MK vs TX
- Thread starter M118LR
- Start date
I'm not a big fan of the Taurus TX22, I've had both standard and competition models.
They've had their share of issues, such as poor rifling in some of the barrels.
I get they can be made into a bullet hose pretty inexpensively, but that 'feature' holds no interest for me.
For a budget friendly, optic and silencer ready, .22 pistol, I prefer the guns coming out of Turkey to the Taurus. I recently picked up a Retay USA RXP-22 that was $203 with two 13rd magazines (made from alloy, not plastic). It is milled for small footprint optics and includes one plate for the larger footprint sights, as well as being threaded 1/2-28. Probably not an heirloom piece, but it works and shoots quite well for me.
They've had their share of issues, such as poor rifling in some of the barrels.
I get they can be made into a bullet hose pretty inexpensively, but that 'feature' holds no interest for me.
For a budget friendly, optic and silencer ready, .22 pistol, I prefer the guns coming out of Turkey to the Taurus. I recently picked up a Retay USA RXP-22 that was $203 with two 13rd magazines (made from alloy, not plastic). It is milled for small footprint optics and includes one plate for the larger footprint sights, as well as being threaded 1/2-28. Probably not an heirloom piece, but it works and shoots quite well for me.
Last edited:
Could not pay me to buy another Taurus. Low quality. JMHO. YMMV.
I have a Taurus 357 Magnum that is every bit as good as a Smith & Wesson Model 19.
Hell even my Rossi 357 cylinder locks up tight just like a Colt when you pull the trigger.
Now, some of the Taurus pistols (semiautomatics), I'll agree with you.
They don't last with heavy use.
Hell even my Rossi 357 cylinder locks up tight just like a Colt when you pull the trigger.
Now, some of the Taurus pistols (semiautomatics), I'll agree with you.
They don't last with heavy use.
I bought the TX-22 because it has similar size, feel and controls as my Ruger American Compact. It makes for a nice practice piece for me and the littles have a ball with it. That said, I wouldn't put it on par with my 22-45 when it comes to accuracy.
Unlike the MK & TX which have mounting plates fixed to non-moving barrels. For Sights on slides I like my Kimber 1911 Target Rimfire.
I've already got Target Pistols. Granted they would need some modifications to shoot steel plates, but the Old MK's are just to labor intensive to reassemble. IMHO.
The current MK has a higher price point than the TX, and from my research the TX seems to hold it's own as a "Bullet Hose" during steel plate work?
Attachments
Last edited:
S&W Revolvers and Beretta Pistols were manufactured Originally at the Taurus Plants. So way back when the quality was exactly the same. Nowadays things may be different? But I've been happy with the Old Taurus 9mm 1911 & PT 101. Flawless function in my hand.
contender
Ruger Guru
I'll put up the Ruger MK series with it's 77 year history of accuracy, simplicity, dependability etc against ANY Taurus model.
We've had way too many Taurus guns that came to us NIB for use in our NRA events, that had to be returned for mechanical issues. And the customer service is sorely lacking when it is compared to Ruger as well.
But the comparison of the Taurus TX22 against the MK series,, is not a proper comparison. The SR22 & the TX22 are more alike than the MK is to the Taurus.
We've had way too many Taurus guns that came to us NIB for use in our NRA events, that had to be returned for mechanical issues. And the customer service is sorely lacking when it is compared to Ruger as well.
But the comparison of the Taurus TX22 against the MK series,, is not a proper comparison. The SR22 & the TX22 are more alike than the MK is to the Taurus.
Most anything made by man is flawed.
SR22® Pistol Product Safety Bulletin https://share.google/wDbNgeUexh7J3i224
SR22® Pistol Product Safety Bulletin https://share.google/wDbNgeUexh7J3i224
