How does taurus stack up to smith/ruger?

[upnorthbacon]

I'm looking to buy a 44 or 357 4" revolver.  My dad has a 357 7 shot 6" taurus and really likes it.  I've heard that smith and ruger's are better quality that taurus?  It sounds like taurus has lifetime warranties though.  I'm really leaning towards a tracker or plain model 44 w/4" barrel or model 608 357 w/4" barrel.  Both appear to be close to the size of the smith 629 or ruger gp100.  Will I lose accuracy with a taurus?  I hate the thought of spending $600-700 dollars on a smith and the rugers look kind of ugly (The grips feel strange but I'm aware an aftermarket grip will fix that).  It's mostly going to be a woods gun if I happen to get a deer withing 15-20 yards I might take a poke at him but it's mainly target shooting and maybe an ocasional animal.  I'm by no means a target shooter and interested in reasonable accuracy without a scope, and reliability.

[DirtyHarry]

Every Taurus I own is of excellent quality, but over the last couple of years in particular, the quality on some models has been suspect and the customer service has been a nightmare for most.


I have never been a big ruger fan, the factory trigger on every ruger I have ever touched has been horrible and I have never bought into the investment casting process used to make their frames. I contend that investment casting is merely a way to save a few cents by eliminating most of the machining process and I believe that forged steel is much better.

The only thing I see wrong with S&W is the agreement the previous owners entered into and the current owners have neglected to attempt to get out of. Just wait until the next anti-gun democrat gets into office...

[MikeP]

Every Ruger that I own, rifles and pistols, has been accurate and reliable. My personal protection carry weapon, an SP101, is as dependable as a hammer. It is a great little pistol in every respect.

My wife's Taurus Model 85 .38 special is a nice little gun, too. It was bought in 1990. My only problem with it is that once in a while, it fails to fire for some reason...probably a weakened spring. Being a revolver, the easy solution is to pull the trigger again on a fresh round. But it still bothers me. I will get it looked at.

[upnorthbacon]

Well not to offend anyone but I decided to go with a S&W 686 instead of a taurus.  I guess I was a little hesitant after reading some of the articles in this forum.  I realize any guns can have problems but smith seems to have a little better track record.

[Greybeard]

Of the three makers you listed Taurus comes in a solid fifth (5th) place. I used to be really high on Taurus. That was before they got too big for their breeches and let quality fall to the bottom and customer service go out the window. I now longer buy Taurus at all. Shame I used to highly recommend them back when they made good guns and backed them with quality customer service.

[shaner]

id say graybeard has a point, id put ruger tops for service and building strong  handguns , but taurus is just to well priced forthe quality u get, i cant knock them i own 3 of them now and have never had even a glich in the service from them... get what feels good to yur hand and wallet is about my best advice, u  can shoot a lot of ammo forthe difference in cost

[adirondacker]

here's my two sense.i own a lrge # of rifles,12 or 15 are rugers ,22 to 45 caliber,all diferent types of actions.i love every one of them.for some reason though out of the 17 handguns i own only one is a ruger,that's a little single six tri-color.i do however own a few taurus revolvers 17 cal up to 480 cal.they have all functioned flawlessly.i cannot recall having a problem with any one of them.my raging bull .480 is what i shoot most,i have pounded over 750 rounds of heavy cast bullet loads out of it,only problem i have had has been a couple of loosened screws.i assume due to the fairly stout recoil.the taurus just seem to be very erginomic and seem to fit me very well,you can't ask for a better trigger pull straight from the factory.i would like to add another ruger to my collection you know to keep the little single-six company,so if anyone has a nice 45 colt blackhawk,they would like to part with let me know.i guess what it all comes down to is personal preferance,and maybe the final deciding factor $$$$$$.

[unspellable]

My experience has been that S&W quality control is somewhat over rated.  Their repair service is pretty decent.  The older ones are pretty.  They are reliable if not abused.

Ruger are built like tanks and pretty much unbreakable.  They do sometimes have issues with things like chamber mouth diameter.  They don't have the best triggers in the world.  Poorest of the three for ergonomics.  But buy a Ruger if you plan to abuse your revolver.  Their repair service is good except for their habit of restoring all your custom work to factory specs.

Taurus quality control is spotty.  Some are very good, some not so good.  Their flagship Raging series seem to have the best quality control.   I've never dealt with their service department but one hears terrible stories.  Their styling and ergonomics are better than Ruger's.  I wil lbuy a Taurus, but I give it a very detailed inspection first.  I had a snubby with a chamber alignment problem.

[Uncle Ji]

I love my Ruger Blackhawk but was never thrilled by their double actions their trigger pulls being the lousiest of the 3, and they're being just too heavy and bulky compared to S&W and Taurus.  I love the S&W quality, and sweet trigger but they are pricey.  I had a 686 I wish I never sold but that's another story.  I currently own 2 Taurus a model 94 j-frame clone 9 shot .22LR, and a model 44 6" ported barrel .44 mag.  I'm very pleased with both guns, and would highly recommend a them though my  model 44 was purchased in '98, and my model 94 even earlier in '90.  Don't know what the quality or customer service is like of the current crop of Taurus but I was happy with them 7 years ago.  I also own a ROSSI 971 .357 mag that i'm very happy with which I purchased in '92.  This gun is no longer made but still available on gunbroker.  I like the Brazilian guns and recommend them for anyone on a tight budget.

[ratgunner]

I honestly don't think Taurus compares to a Ruger or Smith at all.It's like compareing a Yugo to a Mustang and a Camaro. :shock:

[glockbox]

Ruger makes the strongest frame, S&W makes the sweetest action, Taurus makes me want to puke! They screwed me so hard with thier customer service policy. Did you know that thier 10 warranty starts on the date on manufacture? I bought a 22 rifle of thiers and I couldn't hit 4"x4" wooden blocks at 25 yards with it from a bench! Guess what they told me? It wasn't covered because the gun was made 11 years ago, nevermind the fact that I bought it new just a couple of months earlier. After talking to a supervisor I finally convinced them to take it back and repair it. Suprise #2! No parts! I'll have to wait for them to come in on the bannana boat. Six months later I finally talked them into sending me a new gun. I took it to the very next gun show and got rid of it. I'll NEVER buy foreign junk like that again! I have NEVER had S&W or Ruger do me wrong. S&W even sent me new grips and mag bases for a pistol that I had blow up on me (not the guns fault) Case head seperation. I told them I bought the gun used and was shooting reloads in it. They sent me parts for free! Can't beat that kind of customer service.

[mt3030]

I've owned Colts & Smiths steady since 1964. The quality of my Smiths has always been top notch, both in quality of service and finish. I did have a timing issue on warranty and they fixed it at a local gunshop, but it took almost a year to get it back. And that was the shops fault, not S&W. As already mentioned, I too have had heartburn over their politics. I rate their revolvers #1 (along with my Colts) in my book.

I currently own 4 Taurus's, a model 94 (22LR), a Model 44 (Special), Model 111 (9mm) and Model 92 (9mm). All have been manufactured in the last 10 years. (Thirty years ago the Taurus line was the same as the Rossi line of that time, not worth buying. The current Taurus line is a completely different story.) I have no idea of the quality of their customer service because I've never had a problem. I personaly do not feel their final finish is up to Smith, but neither are their prices. Overall, a very servicable line. I rate them #2 in my book.

My Rugers have never failed to stand up to lots of shooting and are as strong as a tank, only problem is they look like they were built in the same factory. I find them heavier then needed, but I'm sure this extra weight is why they are so pleasent to shoot and why they stand up so well to heavy loads. Most have needed at least springs and sometimes complete trigger jobs. I decided that by the time I had the trigger issue resolved, I might just as well buy a Smith (and later) a Taurus revolver in the first place. I love their single actions. Their semis (other then the Standard .22) I have no use for.

Of course, just one man's opinion.

Wally

[myronman3]

you have heard how taurus's customer service sucks.   this is all you need to know about that.  

rugers are not as tough as folks think.  trust me.   avoid them.

smith is still under the "agreement".   while i own an older smith, i wont buy a new one because they havent made a serious attempt to get out from under the agreement.  if and when they do, that will change.  

i own a smith, a kimber and a f.a. pistol; and have never had a problem with these three.

[talonap]

From what I've heard, Taurus has a LIFETIME WARRENTY on all their firearms. Has this changed recently?

[Graybeard]

What good is a life time warranty if they will not or cannot fix the guns? Read of my problems with their life time warranty in older threads here.

[corbanzo]

Taurus is a good shooting pistol you arent going to lose anything of accuracy, you will most likely be surpirsed about how well then shoot.  As for the caliber, if you just want it for some fun shooting, and maybe a close range deer, go for a .357.  Less recoil than the .44, but still enough power, when it comes to that close of a range, shot placement is the key, You could kill a deer with a .380 at 20 feet if you shot it right.

[RGS]

I have a Tracker and a S&W Mountain
gun, both in .41 mag.  They both have the 4" barrel and both are stainless steel.  The Taurus is ported and a 5 shot.  The Smith holds 6.  

I shoot the Taurus better then I do the Smith for some reason.  It may be the ported barrel.  

The Smith will take heavyer loads and heavyer lead then the Tracker.  In fact the Smith will handle 230gr Leadhead Keith bullets that will not go in either the Tracker or the Ruger Blackhawk without cutting down the case length a bit.

Single action trigger pull on the Smith and the Taurus is good.  About the same as far as I can tell.  Double action, the smith with it's larger cylinder has a longer DA pull than the Tracker.  They are both smooth but I think the Tracker is a little lighter.  

The sights on the Tracker are target style with a over sized rear sight.  The Mountain Gun has the S&W adjustable sights.  I can see the Taurus sight picture better.  I think the over sized rear sight helps me out a little.  This may be another reason I seem to shoot it at least as well and sometimes better then the Mountain Gun.

When the Tracker was new, 5 or 6 years ago, the DA trigger pull was rough.  It would snag about half way through the stroke then break free with a jerk for a true "suprise break" :wink:

I put a couple hundred rounds through it and dry fired it for a while.  The trigger action smoothed up and it has been fine ever since.  This was not needed with the Smith, but that one was used when I got it.

The fit and finish of the Smith is better then the Taurus.  This is not to say there are any flaws in the Tracker's finish, but it does have some sharp edges the Smith does not have.  I like the factory grip on the Tracker better as well.  It seems to fit a little better.

Smith & Wesson Mountain Guns go for $600 or $700 on most auctions.  the Tracker is about half that.  I do not believe the Mountain gun is twice as good as the Tracker.  For traditional bullet weights in this caliber, the Taurus holds its own quite well.  If one shoots heavy for caliber handloads at top end velocities, the Smith is the way to go.

I am glad I have both.  I don't feel "conflicted" in the least. :money:

[chevyfan1a4]

What good is a life time warranty if they will not or cannot fix the guns? Read of my problems with their life time warranty in older threads here.

This is interesting comment you made about taurus considering i sent my taurus back, and I got it back in about 2 weeks. All fixed and shoots like a dream. I think some people here, as well as others on the internet just have a grudge agianst Taurus for one reason or another. Taurus does make great guns, their pt-92 pistol is awesome, and there revolvers are sweet. Yes, some guns that come from Taurus may be crap, but i can say the same about Smiths, Rugers, Sig's, Glocks, and Berreta.
I have never had a problem with Taurus and I highly recommend them to any one loo**** for a great handgun

[mg66]

I have put 1000s of rounds through my PT92 and never had a mis-feed. A damn fine piece of ordanance. Only thing I have changed is put an LPA adjustable rear sight on it. As for my new Model 44SS6 I have only put 50 rounds through it .... only time will tell. I was looking at a S&W in the 44 Mag but feel I would be paying for the name somewhat. Nothing could beat the 44SS6 for $465.