Monday, August 20, 2012

Here's where I do some hating.



See the woman stuffing the Taurus into the floppy neoprene Uncle Mike’s IWB sausage sack, with its plastic belt clip clipped to the beltless waistband of her jeans at about 0:07 in the video, in such a fashion that it will fall out with any vigorous activity, to say nothing of coming out attached to the pistol if she tries to draw it in a hurry*?

They put that IN THEIR COMMERCIAL.

If that doesn’t tell you everything you need to know about Taurus and its target demographic, I don’t know what does.

Yes, I’m a hater, but not all hate is unjustified.

(H/T to Unc.)

*Also to say nothing of how she's having to hold the holster mouth open with her weak hand to get the gun in. That's a real good way to set yourself on fire.

31 comments:

Brandon said...

I saw that too haha - wishful thinking: the marketing department just sucks? :)

Anonymous said...

Those "unkie Mike's" suede holders serve a purpose...though with a belt, preferably...

For those of us who...uh...lived in places where "totin'" was "verboten", some folks may have, possibly...taken responsibility for our own safety. Maybe. And, said folks had the idea if they ever needed to use said item that said item could perhaps be..."lost" along with the "unkie Mike" and any other accoutrements of said item at the earliest convenience.

Not that I ever did that. I heard of people who did.

In retrospect...the person who did those things was lucky not to have needed said items as...some of the items had been purchased through stores. By them. With the fancy "yeller forms".

Live and learn...

That individual got a severe talking to about such indiscretions, I tell you what.

And since Ohioland went on to "permit" folks to tote with the permission slip, that's a moot point now.

(Name Redacted).

Weer'd Beard said...

Well they assume that more people who know jack about guns will be too busy laughing at the "There's no such thing as 'second best'" line saying: "Second best would be a hell of an improvement!"

In a world where Glock owners will replace their sights, and M&P owners will replace the trigger before ever firing the first round, but buy them because they are indeed quality guns overall, a QC nightmare like Taurus talking about "Quality" is the BIG issue.

Anonymous said...

In thier defense they did put a couple of seconds of Jessie Duff in there as well.

That makes a wash in my book.

We get a lot of new IDPA shooters with nylon holster. As an SO I won't let them holster or draw from them, they start from low ready. After a couple stages, the light goes on and they decide to get a decent holster and belt.

Gerry

pdb said...

Taurus: You could have bought a real gun for that!

Jake (formerly Riposte3) said...

I just don't get the hate for the Uncle Mike's IWB holsters. Mine held my pistol quite well with a belt. For reholstering, I just used my brain and pulled out the holster, inserted the gun, then replaced the whole assembly back inside my waistband.

When used properly (i.e., with a decent belt), they hold it securely, they're fairly comfortable,and they're good "entry level" holsters for people who might otherwise be forced to choose between buying practice ammunition and a carry holster.

However, the fact that Taurus may be better off using a higher quality holster in an advertisement, and that they're showing it being used the wrong way, are totally different issues.

Ron Larimer said...

I don't hate, except for the judge. Taurus is just one of the gun companies I ignore completely.

The Raving Prophet said...

What I personally find amusing is that as Taurus owners try to defend the company as making quality guns and those who say otherwise as just "haters," Taurus themselves recognizes their quality control department was startlingly bad even by the modern standards of pinching pennies and letting the warranty folks sort it out.

However better they may be, my own past experience with a Taurus means they've spent their chance with me. There's better choices at the same (or very close) prices.

Stuart the Viking said...

Hey, I'll admit to owning a Taurus. It's a rather long story how it came into my hands, I never intended to own a Taurus. I keep it around to use as a loaner in the rare occasion when someone that I trust NEEDS a gun and doesn't have one. It's reasonably accurate, this particular one is reliable (or at least has been for me, previous owner did have to have it repaired), fairly simple manual of arms, and most importantly, if it "went away" I wouldn't cry about it.

I think it's a good idea for any gunnie to have a throw-away piece. Most gunnies I know personally usually have a spare glock stashed somewhere that they would use for that purpose. I REALLY dislike glocks, so I have the Taurus.

s

ToddG said...

I know Mark Kresser personally, having worked with him at both Beretta and SIG. I'd really like to think he'll have an impact on the culture at Taurus and turn them into a better company. But they're coming from a huge confidence deficit. Savvy consumers will need a lot of convincing before they'll trust Taurus as a contender for anything above the level of joke.

docjim505 said...

I think that Jake (formerly Riposte3) raises a good point about people having to choose between an expensive holster* and spending a few bucks more on the guns itself, ammo, or even lessons?

Anything that gets law-abiding citizens to dip their toes into the pools of lawful carry should be welcomed. And, as Gerry writes, some experience with a poor holster may well lead to people investing in something better. Crawl before you walk...

===

(*) That may well not suit them; how many holsters gather dust in the bottoms of closets because they either didn't work as well as hoped or else fit a firearm that has been traded away or has otherwise become a safe queen?

Woodman said...

Insert comment about how Taurus isn't all that bad and my dad/girlfriend/local LEO/myself have one they swear by.

These guys exist for the same reason the that got Kia and Hyundai in the marketplace. If all you can afford, without knowing what you are doing at a used car lot, is one of them it meets the first requirement of driving to work. (Have a car)

Jake (formerly Riposte3) said...

@ Woodman: Even if you do know what you're doing at a used car lot, if that's all you can afford, well, as long as it runs then it still meets the first requirement of driving to work - and you can't afford more anyway. It at least gets you in the game if you didn't have a car before.

Once you're able to get to work, you can start worrying about saving up for something better.

Woodman said...

That being said, my Dad actually does love Taurus, he has a .40 semiauto and a .38/.357 wheel gun and loves them both.

He went out and bought the second after carrying the first for a year. We put a couple hundred downrange last weekend on the .38 and it's a pretty reliable hunk of metal. Accurate enough for MoBG at 25 yards.

When I get serious about a carry weapon I'll need to see for myself what I want. Right now the closest I get to a carry piece is a Nagant... I don't have any room to throw stones.

Bubblehead Les. said...

The Problem lies not in Mr.Kresser, but in his Bosses. They have some interesting Designs, but their Material Choices and Execution Sucks. And when the Customer Service Dept tells you that the Trigger Pull on their Nine Shot .22 Revolver is DELIBERATELY made so heavy "because Kids might think it's a Toy, so no, you can't Lighten it down to where an 18 Pound Gauge can Measure it,' then they don't get my money.

So I expect Mr. Kresser to beat his head against the Wall for a couple of years, then move on.

Joe in PNG said...

There are a few problems with crappy entry level gear:
1) you have crappy gear
2) you have less money to get something good
3)You have something that is pretty much valueless if you want to trade up
This is pretty much true across the board, from guns to guitars to cameras to motorcycles.

The Great and Powerful Oz said...

I bought a Taurus PT-92S over 20 years ago. It's never been a good pistol. My .380 Mustang is far more accurate and has never had a misfeed. With the Taurus I can expect a misfeed every 25-50 rounds.

I still have the gun because I wouldn't feel right about selling it to someone else.

Scott J said...

Tam will probably never accept my friend request since I'm posting this but back when I was looking for a compact .45 Mike of Sipsey St. recommend I have a look at the PT745.

I gambled on a used one in stainless for $325 and have had no trouble out of it. I have fired several hundred rounds out of it in practice and it sees CCW duty from time to time.

Tam said...

Scott J,

"Tam will probably never accept my friend request..."

That's one of those Facebook things, right? :o

I suck at Facebook.

John said...

Anyone else think it was peculiar that gal shooting plates with the 1911 wasn't hitting any of them? And what about Kresser's target at all of 5 seconds in -- shots were all over the place.

Looks like substantially less than second-best to me.

Tam said...

John,

"Anyone else think it was peculiar that gal shooting plates with the 1911 wasn't hitting any of them?"

They were not falling plates. I assure you that Jessie Duff can hit a plate.

Brigid said...

Unless "friending" me involves mailing me a pound of Bacon, I'm OK with being left out of the whole facebook thing.

I have a facebook account for the sole purpose of checking my daughters spot. It's a name out of a book, gender neutral. There is no bio, no picture, no nothing. It's simply a means to log in and view the offsprings photos, especially while she was at college.

Yet I have people listed on there as "friends". People I've never heard of. Go figure.

Mike said...

Yeah, they're not falling plates, but you should have still been able to see hits on that nice fresh white paint. I saw one on the edge of the second plate from the right at 7 o'clock, but that's the only one I saw...

Accurate shooter shooting at nice, fresh-painted plates, but not registering hits suggests an inaccurate pistol. :p

I had a PT1911 for a while. It was accurate, I just realized that 1911s have way too skinny grips for me...

Scott J said...

Yes, Tam, Facebook :)

I got on it a few years back for family updates (as someone mentioned earlier).

Stuck around because it's a nice way to stay in touch with an extended circle of friends.

Also it's sort of like blogging for those of us not interesting and/or witty enough to blog.

Chris Meissen said...

Over past eight years I or a family member have had experience with three Taurus pistols. Back in '04 I purchased a Gen 2 MilPro PT140. I've had no problems with it and carry it frequently. Last March, I bought my daughter a used PT111 with the understanding that the seller would allow us the weekend to wring it out. She kept it, loves it, shoots it well, and carries it regularly.

OTOH, in 2009 my son purchased a brand new PT145 from his base's PX. The list of problems with that gun would take too much space. After a exactly one year that involved five trips back to Taurus and enough BS from Taurus' customer service to fertilize a truck garden, he finally got it fixed right. He fired two mags through it to assure proper functioning and promptly traded it for a .45ACP Baby Eagle.

James family outpost, Iowa. said...

Taurus made a decent pump action rimfire copy of the Winchester model 62 gallery gun some years back. Naturally the one thing they did get right, they no longer make. Sigh. It remains the only Taurus I desire...

Cybrludite said...

I've had good luck with them so far. (knocks on wood) That said, most of mine I bought used off of folks I know personally.

Tremaine said...

It's an accurate representation of most people I've met who CCW actually. Very few their expensive gun in a good holster.

Matt G said...

At 0:18, you see the second plate get rocked back slightly so that it appears that she hit it just slightly left of center. Also at 0:18 (note: two hits in one second, while in slo-mo), she hits the third plate (from the right) just a couple of inches low left of dead center. That's the only hit that I can make out the bullet strike, at full screen, with the resolution run all the way up to 720p.

The plates aren't in focus. Hell, even the shooter isn't in hard focus. The focus is on the gun, with a medium depth of field. Yeah, I would have preferred a super-long DOF to show hits registering, too, but maybe that doesn't work so well with bullet-cam slow-mo camera work. (The depth of my ignorance about video photography has not yet begun to be plumbed.)

TinCan Assassin said...

The Taurus in my hand is better than the Smith on lay-away. I NOW own both, but the Taurus M85UL is still my primary carry gun. It's hard to hide my Model 10-5. And before I had the Taurus, I had a Hi-Point. It was what I could afford, and got me into the "Responsible for my own safety" department.

I still own the Hi-Point, and it gets to the range with me on occasion. I shoot TulAmmo through it, too.

An Ordinary American said...

I'm 2 for 4 with Taurus, with the "2" being from purchases over 25 years ago.

First was the PT92 after having gone through two Berettas, the second was a Model 85 when I needed an ankle gun for a looming u/c assignment.

Still have both of them, still carry both of them regularly and have 100% confidence in both.

The latter 2 were purchased in the past 24 months--the PT1911 45 nightmare, and the Judge. The 1911 went back to the gunstore without having had a single round fired through it, such was the non-QC that was rampant.

The Judge wasn't quite as bad. Bought it for a survival gun in the airplane, and after some semi-serious smithing, it serves the purpose.

But my days of even considering a Taurus product are gone, never to return.

--AOA