The truth about Taurus

[premier1]

Taurus has been importing handguns in this country since 1968.At one time was owned by Smith and Wesson and made on the same machining.In 1980 they purchased the Berretta factory in San Paulo and began making their firearms there. These days they are made like most all manufacturers on CNC machines. For all the gun snobs out they who believe that if their gun isn't a Glock,Kimber or Sig (of which I have acquaintances who have owned these and had to send them back because of problems)I own 3 different Taurus hand guns without a hitch. This past year I received my act 235 lethal weapons license here in Pa.I qualified first in my class scoring a 147 out of 150 with a Taurus PT145 Pro. In the class were 5 retired police officers with their Glocks one rich guy with his Sig (of course) and various others with their choice.I contend that the shooter makes the gun. Oh by the way it doesn't hurt to have served in the USMC. I welcome any responses.Semper Fi.

 

[Ky Larry]

Glad you're happy with your Tauri. I've owned one Taurus, a PT-92. On my first range trip with it, after 3 shots the slide locked up and wouldn't move. Also, the rear sights fell off. Took it back to Bud's and traded it for a S&W Model-19. As the saying goes, YMMV. Shoot well and often.

 

[357 Terms]

For all the gun snobs out they who believe that if their gun isn't a Glock,Kimber or Sig (of which I have acquaintances who have owned these and had to send them back because of problems)

This is what i hear from pro-Taurus people all the time " no first person experience"

Let me tell you mine: I sent a pitted pt1911 barrel back to Miami and recieved one that was horribly pitted, so bad that the gun shop I bought it from took it back and gave me store credit. (the store manager said it looked like the barrel was dragged behind the boat from Brazil) Horribly inexcusable customer service.

A pt145 that the mag release would drop the mag during firing to MANY of us, and all three mags. Sent back to Miami. Came back NOT fixed, same problem.

Out the cost of shipping both times.

Never another Taurus for me.

 

[skifast]

I have owned 8 or 9 Taurus semis. I think their designs are good. Customer service and quality control are poor.

If you win the Taurus lottery and get a good gun out of the box, they work well. If not, you will need to spend some time getting to know their customer service people. When they finally fix it, you wil have a good firearm.

I am neither a Taurus hater nor lover. As far as your shooting performance, I believe in the saying "it is the Indian, not the arrow"

 

[RickMD]

My experience differs from yours. I owned one Taurus - the last I'll ever own. It was sold promptly. I'll side with the "rich guy" with the Sig Sauer.

 

[wojownik]

At one time was owned by Smith and Wesson and made on the same machining.

Um, not quite. From Taurus' own web site: "Smith & Wesson had been purchased by a conglomerate named Bangor Punta. In 1970, Bangor Punta also purchased 54% of Taurus. Thus, the two companies became "sisters". Smith & Wesson never owned Taurus. They were both independent companies."

Also, Taurus bought a factory once owned by Beretta - so made on Beretta machinery, not S&W.

... one rich guy with his Sig (of course)

Reverse snobbery doesn't help your case. Not very high road at all. I'm not rich by any stretch of the definition, and I still dig my Sigs. Never owned a Taurus. Never looked down at them either. Just not my interest area.

Glad your Taurus is working out for ya.

 

[gearhead]

My carry rotation is a PT709 Slim and a 24/7 DS Pro Compact in .45ACP. Both were bought new, both have been 100%. The 709 doesn't like Blazer aluminum case ammo (I bought a couple of boxes for the range) but that's the only thing either one of them have had any issues with in hundreds of rounds and my 709 isn't the only pistol that doesn't like the Blazer. I bought a Raging Bull revolver used through gunbroker, its lockup wasn't very good so I sent it back to Taurus without firing it. I got it back, repaired, at no cost after two weeks.

Based on my experiences I have no problem with Taurus, neither their designs nor their service.

*Edit to add*
I also own semi-autos by FN (FNP-9M, FNP-45 Tactical, FN 5.7, Hi Power), Beretta (8040 Cougar), and some milsurps in 9mm Mak, and I own revolvers by S&W and Ruger. So I do have experience with other handguns, I just find the Tauruses to work for their intended purpose.

 

[thefamcnaj]

Glad your Taurus wasn't a piece of crap. Glad it shot well to. I'll Stick to my glock, sigs, and xd's.
I'm neither rich or a snob. The slim line Taurus I owned was a complete pos.
That one gun was so bad, that ill never look at another Taurus product.

 

[PedalBiker]

I have a Taurus 85 revolver. It's a nice gun, but...
The cylinder stop was rounded and would not lock the cylinder until I stoned it square enough to hold.
The cylinder chambers are rough and so it takes a little more time to clean.
The forcing cone is quite rough and so it fouls badly, even with jacketed bullets.

I also have a Smith airweight that didn't cost much more. Dollar for Dollar I'd give the edge to the Smith.

 

[Sauer Grapes]

Reverse snobbery doesn't help your case.

I have to agree. If your trolling for an argument, can't help ya.

 

[ApacheCoTodd]

The folk who think that Taurus products are crap, based upon their experience are correct.

Those who think Taurus is at least as good as most anything else, based upon their experience are correct.

Those who have no experience have an opinion of little consequence to the above.

Those who grow bored of staring at their Farrah Fawcet posters in their parent's basement and live to generate fights on the internet are tiresome.

 

[Jim K]

Taurus designs and materials have never been in question; there have been problems with their production quality control and customer service. The QC appears to be improving, so I, for one, am willing to cut them a break until we see how things go in that direction. IF Q/C improves, customer service will take care of itself; CS is not needed if nothing goes wrong. Meantime, l suggest we stop recirculating ten and twenty year-old horror stories about Taurus and keep an eye on current products.

Jim

 

[oneounceload]

Quote:
At one time was owned by Smith and Wesson and made on the same machining.
Um, not quite. From Taurus' own web site: "Smith & Wesson had been purchased by a conglomerate named Bangor Punta. In 1970, Bangor Punta also purchased 54% of Taurus. Thus, the two companies became "sisters". Smith & Wesson never owned Taurus. They were both independent companies."

Also, Taurus bought a factory once owned by Beretta - so made on Beretta machinery, not S&W.

Quote:
... one rich guy with his Sig (of course)
Reverse snobbery doesn't help your case. Not very high road at all. I'm not rich by any stretch of the definition, and I still dig my Sigs. Never owned a Taurus. Never looked down at them either. Just not my interest area.

Glad your Taurus is working out for ya.

+1, sounds like the bragging OP doesn't even know the basics, but that is typical when someone tries to justify buying cheap crap

 

[Liberty1776]

not to quibble with the OP, but - it's not the truth about Taurus. It's the truth of your luck to have a couple good ones. My PT945 worked flawlessly, always. Just not my favorite weapon. (and I'm not rich and I have a Sig) and thank you for your service...

 

[tlmkr38]

The folk who think that Taurus products are crap, based upon their experience are correct.

Those who think Taurus is at least as good as most anything else, based upon their experience are correct.

Those who have no experience have an opinion of little consequence to the above.

Those who grow bored of staring at their Farrah Fawcet posters in their parent's basement and live to generate fights on the internet are tiresome.

How can anyone get tired of looking at Farrah posters??? LOL!!!

 

[PapaG]

For what it is worth, Bangor Punta owned S&W, Taurus, Alcan, Scamper campers, Brunswick, a leather company, a plastics company, and Harley Davidson for starters. All suffered greatly during that period. The leather, ammo and plastics were such poor sellers that to get Smiths dealers had to take a certain amount of "related" stuff to get the dealer price on the guns. Example: a 29 dealer cost was about $220. Had to take $440 in "related" stuff to get it...ammo, leather, mace, shotgun shells, Smith shotguns (the horrible 916 or the 1000). A model 10 required $125 in related stuff. We sent more than a few Smiths back for repair (replacing burred screws, improperly installed sights, misalignment, and so on....all new guns. Was happy when that made in hell alliance dissolved.
Visited the Harley plant in York in 89 and they still laughed about the "modernization" that BP did which screwed production and quality up horribly.
Brazil did, I believe, nationalize the Beretta plant when they had all the Berettas they wanted.
Taurus innards were never like S&W innards...very little cross polination occurred.

 

[jk2008]

"l suggest we stop recirculating ten and twenty year-old horror stories about Taurus and keep an eye on current products."

My first-hand experience with Taurus (or "horror story"--if you want to put it that way) occurred about three years ago and with a newly purchased, current model. The story was similar to what so many others have reported: Taurus' shoddy workmanship led to me having to interact with their nasty-tempered customer service reps (who never did solve the problem).

The way I've heard some put it is that buying a Taurus is a crap shoot--you may get a good one and be happy for the rest of your days; or, you may get a lemon and spend what seems like forever trying to correct their errors while dealing with condescending CS types.

Life is too short for that, so as far as I'm concerned, Taurus isn't worth the risk and I will never own another.

 

[wideym]

At the gunshop I work at, Taurus is a popular seller. Expecially the newer models. One thing I remind customers of is the Taurus Lifetime warrenty. That's one thing they have over just about every other gunmaker. Of the hundred or so sold, new and used, since I started working there, only 5 have required factory work and the company sent prepaid postage for the pistols. One was a Judge that didn't time correctly, two were their little .22lr auto with the tilt up barrel, one Millenium, and a PT92.

 

[johnsack2001]

I personally have owned 2 Taurus Millennium Pro. 9mm Both purchased in 2006. Both were DOA and took several calls to get them to send the shipping box to me. It took over 2 weeks before they confirmed they had the pistols each time and all three times they notified me I was quite a way down in the Que and it may take some time to get them back one quote was 3 weeks. I bought the second one while the other was out for repairs. The first one had problems with the mag release being too stiff to the point of nearly having to smack it with a hammer to get the mags out. The other had an issue where the slide release would "Jump" while being fired and lock back the slide. When I got the first back they didn't even send my magazine back to me but the gun did work so I wasn't too put out. But sending in my second one proved to be quite the chore as the paper work had gotten screwed somewhere along the lines and my HG ended up in Kansas. By the time I had gotten it back she slide rail had some how gotten bent so I had to send it back yet again. I gave up after that and sold them both and I do not believe I will go back.

But as a consolation my Judge never had a problem.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

I don't ever read anyone degrading the design of Taurus guns, just the execution. The quality control is god aweful, and customer service is horrible from what I've read.

I'm glad you like yours, but I have first hand experience with three bad Taurus guns. I will never buy one.

It's like if Boeing designed an airplane, and then had it built by a bunch of clowns. Good design with out good QC and consistency does not make a low cost point worth it to me. It's a real shame too since Taurus makes some really nice looking guns.

Would you put the engine and parts from a Pinto into a Corvette? I wouldn't.

 

[TXSWFAN]

I've owned one Taurus. It was a .38 Ultralite. To this day, it has been the only wheelgun that I've owned that didn't go bang when I pulled the trigger. I sold it and have never looked at another Taurus product.

 

[WinThePennant]

Taurus is hit or miss, or so I hear.

I once had a Taurus .38 Special snubby, and it was a great gun. I could shoot the lights out with that thing.

 

[Hurricane]

I always saw them as an "Also ran", in that you could get a good one, you could get a bad one.

Or you could just get a Smith & Wesson/Beretta/Ruger etc.

I'd write more but I have to go start a thread on why Hi-Points deserve more credit.

 

[PX15]

FWIW:

I think you can get a good, or bad, example in any brand of firearm.

I have only only owned one Tauri', it was unacceptable, so I have never bought another.

Chances are if THAT one had been 100% I'd be a big Tauri' fan.. But, it wasn't, so I'm not.

But, if it makes you feel any better, I like my Henry HT001Y at $267.50 OTD just as well as I do my 5 Marlin 39's that cost (on the average) twice the price of the little Henry..

Go figure?

Jesse

 

[Weevil]

Had a .44 spl revolver that was decent.

Had a PT22 that was the worst jam-o-matic hunk of junk I ever owned, and two trips back to Taurus didn't change that fact.


If you love 'em great I'm happy for you.

Personally I won't waste my money taking the Taurus crapshoot.