Posted: 1/27/2009 10:08:57 AM EDT
| Is it worth spending $300 more on a .22 S&W revolver than a Taurus? |
|
I own a Taurus 96 that I paid $225 for used. It works, is as accurate as a Smith. I have shot Smith's many many times. There is no question they are a nicer piece of machinery.
Much as I would like a Smith 18, and I am a dyed in the wool, Smith guy, I really can't complain about the Taurus. It is rougher than an Smith, double action will give the occasional misfire. But for my purposes the Taurus is perfectly adequate. Its your money, you have to spend it however you're comfortable. |
|
I would say it depends on what your are going to do with it. The S&W is higher quality and will last longer if you are going to put alot of ammo thru it. Better feel. You should handle both if you haven't
That is going to have to be your call but I would pay the extra. |
|
CONAN56: Depends. What your goal is, ie to save money and do some shooting, or to spend extra bux and buy equipment that will appreciate over time. For me I chose the latter, I can shoot most of my guns, and still get what I paid for it, and many cases more than what I paid. Some of my S&W and Colt guns, I can sell for twice what I paid for 20 years ago.
Warning, most of the time guns are a bad investment if that is your goal. For I can shoot and enjoy a gun, and then either sell it or give it to my children who will cherish it. |