Machining specs. between Taurus and Smith and Wesson.

[His lordship.]

While I have recently sold all of my Taurus made guns, I have been curious about the amount of mechanical play on their guns in comparison to the Smith and Wesson products.  

Went to the gun show yesterday where the merchants have their guns out for all to touch.  The cylinder release switch on the Taurus's have always been so loose it is as if they want to jump out at you, the Smiths are noticably tighter, other aspects like the cylinder timing, lockup, and hammer alignment are more loose compared to the S/W as well.  Doesn't Taurus use modern CNC machining in their production.  Why would their guns be so much greater in tolerance?  I also had the Taurus semi-auto clone of the Beretta 92 and in general, I thought it was acceptable regarding the slide to frame tolerance.

I have heard of some semi-autos having more slop in their tolerances to allow for reliability under combat with the dirt and mud aspect.  Is this necessary with revolvers?

Thanks.

[DirtyHarry]

Chris, I know exactly what you mean about the cylinder release, most of mine are loose as well. The rest of the mechanics on the taurus' I own are rock solid, just as solid as any of the smith's I ever had. I have seen loose sloppy examples like the ones you speak of though.
I dont thnk it is the machining process or materials, IMO it is the QC dept or lack there of.

[unspellable]

It's not widely known in the shooting community, but at one time S&W and Taurus were both owned by the same parent company.  During the time they were sister companies much of the manufacturing technology at Taurus went north to S&W and was the source of much of their modernization in recent years.

So if something is looser on a Taurus, it's not because they can't figure out how to make it tight.  The remaining question is, is it loose for a good reason or just to make it cheaper?