Gimme some ideas on a concealed......

[Trick Pony]

I need to find my receipt, I might be wrong.

Did you buy one they had in stock at the store or order it from the website to store? I think they were cheaper online.

[KBScobravert]

Did you buy one they had in stock at the store or order it from the website to store? I think they were cheaper online.

In stock from the Ft Worth store.

edit: was $399.99

[Dacotua]

Are you going to continue deflecting arguments with nonsense? My 1911's run great and that little fact has absolutely nothing to do with this thread on REVOLVERS.

You argue like a 14 year old. You have absolutely no facts to support your side of the discussion, and seemingly no experience on the matter.

You are the one thats arguing like a 14 year old. Cussing in the discussion like it gives you authority. Also you brought up semi automatics.

Again you already admitted that you were getting your information off the net, which is my point in this. You have no valid data points.

Ive attendend many shooting competitions ans have seen many guns fail. Most common failure on revolvers are the cam on the hammer which causes the gun to under/over clock. And as far as the gun manufacturer that has the most failures Ive seen, Its Smith & Wesson. But before you throw a tantrum, I didnt mention this before because the hangun meets that I go to, people shoot 10's of thousands of rounds out of modified guns. Stuff in that class is going to wear out and break.

However on a normal range, the only failures I ever witnessed is with Colt Single Action clones. The hand spring in those usually break if they havent been modified to the ruger style spring/piston style.

Out of all the revolvers Ive never seen fail are Rugers and believe it or not, Taurus.

Im not biased to any revolver.

Now if asked, would I buy a taurus? The answer would be no. What would I buy? Probably a smith because of aftermarket parts and there is a shooting class for the gun. Again that class does not appeal to me. The only revolver competition class thats fun is cowboy action shooting, FOR ME.

[momo]

pshh, who needs to fire... the looks alone are killer!

[Jester]

pshh, who needs to fire... the looks alone are killer!

pimp

[Moose242]

You are the one thats arguing like a 14 year old. Cussing in the discussion like it gives you authority. Also you brought up semi automatics.

Again you already admitted that you were getting your information off the net, which is my point in this. You have no valid data points.

Ive attendend many shooting competitions ans have seen many guns fail. Most common failure on revolvers are the cam on the hammer which causes the gun to under/over clock. And as far as the gun manufacturer that has the most failures Ive seen, Its Smith & Wesson. But before you throw a tantrum, I didnt mention this before because the hangun meets that I go to, people shoot 10's of thousands of rounds out of modified guns. Stuff in that class is going to wear out and break.

However on a normal range, the only failures I ever witnessed is with Colt Single Action clones. The hand spring in those usually break if they havent been modified to the ruger style spring/piston style.

Out of all the revolvers Ive never seen fail are Rugers and believe it or not, Taurus.

Im not biased to any revolver.

Now if asked, would I buy a taurus? The answer would be no. What would I buy? Probably a smith because of aftermarket parts and there is a shooting class for the gun. Again that class does not appeal to me. The only revolver competition class thats fun is cowboy action shooting, FOR ME.

Your opinion is invalid.

[Nash B.]

Ive attendend many shooting competitions ans have seen many guns fail. Most common failure on revolvers are the cam on the hammer which causes the gun to under/over clock. And as far as the gun manufacturer that has the most failures Ive seen, Its Smith & Wesson. But before you throw a tantrum, I didnt mention this before because the hangun meets that I go to, people shoot 10's of thousands of rounds out of modified guns. Stuff in that class is going to wear out and break.

You think that could be because most people are using higher-quality guns for these competitions, so the reason you don't see Tauruses (Taurii?) break is because nobody has them?

[ThreeFingerPete]

You are the one thats arguing like a 14 year old. Cussing in the discussion like it gives you authority. Also you brought up semi automatics.

I merely drew an easy to follow comparison between things that are more relevant and easily understood. As opposed to your ridiculous Kia vs Mercedes assertion that guns are like cars.

Again you already admitted that you were getting your information off the net, which is my point in this. You have no valid data points.

No. I also said
"Speculation. I've known plenty of Taurus revolver owners who would never own another. Do you think they formed that opinion because the gun worked like it was supposed to?"

I don't "know" people on the internet. I've shot plenty of Taurus guns and most of them have fired consistently, but not all. When I was looking for a 905 I actually had conversations with the owners of those firearms. Are those interactions no longer valuable because they happened over the internet?

Data found on the internet isn't necessarily wrong, and when combined with personal experience and supported fact, it can be used to form a pretty good idea of the overall quality of a brand.

Ive attendend many shooting competitions ans have seen many guns fail. Most common failure on revolvers are the cam on the hammer which causes the gun to under/over clock. And as far as the gun manufacturer that has the most failures Ive seen, Its Smith & Wesson. But before you throw a tantrum, I didnt mention this before because the hangun meets that I go to, people shoot 10's of thousands of rounds out of modified guns. Stuff in that class is going to wear out and break.

Neat. Considering you see 100:1 Smith revolvers in competition use, I'd expect that to be the case. I'm not a Smith zealot. In this case, Taurus just doesn't produce a quality firearm, and the alternatives are priced close enough that there's no reason not to buy it.

However on a normal range, the only failures I ever witnessed is with Colt Single Action clones. The hand spring in those usually break if they havent been modified to the ruger style spring/piston style.

Relevance?

Out of all the revolvers Ive never seen fail are Rugers and believe it or not, Taurus.

Again, not every Taurus is going to be a piece of shit, but the percentage of their revolvers that require work to run or that don't run consistently is higher than Smith or Ruger. If gun manufacturers were nice enough to publish failure statistics, then I'd be glad to quote those, but we both know that it's not that simple.

Im not biased to any revolver.

I'm biased against poor quality. If there are dozens of right choices, why make a wrong choice?

Now if asked, would I buy a taurus? The answer would be no. What would I buy? Probably a smith because of aftermarket parts and there is a shooting class for the gun. Again that class does not appeal to me. The only revolver competition class thats fun is cowboy action shooting, FOR ME.

You're a smart guy, and with the exception of your little AC556 lie, you generally post good information. In this case, I highly disagree with your opinion that a Taurus is just as good as a S&W... or Ruger. The internet is a very useful tool, and if you ignore that when it comes to matters like failure rate, then you're obviously restricting your information unnecessarily.

And no, if you look for functional problems on J Frames, you absolutely will not find as many as you will for Taurus revolvers.

pshh, who needs to fire... the looks alone are killer!

Oh, there is no doubt that they look the part!

[Rick Modena]

pshh, who needs to fire... the looks alone are killer!

Any ninja caught on the working end of that baby, should be honored to be shot by it...

[ThreeFingerPete]

Any ninja caught on the working end of that baby, should be honored to be shot by it...

[California]

Is a .22 too small of a caliber for CC? Bought this pistol a couple of months ago. Ruger SR22 with a Crimson Trace laser. It's small and compact. As far as CC; I think it would do the job with some CCI stinger hollow points. Its a fun and cheap gun to shoot at the range and to plank with. $19.95 for a box of 525 bulk ammo.

From gunblast.com (guys does awsome reviews on firearms)

[KBScobravert]

Is a .22 too small of a caliber for CC? Bought this gun a couple of months ago. Ruger SR22 with a Crimson Trace laser. It's small and compact. I think it would do the job with some CCI stinger hollow points. Its a fun and cheap gun to shoot at the range and to plank with. $19.95 for a box of 525 bulk ammo.

From gunblast.com (guys does awsome reviews on firearms)

A .22lr for a CCW is irresponsible.

Enjoy it as a PLINKer.

[Nash B.]

I would be all over that if it had the threaded barrel

[California]

I would be all over that if it had the threaded barrel

Ruger said it will be coming out with one soon. I know there are a few aftermarket ones out already. Here is one: http://www.twintechtactical.com/Products.html

[Nash B.]

Ruger said it will be coming out with one soon. I know there are a few aftermarket ones out already. Here is one: http://www.twintechtactical.com/Products.html

Yeah, but they've been saying that for a while. I don't want to mess with an aftermarket barrel for the plinker that I bought just so I'd have a suppressed .22 pistol; I want the plinker to come with a threaded barrel.