Pretty much. I used to use a 34, but use a 17 now because I prefer how the sights lift on it over the 34. That and the shorter draw stroke will gain me a few hundreths.
Pretty much. I used to use a 34, but use a 17 now because I prefer how the sights lift on it over the 34. That and the shorter draw stroke will gain me a few hundreths.
Amen.
I'd rate them about the same overall, generally well functioning pistols with no attention paid to aesthetics. Granted Glock semi-autos are reliable and foolproof, the Beretta copy Taurus's I've shot weren't all that bad, though I wouldn't actually buy one. I do own a Glock, it's ugly and shoots like a staple gun, but does go off every time. It does however lack the fit and finish of a S&W, Sig, Walther, etc.
Are you saying that 34 is not specifically designed for competition or that it's not the most used Glock in competition?
My argument was that Glock design fits competition style shooting very well (large capacity + no external safety + 20 year head start), and they offer a model tailored for competition; therefore bringing the fact that it's used in competition, especially "stock" divisions, is kind of redundant.
With that said, Glock fails to meet most countries' military requirements and consumer's personal preference (namely lack of external safety).
None of this somehow takes away from Glock's reputation for reliability, durability etc ... nor somehow automatically proves that Taurus is an inferior gun.
I honestly don't know which crowd is worse - 1911 or Glock, every time you say that one of them is not the greatest thing since sliced bread - Jesus kills a kitten.
P.S. You know what else is Austria known for ... yeah, Hitler and Bruno!!!
You are watching
Funkyzeit programme with Brüno.
Yo, man. ****, man. Welcome to the jungle.
Funkyzeit programme with Brüno.
Yo, man. ****, man. Welcome to the jungle.
Amen. I have an OKC cop friend who often carries a Kel -Tec .380 in his pocket off duty...he swears by it; but I wouldn't trust that either even though odds are, it will suffice, as the Taurus probably would as well. As previously stated here and all over OSA; to each their own...and good luck to you if you ever need to use the dang thing, I hope it goes bang. Taurus, Kel-Tec, Hi-Point, etc. have all been known to actually work after all. So have Uncle Mike's IWB holsters.
Doesn't matter why you think it was designed, at IDPA matches you see all sorts of STOCK guns and for me personally, I didn't see a majority of them being G34s......and nobody uses a Taurus..... even on the causual IDPA shooter's level. That was my point.
Correction, glock design more accurate shooting under a faster progression which is why LE officers will also employ their use, among other reasons. Also, it's not redundant at all if one understands how handgun shooting has progressed. Taurus has had plenty of time and put plenty of designs out that could have made it's way into competition circles but they never have? Why is that? More importantly, what's used in competition is pretty significant IMO, as it has brought about all sorts of changes to handgun shooting. Those in harms way, be it LE or Military are adopting several techniques employed by competition shooters nowdays, hopefully that's no secret. So I'd say competition is a pretty good indicator of design and function, or at least it would be beyond retared to disregard it's significance.
I think a lot of people are relaying simply relaying that their experience with glocks supercedes their experience with Taurus. Many DO believe them to produce inferior guns due to experience, myself included. The only gun Taurus was widely successful with.... is the one they got handed the design and machinery to. Outside of that, there's no a platform they produce that I can't think of that wasn't hit or miss..... revolvers included.
just for reference, i've seen glocks break, i've seen xd's break, i've seen 1911's break.about the only handgun i've never seen break are HK. i don' tknow if thats because hk's are that good or because there are relatively few of them in the classes i've attended. but there are only a few tauri in those classes also and i've never seen one that didn't break.that tell's me there is a problem.
i bought a model 85 ultra lite and at round 36 the barrel threads broke,taurus kept it 8 months before replacing it. so between what i've seen and i have experienced taurus isn't a serious selfdefense tool to me. if you're satisfied with them more power to ya
i bought a model 85 ultra lite and at round 36 the barrel threads broke,taurus kept it 8 months before replacing it. so between what i've seen and i have experienced taurus isn't a serious selfdefense tool to me. if you're satisfied with them more power to ya
IMO there are better pistols than Glock for the money... but Taurus is not one of them.
LMAO, so much truth in that statement its not even funny...
