Are you really just paying for a name?

[DonutGuy]

Of all the popular revolver brands, S&W, Taurus, Ruger...etc.,is there a real big difference in the quality? I've shot a few snubs and medium frame of each brand and they all feel and shoot the same. I'm asking because I'm doing some research for my father thats looking for a revolver and I really don't have an answer to why a s&w can be twice as much as any other, other than the name itself.

 

[JerryM]

While I prefer S&W, Ruger makes a good sturdy revolver. The two Taurus revolvers I have owned are not in the same league.

Regards,
Jerry

 

[pesta2]

is there a real big difference in the quality?

Yes

I wouldn't use Taurus in the same sentence as S&W and Ruger.

I owned 4 Taurus revolvers, now I only own one and I am only keeping it becasue it is a 2" .44 spl.

 

[Pahoo]

Not entirely

Are you really just paying for a name?

To a slight extent you are but not entirely as there is a difference. Smith's are that good. Colts as well and the rest from there. It's really a matter of what you might prefer and can afford. For instance, If the money did not matter and I did not already have one, I'd get a Smith. My last purchase was a GP-100 and what a great revolver. Personally I'd rather shoot my GP-100 w/trigger job, than 686 but that's just me.


Be Safe !!!

 

[DonutGuy]

Yes

can you elaborate? or is it just opinion?

 

[18DAI]

Yes. You are paying the company currently calling itself S&W for the famous logo on the ovepriced, overhyped revolvers they are peddaling. :barf:

The Ruger GP100 and SP101 are superb revolvers if you must have a brand new one.

Otherwise find a nice LNIB used S&W from pre 1999. Regards 18DAI.

 

[mes227]

Of all the popular revolver brands, S&W, Taurus, Ruger...etc.,is there a real big difference in the quality? I've shot a few snubs and medium frame of each brand and they all feel and shoot the same. I'm asking because I'm doing some research for my father thats looking for a revolver and I really don't have an answer to why a s&w can be twice as much as any other, other than the name itself.

The S&W certainly isn't "twice as much as any other" - their prices compare well with other guns in their class, they run about 35% more than Taurus (who uses inferior manufacturing quality control based on independent measures of out-of-the-box problems), double that of a Hi Point (which is unequivocally less of a gun by any measure), a little less than a CZ/Dan Wesson or Kimber, about half the price of a Wilson Combat, and slightly more than a comparable Ruger.

There's unquestionably a difference between guns in the S&W or Ruger league and those in the Taurus. To use an extreme example, compare a Hi Point in .45 acp to a Dan Wesson. There's simply no comparison in quality, reliability and accuracy and I've never met a serious gun enthusiast who would rate the two in the same class (I've actually never met on who owned a Hi Point but I'm open to the exception). Once you get within a "league" or class of handguns, like say the S&W and Ruger, or the Dan Wesson and Kimber 1911s, the differences become more about personal preference than overall quality. You can verify this by shooting comparable models side by side (at any range that rents guns). You can see the difference in the grouping when shooting from a rest, and you can feel the difference in how the gun handles recoil, and how it feeds and ejects. This isn't conclusive wrt long-term behavior, but any gun that feels cheap and has multiple FTFs is less likely to behave over the years. You can also see the difference in owner comments on various forums and especially the frequency that out-of-the box guns need to be returned for service (e.g., Taurus has a far worse rep for out of the box problems than Ruger or S&W though they seem to be getting better). Or look at the prices on GunBroker.com. Just as the resale price of used cars is a good measure of original quality, the same applies to guns; not a flawless measure but certainly a good indicator. And, unless you intend to be buried with yours, the resale price of a handgun is important for economic reasons.

 

[madmo44mag]

What's in a name?
History, workmanship, quality, snobbery.
(not including guns like Kimber, ect....)

I've own Colts, S&W, Rugers, Taurus, Rossi and a few others and IMHO it comes down to a couple of things.

The top three (Colts, S&W, Rugers,) all make exceptional guns. Each one has put out a dud every now and then but that true of most products.

Each manufacturer has things about their product that differ from the others. With that said find the manufacturer that has the fit, feel and function you like in the style and caliber you are looking for.

Let me give an example: I would not own another S&W model 29 if you gave me one but I'll take a Ruger SRH any day of the week. Fit, feel, function.
Ruger does not make an auto loading pistol I care for but S&W and colt does.

Then you have the snobbery issue.
There are folks out there that are simply gun snobs plain and simple.

Buy what you can afford and buy a quality firearm that has the fit, feel and function you desire and don't worry about the snobs.

 

[fdreano]

My 'lil Taurus 851 shoots every bit as good as my much more expensive Ruger LCR and has less recoil.

My Kimber 3" 1911 (in the 4 digit price range) took another $200 in customizing to be reliable. Whereas my comparatively cheap Glock 30 pumps out rounds you could drive nails with like there is no tomorrow...and has since I took it out of the box new.

So you tell me what's better ???

 

[Kreyzhorse]

Yes, I'm sure you are paying for a bit of name when buying a S&W or a Ruger. Even with that, those two gun makers make a far better product than Taurus.

In so much as you are paying for the S&W and Ruger name, you are also paying for what comes along with the name; that is better Q / A, a better built gun with better parts and better customer service.

As person who has owned S&W, Ruger and Taurus, I can tell you from experience that their is a clear difference between top tier revolvers like S&W and Ruger and lower priced guns like Taurus.

 

[22-rimfire]

I'm asking because I'm doing some research for my father thats looking for a revolver and I really don't have an answer to why a s&w can be twice as much as any other, other than the name itself

I believe that there is a substantial difference in quality between most Colt and Smith & Wesson revolvers over Ruger which has a significant edge in quality over Taurus, Charter Arms, Rossi, etc. revolvers. You are paying to a degree for the name, but the name is worth something and more importantly, it means something. Ruger makes a pretty good product now in my opinion, but most are still not up to the fit and finish of a Smith or Colt. This is in part why Ruger's cost less than Colt and Smith revolvers. Ruger's plan is to market a good serviceable revolver that is priced below a comparable Smith & Wesson product. They do it. If they didn't, they would not sell nearly as many units.

Compare a Ruger Super Redhawk to a Smith Model 629? Do they shoot better? Sometimes, but not always. I think they feel better to shoot. I don't like the sharp edges on the Ruger product.

Do you prefer a Stihl over a Homelite chain saw? Why do the Stihl's cost more? Are they worth it? I think so.

Why do Freedom Arms single actions cost 3x the price of a Ruger single action? They are much better, but you pay for it. Whether it is worth it to you depends on your appreciation of quality and if you want higher quality at a higher price.

My first revolver was a H&R Model 999 Sportsman (22LR). I mostly looked at price and feel in my hand and I could not tell why I had to pay 2 or 3x the price for a Colt or Smith at that time. So, I bought the H&R. Shoot it and really liked it at first because I had nothing to compare it to. Roll the clock forward and I was getting pretty disqusted with the sights working loose, hot powder and lead hitting my hands and face when I shot it and so forth. Accuracy was adequate. I bought a Colt and the difference was like night and day. Never shot that H&R again; not once.

It takes some experience to understand the differences in quality. My early experience reference point was pretty much if it shot, why spend more. But there is so much more. So today, that H&R is worth at best $250 in as new condition and the Colt Diamondback is worth 4x the price and is still a much much better revolver. It comes down to are you happy with a Yugo or do you want a Toyota, Nissan, or Ford. Quality costs. You have to decide for yourself if you want a Yugo or a better one. Buy a Taurus revolver and if you aren't lucky, let me know how you like it after sending it back to the factory a couple times to make it work right?? Even then, they often don't work right. But as was said, everyone makes a lemon from time to time.

 

[Andy Taylor]

I was working up an answer for you, but 22-rrimfire pretty much said it.
I will add however that, with Taurus, quality seems to be pretty hit-or-miss. sometimes you get a good one that works as well as anything ever produced by the big three revolver makers. Other times, well, not so much.

 

[BigJimP]

No, you're not just paying for a name ...you're paying more for a higher quality product with S&W. This is especially true in the older S&W revolvers ...where collectors are setting the prices in the marketplace / and Rugers and Taurus are not keeping up in value with S&W.

Everybody should buy what they like - and if you've fired a lot of them / and think your money is best spent with Ruger, Taurus, etc ....then you should do that.

I think the top end of the revolver arena is S&W and Colt ....but most of us gravitate to one or the other - based on what fits our hands the best. Both S&W and Colt are high quality guns in my opinion...that over time ...have proved they have held or increased in value significantly. While the looks of the gun is one thing ... it also comes down to the triggers on the guns ...nice clean double action triggers / nice clean breaks in single action. Ruger and Taurus can't come close to S&W or Colt ...in their triggers. Between Colt and S&W, I prefer S&W ...because of the way they fit my hand.

 

[Powderman]

Well, let's see.

First, the Smith and Wesson--note: here, I am referring to the pre-lock models, and the older the better.

Pull the trigger in double action; nice, smooth pull and accuracy. You have choices for different calibers: in .357, you can go from a 640 hammerless to an N-frame Model 27. Need some tuning done; want to lighten the pull a bit without sacrificing reliability? Change 2 springs, and you're there. With some VERY light polishing in two other places, you have a buttery-smooth double action pull without stacking, and a single action pull to die for.

I also like Colts--but mostly for their semi-autos. The 1911 platform is one of the most versatile guns on the planet, period. However, the SAA just SCREAMS history. Put it on half-cock, open the loading gate. Drop in those big, shiny cartridges. If you're holstering it, load one, skip one, load the rest, pull the hammer back to full cock, and let it forward.

When the time comes, draw the revolver and haul back that hammer. Listen to those four distinct clicks--solid and sure as a bank vault. Pull the trigger, and let that gun boom! Feel it roll back easily in the hand, placing the hammer right next to your thumb; put the thumb on the hammer and roll the gun forward. What else do I need to say about possibly the second most copied design in the world?

Taurus?

Welllll........

A friend of mine had his Taurus Model 66 lock up on him. A quick disassembly revealed the problem--the cylinder hand spring and plunger, located in the back of the trigger, had frozen in the fully compressed condition.

I called Taurus, and asked them for a part to replace it. Now, I have called Smith and Wesson numerous times in the past--no problems, they sent what I asked for. Taurus? Their only reply--"Send it back to the factory". Turn around time was expected to be about 6 months.

Now, I wanted to get my friend back on the firing line quicker than that, so I agreed to undertake a more aggressive approach. I secured the trigger in a vise, checked for level and chucked in a titanium bit of the appropriate size. I set the press to its lowest speed, got out the can of Do-Drill (tapping fluid, to lubricate the drill, clean out the chips and keep temperature down) and eased the bit down.

Imagine my surprise when the drill cut through the back of that compressed pin like a hot knife through butter! Apparently heat treatment is not their strongest suit.

I fed the drill slowly into the work, stopped after 1/4 inch, and backed it out. The pin came out easily, and I beheld what looked for all the world like a THICK HEADED CARPET TACK. I had to stop and look at it for about 5 minutes. I was positively appalled that ANY gun manufacturer would allow such garbage into their firearms. By the way, the spring (which had collapsed) looked like the spring you find warpped around the filler for a Bic retractable pin!

Both my friend and I shook out heads at that. He asked, "What can be done about it? I said, "I'm about to show you."

I procured some water-hardening drill rod, cut off a piece, then shaped it flat on one end, and with a slightly radiused tip in the other. I hand-cut a small groove for the leg of the cylinder hand to rest in. Next, after checking and ensuring the proper dimensions, I heated the part over a neutral flame, quenching it just when it showed color. Hand rubbing with Simichrome restored the bright finish.

The inside of the recess got polish as well, with a Q-tip spun in the drill press, coated with Simichrome polish. Now, I replaced the assembly, using a close-fitting Wolff spring. I oiled the whole thing, and reassembled the revolver. Oh, yeah--did I mention that the gun was seriously out of time, as well? That got fixed, too.

Yep. Taurus sure puts out a fine product. :barf:

I think I'll stick with Smith and Wessons, Colts and Rugers, thank you very much.

 

[MLeake]

S&W vs Taurus

Here are a couple things you can do your own searches for, on this forum and others like it, or even on google.

First, look at customer service between Smith and Wesson, and Taurus. Look at customer satisfaction; time required to complete repairs; quality of work done on repair.

Next, check rates of return to dealer for repairs on NIB (new in box) revolvers.

From what the gun shop owners I know have told me, they get a vastly higher percentage of Taurus revolvers brought back for problems a NIB gun should not have, than they ever get back in S&W.

I haven't had personal experience with Taurus, but I have had with S&W. One gun that went back to them was purchased used, and around 35 years old (Model 28 6"). Despite the fact that it was a used gun, S&W took it in for free adjustment to correct a timing issue (something that happens over time with any heavily used revolver).

Another was one that got blown up... not the fault of the weapon. The ammo manufacture paid S&W to replace my gun. As the weapon was not a current model, S&W had to get creative, and build a new one from their spare parts bin (Model 29 Mountain Gun .44Mag). They sent me what I'd call an exact duplicate, except that it was nicer than the one that got blown up.

So, yes, I'd say S&W gives you more than a name.

 

[orionengnr]

And if you have to send an S&W or Ruger back, they pay freight both ways. That is a significant expense (these days, $65-75 one way).

Two examples. And bear in mind that I have owned approximately 20 S&W revolvers and two semi-autos in the last twenty years or so.

--I bought a 360 used, and subsequently sold it to a friend after about 10 rounds (five .357 and five 38; yeah, I'm a slow learner. My wrist still hurts four years later). He put a few rounds of .357 and noted what appeared to be "pepper-flecks" of missing Scandium on the cylinder face. Called S&W, they sent a pick tag and it was on it's way back to Springfield. Yeah, he was the third owner, but they did not care one bit. He had it back in one week's time, new cylinder, no charge, and has no problems since.

--I bought a 396 used, and the previous owner had used who-knows-what to clean the alloy framed revolver with the silver finish. The solvent had eaten some of the finish--looked pretty bad in one spot about the sixe of two thumbprints on the frame. I sent it to S&W (there was no way I would ask them to pay for shipping on something that was customer-inflicted damage) and asked them to look at it and give me an estimate on refinishing. I called them a week later. It was already enroute back to me. Complete refinish, good as new, no charge.

I have never owned a Ruger revolver, but experienced the LCP recall in 2008. Ruger sent the pick ticket, paid for shipping both ways, had it back to me in a week (this was Thanksgiving time) and included a free magazine and a hat for my trouble. In fairness to Ruger, I had experienced zero problems with it prior to recall and zero problems after. Very pro-active approach overall.

Now do a search on Taurus Customer Service and you will read about plenty of people who pay to send their firearm back two and three times and get it back with the same problem existing. Better yet, many of them wait three to six months each trip for this service.

Paying for a name? Call it what you will. In my experience you are paying for an American company who employs American workers to build a quality product...and stand behind it when they fail to achieve the mark.

 

[James K]

Just as an example, someone mentioned the inconsistent quality control of Taurus, and they are right. A good Taurus is as good as a S&W; a bad Taurus is junk and lotsa luck getting it fixed or replaced.

A big reason is that QC costs money and you pay for it in the product. QC requires inspection of parts, checks on ouside purchases like steel stock and springs, testing of hardness where required, etc., etc. It requires replacement of machine tools more often, constant checks on automated tooling, spot checks to make sure the regular inspector is doing his job, etc.

When the gun is finished, it should be proof tested and function fired. That costs time and ammo which is another way of saying it costs money.

Those are just a few of the reasons high quality products in any area cost money. And that money will be regained by the manufacturer in his price to the distributor/dealer. And you will eventually pay it.

If you decide that the cheap gun is as good as the expensive one, you may be right sometimes; but most of the time you will be wrong.

Jim

 

[bearone2]

you get what you pay for.

if you want to pay $300 and then stake your life on that choice, not one i'll make.

 

[Jim March]

Overall, as long as you like a particular gun they sell, Ruger is the best value in the industry.

The "reputation for recalls" is a two-way street. It's not good, granted, but Ruger to their credit does recalls if *anything* systematic is wrong with a gun series. They then pay shipping both ways and sometimes toss in a freebie for your trouble, like a spare mag or whatever. Taurus many times has had similar problems and NOT done recalls like they should have, instead forcing owners to pay shipping both ways and massively dragging out the repairs.

I will never, ever own a Taurus. I did very briefly, once, when I was given a broken one for free.

Ruger vs. S&W is a harder choice. Both make very good guns. S&W tends to be more refined, Ruger tends to be tougher, both are very functional, Ruger costs less. And add one more strong tendency: the Ruger will be easier for the owner to work on and Ruger actually publishes both written and video instructions for free for complete teardowns that don't violate a warrantee. That last, to me, tips the balance WAY in Ruger's favor. Trigger not good enough yet? No problem - I can fix it myself for peanuts.

That's why my daily carry gun is a Ruger and if I score another piece any time soon it's most likely going to be a Ruger. Call me a "fanboy" or whatever but those videos right on Ruger's official website tell the tale of how well Ruger takes care of their people and don't even care if you bought it used or new.

 

[Ideal Tool]

bearone2, just about said it all...When I worked as a tool maker in a GM parts plant, we had an oil temp. senser line. The senser components for Chevrolet, and Buick were crimped/staked in place. The Cadillac sensers were not only crimped/staked..but went through a solder wave machine...You pays yer money....