Originally Posted by RICK54

I know of one taurus basher here who always joins in every chance to bash the taurus brand.

Yes, that would probably be me...

Go read the Taurus Quality thread - I have links to tons of stories. And, I;ve been collecting more since I posted that.

Sorry - but I say get a Ruger P95 or a Stoeger Cougar, if that is all you can afford. Those guns are much better quality than Taurus. I have owned both of them too. I can get a blue P95 for under $300, and a stainless one for $310-$320. Cheapest gun I'd buy to defend my life.

I have used both guns and would prefer a glock over a taurus. Get the glock, Its battle tested.

Not worth a reply a am finished here!

I guess a die-hard Taurus fan would consider me a "Taurus Basher," too, although I have nothing against them as a practice gun, or for anything else that does not involve self-defense.

It is purely a matter of playing the percentages. The overall odds have always been overwhelmingly in favor of a person never having to use a gun for self defense, but the fact remains that a person who has made the decision to carry a lethal weapon has some reason to believe that doing so might save him or his loved ones from suffering at the hands of some evil or misguided assailant. That is a grave decision, when you think about it, and requires a huge commitment to quality, in both training and equipment selection.

That person is basically saying that he is willing to take a another life, in defense of something he holds very dear, like his own life or someone else's. So, when he has finally arrived at that decision - to prepare himself for that single moment in his life, when he may live or die, based on his equipment and personal ability...why would he even consider using a product that has been crafted by a company who is well documented to not have that same level of commitment?

Taurus has been rolling defective equipment off the assembly line for years, not because they necessarily have poor designs, or because they use cheaper parts (almost every manufacturer has increased their use of plastic and MIM parts), but because they let the 'borderline' quality guns go into the marketplace. The manufacturers who have better reputations have them because they cull the borderline items and run them back through the process until they meet minimum standards. A few slip by, but not enough to ruin their reputations - that actually takes quite a few mistakes to do.

Taurus's answer to that has been, for many years, to simply say 'send it back and we will fix it.' That's a good thing, when they actually do it, but it doesn't help the guy much, who bought a gun for that single moment in his life when he needed to believe his gun was going to save his life, or someone else's. It's all about confidence, and when there is documented evidence of poor quality control, over a period of decades, a prudent person will have doubts, and that is a bad thing when a person is under severe stress.

If you can't understand and accept the above argument, maybe you should re-think your own level of commitment to using lethal force in defense of the things you hold dear.

If you don't know your gun shoot it a lot make sure you don't see any problems after many rounds maybe you should not be carrying, any new gun untested can misfire if you don't like taurus does not make you a basher its just some take it a little over board.

yeah, i would definitely go with the glock. i have the taurus pt145 and an glock 33 and the quality and overall performance of the glock is much better. the glock costs more but you will be alot happier with it.

I don't believe Taurus is anywhere near Glock at this point, at least not in their duty pistols. Look at Glock assessories, inexpensive factory mags, reputation. However, you might find a Taurus that works, fits you well and you can shoot it well. You might not like the feel of a Glock and possibly won't shoot it as well? But, I doubt it. Really, it's unfair to make comparisons between these two at this point, besides, Glocks can go for $200 to $300 more depending on what model you choose. Taurus vs. Ruger would be a closer comparison and this is coming from a biased Beretta guy.

Skip both... Get a S&W M&P45 Compact.

You get Glock-reliability, in an American made gun, and you keep $50-100 in your pocket for ammo.

Jeff

I have already bought the Glock....when I took it to the gun range to shoot I noticed they had a Taurus for rent

I rented it and did a side by side test and the Glock won by a long shot

Billy

Originally Posted by Shipwreck

Watermelon vs a Glock...

Ice cube versus a glock...

apple sauce versus a glock...

THESE are all more realistic comparisons than Taurus vs Glock

if everything is compared to the Glock. It is plain to see that it is the Glock that should be owned.

I own both and hands down the Glock is the better of the two.

I have heard, on a steady basis, that Taurus owners either love or hate the quality of their pistols. On the other hand, I have never really heard of a Glock owner complaining about the quality of their Glocks.

This will help you to know all about Mr Glock.A man that made a pistol a master peace.
http://www.gunknowledge.com/Document...icial_UGUM.pdf

For CCW I would prefer a Glock 36; fire-power wise is gives up some compared to the 1911, but it is flatter and easier to carry than either the 1911 or the Glock 30.

The Glock 30 has a reputation as being very accurate. I've not shot one. The Glock 30 seems closer in size to the Glock 23 than to the baby Glocks.

Originally Posted by shipwreck

watermelon vs a glock...

Ice cube versus a glock...

Apple sauce versus a glock...

These are all more realistic comparisons than taurus vs glock

cosign

Originally Posted by Packard

For CCW I would prefer a Glock 36; fire-power wise is gives up some compared to the 1911, but it is flatter and easier to carry than either the 1911 or the Glock 30.

The Glock 30 has a reputation as being very accurate. I've not shot one. The Glock 30 seems closer in size to the Glock 23 than to the baby Glocks.

They are accurate, or I can just shoot that .45 better than a 1911. My sister's husband has one and I was able to shoot that gun much better than I could any of the 1911's we had in the Marines.

Originally Posted by denner

Taurus vs. Ruger would be a closer comparison and this is coming from a biased Beretta guy.

How does a Biased Berreta guy have any credibility saying anything about a Taurus or a Ruger? Not a jab just really curious about the basis for the comparison. These kind of statements really interest me on these forums.

RCG

Originally Posted by recoilguy

How does a Biased Berreta guy have any credibility saying anything about a Taurus or a Ruger? Not a jab just really curious about the basis for the comparison. These kind of statements really interest me on these forums.

RCG

Maybe he is like me. I have owned a lot of different handguns in the past, but sold most of them off to take care of some unexpected financial business at home. Ever since all of that went down, three years ago, I have concentrated on owning the brand that I liked best. In my case that would be a Beretta. I had owned a PT-111(2nd generation), a PT-22, a Model 85 in .38 Special, and a PT-92. Unfortunately, I had to sell seventeen handguns all together. Not trying to pick a fight here, just trying to see this from all points of view, thats all.

I'm not trying to start a fight either but the way I read it and truthfully the way I still read it is

I am a Berreta guy.... Glocks are way better then Taurus as a matter of fact they are way better then Ruger too.

I was just asking for a point of reference to lend credibility to the statement. I realize there are always a bunch of maybe's. If your senerio is the case then maybe there is a credibility to the implication that Taurus and Ruger are both inferior quality handguns, I was just curious. I like there to be experiance or facts that opinions are based upon not just points of view. I could be wrong just saying what I read.

I like my Tauruses, I like my Glocks, I have had more jambs from breaking in a Glock than from the Taurus. I have had to do some work to taurus and Glock to get them to work they way I want. I trust my life to either one, I never trust a firearm out of the box. Taurus and Glock are completely differant animals. But hey, I'll take my Taurus to the range, you bring your glock, I will embarass you. Hell I'll bring a HiPoint!

I have never owned a Taurus but have handled a few and not been impressed. I have owned a few Glocks and own two now, I would always pick the Glocks first.
Just my opinion.

A few comments / opinions after reading through this thread...

- First, to the Op, I agree with the sentiment expressed by others that you can't judge quality simply based on the country of manufacture. While it might be a good general indicator for some products / industries, I would recommend not adopting a basic "country = quality rating" mentality. Parts, assembly, labor, national/industry standards, etc... all happen in a global economic melting pot today. Even if you have that mentality, it's hard to exercise it with accuracy. BUT, to the extent that it's clear and the products are good, I would recommend supporting the economy of the country in which you live because it's good business!

- Second, I have no direct experience with Taurus. I don't want to propagate gossip, but generally speaking most of what I read about Taurus reliability is less than positive. That's just my experience - I recommend doing your own research.

- Third, I do have direct experience with Glock and based on what I've read and personally experienced -- a very reliable firearm, reputed as one of the most reliable on the market.

- Fourth, to the Op,... just curious... by what means of deduction did your research lead you to a Glock vs Taurus decision point? It seems like an an unusual place to find one-self. What features, requirements were you trying to satisfy and how many other guns did you consider?

Taurus, Good or Bad I have 4 Taurus revolvers none of which ever gave me a problem over the years I have used them and I mean a lot. On the other hand I had 2 Taurus autos that were nothing but trouble. In this thread you can find the exact opposite of my problem. Why I don't know,. I did swap my Taurus 9mm for a glock 19 and get no more keyhole bullets on the target. The Taurus drove me nuts would not shoot anything.