one blue, one stainless,. I also have a 4" Model 941, in blue.

The FIRST thing that I do with ANY revolver, new or used, is inspect it PRIOR to paying for it. This does away with the cosmetic problems. I also check the cylinder gap. I just picked up a Mint Model 17 S&W. I don't think that it had more than a box of .22 through it, it was that clean. The cylinder gap was .002"!! Tell me that won't bind after 30-40 rounds!! However, I found it prior to paying good money.

The next thing that I do is pull the sideplate when I get it home, and clean out the internals. Gun Scrubber works well. After that, it's lubed, and ready to shoot. Many foreign manufacturers ship their guns filled with preservatives. This is due to the manner of shipping, by sea. They usually arrive via container ship, and are often stored open to the weather, protected by the container. Humidity and other conditions require corrosion resistance.

By following that program, I've been pretty good at finding, and keeping, decent guns. No matter who made them.

 

[oldfool]

JR47 is dead on when it comes to checking out used guns, no doubt about it, ANY used gun, ANY new gun, ANY make/model/caliber

it's a dirty rotten shame that Animal M. got a raw deal on a Taurus 96, 'cause somebody did things to the one he got that nobody should ever do to any firearm (and he never had a chance to inspect 1st hand, up front) If you saw those pictures, and knew anything at all about revolvers, you know that was not "factory", no matter the brand name. At least he finally got a good S&W, none better, if you check 'em out right before buying. If you routinely find those for <$300, please let me send you a dollar, so you can buy a lotto ticket for me.

But this whole notion that brand X is great and brand Z is flawless is just plain utter nonsense.

I own a pair of k-17s "to die for", both bought used, and a Taurus 96 bought used, and all three are to be envied. (Same to be said for a pair of S&W 66s and a Taurus 66, all in 357, one S&W bought NIB back-when, one bought used 20 years later, the Taurus bought used within a few months of the 2nd S&W, all three bought for ~$330 a pop, color me happy. The k-17s cost me near double that. Color me happy.

One of my two k-17s has the cylinder gap JR47 complains about. More people should be so lucky. Some people have to pay for custom refitting to achieve that. A 12 second wipe down of the cylinder face every 60-75 rounds with a CLP soaked patch is no burden for me, happy to do it. Only one I own that applies to. Don't need all mine to be that tight, but glad that one of mine is; flawless, runs like a champ in DA fast mode, just keep excessive powder residue off the face. A CCW self defense gun it ain't supposed to be. Just pretty and smooth and real real accurate.

OP was not Taurus vs. Ruger vs S&W vs. Dan Wesson vs. Freedom Arms vs. Korth.
OP was not even about what to beware of when buying used.

OP was what people think about a very specific make/model ~$300 NIB 22 revolver.

People ought know not to expect a custom shop hand fitted and tuned K-22 for $300, and they mostly do not expect.
A Taurus 94 22 rimfire can serve the needs of many (and obviously does, for some).
When it does, it's a good deal.
but the very specific make/model/vintage gun in question is nothing short of notorious for quality issues; back surf this or any other popular gun forum (rimfirecentral included) and you will endlessly read same-same.

if you get an acceptable one, it is capable of very good accuracy in SA mode
it has one of the worst DA revolver triggers ever made
it doesn't cost what a K-17 or k-22 or Korth does
want one, get one
buy yourself a lotto ticket same day
(what could it hurt, only costs a buck - you only have to win one of two bets to be happy, because if the 94 doesn't work out you can always buy a Korth)

me, I want a S&W 651 in WMR to match my old model "mint" S&W 63
saw one on gunbroker for ~$900.. this ain't gonna happen
and a Taurus 941 ain't going to happen either, checked out a few too many of 'em
(a mint S&W 6" k-48 did work out, but $300 it was not, but it was a gamble)

OP wanted to know if a Taurus 94 revolver was a good bet for his hard earned dollar
well, it depends mostly on the price of the lotto ticket, and what payoff you are hoping for

If you buy your revolvers based on internet "woobie brand" wars, or gun rag articles, expect to suffer from a lot of disappointments
improve your odds by doing what JR47 said

if asking for internet gun forum advice, ignore "brand wars", and pay close attention to comments from those who have 1st person experience with specific make/model/caliber/vintage

good luck, OP
it was nothing if not entertaining

 

[steven58]

Funny Thing; wild geese are the only ones I've ever had to chase with a gun. The domestic ones just come right up to you if you hold out your hand

I didn't imply that used S&W .22 revolvers at fair prices were easy to find. But "mythical"? Please, if you don't get up out of the old lounger and look you will never find one.

So JR47, I did a search on gunbroker for completed sales in the past 90 days. Here's what a few SECONDS found for me:

S & W .22 LR Mod 17-4 Revolver Blue 6" SOLD $434.07 on 1/23/11
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=211559666

S&W .22/32 Kit Gun Round Butt .22 w/Box SOLD $449.99 on 2/6/11
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=212765317

S&W Airlite .22 LR 8-shot 3" Stainless SOLD $500.00 on 2/20/11
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=215885850

S&W Smith & Wesson 34-2 22 LR .22/32 Kit Gun SOLD $455.00 on 3/27/11
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=220964685

Now, I only got to page 4 of 28 and found the above. Hey, maybe I should try to find bigfoot while I'm at it!

So boys and girls show of hands: for the above prices, who would rather have one of these used S&Ws instead of a brand spanking new Taurus 94 with trigger work? anybody? Beuhler?


Know what else I noticed on gunbroker? many of the used Taurus revolvers for sale (there seem to be a ton!) took the care to put "not S&W" or something similar in the title so a search for S&W .22 revolvers "accidentally" turns up the Taurus as well. None of the S&Ws had "not Taurus" in their titles. Wonder why?

Yes, guns are often shipped filled with preservatives to prevent rust. So what were all those metal shavings and chips? Sacrificial anodes?

 

[oldfool]

"for the above prices, who would rather have one of these used S&Ws"

without holding 'em in my own hand and checking them out myself (or an opinion from Jim Supica), none of the above

the ejector star on the k-17 don't look quite right to me

(so.. how many of those did you buy, steven ?)
better gamble than a Taurus 94, yes, but caveat emptor nonetheless
which is really all JR47 was saying, you know

 

[skidder]

I wonder what the net-carbs are in that cream filling. The one I got back had choclate cream on the outside, but haven't got to the center yet. Sometimes when you pull an Oreo apart they break.

I need something to relieve my anger at Taurus and I hope it don't cost $500 dollars. :banghead: hmmm..... maybe a trip to the gun show.

 

[steven58]

Hi Old,

No, I didn't buy any of those. I just posted those as a response to the "mythical used S&W" wild goose chase" comments.

I see what you mean about the star on the 17. Must have been the lighting cause the buyer feedback was

A+ "better than he said it was, very satisfied, will buy from again."

I bought my Model 17 about a year ago on gunbroker. It was LNIB, never fired, with the box and all papers and the original receipt from 1987 ($261.00 with tax!) I paid about $550.

It's a superb revolver with amazing accuracy and a great action. I just changed the grips and went to a smooth narrow trigger for double action use. It is by far my favorite handgun. See attached.

As far as buying used? Yes, caveat emptor, trust but verify, and always be prepared to call "shenanigans" if warranted.

Seriously, in my modest experience on gunbroker I have found that asking the right questions in advance is the key. Maybe I've just been lucky but so far selling has been much more of a PITA than buying.