Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Handgun Discussion
Taurus over Glock...
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Glocktogo" data-source="post: 1762009" data-attributes="member: 1132"><p>You guys are manufacturing animus where none exists. The entire premise of this thread was which is better, a new Taurus or a used Glock. Considering that they both sell at pretty much the same price point, I fail to see how we're "looking down" on those that can't afford a Glock. I've actually owned a Taurus 85 snubbie that I considered perfectly serviceable for it's intended use. I've owned service caliber handguns that cost anywhere from $175 to over a grand. I've owned pretty much every brand of service sidearm available in the US, and quite a few that you never see in cop's holsters. One of the most accurate I've owned was a Ruger P-97. One of the most reliable was a Star Firestar .40. A Charter Arms .44 Spl is still on my want list, along with a Star PD. </p><p></p><p>While I wouldn't personally spend my money on any of the Taurus semi-autos, I never said they were all crap. The PT-92 has been mentioned as a good one. Most of the others aren't at the same level though.</p><p></p><p>How about we stop going off the tracks in this thread about competition 34's, looking down on others and rabid Glock fanboyism? Can we not just stick to the original topic, which is the new Taurus vs. used Glock article? <img src="/images/smilies/frown.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":(" title="Frown :(" data-shortname=":(" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Glocktogo, post: 1762009, member: 1132"] You guys are manufacturing animus where none exists. The entire premise of this thread was which is better, a new Taurus or a used Glock. Considering that they both sell at pretty much the same price point, I fail to see how we're "looking down" on those that can't afford a Glock. I've actually owned a Taurus 85 snubbie that I considered perfectly serviceable for it's intended use. I've owned service caliber handguns that cost anywhere from $175 to over a grand. I've owned pretty much every brand of service sidearm available in the US, and quite a few that you never see in cop's holsters. One of the most accurate I've owned was a Ruger P-97. One of the most reliable was a Star Firestar .40. A Charter Arms .44 Spl is still on my want list, along with a Star PD. While I wouldn't personally spend my money on any of the Taurus semi-autos, I never said they were all crap. The PT-92 has been mentioned as a good one. Most of the others aren't at the same level though. How about we stop going off the tracks in this thread about competition 34's, looking down on others and rabid Glock fanboyism? Can we not just stick to the original topic, which is the new Taurus vs. used Glock article? :( [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Handgun Discussion
Taurus over Glock...
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom