Image courtesy Taurus USA

Taurus‘ newest iteration of the almost-classic Model 85 isn’t what it looks like. Instead of a non-firing cutaway dealer sample, the View is a fully-functional Model 85 with a concealed hammer, round butt, and a transparent Lexan side panel. Taurus is marketing it as a serious CCW firearm, although the optional pink frame version may suffer from a deficit of street cred . . .

I’ll say it so you won’t have to: trigger discipline. But she’s armed and she’s driving a vintage Jeep, so we’re good.

The View is naturally chambered in .38 Special, and it has an exceptionally short 1-inch barrel. Taurus forum scuttlebutt wonders how well that little stub of an ejector rod will toss the empties, but awkward reloads are part of the territory when you choose a small-framed snubby anyway.

Like everything cool, we’ll be sure to watch for the View when we’re in Vegas. (In just two weeks!!) Damn, I’m psyched.

Recommended For You

63 Responses to Taurus’ New Snubnose “View” Is 10063 Whoopi Free!

  1. It’s a view alright.Too bad the Jeep owner doesn’t have a lexan portion for her attire!

    Wait, there’s a gun in that photo?

    • They are trying to appeal to the “steampunk” and “maker” crowd, no doubt. It will be interesting to see how it sells with first time buyers.

  2. It doesn’t do anything for me.
    I prefer the TCP .380 with a Crimson Trace.
    Nice thin and light weight pocket pistol.

  3. She could have bought a real pistol/revolver. And, before you say it, no, I would not like to be shot with that one either. (She would not have to hold a pistol on me in any case).

  4. Gun reminds me of the “Visible V-8” model I built when I was a kid.

    Oh, and as far as the round butt–how can you tell from her pose?

    • I’m less concerned about the ejector rod than the fact that they have essentially no barrel on the thing. This has to affect the performance of the majority of rounds designed for .38 Spcl. How much difference would another inch of barrel make in the design of the pistol?

      • I didn’t get very good expansion from my .38 +P Winchester 135 grain PDX from my Smith 340 PD 1 7/8″ barrel at 10 feet. I shot the slugs into a series of 1 gallon water jugs taped together with Gorilla tape and stacked 4 deep. I got expansion to about .50-.55″ in three separate tests. My seat of the pants estimate is that a 1″ barrel would ruin the performance of a .38, and virtually destroy any chance of expansion in JHP rounds.

      • Having worked in a large company, there are days when all the competent people are out of the meeting, doing actual work. That’s the day when stuff like this gets the green light.

        • Actually, I vote for this being a marketing idea that everyone was too timid to shoot down because it had the support of a top executive.

          My cousin worked in marketing for a huge company before becoming an even bigger whore (consultant). He told me the best way to get ahead is to fake honest enthusiasm for every idea the boss has, even the bad ones, and jump ship before they go bad.

  5. This gun is supposed to be the smallest and lightest (at 9 ounces) 5-shot .38 on the market. So carrying it should be a pleasure, while shooting it should be painful.

    The Lexan panel may come with a benefit: Taurus is known for not finishing the internals of its revolvers very well, resulting in burrs that can affect performance. Maybe Taurus will make those internals nice and pretty (and hence make the gun perform better), since they’ll be in full view.

    Lexan is tough stuff, but it does often form hairline cracks under stress. Time will tell how well it holds up on this gun.

    • I was reading in a magazine that Taurus actually mentioned that very fact, so I am pretty sure this one will be at a slightly higher level of QC.

  6. I think this would be cool on a larger frame gun, but that’s because I think watching the internals of machines is fascinating.

  7. I like it and want one, if the price is right. Even if it is just to have in on the wall and sit and watch the clock work tick as I cycle it.

  8. With that pistol trigger discipline is meaningless. Youre not likely to have an unintended discharge with a 10-12lb trigger pull. And with a 1″ barrel its going to belch fire and not hit a thing. Those things used to be called “belly guns” cause to be able to accurately hit anything you have to shove it in their belly and pull the trigger.

  9. I’m not crazy about all their designs, but I have to give Taurus a lot of credit for taking a chance on crazy new ideas. Some of them, like the Judge, have found a niche. Even the ones that aren’t huge hits (Raging Hornet) still make the gun wold more interesting.

  10. “but awkward reloads are part of the territory when you choose a small-framed snubby anyway. antiquated, antique firearm design that no one should ever make ever again ever.”

    Someone has to stir the pot of pointless flaming debates… :-p

  11. It looks like an N.D. just waiting to happen. I could easily see someone so distracted by looking at the mechanical movements of the internals that they forget its loaded.

  12. At under 10oz I’d be interested in handling one regardless of how ugly it is. As a CCW piece you aren’t going to be showing it off. I kind of see this as an ideal ankle/pocket carry revolver.

  13. I don’t understand the 1 inch long barrel. I really don’t like snub nose 2 inch barrels as it is. So what is the point of a 1 inch barrel? To make it more concealable? If they want it to be more concealable, then make it thinner, not shorter. There must be a way to make the cylinder smaller. In fact, I would be willing to give up one round of ammunition for a substantially smaller cylinder which would lead to a substantially thinner and much more concealable handgun.

  14. Everybody cries, moans, rends their sackcloth, and beats their chests.

    Don’t like it? Don’t buy it. Jeez.

    I can think of stupider guns out there that sell like hotcakes or are “obscure objects of desire”. Me, I think this one’s kinda nifty. Will I buy one? Maybe, but only if I have a chance to handle one first. Maybe.

  15. I had examined a Taurus 9mm revolver before and found it lacking with respect to good cylinder lockup so I am somewhat leery of their products, but this one, from a design perspective, does make some sense. Many people prefer the revolver due to the perception that it has fewer modes of failure than a semi-auto but the choices available seem to be me too copies of one another where all are pretty similar in weight and size. This one seems to at least break some new ground in both size (smaller handle and barrel) and definitely weight. I could care less about the transparent side plate, it seems gimmicky, but for sure it helps cut the weight of the gun as does the one inch barrel. Many people will end up carrying a gun for years or decades and never need it anyway and might look back and wish that they had lugged less weight around but still had a minimally acceptable caliber in their pocket. And some folks will give up on carry because all the choices are too heavy and bulky. This gun is a step in the right direction in that sense, and I hope Taurus goes even further and develops a smaller version in .32acp or .32H&R Mag, or even .380 with the hope of getting a smaller cylinder — either shorter or thinner — and a smaller frame. I will definitely check one out next time I see them available.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *