Gold & Silver Forum (http://goldismoney.info/forums/index.php)
- Survival Prep (http://goldismoney.info/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=141)
- - Taurus Vs. S&W (http://goldismoney.info/forums/showthread.php?t=189299)

drewfu | 10-16-2007 10:52 PM
Taurus Vs. S&W Is there a debate over the quality of these two manufacturers? Is there clearly an advantage to paying double for a Smith & Wesson? I'd like to restrict the current debate to revolvers, only.

Quixote2 | 10-16-2007 11:09 PM
Re: Taurus Vs. S&W When I bought my wife her short barrel Aluminum frame 38 special last year, I had both Taurus and S&W in my hands. I could not see any difference in quality. I went with the Taurus. The Taurus is rated for +P loads, my old S&W K38 is not.

eat_beef | 10-16-2007 11:40 PM
Re: Taurus Vs. S&W There is a difference in quality. The fit and finish won't be as good on the Taurus. But in a revolver, Taurus makes a nice piece. I've been very impressed with them. If you're not hung up on pretty, I'd say Taurus is the way to go, but I really don't know how the two compare in resale value.

SilverCity | 10-17-2007 12:00 AM
Re: Taurus Vs. S&W They both have lifetime warranties, but I have heard reports of less than satisfactory customer service from Taurus. Smith & Wesson, on the other hand--by personal accounts--has outstanding service. Decide what is important: cheaper purchase price, perhaps poorer service, and less resale value compared to higher price, better service, better retained value...

electric-amish | 10-17-2007 01:16 AM
Re: Taurus Vs. S&W Most people won't shoot a gun out. Most will not test its Metal or design with crazy loads or conditions. Most people will not need a warranty call or work on a gun of any type. I like S&W but for most people Taurus would be more than enough. I recently bought an M&P from S&W. Broken striker after repeated Dry Fires. S&W says its OK to Dry Fire the M&P. They didn't have Electric-Amish in mind. In 25 Days I had Dry fired 2500+ times and shoot 600. I did this to smooth the trigger on a double action only Pistol; Worked like a charm. However the striker couldn't take it and BOIIIING It was toast. I sent it in to be replaced. I also made a note to check the front sight(It seemed Micro bent to me) I called them today with the Serial # and they said it was in the mail room on its way back should be here Thursday. The said they had replaced the front sight (I was very suprised and expected an its OK) they also shot it at the test range to make sure its accurate. They replaced the striker. While I think 22 days is excessive, 6 of those days were Sat's and Suns. 4 days are travel time. so 12 days and they had to take it off the bench and shoot some rounds so maybe an extra day for dept transfer and an extra day to transfer it back to the repair bench for final OK.====10 days Not really all that bad. By Sat evening I will have a feel for their repairs with 200 rounds. On the Phone less than 2 min today with S&W and had all the answers I was wanting from VERY HELPFUL people. I am way pleased with this aspect and am telling people about it. Great Customer service dept!!!!! Did I say My Cost Zero!! So I would go with S&W as of now. E-A PS-- I fricken love this pistol --Points beautifly, sits low in my hand and, holds 15 in the Mag.

drewfu | 10-17-2007 10:08 AM
Re: Taurus Vs. S&W I appreciate the great, informative posts. I already shoot quite a lot (not as much as EA!) and I carry the S&W Air Lite PD in .357 Mag. It's beautiful! However, it's not the type of revolver to really practice your aim with. I'd like to get another in at least a 6" barrel for the range and just because I like guns! Although the price is double for the S&W, I always try to buy things that will last as long as possible and even if I do sell, will have great resale. Maybe another S&W in the works...

drafter | 10-17-2007 10:33 AM
Re: Taurus Vs. S&W I've got a S&W model 65 .357 I worked a trade for. Really nice well made gun. I think if i was looking at buying a revolver these days I'd probably go with the Taurus though. All of the ones I've seen are equally as nice but like you've noticed at a much better price. I'm still of the opinion that if the quality is good and the price is reasonable I'd still rather support a US gun manufacturer, but that's getting tough these days unless you've got money to burn.

twenty4karat | 10-18-2007 11:22 PM
Re: Taurus Vs. S&W One thing about Taurus that I like is that they adapted the transfer bar hammer system that Sturm, Ruger & Co. Developed many years ago (by the way, don't rule out Ruger's. They make a fine piece). I've owned all three of these at one time or another (of course, all I have now is a sling shot). You always pay a premium for S&W and Colt for that matter (I've had Colts also). About 30 years ago, I bought the Ruger an SP 100 (I think that was the model) in .357 w/4" barrel. A very sturdy and reliable piece. In those days however, all of the Law Enforcement Agency's "poo hoood" the Ruger. Also in those days, Ruger's were almost half the price of a S&W or Colt. Since then, I've seen Ruger side arms on uniformed Law Enforcement personnel. As a result, their prices have closed the gap significantly. As I said the transfer bar system was pure Genius! Especially on single action fire arms. It allowed you to load all six cylinders with out worry of accidental discharge. And even though they didn't encourage it, you could dry fire with little or no damage to the firing pin. My final two cents: Any of the above brands are fine firearms. It's up to you and your pocket book. Maranatha, :smile:

drewfu | 10-18-2007 11:26 PM
Re: Taurus Vs. S&W You know, in the end I'm such a gun nut that I probably will try them all, as my pocketbook allows.:D

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:13 AM. |

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright = None use it and Link to GIM