|04-05-2004, 12:27 PM||#1|
Join Date: Dec 2002
Taurus Model 82 Range Report
Recently, I acquired a new Taurus Mod. 82. This is a .38 with a 4" barrel. I brought it to the range and this is my report. All rounds were Fiocchi FMJ. All groups were 5 shot strings. All were fired single action from a sitting position with the pistol bench rested at seven yards and fifteen yards. The smallest group at seven yards was 5/8". The largest at seven yards was about 2", with one flyer. I fired five strings. Three groups were about 1 1/2". At fifteen yards I fired four strings of five shots. The smallest was 2 1/2". The largest group was 3 1/2". The pistol tends to shoot to the right.
Overall I'm satisfied with the Taurus. Two days after I got it, I sent it back to correct a lock up problem. It was returned and the problem seems to be fixed. The finish is a deep blue, almost black. The trigger is a bit stiff in both double and single action. This may smooth out after a suitable break in period. The quality of workmanship is good but not great. Overall, I happy with it. They are less money than the leading brands but worth what you pay.
|04-05-2004, 05:54 PM||#2|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Guarulhos - SP, Brazil
The Taurus 82 revolver is still widely used here in Brazil by police officers and private security agencies, despite the adoption of the .40 S&W (PT-940, for plainclothesmen, and PT-100 for uniformized men) by LE agencies. It's an excellent gun in its category.
|02-22-2005, 06:19 AM||#3|
Join Date: Jul 2004
The reason you had to send it back for a lock up problem because the Taurus 82 is a piece of junk. No revolver should lock up. You should never have to send a brand new gun back to the factory for something like that. i am a security officer and I was issued a Taurus 82 four years ago. Because the Tauruses are so unreliable we now carry S&W's.
I have heard that Taurus has improved its quality, but I will never purchase another one.
| || |
|02-23-2005, 06:15 PM||#4|
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Fort Worth, Tx
Well I tend to agree that a new gun should not have to be sent back to the factory for repair, but a quick perusal of the 1911 topics shows that this happens often. Kimber makes good quality stuff, but there are numerous posts here about their new guns (costing 3-4 times as much as the Taurus) needing repair. We seem to accept that a dog gets out occasionally for the top makes, so why not for the cheap ones?
BTW, I hope nobody is going to claim that a defective Smith never slipped by the factory inspectors either.
|02-27-2005, 12:39 PM||#5|
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Savannah, GA
I currently have a new Taurus Model 82 that is my favorite range pistol and I shoot an older Taurus Model 96 (6-in K-Frame 22LR) more than any other of my guns. Some other Taurus revolvers that I have owned include Models 85 (2-in stn stl J-frame), 431 (3-in stn stl .44 spl), and Model 66 (6-in 7-shot K-frame .357). I have also owned and sold S&W Models 10, 15 and 19, and sitll own a Model 36 Chiefs Special. Taurus makes a good product these days and stands behind it. I now buy Taurus a lot more often than S&W because I believe I am getting a lot more value for my money along with a good product.
BTW, I recently bought my first Taurus auto--a PT-92--than I like so much that I'm sure I will be bying other Taurus autos.
|Search tags for this page|
taures 82 review,
taurus 82 problems,
taurus 82 review,
taurus mod 82 problems,
taurus model 82,
taurus model 82 problems,
taurus model 82 review,
taurus model 82 reviews
Click on a term to search for related topics.
|Thread||Thread Starter||Forum||Replies||Last Post|
|Taurus PT1911 Range test and report||busdriver72||M1911 Pistols||2||08-22-2007 04:00 PM|
|model 41 range report||curt45||Smith & Wesson Pistols||0||10-13-2004 01:26 PM|
|Range Report: S&W Model 64 w/3" Bbl...||Stephen A. Camp||Gun Tests||6||09-30-2004 06:48 PM|
|Range Report: Taurus Model 431 .44 Special....||Stephen A. Camp||Gun Tests||4||08-22-2003 05:40 PM|
|Range Report: Taurus PT92AF 9mm...||Stephen A. Camp||Gun Tests||6||07-24-2003 06:24 PM|