The R92, the Little Boy and the Big Boy

Maximizing the performance of your Rossi firearm.
Post Reply
User avatar
Ranch Dog
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 9398
Joined: 23 Jan 2012 07:44
Location: Inez, TX
Has thanked: 1838 times
Been thanked: 2281 times

The R92, the Little Boy and the Big Boy

Post by Ranch Dog »

It was a beautiful day so I decided to run both my R92 357 Mag and 454 Casull across the chronograph as the weather and winds have not allowed me to do that since I became settled on a load. Might be interesting to see how different the rifles are from one end to the other.

Both rifles have the 20" barrel. The 357 Mag is shooting my TLC359-175-RF, a 175-grain Round-Flat nosed bullet, sized at .357", and pushed with 16 grains of Lil' Gun. The 454 Casull is shooting my TLC454-290-RF, a 290-grain Round-Flat nosed bullet, sized at .452" and pushed 34 grains of Lil' Gun.

The 175-grain 357 Mag chronographed at 1800 FPS and the 290-grain 454 load clocked in at 2155 FPS, both corrected to the muzzle. Here is what the terminal end of the both look like.
Load04_terminal.jpg
Load01_terminal.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Michael
Image
User avatar
pricedo
2000 Shots
2000 Shots
Posts: 2509
Joined: 31 Jan 2012 10:36
Location: Dual Citizen (United States & Canada)
Has thanked: 56 times
Been thanked: 234 times

Re: The R92, the Little Boy and the Big Boy

Post by pricedo »

2971 ft-lbs of muzzle energy out of that 288 grain 454 Casull load :!: :shock:

My 45-70 loads don't top that by much and I'm packing another 3 pounds of steel around.
A range session with that light rifle shooting that ammo must rattle the ball joints in the shoulders. :o
LIFE MEMBER - NRA & GOA
User avatar
Ranch Dog
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 9398
Joined: 23 Jan 2012 07:44
Location: Inez, TX
Has thanked: 1838 times
Been thanked: 2281 times

Re: The R92, the Little Boy and the Big Boy

Post by Ranch Dog »

pricedo wrote:A range session with that light rifle shooting that ammo must rattle the ball joints in the shoulders. :o
Not bad at all. The Casull is well stocked with the shape of the butt and pad, pretty much identical to their RG4570. Shooting the R92 357 Mag after the Casull was like shooting a BB gun until I was a little sloppy with the shoulder fit and then that square, steel butt plate cracked the heck out of my shoulder joint, still hurts this morning![hr][/hr]On the subject of the 45-70 Govt., I thought I would also offer some comparisons with between the R92 454 Casull and my RG4570. Before the charts I would like to note that I only load my RG4570 to 35.0 KPSI, this rifle is not a Marlin 1895. Comparing the two, Rossi to Marlin, is an apple to orange comparison with respect to the information I offer below.[hr][/hr]Weight of the Rifles

I do think the R92 454 and RG4570 is an apple to apple performance comparison when the weight of the firearm is used as the base. My R92 weighs exactly 7.14 pounds, the RG4570 exactly 7.18 pounds.

Rossi lists a weight for my R92-68011, which is a 20" round barrel carbine, at 5.0 pounds making for quite a differnce. My rifle has become a "Scout" with the addition of the Rossi base with the epoxy to hold it down (1.3 ounces), the Weaver Quad Lock rings (2.4), the Weaver K4 Scout Scope (6.9), and the Rossi Synthetic Cheek Piece (3.2) but it was no where close to the catalog weight. Box of the box, my rifle weighed 6.28#. As a comparison my R92-56001, the 357 Mag, out of the box weighed 6.15#. I do not know where Rossi comes up with the 5# for the carbine as the average weight of all six of my R92s out of the box is 6.2#.

On the other hand, the catalog lists the RG4570 at 7# but my rifle was 6.28# out of the box and with the Bushnell Banner 1.5-4.5X32 scope and Quad Lock Rings it weighs 7.18# I keep very detailed records of my work. Adding a full magazine tube either rifle plus one in the chamber results in a weight gain of .1#.[hr][/hr]Performance Comparisons

This is a comparison using just my bullets and loads for my R92 454 and my RG4570B. Everything is actual performance except the 454's TLC452-330-RF. The projections for the others where quite accurate so I expect the same with the new bullet. Clicking on the charts will open a larger image.
compare_FPE.jpg
compare_power.jpg
compare_index.jpg
compare_recoil.jpg
[hr][/hr]I'm not trying to draw any conclusions just walking through this looking at my rifles in detail. They each are very nice rifles delivering a terrific punch. The 45-70 Govt has a bit more utility when it comes to bullets but if you are buying reloading components your powder needs in feeding it are dramatically reduced. I actually feel that they are quite comparable in performance and don't believe the critter, any critter, is going to be able to measure it.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Michael
Image
User avatar
pricedo
2000 Shots
2000 Shots
Posts: 2509
Joined: 31 Jan 2012 10:36
Location: Dual Citizen (United States & Canada)
Has thanked: 56 times
Been thanked: 234 times

Re: The R92, the Little Boy and the Big Boy

Post by pricedo »

The custom loaded 335 grain 454 ammo I have on the way in is averaging 1530 fps MV out of a revolver (they didn't say exactly what revolver) but I expect the MV of the same ammo will pick up 300 - 400 fps when fired from a 20" 92/454.
My anticipated MV of around 1950 fps for a 335 grain from my M92 is not that far off your figures.
The revolver looses some cause of the short barrel and gas leakage from the cylinder - face of the forcing cone gap.
The revolver - rifle MV gain for handgun ammo has been conjecture to date.
It would be nice to see some range derived empirical data on the subject.
I guesstimate 300 - 400 fps gain from a Revolver like a 7.5" Ruger Super Redhawk revolver to a 20" Rossi R92 in 454 Casull for 350 - 400 grain lead bullets.
LIFE MEMBER - NRA & GOA
User avatar
Ranch Dog
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 9398
Joined: 23 Jan 2012 07:44
Location: Inez, TX
Has thanked: 1838 times
Been thanked: 2281 times

Re: The R92, the Little Boy and the Big Boy

Post by Ranch Dog »

pricedo wrote:The custom loaded 335 grain 454 ammo I have on the way in is averaging 1530 fps MV out of a revolver (they didn't say exactly what revolver) but I expect the MV of the same ammo will pick up 300 - 400 fps when fired from a 20" 92/454.
My anticipated MV of around 1950 fps for a 335 grain from my M92 is not that far off your figures.
The revolver looses some cause of the short barrel and gas leakage from the cylinder - face of the forcing cone gap.
The revolver - rifle MV gain for handgun ammo has been conjecture to date.
It would be nice to see some range derived empirical data on the subject.
I guesstimate 300 - 400 fps gain from a Revolver like a 7.5" Ruger Super Redhawk revolver to a 20" Rossi R92 in 454 Casull for 350 - 400 grain lead bullets.
I suspect you are right on the money with the estimate. You could get close in QuickLoad but of course the cylinder gap loss is the unknown. One trick in using the software with a revolver is to make the estimates and then shoot the load. From there you leave everything in QL alone but slowly adjust the case H20 capacity to reflect the muzzle corrected velocity the chronograph recorded. With that change, the case is saved specific to the revolver. Both the pressure and velocities remain very accurate when the case is used. The only thing that isn't an accurate reflection is the case density.

My mind is always turning and in light of the rifle weights, it would be interesting to see a 18" RG4570 with a 3/4 tube and the Skinner peep. I think 16 1/4" would be too short for the 45-70 and the 2" reduction to 18" would probably not reduce the weight much as the barrel is quite thin. The shorter tube would help as would the loss of the front band. Four in the tube and one in the chamber is still pretty good. It would be a little tighter but probably not enough to matter and would not justify another manufacturing run. The mind does wander though.
Michael
Image
User avatar
Arktikos
Founding Member
Founding Member
Posts: 434
Joined: 11 Mar 2012 20:42
Location: JUNEAU/HAINES, ALASKA
Has thanked: 77 times
Been thanked: 49 times

Re: The R92, the Little Boy and the Big Boy

Post by Arktikos »

This is great stuff to read, comparing the difference between guns. I also am hungry for more information about Quickload and the tweaks needed to make it a more accurate estimator. My copy just sits on my hard drive for now more or less but I want to use it much more in the future. I wish there was a sub forum here for QL and other ballistics software to hear about how other users adjust for variance to reflect actual chronographed results from various guns. Of course there would need to be the usual "use at your own risk" warnings, but that goes for any hand loading forum discussion.

Sent from some beach on Kauai HI
No such thing as bad weather in Alaska, just lousy clothing choices!
User avatar
Ranch Dog
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 9398
Joined: 23 Jan 2012 07:44
Location: Inez, TX
Has thanked: 1838 times
Been thanked: 2281 times

Re: The R92, the Little Boy and the Big Boy

Post by Ranch Dog »

Arktikos wrote:This is great stuff to read, comparing the difference between guns. I also am hungry for more information about Quickload and the tweaks needed to make it a more accurate estimator. My copy just sits on my hard drive for now more or less but I want to use it much more in the future. I wish there was a sub forum here for QL and other ballistics software to hear about how other users adjust for variance to reflect actual chronographed results from various guns. Of course there would need to be the usual "use at your own risk" warnings, but that goes for any hand loading forum discussion.
Well the good thing is that the fox has the keys to the hen house so we can do just about anything to the chickens we want! I will crank it up in the next couple of days. There was a Yahoo user group for QL a number of years ago but it was a very snooty group and little was learned from it. Every question had to be approved for listing and I never had a question answered. The Author of the software used to occasionally respond to questions on "24 Camp Fire" but I haven't been over there in a long time. A fellow on Shooter's Forum, "Uncle Nick", is pretty good with the in's and out's of the software and I've learned a bit from him. Shooting it against pressure trace equipment and a chronograph has given me an advantage in understanding it and putting it to use. Really you don't need to do a thing to it except run it to get great data, more specific than published data from my experience.
Michael
Image
User avatar
Arktikos
Founding Member
Founding Member
Posts: 434
Joined: 11 Mar 2012 20:42
Location: JUNEAU/HAINES, ALASKA
Has thanked: 77 times
Been thanked: 49 times

Re: The R92, the Little Boy and the Big Boy

Post by Arktikos »

Ranch Dog wrote:
Well the good thing is that the fox has the keys to the hen house so we can do just about anything to the chickens we want! I will crank it up in the next couple of days. There was a Yahoo user group for QL a number of years ago but it was a very snooty group and little was learned from it. Every question had to be approved for listing and I never had a question answered. The Author of the software used to occasionally respond to questions on "24 Camp Fire" but I haven't been over there in a long time. A fellow on Shooter's Forum, "Uncle Nick", is pretty good with the in's and out's of the software and I've learned a bit from him. Shooting it against pressure trace equipment and a chronograph has given me an advantage in understanding it and putting it to use. Really you don't need to do a thing to it except run it to get great data, more specific than published data from my experience.
Published data is great when what you are looking for is mainstream enough but what I find, particularly with 45 colt at loads approaching Ruger only is there isn't that much for whatever reason, and then with powder like Lil Gun it is pretty scarce. I have ran some Lil gun loads through QL and am just waiting to get a different chronograph to give them a try. There are so many ways to use the software including Quick target and I would certainly benefit from others experiences using these programs and i am sure others would as well.

Sent from some beach on Kauai HI
No such thing as bad weather in Alaska, just lousy clothing choices!
User avatar
pricedo
2000 Shots
2000 Shots
Posts: 2509
Joined: 31 Jan 2012 10:36
Location: Dual Citizen (United States & Canada)
Has thanked: 56 times
Been thanked: 234 times

Re: The R92, the Little Boy and the Big Boy

Post by pricedo »

I have Shoot!, Lee Shooter, RSI Labs, Sierra V6 & now Quick Load on my computer.
The icons might as well be gravestones with RIP on them for all I use the programs.
My load data is on an Microsoft ACCESS 2003 database which I wrote & customized in VBA myself & if I want more/different functionality I can add it anytime I want like a Mattel block toy from the 60's.
I have intimate & complete control over the process.
I can customize the ACCESS database reports to manipulate & present the information any way I want.
Someone elses program is "hardened cement" & I'm stuck with what I got good or bad.
If I had the algorithms I could write my own version of QL.
LIFE MEMBER - NRA & GOA
User avatar
Arktikos
Founding Member
Founding Member
Posts: 434
Joined: 11 Mar 2012 20:42
Location: JUNEAU/HAINES, ALASKA
Has thanked: 77 times
Been thanked: 49 times

Re: The R92, the Little Boy and the Big Boy

Post by Arktikos »

pricedo wrote:
If I had the algorithms I could write my own version of QL.
Maybe but that would be the sort of tedium that would rival 20 years at Attica. I'd rather just buy the program for $168,but then i'm probably lazier thank most! :mrgreen:


Sent from some beach on Kauai HI
No such thing as bad weather in Alaska, just lousy clothing choices!
Post Reply