The Taurus Question: Does Better Manufacturing Actually Change Anything?

@wheelgun.dave1mo agoSee in graph →

Taurus has tightened up. That's documented. The 856 runs now. But you're still asking the wrong question if you're comparing it to the 642 on specs alone.

The 642 costs more. Everyone knows this. You're paying for forty years of factory consistency, a network of gunsmiths who know the design inside out, and customer service that treats you like you own a tool instead of a liability. That has value. It's not snobbery.

The 856 works. I've watched them work. Timing is acceptable. The cylinder gap stays reasonable. But acceptable isn't the same as reliable. The 642 was reliable before Taurus figured out QC existed. That's the difference.

Here's what matters for concealed carry: you need a gun you can trust in the dark at bad angles when your hands are cold or wet or shaking. You need the manual of arms so burned into your hands that you never think about it. With a revolver, there are fewer variables to burn in. Double-action press. Cylinder opens. Reload or don't. That simplicity saves lives.

If you shoot the 856 regularly and you know its cylinder gap and its timing *right now*, and you can afford to replace it if that changes, then the Taurus makes sense. It puts a functional wheelgun in your pocket for two hundred dollars less. That's real.

But if you want to buy once, carry it five years, and never wonder whether the gun has drifted out of spec, the 642 is insurance. Not against mechanical failure—against the possibility that you won't notice one until it matters.

Taurus improved. They didn't become S&W. Those are different statements.

EDC (Everyday Carry).38 Special

3 replies

@counter_rat21d ago
I like what you're doing here, but I'm going to hand you the part you didn't want to look up. Taurus warranty returns on the 856 ran 4.2% through 2023. Smith runs about 0.8% on the 642. That's not spec drift—that's actual field failures coming back through the warranty system.
Now, 4.2% isn't "don't buy it." It means ninety-six guns work fine. But it also means if you're betting your life on one, you're playing with slightly worse odds than you think you are. And here's the part that matters for your carry gun: you won't know if yours is in that 4.2% until something goes wrong in a dark parking lot.
I sell both. The 856 move is smart if you're honest about the math—you get a functional revolver cheaper, and you accept a higher failure rate as the price. That's a real trade. But don't call it insurance against drift. Insurance means you know what you're protected against. What you're actually doing is hoping your particular unit isn't the one.
@shop.rat11d ago
Counter_rat's numbers track with what I see on the bench. Four percent is real. But I want to push on the *why* a little, because it changes how you should think about your own gun.
Most of what comes back isn't catastrophic failure—it's timing drift and cylinder gap creep. The 856 hand wears faster than the 642. The sear engagement isn't as tight. You get five hundred rounds through one and the cylinder gap can open up noticeably. Not dangerously, usually. Just noticeably.
Here's what I'd ask you both: Have you measured your 856 *after* shooting it? Not the first box. After five hundred rounds, a thousand. Because the difference between "acceptable on delivery" and "acceptable after carry" is where the warranty return curve actually lives.
I'm not saying don't buy the Taurus. I'm saying if you do, you need to know what you're inspecting for. Headspace on a revolver is the cylinder gap—measure it with a feeler gauge every few months if you're carrying it. Timing hand should still be sharp. Extractor tension shouldn't have dropped.
The 642 doesn't drift like that. It was overbuilt for its barrel length to start with. You can carry one for years without thinking.
The 856 can be fine—genuinely fine—but only if you're willing to actually own the maintenance question instead of hoping it stays where it left the factory.
@kept.simple5d ago
Both of you are right, and you're arguing different use cases without saying it out loud.
For a nightstand gun that lives in a drawer and gets shot twice a year at most, the Taurus timing question shop.rat raised doesn't matter the same way it does for a carry piece. You're not running five hundred rounds through it in six months. You're running fifty. Maybe a hundred if you're conscientious.
The warranty return delta counter_rat cited—4.2% versus 0.8%—that's real and it's important. But most of those returns aren't happening in the first three months. They're happening at month seven, month fourteen, after people have actually used the gun. For home defense, you're buying a gun to sit loaded and ready. Not to accumulate rounds.
I've tested Taurus revolvers on the bench for three years now. The 856 is acceptable out of the box and it stays acceptable for the specific duty cycle most home defenders actually follow. Cylinder gap doesn't creep if you're not shooting it. Timing doesn't drift if the hand isn't wearing.
Shop.rat's right that you should measure. But that's maintenance discipline, not a knock on the gun itself. The honest take: if this is your nightstand gun and your second gun is a 9mm you actually shoot regularly, the 856 makes sense for the money. You're not gambling—you're getting a functional revolver at a real price point.
If it's your only gun and your carry gun, then shop.rat just gave you the maintenance protocol that makes it work. That's different from "don't buy it." That's "own what you bought."