The Liberal Gun Club Forum

I owned a titanium Taurus M85 I bought back in 2003. I traded it in last week to finance the new PT-25 I just bought, a 2011 model.

I got $175 for the trade in--not bad, considering I paid $325 for the gun (new) years ago.

I haven't fired the P-25 yet, but the gun certainly looks/feels solid. I can't find any rough machine marks that Taurus was notorious for years ago. I'm also pretty impressed by the vast array of different models and designs Taurus offers.

The dealer I bought the PT-25 told me that Taurus started to make slow improvements in the quality of their guns beginning about 10 years ago, but the quality has increased exponentially during the past 2-3 years. Anyone else had the same experience with Taurus?

I don't know if they out and out suck but their quality is less than SW or Ruger. I the ones I shot 30 years ago seemed to be made of very soft metal but the newer ones aren't near as bad. My PT22, about 4-5 years old, is worn badly at the rails but its had heavy use and wasn't kept lubed. I picked up a Taurus 44 snub, 3 or 4 years old, and did work on it. I think the parts are not as heavy duty as other revolvers but the workmanship isn't way less than a SW but clearly not the same level.

A fair assessment based on these two guns is they are moderate quality at moderate prices. Maybe a 7 quality at 6-7 prices.

I've owned several Taurus semi-auto's over the years and had good luck with all of them. I currently have a PT 709 slim in 9mm. I carry that gun more than any other. No complaints.

The CEO of Taurus recently said that they were going to concentrate more on quality and quality control. That is an admission that they have failed to maintain a degree of quality manufacturing. I hope that he was sincere in his promise. I personally will not buy a Taurus firearm becuase of past experiances. They make some really cool rimfire revolvers yet they weight too much and the trigger is too heavy for a rimfire cartridge. There new 22LR/22mag revolver is heavier that their Raging Bull 454 Casull and with a DA trigger of 16 lbs and the quality problem I can't see buying one.

I shot the shit out of my 92 never had one jam close to 10k rounds.

Skeptilius wrote:I've owned several Taurus semi-auto's over the years and had good luck with all of them. I currently have a PT 709 slim in 9mm. I carry that gun more than any other. No complaints.

PT709 - never an operational problem for me. I don't like it for pocket carry because of the adj sights.
The single/double action and safety are nice too.

I bought a PT809 a few months ago and within 3 trips to the range both the sights fell off. It also fails to reset the trigger occasionally.
You get what you pay for, until you start paying for luxury.

I had a PT92, and to this day it's still one of the most reliable handguns I've ever owned. I bought it used, and the finish was trashed, along with the muzzle crown. Due to the crown, it wasn't terribly accurate, but aside from a single bad magazine follower in one of the mags, it fired and ejected consistently. It looked horrible, but damn was it trustworthy. I got rid of it because it was just too much gun for being a 9mm, Imo. Presumably though, a simple re-crowning would have solved the accuracy issue, and if I wanted to open carry a 17+1 pistol, it would have done it quite nicely... Far too large for a ccw.

Had a SS snubnosed .357 by them. It was decent and I had no complaints. OTOH, when I traded it towards a S&W Model 64, I really didn't miss it either. Yeah, if S&W is at 9 on the scale, 7 is fair for Taurus IME & all that.

Paladin wrote:I shot the shit out of my 92 never had one jam close to 10k rounds.

I carried a PT-92 for the last ten years I worked at the Port. It never jammed or failed me in any way. I had total confidence in that gun. I can't speak for the older Taurus guns - maybe they had some quality control problems; but the current models are as good as any in my opinion.

250 rounds in my TCP and one jam because of limpwristing.

I forgot. The rear sight screws holding the sight to the slide came loose. Could probably use some locktite.

PT709

The Beretta clones they have work very well. Haven't heard a bad thing about them.

Really not a fan of their revolvers. They just don't have the same fit, finish, and lockup of a Smith. My Smith revolvers feel like they're lubricated with the tears of angels every time I open the cylinder or spin it. Every Taurus I've held just doesn't feel as good.

I shoot American made guns except for my Browning Hi Power. Taurus is a very fine gun. I just don't shoot them.

punkinlobber wrote:I shoot American made guns except for my Browning Hi Power. Taurus is a very fine gun. I just don't shoot them.

Surprisingly, the Taurus PT-25 is made in America....

Van wrote:

punkinlobber wrote:I shoot American made guns except for my Browning Hi Power. Taurus is a very fine gun. I just don't shoot them.

Surprisingly, the Taurus PT-25 is made in America....

Ditto on the TCP as well.

the only 1911 I have fired was a Taurus. It hit what I aimed at and functioned like it was supposed to. It was a rental and had been shot quite a bit, rarely cleaned or cared for...I don't know if there is anything else it was supposed to do...? It worked.

Are they supposed to be a poor quality handgun?

rolandson wrote:the only 1911 I have fired was a Taurus. It hit what I aimed at and functioned like it was supposed to. It was a rental and had been shot quite a bit, rarely cleaned or cared for...I don't know if there is anything else it was supposed to do...? It worked.

Are they supposed to be a poor quality handgun?

Not necessarily per say but hit or miss in terms of quality control.

so is everything else these days.

How's their Customer Service? Seems that that is what really matters anymore.

rolandson wrote:the only 1911 I have fired was a Taurus. It hit what I aimed at and functioned like it was supposed to. It was a rental and had been shot quite a bit, rarely cleaned or cared for...I don't know if there is anything else it was supposed to do...? It worked.

Are they supposed to be a poor quality handgun?

Strongly considering buying a Taurus PT 1911. Every review says that what you get is worth the price. You're talking a decent starter 1911 for Glock prices. Can't beat that.

inmediasres wrote:

rolandson wrote:the only 1911 I have fired was a Taurus. It hit what I aimed at and functioned like it was supposed to. It was a rental and had been shot quite a bit, rarely cleaned or cared for...I don't know if there is anything else it was supposed to do...? It worked.

Are they supposed to be a poor quality handgun?

Strongly considering buying a Taurus PT 1911. Every review says that what you get is worth the price. You're talking a decent starter 1911 for Glock prices. Can't beat that.

my experience is that it was reliable and accurate...it wasn't a shiny tight assed prima-donna, not that there is anything wrong with tight-assed prima-donnas, it simply did what it was supposed to do.

I have a friend who has had nothing but bad experiences with Taurus revolvers and refuses to buy them again. He wouldn't even sell them to me. I've never owned one.

The Taurus PT-1911 is a damn nice gun for the money. Reliable and accurate. I had one and never had a problem with it. I currently have a Remington R1 1911; but if I ever convinced myself that I needed another 1911 I would not hesitate to buy another Taurus.

Progurt wrote:I have a friend who has had nothing but bad experiences with Taurus revolvers and refuses to buy them again. He wouldn't even sell them to me. I've never owned one.

I won't defend Taurus revolvers. I had one and didn't like the feel of it and I didn't like the trigger. But to be fair, I don't like revolvers period - anybody's. I've never been able to shoot one accurately.

Another issue with Taurus is that you can't really improve the gun and have it still be beneficial. I've read countless articles, and I think mentioned it once or twice on here, that putting improvements into a Taurus revolver doesn't make sense because you will never recoup your costs. If you take a $400 revolver, and have a gunsmith spend time fixing it to the tune of $150, you still have a $400 gun. It won't appreciate in value. Put that same $150 into a Smith, and that gun will certainly go up in price over the years.