Taurus Warranty Experience - Surprisingly Good

[RX-79G]

Along with so many gun things, it is considered bad form to call a spade a spade. "All brands have lemons", but that gets said ignoring that some brands have next to none and other brands are outrageously lemonade.

Taurus has to be the only gun brand whose fan forum has a "Product Problems" subforum. That is insane.

Taurus has rampant design and production quality problems across their product lines. Revolvers that lock up, autos that fire at the wrong time, accuracy all over the place. It is an incredibly bad brand, and any sort of effort on the part of gun people to apply statistics to consumer advocacy would have killed it by now. Consumer Reports would bury Taurus. But gun people don't want to hear it, so new people keep getting fished in.

And that's despite the fact that you can buy an all metal S&W .38 revolver or a decent quality steel 1911 for less than $400. How cheap do you need a defensive arm to be?????

 

[FALshot]

^^ I will take your word about Taurus customer service 35 years ago. But since your Taurus has been reliable for 35 years, you have not had to worry about customer service since you have had a a reliable firearm, right?

I love my Smith's, adore my Python, and at the same time my two experiences with Taurus products have been nothing but positive. (I haven't shot the third one yet.)

I love my 1911's and Hi-Powers, nothing like them. I also love my Glocks and have to say that although ugly, (my opinion) Gaston Glock brought out a remarkable design that virtually all other manufactures have copied to one degree or another.

Yet, within the firearms community, enthusiasts, you will find legions of people who will trash Glock with red faced emotion,....(Especially the 1911, Hi-Power crowd.) It's difficult to generalize but I thing my comment is accurate.

Maybe life is too short to spend .22 money on a centerfire. That being said, maybe some people will pay more for the privilege of paying more? What about someone who cannot afford a nice Smith or a Colt Python, should they be excluded from the shooting sports until they can afford a higher quality firearm?

Anyone have any trouble with a Remington, say an 870 Express in the last few years of Remington's existence? Thousands of them did not function reliably right out of the box,........ Customer service was non-existent near the end. (Yet I have a couple of 700 bolt guns that are world class accurate and reliable.)

Does that mean Remington makes poor firearms and one would avoid them?

The firearms community is a diverse group with a wide spectrum of opinions.

 

[RX-79G]

^^ I will take your word about Taurus customer service 35 years ago. But since your Taurus has been reliable for 35 years, you have not had to worry about customer service since you have had a a reliable firearm, right?

I love my Smith's, adore my Python, and at the same time my two experiences with Taurus products have been nothing but positive. (I haven't shot the third one yet.)

I love my 1911's and Hi-Powers, nothing like them. I also love my Glocks and have to say that although ugly, (my opinion) Gaston Glock brought out a remarkable design that virtually all other manufactures have copied to one degree or another.

Yet, within the firearms community, enthusiasts, you will find legions of people who will trash Glock with red faced emotion,....(Especially the 1911, Hi-Power crowd.) It's difficult to generalize but I thing my comment is accurate.

Maybe life is too short to spend .22 money on a centerfire. That being said, maybe some people will pay more for the privilege of paying more? What about someone who cannot afford a nice Smith or a Colt Python, should they be excluded from the shooting sports until they can afford a higher quality firearm?

Anyone have any trouble with a Remington, say an 870 Express in the last few years of Remington's existence? Thousands of them did not function reliably right out of the box,........ Customer service was non-existent near the end. (Yet I have a couple of 700 bolt guns that are world class accurate and reliable.)

Does that mean Remington makes poor firearms and one would avoid them?

The firearms community is a diverse group with a wide spectrum of opinions.

We are talking about Taurus right now, and in the recent past. I have an '80s Taurus PT92 I would rate as excellent (because it was correctly built on Beretta tooling). But that doesn't have anything to do with the rampant problems Taurus has had for at least a decade. Problems very similar to what Remington was having toward the end.

None of which has anything to do with the pushback against Glock's ridiculous level of fandom.

And it is simply a false paradigm to say you need to buy a Taurus because a Colt is too expensive. There are so many reasonable or even excellent quality low priced guns these days. Stoeger, Girsan, Armscor, Keltec, yada, yada.

 

[FALshot]

Right, it's simply a false paradigm to say you need to buy a Taurus because a Colt is too expensive,...in your opinion. What could some poor guy do to satisfy some of the posters in this thread if they can not afford a higher end handgun? (Remember, life it too short to spend .22 money on a centerfire, right?)

And although we are talking about Taurus right now it is not beyond the pale to bring up what you so eloquently demonstrate with your attitude towards Glocks ("ridiculous level of fandom.") Again, in your opinion

How ridiculous is the level of fandom it when people purchase a Glock and run 10K or 20K rounds though them without any problems? (Some people call it a satisfied customer which created the fandom that you find ridiculous.)

How much money did I have to spend on a couple of 1911's to have them shoot as reliably and accurately as my $500.- Glock 21 did right out of the box?
A rhetorical question that I will answer myself:

Baer 1911 Premier II, 5" Model, .45ACP

$2,427.00

I have run two Taurus revolvers though the ringer and had no issues whatsoever. But I realize that that will never be enough for fellas who think like you.

While you are entitled to you opinion, your opinion is no more valid than mine or anyone else's for that matter.

 

[RX-79G]

Right, it's simply a false paradigm to say you need to buy a Taurus because a Colt is too expensive,...in your opinion.

And although we are talking about Taurus right now it is not beyond the pale to bring up what you so eloquently demonstrate with your attitude towards Glocks " ridiculous level of fandom.) Again, in your opinion

While you are entitled to you opinion, your opinion is no more valid than mine or anyone else's for that matter.

That's not even an argument. It is not my opinion that there are multiple bargain brands of firearms that compete in the price range of Taurus.

It is not my opinion that the majority of Glock criticism is not low quality and customer service issues.

Those are facts.

 

[FALshot]

Your facts,...

Remember, in your opinion Glocks have a ridiculous level of fandom.

 

[RX-79G]

Your facts,...

Remember, in your opinion Glocks have a ridiculous level of fandom.

They do, but that wasn't the fact. The fact is that Glock criticism is not for the same reasons as Taurus criticism.

 

[FALshot]

And while some of Taurus criticism is indeed valid, some of it is overstated.

Some Taurus owners have had good function and reliability from a admittedly budget firearm.

 

[RX-79G]

And while some of Taurus criticism is indeed valid, some of it is overstated.

Some Taurus owners have had good function and reliability from a admittedly budget firearm.

Which doesn't validate choosing Taurus over brands that are also budget priced and don't have widespread and egregious problems. You're just restating the "all brands have lemons" nonsense. Taurus firearms are obviously a terrible bet to make with your money or your life.

 

[ma96782]

RE : This vs. That Brand

Just my $0.02.

For me generally......
Just like how it's not acceptable to stereotype groups of people......it's probably fair to say, that the same sort of thinking, should/could follow about firearm manufacturers.

YES......I still make mistakes about people and guns. And, it shapes my thinking. It's a part of being a human.

Aloha, Mark

PS......IF/WHEN a business should go out of business.
There is/was probably, a reason for that.

 

[FALshot]

Which doesn't validate choosing Taurus over brands that are also budget priced and don't have widespread and egregious problems. You're just restating the "all brands have lemons" nonsense. Taurus firearms are obviously a terrible bet to make with your money or your life.

Which actually does validate an individual purchasing a Taurus, especially after they have had a positive experience with them.

You're the kind of guy who, when challenged, will refuse to see any other point of view than your own.

Restating the fact that all firearms manufacture's have one degree or another of quality assurance issues is not nonsense, unless of course you are an individual who must have the last word in spite of being irrational.

After all, I own two custom 1911's* and two custom Hi-Powers*,....And I also shoot Glocks. (Oh, the horror!)

*Not to mention a couple of Smith's and a Python

 

[RX-79G]

Which actually does validate an individual purchasing a Taurus, especially after they have had a positive experience with them.

You're the kind of guy who, when challenged, will refuse to see any other point of view than your own.

Restating the fact that all firearms manufacture's have one degree or another of quality assurance issues is not nonsense, unless of course you are an individual who must have the last word in spite of being irrational.

After all, I own two custom 1911's* and two custom Hi-Powers*,....And I also shoot Glocks. (Oh, the horror!)

*Not to mention a couple of Smith's and a Python

You realize that I don't dislike Glock's, right? I was summarizing the criticism they get.

I'm the kind of guy that pays attention and is open minded. I watch a lot of trends and take an interest in whether companies are doing better or worse. I am a poster on the Taurusarmed forum, and have observed what has been going on with class action suits, massive recalls and just the day-to-day complaints. As a trend it is super screwed up.

I don't understand the point you're making about individual's. Of course anyone can get a few of the good guns Taurus makes. One could get a great Yugo car or not get diarrhea from Olestra potato chips. But you would have to be kind of blind to not notice what everyone else has experienced.

Just like how it's not acceptable to stereotype groups of people......it's probably fair to say, that the same sort of thinking, should/could follow about firearm manufacturers.

A gun company is not a population of individuals. It is the individual. And just like a person who does consistently terrible work, Taurus ought to be fired.

 

[ma96782]

A gun company is not a population of individuals. It is the individual. And just like a person who does consistently terrible work, Taurus ought to be fired.

YES....I knew that.
Note the "PS". Yeah, it was my attempt......to get folks like YOU perhaps, to better understand my posts. LOL.

I failed......I guess.

For the record.......
I own a Taurus 709 semi-automatic pistol.

Q: Would I recommend it to someone that I like?
A: Sure. Just make sure to take it out and practice with it, often.

Aloha, Mark

PS......has anyone else noticed? The "argumentative and/or badgering" sort of posts that seems to have become more frequent/common?

 

[RX-79G]

YES....I knew that.
Note the "PS". Yeah, it was my attempt......to get folks like YOU perhaps, to better understand my posts. LOL.

I failed......I guess.

For the record.......
I own a Taurus 709 semi-automatic pistol. And, would I recommend it to someone that I like? Sure. Just make sure to take it out and practice with it, often.

Aloha, Mark

PS......has anyone else noticed? The "argumentative and/or badgering" sort of posts that seems to have become more frequent/common?

No, I don't always understand your posts, and others don't either. I you appear to think it is funny to say leading things and then refuse to clarify anything.

There is going to be more arguing if you don't just have one set of beliefs on the forum. But I haven't badgered anyone. I've been badgered and trolled, though. No surprise, that.

 

[ma96782]

No, I don't always understand your posts, and others don't either. I you appear to think it is funny to say leading things and then refuse to clarify anything.

There is going to be more arguing if you don't just have one set of beliefs on the forum. But I haven't badgered anyone. I've been badgered and trolled, though. No surprise, that.

So then?
You're speaking for the "others" too now?

Whatever.

Aloha, Mark

PS.....a lawyer might just call that......
"Argumentative".

OK, Ok, ok......sorry about that.

 

[trevi]

Post #11

I would have thought/guessed/imagined.......

That a firearms manufacturer would/could have at least stuck some kind of lazer (or whatever) down the barrel before releasing the product for sale/consumption. Yeah, a cheap and easy, QC measure. Rrrrrrright, checking to see...... where the lazer dot ended up on a target placed at x yards or feet down range. Then, within a certain parameter........it could either be passed or rejected.

Shooting it would also be fine too, though costly.

WAIT, Wait, wait......
What do you think this is?
Walther (or some other manufacturer), that does/did (in the past at least) actual live firing and would include the used target in the box? LOL.

Silly me.
Oh wait......yeah.......
View attachment 1192022

Don't get me wrong......
I'm glad that you got it fixed and that you're NOW satisfied.

Aloha, Mark

Apparently, CZ got time fo dat!
Only CZ sends test targets with guns.

 

[trevi]

Along with so many gun things, it is considered bad form to call a spade a spade. "All brands have lemons", but that gets said ignoring that some brands have next to none and other brands are outrageously lemonade.

Taurus has to be the only gun brand whose fan forum has a "Product Problems" subforum. That is insane.

Taurus has rampant design and production quality problems across their product lines. Revolvers that lock up, autos that fire at the wrong time, accuracy all over the place. It is an incredibly bad brand, and any sort of effort on the part of gun people to apply statistics to consumer advocacy would have killed it by now. Consumer Reports would bury Taurus. But gun people don't want to hear it, so new people keep getting fished in.

And that's despite the fact that you can buy an all metal S&W .38 revolver or a decent quality steel 1911 for less than $400. How cheap do you need a defensive arm to be?????

Well,....? there is Hi-point. If you wany to talk about cheap.

 

[RX-79G]

Well,....? there is Hi-point. If you wany to talk about cheap.

As far as I can tell, the tremendously ugly Hi-point has a better reputation for functioning than Taurus does. But zero pride of ownership.

 

[trevi]

As far as I can tell, the tremendously ugly Hi-point has a better reputation for functioning than Taurus does. But zero pride of ownership.

Never owned a Hi-Point. Owned several Taurus' and never had a problem. Only sold them to simplify mag use.

 

[FALshot]

You realize that I don't dislike Glock's, right? I was summarizing the criticism they get.

I'm the kind of guy that pays attention and is open minded. I watch a lot of trends and take an interest in whether companies are doing better or worse. I am a poster on the Taurusarmed forum, and have observed what has been going on with class action suits, massive recalls and just the day-to-day complaints. As a trend it is super screwed up.

I don't understand the point you're making about individual's. Of course anyone can get a few of the good guns Taurus makes. One could get a great Yugo car or not get diarrhea from Olestra potato chips. But you would have to be kind of blind to not notice what everyone else has experienced.


A gun company is not a population of individuals. It is the individual. And just like a person who does consistently terrible work, Taurus ought to be fired.

First off, you have not been "Badgered or Trolled," period. (In my opinion.) I don't think you have badgered or trolled either. It's been a spirited debate.

I will take your word for it that you do not have an issue with Glocks. But honestly, on an internet forum like this people can only make a judgement by what you have said. You mentioned the "Ridiculous level of fandom" in context to Glocks. How could anyone, (who can only make a judgement of the situation from your words) believe that you do not think that there is in fact a "Ridiculous level of fandom" where Glocks are concerned?

You may in fact be the kind of guy who is open minded but I do not believe that your post's in this thread reflect that.

You mention "A few of the good guns Taurus makes." Perhaps implying that Taurus only makes a few good guns?

If you believe that at least a simply majority, (over 50%) of Taurus firearms do not function properly then you have an unrealistic perspective. Top of my head, at one time perhaps 10% of Taurus firearms had issues. (Which is indeed massive considering the sheer volume.) But honestly, when is a recall of any mass produced product not "massive?"

I believe that you are incorrect that Taurus does consistently terrible work. Using a company and people as a metaphor you believe that Taurus should be fired, and thus, Taurus should be put out of business.

If Taurus was in fact consistently terrible the company would not longer exist. (Although, obviously they have had their share of problems.)

Taurus will continue to exist because they offer, overall, a decent firearm at a more than fair price. There will always be a market for firearms that "Joe Average" can afford to own.


I have been around the shooting sports all of my life. There is plenty of snobbery in the shooting sports. From the 1911 and Hi-Power crowd who make fun of the "Tupperware guns" that Glock produces, to some guys who show up to my Trap Club with $10K, (or $20K) Perazzi and Kolar shotguns,....And some "Average Joe" with a BT99 makes them look silly,....I've seen poor semi-toothless bubbas from South Carolina outshoot British snobs with $100K shotguns. I have seen a kid with a half-worn out Enfield shoot pie-tin sized groups at 800 meters while snobs with $10K Accuracy International rifles could not do better.

Some of the comments in this thread highlight the opinionated closed minded willful ignorance of those involved in the shooting sports.