[Ebb27]

Doesn’t bother me at all. I just watch.

If you want a straight blowback 380 from Taurus, go for it. I don’t buy any straight blowbacks, Taurus or otherwise. I’ve had my share of both.

As far as quantity over quality, I find it entertaining that people would rather have a few dozen cheap handguns over a few good ones. But hey, I enjoy the entertainment. Doesn’t bother me. Quite the contrary

I’m not speaking of the folks who own a few cheaper guns within their means. I’m talking about those that spend a ton of money on them. In the end, they own a bunch of junk. But if it makes them happy, so be it.

Live and let live if they want to invest in low cost guns so be be it.....whatever makes you happy.

But I'm not the type to judge people and call their stuff junk, even if it's not my cup of tea....that just seems mean and rude to me.

People show me their Hi-Points they're proud of, and yeah I would never own one, but I not gonna put them down and be mean about it. And I have to admit they do work everytime I've tried them so if that's what they're into good for them, I see no need to put them down and call their choices junk....but that's just me. YMMV

Seriously how many guns does a person actually "need". So to the average non-gun person a large collection of guns be they cheap or expensive is just wasting money on nonsense you don't really need anyway.

So why not just recognize that we all have a common ground with our love of guns be they low or high end and respect each other's choices....even if that's not what you're into.

 

[bac1023]

Live and let live if they want to invest in low cost guns so be be it.....whatever makes you happy.

But I'm not the type to judge people and call their stuff junk, even if it's not my cup of tea....that just seems mean and rude to me.

People show me their Hi-Points they're proud of, and yeah I would never own one, but I not gonna put them down and be mean about it. And I have to admit they do work everytime I've tried them so if that's what they're into good for them, I see no need to put them down and call their choices junk....but that's just me. YMMV

Seriously how many guns does a person actually "need". So to the average non-gun person a large collection of guns be they cheap or expensive is just wasting money on nonsense you don't really need anyway.

So why not just recognize that we all have a common ground with our love of guns be they low or high end and respect each other's choices.

All good

You’re actually agreeing with me on some points.

As for what I consider “decent”, it’s not high end. It’s mainstream. Taurus, KelTec, the numerous Turkish companies and Filipino companies to me are below average. They’re better than Jennings, Bryco, and even High Point, but I wouldn’t consider them “decent”. I’d call them passable.

 

[TheFlash]

A data point of "one", but about a year ago, I bought an all stainless 856.
An accurate and reliable snubbie revolver (after >200 rounds to-date) that offers a 6-shot cylinder vs. the more common 5-shot cylinder.

 

[billy b]

All good

You’re actually agreeing with me on some points.

As for what I consider “decent”, it’s not high end. It’s mainstream. Taurus, KelTec, the numerous Turkish companies and Filipino companies to me are below average. They’re better than Jennings, Bryco, and even High Point, but I wouldn’t consider them “decent”. I’d call them passable.

i have more than a few guns. some revolvers from S&W came out of their custom shop. disappointed in that one from the CS. i have a Rock Island 206 38 snub nose that i paid on sale $200 new. i shoot the RI better at combat distance, better than any revolver I've ever owned. go figure. bling doesn't do a thing for me.

 

[bac1023]

i have more than a few guns. some revolvers from S&W came out of their custom shop. disappointed in that one from the CS. i have a Rock Island 206 38 snub nose that i paid on sale $200 new. i shoot the RI better at combat distance, better than any revolver I've ever owned. go figure. bling doesn't do a thing for me.

So “bling” is what you think the difference is?

I wasn’t referring to bling at all. In fact, Taurus and other less expensive brands many times use a ton of bling.

 

[Ebb27]

All good

You’re actually agreeing with me on some points.

As for what I consider “decent”, it’s not high end. It’s mainstream. Taurus, KelTec, the numerous Turkish companies and Filipino companies to me are below average. They’re better than Jennings, Bryco, and even High Point, but I wouldn’t consider them “decent”. I’d call them passable.

Yeah there's certain guns I have no interest in like KelTec cuz of bad experiences with them and Taurus was another one I swore off for similar reasons, but started hearing good things about and decided to give them another chance.

The Turk stuff I haven't tried any yet, but I am kinda curious about, and the Filipino stuff I've had a couple of their 1911s and consider them a good starter kit that you can build a decent gun from.

And then there are companies I once respected and was proud to own that I'm no longer interested in like Colt, S&W, and Walther that for various reasons have left a bad taste in my mouth. Ruger is another one I was a fan of but have drifted away from. Though I would be willing to try any one them again if something really interested me.

As for things like Bryco or Jimenez those kind of guns are indeed just junk and IMO are scams for people who just don't know any better. These are about the only ones I have no respect for. I'd jump on a Hi-Point before I'd ever waste money on those.

 

[bac1023]

Yeah there's certain guns I have no interest in like KelTec cuz of bad experiences with them and Taurus was another one I swore off for similar reasons, but started hearing good things about and decided to give them another chance.

The Turk stuff I haven't tried any yet, but I am kinda curious about, and the Filipino stuff I've had a couple of their 1911s and consider them a good starter kit that you can build a decent gun from.

And then there are companies I once respected and was proud to own that I'm no longer interested in like Colt, S&W, and Walther that for various reasons have left a bad taste in my mouth. Ruger is another one I was a fan of but have drifted away from. Though I would be willing to try any one them again if something really interested me.

As for things like Bryco or Jimenez those kind of guns are indeed just junk and IMO are scams for people who just don't know any better. These are about the only ones I have no respect for. I'd jump on a Hi-Point before I'd ever waste money on those.

Hi-Point is definitely an upgrade from those

 

[Ebb27]

It's a near Beretta 82 clone so I suspect they're competing more with the Beretta 80X not Glock or Ruger per se.

I'd add the Girsan MC-14T to that market....and I suspect the Taurus will be much closer to it's price range than the Beretta. And it has a tip-up barrel....all you Beretta fans should know who made those popular. As mentioned a great option for those who struggle to rack the slide.

 

[fg17]

A data point of "one", but about a year ago, I bought an all stainless 856.
An accurate and reliable snubbie revolver (after >200 rounds to-date) that offers a 6-shot cylinder vs. the more common 5-shot cylinder.

I've had good luck with a Taurus 856 Ultralight.

 

[SilverBiscuit]

I have zero interest in this gun but one of my guns that has impressed me the most is a Taurus. My Gen 1 TX22 has over 10,000 rounds through it and is completely reliable. The only malfunctions it has seen are from cheap ammo that had no primer in the rim. So I wouldn’t dismiss a Taurus off-hand but they can be a gamble because their quality control and manufacturing consistency is spotty as well as their customer service. So a good one is good but a bad one by many documented accounts can be a real headache.

 

[bac1023]

I have zero interest in this gun but one of my guns that has impressed me the most is a Taurus. My Gen 1 TX22 has over 10,000 rounds through it and is completely reliable. The only malfunctions it has seen are from cheap ammo that had no primer in the rim. So I wouldn’t dismiss a Taurus off-hand but they can be a gamble because their quality control and manufacturing consistency is spotty as well as their customer service. So a good one is good but a bad one by many documented accounts can be a real headache.

Yeah the TX22 I shot felt great and I’d take it over the many Umarex built rimfires on the market

 

[rla73]

I have zero interest in this gun but one of my guns that has impressed me the most is a Taurus. My Gen 1 TX22 has over 10,000 rounds through it and is completely reliable. The only malfunctions it has seen are from cheap ammo that had no primer in the rim. So I wouldn’t dismiss a Taurus off-hand but they can be a gamble because their quality control and manufacturing consistency is spotty as well as their customer service. So a good one is good but a bad one by many documented accounts can be a real headache.

I don't own any Taurus semi autos but currently have a model 82 .38 special revolver. It has been great so far and very accurate. Their smith clone revolvers (82, 65, and 66) appear to be of good quality and the reviews are overwhelmingly positive. With Taurus it appears certain makes and models are good while others are not so good.

 

[bac1023]

I don't own any Taurus semi autos but currently have a model 82 .38 special revolver. It has been great so far and very accurate. Their smith clone revolvers (82, 65, and 66) appear to be of good quality and the reviews are overwhelmingly positive. With Taurus it appears certain makes and models are good while others are not so good.

I had good luck with the two Taurus revolvers I owned, but I’ve seen others not as lucky.

 

[mac66]

Here' a video of the 58, also saw one from the NRA convention

Built to last. Sized to carry. Introducing the Taurus® 58

Taurus is bringing back the Model 58

A Glint in the Darkness: Taurus Model 58

 

[J.R. Bob Dobbs]

I’m one of them. Have never tried their semi’s, and won’t.

 

[bac1023]

I’m one of them. Have never tried their semi’s, and won’t.

I had issues with their semis for sure

 

[rla73]

I had good luck with the two Taurus revolvers I owned, but I’ve seen others not as lucky.

I definitely would not buy one sight unseen. If Taurus could get their customer service on par with Hi Point I honestly think it would help them become a contender with other gun manufacturers.

 

[bac1023]

I definitely would not buy one sight unseen. If Taurus could get their customer service on par with Hi Point I honestly think it would help them become a contender with other gun manufacturers.

Taurus has always struggled mightily in that regard. Not a real good combination with below average quality control.

 

[amd65]

The only Taurus I’ve owned was a 9mm Model 92 Beretta clone. It was excellent in every regard.

 

[John_AZ]

I have no interest in this gun.

I do, however, appreciate some of the low end entries like this. Sometimes I want to buy a gun because it operates differently, but don’t want to spend the money on “the gun”. I like to learn how different types of guns operate (Beretta 92, SAA, 1911, etc etc) but not looking to do anything serious with it. Often times I will buy something, shoot it, learn about it, then sell it off. These “clones” make it a bit easier.

But at this point, I think I’m kind of over it.