Bad vibe with cheaper manufacturers?

go drive a ford, then go drive a mercedes.

yeah, it will get the job done if taken care of, but it's a different league.



not that I'm knocking it, but "you get what you pay for" is the truth.

Cheap? There are different levels. I personally wouldn't call a taurus cheap. I would call a taurus reasonably priced/affordable, something like that.

Compare a Taurus 1911 and a really nice one. We know a few things about 1911s. the bushing to barrel match up matters when it comes to accuracy. For a smooth trigger it takes a lot of handwork during assembly. A really nice 1911 will have more hand selection and fitting of parts, especially the bushing and barrel. So the fact that the Taurus doesn't give you that makes the taurus 1911 a really bad choice for a "bullseye" competition gun. But it doesn't make it a bad gun at all. It is still possibly a good service level/carry gun. Out to 15 yards with factory ammo it'll hold its own. Beyond 15 I'm choosing a shotgun, and after 25 yds, it's a shotgun with slugs, or rifle time if the SHTF! Shooting a 1911 25 or 50 yds is basically a trick shot. For fun or competition. Not something you want to do to save your life.

Citadel? I don't have any history with them. Taurus is proven to give you a certain level on a consistent basis. But a quick check online shows the Citadel to be in about the same price range as Taurus and Ruger. I'd definitley go Ruger and Taurus before Citadel just because of the track record.

So no. You don't need to spend a ton. Ruger makes some of the best mid-level priced guns on the market. Heck, I can't find a reason to spend $300 to $400 more on an S&W revolver (they are amazing guns though!) when I can get a Ruger GP100. Taurus isn't that far behind and getting better all the time as their workforce becomes more and more experienced. I wouldn't be surprised if Taurus doesn't start making "master built" or "custom shop" guns soon that are worth the extra coin.

Without knowing what others in your unit shoot I don't know where we are setting the bar for "Hi- End".

We are Dealers for Wilson Combat and Nighthawk Customs so I will use these as my examples for side by side. The biggest diff is going to come in the areas of Materials, Assembly, and Warranty.

Custom or most hi-end guns are built using Machined major parts where others would use cast parts. With Wilson all parts are made in the Wilson shop from American Materials for small parts likes screws and small springs they don't make they still have a made in US requirement for suppliers. All parts are hand fit and tuned by a Gun Smith. Everything on the gun is fit an tuned. Example is if you went to a production gun line you get gather all the parts assemble the gun function test it you would be able to shoot it. If you gathered all the parts for the gun at WC or NH you would not be able to assemble the gun, all the last tolerences are taken out by hand as the gun is fiitted.

Warranty on these Guns is very good they both warranty the guns for life regaurdless of who the original owner is. Example I had a used Wilson come in Owner said he put 20k rounds through it. We used it on Range as a rental and put at least another 6-8k through it. Sold it to a Student he put a few rounds through it and started having problems not locking open on empty mag. He sent it to Wilson they replaced Slide Stop sent gun back with a 47d magazine for his troubles no questions no hassle. Don't get me wrong all of this is built in to the price and you pay for it.

As for your Gun I would not loose any sleep over it like anything mechanical how it runs has a lot to do with how you take care of it. Keep it cleaned and properly lubed, use quality magazines and ammo and it should serve you well.

Hope that helped.

deloscielos said:

Hey thanks for the input, fellas! Very informative.

Can you give me a few examples of a really cheap low-tier handgun and a few examples of a high-end expensive handgun?

I think for my first pistol, Taurus is a good start.

Click to expand...

To paraphrase RelianceArmsRep, It's all relative...

If we're talking factory guns, not boutique, Let's just go ahead and put S&W and Colt at the top end of the double action revolver scale for cost.

I think Kimber has gone beyond just being a boutique company, and they produce a lot of what I would call "expensive-ass factory guns" if you are looking at 1911s. Anything more expensive is definitely boutique.

In terms of what most would consider EDC semi-auto guns (DA only, or DA/SA automatics) you probably have to go with Sig Sauer as the most expensive. As a subclass of that you have the composites where Glock, S&W M&P, Springfield XDs are all in a dead heat at the over $500 but under $600 price mark.

Remember now I'm just talking "walk into any gun store and buy it" factory produced guns. Also there is preference involved. I don't care how much it costs, if I don't want to shoot it, I'm not going to list it! CZ might make some good guns, but none of them have ever really called out to me.

Cheap guns? Why bother paying that much attention? If it's around $350, NIB, I can go awhile, eat ramen, cut down on beer and soda, and save up till I have $550 and get a Glock, S&W M&P, or Springfield XD.

Your taurus looks cool, like a beretta, and let's face it, autos are pretty simple. The Tauruses (is that even a word?) I've handled have been solid. I shot a PT92 (I'm not a 40 cal guy so I never shot the 101) and found some things on it I liked better than the Beretta. More metal for instance.

If you want reasale after 20 years... Colt, Smith & Wesson...

If you just want to put lead down range... whatever you can afford...

If you want to trust your life on it.... Colt, and Smith & Wesson...

All steel guns, plastic guns are like fat ugly girls... some guys like 'em but you won't find 'em in my hands....

bigggbbruce said:

If you want reasale after 20 years... Colt, Smith & Wesson...

If you just want to put lead down range... whatever you can afford...

If you want to trust your life on it.... Colt, and Smith & Wesson...

All steel guns, plastic guns are like fat ugly girls... some guys like 'em but you won't find 'em in my hands....

Click to expand...

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl: You know what the french say about choosing between fat girls and skinny girls? You're choosing where they have wrinkles. On their butt or on their face...

I've always said... roll 'em over and they all look like sisters....

Anyone want to shoot my Hi-point, Ruger, and STI, qall .45s. all side-by side?
LOL.
Someone could bring a REALLY high end .45 to top it off.

deloscielos said:

My question is, what's the difference between my cheap handgun compared to a high-end model?

I'm no competition/sports shooter, I just shoot for fun! Other than that, the weapon is for home defense. Is there really any need to have a ridiculously expensive pistol?

Click to expand...

Just like with anything else, it all starts with the raw materials. Some use top grade materials, machined to close tolerances and then had finished for fit and operation.

Others may start with the same machined parts, or substitute "investment cast" parts. To remove any burrs the parts in a cheap firearm are usually just tumbled rather than hand finished.

Take apart a Sig 9mm and compare the internal parts with a Hi-Point. The differences will stand out like a sore thumb.

Some might say "so what, it still goes bang". Yes, but will it do so every time? For a long time?

Keeping the cost of a product down, regardless of whether it's a Toaster for the Kitchen, or a Firearm for Self Defense, something has to be left out. Cheaper parts and less hand finish time are often the first to be targeted for savings.

All this said, there is a point where all the extra "fancy" doesn't add to the quality of the product. Likewise, the big "Names" have big budgets for promotion and advertising. All that expense shows up in the price of the firearm.

When deciding on whether to buy a cheap firearm or spend more money, ask yourself what you are willing to pay for reliability. In Self Defense scenarios there is no second chance. You want a firearm that has a track record for reliability, period. Doesn't have to be fancy, or one that impresses your friends. It just has to be work when literally, your life depends on it. Is that worth saving a couple hundred bucks? Or is it better to go with something that has been tested, over and over, not just in the factory, but in real life scenarios?

For me, I've always gone for the "Ford/Chevy Sedan" rather than the "Ultra Economy or Exotic Sports Models" when selecting something for SD Carry.

Cheap or High End? What's your life worth?

FWIW, Taurus has an interesting history. Their first firearms were developed using Colt, S&W and Spanish firearm features. At one time Taurus was owned by the same group that owned Smith & Wesson with lots of tech info shared. Beretta built a factory in Brazil that and eventually sold it, tooling and all, to Taurus. Maybe that's why they have a pistol that looks so much like a Beretta 92.

Overall, I have seen lots of Taurus pistols that are right up there for quality and reliability.

koorbloh said:

go drive a ford, then go drive a mercedes.

Click to expand...

But my Ford had softer seats and more cup-holders

deadshot2 said:

Maybe that's why they have a pistol that looks so much like a Beretta 92.

Overall, I have seen lots of Taurus pistols that are right up there for quality and reliability.

Click to expand...

My understanding is the Beretta look alikes actually were licensed. Taurus paid to copy them.

philster said:

My understanding is the Beretta look alikes actually were licensed. Taurus paid to copy them.

Click to expand...

+1

I'm by far no expert on firearms, but my Taurus PT145 (subcompact .45 acp) is one of the best firearms I've owned. It's great for home defense and CPL carry, but if I were to have a choice between it and a glock for home defense, I'll choose a full size Glock.

I do beleive that the huge debate over frame types, etc is a big debate, but I've owned both poly frame handguns, and other frames (I don't honestly know if they are steel, aluminum, etc)... and they both shoot quite well.

As for a price range, if the gun feels comfortable to me and I know it's a reputable name that I've heard of and not some off the wall no name gun name, I'll take a risk with it as long as it's not pushing a huge hole in my wallet. $300-$400 is a decent price for a firearm, but there are plenty that are well worth above that, and they are from reputable companies..

philster said:

My understanding is the Beretta look alikes actually were licensed. Taurus paid to copy them.

Click to expand...

Not exactly. Here is a short from the Taurus History page:

Beretta had won a huge contract in 1974 to produce small arms for the army of Brazil. Part of the deal was that Beretta construct a Brazilian factory and use Brazilian labor. This they did, in the southwestern coastal city of Sao Paulo. When the contract ran out in 1980, Beretta sold the plant, literally "lock, stock and barrel," to Taurus. Taurus now owned everything that once belonged to Beretta, including drawings, tooling, machinery, and a very experienced work force. Taurus was in the pistol business, and immediately sought to improve on the Beretta design, resulting in the popular and acclaimed Taurus PT-92 and PT-99 9mm pistols.

The only "payment" to Beretta was in the form of purchasing the factory and everything in it including the drawings. When a manufacturer makes an "improvement" on someone else's design they don't necessarily have to pay for the privilege of manufacturing and selling it.

Click to expand...

deloscielos said:

Heck, the first time I shot a firearm was in basic training!

Click to expand...

I'd already been a "shooter" for 15 years when I made it to basic training and that was 50 years ago.

A unique time. I qualified on an M-1 in ROTC, was issued an M-14 when on Active Duty which was replaced by an M-16 before I left.

deadshot2 said:

I'd already been a "shooter" for 15 years when I made it to basic training and that was 50 years ago.

A unique time. I qualified on an M-1 in ROTC, was issued an M-14 when on Active Duty which was replaced by an M-16 before I left.

Click to expand...

And a 1911 was sitting there in a corner the whole time shaking its head and laughing at the other guns the whole time chuckling "Newbs..." :rofl:

deadshot2 said:

Not exactly.
The only "payment" to Beretta was in the form of purchasing the factory and everything in it including the drawings. When a manufacturer makes an "improvement" on someone else's design they don't necessarily have to pay for the privilege of manufacturing and selling it.

Click to expand...

Cool. They really got a steal then. Minor retooling for a gun the U.S. Gubment thought was good enough...