That one split the barrel tube on me with factory ammo in a clean clear bore. Had two charters, one their old model 357 with the aluminum barrel shroud that I picked up used.

I've worked on most weapons out there and have owned all three brands personally. Still, all things being equal, if I could find a used Smith in good shape, pre-lock/MIM, I'd buy one over the comparable new Taurus - right now.

At the price point, I'd definitely go with Taurus if I found one that interested me. Taurus has some very interesting stuff out there, but I haven't bought any for a while. For competition, you'd definitely want to go with S&W. Internals are not finished nearly as well as the S&Ws (new or old), but they work well. I think some Taurus offerings compare favorably with S&W if you're just looking for reliable revolvers to shoot a lot and have fun with. But all of mine now are pre-lock, pre-MIM (sold/traded off 637s, 686s w/The Lock & MIM parts). Still, a fun gun to shoot and the beginners (especially young boys) enjoy it. Taurus 94, okay,very reliable but not as accurate as hoped for, pretty gun, fit and finish excellent, but not a great DA pull, just okay in SA. Accurate, 100% reliable, Taurus' version of the Smith Model 60 and it compares favorably to my Smith 60-7 (probably has a better trigger pull). I've a 1992 Model 85 in stainless that's been simply awesome. Great revolver, he's had it for years, it's a tackdriver and looks pretty good, too.

Both seem reasonably well made, a little plain for my taste, simply finished, but functional, not blessed with great trigger pulls, but reliable and acceptably accurate.īrother has a Taurus. I do have a couple friends who each own one - one has an older Bulldog and another one of the recent production Bulldogs. I have no ownership experience with Charter Arms. (And for some reason, even those who've never shot or owned one, love to bash Taurus guns.) I hope it doesn't turn into the S&W snobs against the budget gun fans.

Is charter arms revolvers any good