Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Rimfires Taurus rimfire rifles discontinued

Nosing around the Taurus web site today, I noticed that all the .22 rifles are now discontinued. I immediately contacted my dealer to order up a Model 63A while the gettin's good.

This is really too bad, because these were great reproductions of what I thought were timeless rifles...Perhaps I'm wrong about that. Still, hate to see 'em go.

When my daughter gets a little bigger, I'll be looking for a Taurus 62 carbine.

If anyone with a beater Winchester rimfire wanted a nice inexpensive tang sight, start looking for the Taurus ones now!

(just need to get a replacement tang screw)

And that screw is a 10-36 thread, if its a 62A..........

Brownells has em.

I never thought much of the Taurus rifles. I haven't shot one, but the several I've looked at off the shelf had some pretty shoddy workmanship with fit and finish. Plus that goofy safety thingy on top and they never got another look from me.

The Rossi and Taurus 62s in 22 Magnum, particularly the stainless carbines, made for a nice sized and easy to take-down survival rifle. I've owned a few of the 62s in both 22 LR and 22 Magnum and they functioned fine, but none could hold a candle to the fit and finish of a Winchester 1906 or 62.

Jeff

They're definitely not Winchesters, but they are very good rifles, at a fraction of the cost. I'm grabbing the model 63 while I can; it's one cool and fun rifle. I'll pay less than $250.00 including shipping. The same thing in a Winchester would cost me over $600.00. They look nicer, but they really don't shoot any different, at least not in my experience.

I have a Taurus Model 63 that is the most fun 22 rifle available for general plinking. No scope on it, just irons and tin cans at 50 yards, off hand shooting.

Don

Wife has a SS 63, it is her favorite 22 to shoot, and she has a couple of nice ones. Has always shot good and functions flawlessly.

You may know, or maynot know, but the original Winchester 63 could be made to machinegun, just by operating the trigger a certain way. Most older experienced gun dealers are aware of this. I wonder if Taurus will? And I wonder if the later Winchester 63's made in Japan will? I sorta figured that the well known, or maybe not so well known little trait of the orignal 63, may have gotten fixed in the later models.

Does anyone here know for sure?

Hey Don, how accurate is that 63? A dealer has one left in my area for 229 bucks, but I hear there not very accurate, any truth to that?

Sure looks like a nice gun

I don't have one of the Taurus but I do have a Winchester 63 22LR. It is the gun I learned to shoot with when I was about 8 or 9 years old. I shot everything from coyotes to beer cans with that thing. I still have it in the back of my safe but I haven't shot it in a long time. After reading this post I think I might dig it out, give it a good cleaning, and go run about 200 rounds through it. I bet it will bring back some good memories when I shoot it.

coyoteman23

I really like my Taurus 63a. The workmanship on the one I have is great. I've never felt the need to put a scope on it and do pretty well on can/squirrel sized targets out to 50yds or so. I'm sorry to hear they're not selling well enough to keep the production going.

I never shot the rifle from the bench to check accuracy. I know it's hell on tin cans at 50 yards off hand. It has never malfunctioned, and I never clean it..
And, $229 is a VERY good price.

I have a Taurus 63 and it is the sorriest POS I have ever owned. Will not function reliably with any type of ammo, stovepipes, fails to extract, fails to fire, trigger is horrible. The Taurus tang sight I got with it is not worth the powder to blow it to hell, will not return to zero, no discernable clicks and changes elevation zero every time you fold it down and put it back up.

Other than that, I guess it is OK.

You should contact Taurus, we have had very positive results with their customer service department.
Any company can make a lemon, I have had some from other firearm manufactures, so far have all been corrected with no charge.