I've owned a number of Taurus revolvers, and one Rossi over the years. They were all from the time period of maybe the late 70's/early 80's to maybe the mid 90's. Most of them had wood grips, although two of them did have the more modern rubber. All but one were purchased used, so I'm sort of vague on the dates.
The only one I really shot extensively was a Model 82, IIRC. A heavy barrel Model 10 copy anyway. That gun was a shooting trick with 38 wadcutters. I got that as the second of third handgun I ever bought. Shot the snot out of it. I used wadcutters because they were cheap to buy and cheap to reload and they worked just fine.
The rest of them were all good guns too. I admit that I didn't always shoot them extensively. I'm a buy, try, get bored, trade/sell guy. But the only thing I could see "bad" about those guns was the finish wasn't as nice as a Smith & Wesson. That doesn't mean the finish was bad, just not as nice. Now, I did shoot them all. They all shot just fine, I just can't comment on how they'd hold up over time.
Having said that about the finish, two or three of them...a 65, 66, and a 431 were as nicely finished as any S&W I've ever owned. I sort of wish I'd kept all three of them, but then I wouldn't have had something else I got to try.
The new ones, I have no idea about. I very seldom even look at a new gun.
Is a Smith & Wesson worth the extra money? It depends. I buy each gun on it's individual merits. But generally speaking, yes, a Smith & Wesson or Ruger is worth the extra.