Well, you cannot call me a quitter!

[Ranch Dog]

Despite the CJ4510 not working out for me, I bought another one. Not quite the same as this is the SCJ44, chambered in 44 Mag. These were just released to dealers two weeks ago and this is the CJ I wanted prior to my CJ4510 purchase, I just was tired of waiting for the 44 Mag. This is not a rifle/shotgun combo with all the issues that pairing creatures. The biggest point is that it has a cylinder of appropriate length for the respective cartridge. I will start working with it this week but already like what I've seen in several area as compared to my first rifle.





[hr][/hr]

Added info:

• The rife has an overall length of 34.5"!
• The scope base is very interesting and improved from that of my first rifle. The base is secured to the frame with three screws. All of this was tight and not glued down.
• The weight of the rifle with the Bushnell Banner 15-4.5X32 is 7#.
• The barrel is of a larger diameter than that of my CJ4510. I'm not sure if I will be able to locate my old data to make the actual comparison.
• The barrel has a .4205" bore and .4305" groove, perfect for my TLC432 series of bullets. Those bullets on loaded cartridges provide a perfect cylinder fit.

[Ranch Dog]

Took the SCJ44 Circuit Judge from first shot to first kill yesterday! This was the cleanest Braztech yet. Just enough packing grease to keep the moisture out and the rifle was cleaned up and ready to go in minutes. In that I'm a scope shooter, the sights came off. As with the CJ4510, the front sight holes where drilled completely through the barrel. I kind of understood that on the with the 4510 as the muzzle is very thin in that it is sleeved for the choke tube. Not so with the 44. The barrel is very thick at the muzzle on this model and there is really no need to disfigure the bore/groove. At least the they were drilled clean, a cotton patch jagged through does not hang up on them. The only precaution here would be in the selection of filler or replacement front sight screws, especially in light of how hard it is to get replacement hardware from Rossi.



I did remove the scope base from the frame. It is held in place with three screws into the strap of the revolver frame. The forward portion of the base is mated to "block" through a dovetail. The block is only a tight fitting spacer and is not attached to the barrel as I thought earlier. I'm not sure what it is cast from either. Didn't want to mess with it too much as I didn't want to damage it. The three base screws where properly secured by Rossi with Loc-Tite without any attempt to glue the base down. It was clean as a whistle under the base.



Having done quite a bit of load work with the 44 Mag over the years, I just went straight to Lil' Gun and my 300-grain bullet, the TLC43-300-RF. I did use QuickLoad to recommend the max load for the specifics of the SCJ44 which was 20.2-grains. I shot a 5-shot increment at a 5% reduction and one at a 2.5% reduction and then max load. Please with the load, I used ten more shots to sight the rifle in at 100-yards and verify the zero. Only 15 shots in all.

At the 2nd shot, I was struck in the face my several objects right below my shooting glasses. I thought, here we go again! Ends up the hammer spur failed. Before you think it, it was not over-tightened. I only apply force through the short end of the allen wrench. There was something wrong with the cast. I found two of the now three pieces on my bench.



I had bought a hammer spur intended for the Rossi Single Shot Rifles to try on my Rio Grande. It didn't work in that application but it did work on the Circuit Judge. It has a bit more beef to it. I suspect that the part that failed simply had a problem in the casting.



Here is the first five bullets at 100-yards. Shots 16 through 20. Not bad and it will only improve as the barrel gets a bit of friction through it.



There was less blast on me, my face and support arm, but it was still there. In the twenty-five shots I did see the start of light scorching exactly where it appeared with the CJ4510. The next two photos are shots after the soot was clean off the forearm.



To try to remove this would require that the finish be worked into. I think the rifle will just end up with a character mark on both sides.



I still long for a CJ chambered in 45 Colt with an appropriate length cylinder. The 45 Colt/410 bore shotgun is an appropriate mix for the Judge where distances are measured in feet but nothing but a compromise in a rifle when shot beyond 25-yards. There is just too much in the "works", the smooth-bore create by the double length of the cylinder, the forcing cone, and the smooth-bore of the choke tube. Pretty much an internal ballistics nightmare which effects the ultimate performance of the bullet. On the other hand, I do not find any issue with the SCJ44. It is a unique rifle that provides six quick shots with rifle accuracy. This rifle will become my tractor/truck gun here on the ranch. I pine for CJs, with the appropriate cylinder lengths, chambered in 357 Mag, 41 Mag, and 45 Colt.

Oh! Shot 26 was through a nice feral hog boar at 70 yards!

[pricedo]

Nice shooting RD !
I saw one of those .44 Mag Rossi rifolvers in a shop a while back and remembering how unimpressed I was with the .45 LC/.410 CJ I passed it up without a second glance.
Maybe it needs another look.
The only rifolver I have right now is an Uberti 1873 revolver carbine in .45 LC.
I have the model with the target sights.
It's a little awkward to shoot and has a brass butt plate with needle sharp points but it's as accurate and as pretty as old heck........real nice wood.
Unfortunately it's as expensive as old heck too.......$800 for that little beast.

[Ranch Dog]

Unfortunately it's as expensive as old heck too.......$800 for that little beast.

They forgot to put a forearm on the thing! Just looking at the picture and seeing the butt stock makes me hurt!

[pricedo]

Unfortunately it's as expensive as old heck too.......$800 for that little beast.

They forgot to put a forearm on the thing! Just looking at the picture and seeing the butt stock makes me hurt!

It's not as hard as you might think to shoot.
After all it's just a modestly powered .45 LC & not a .44 Mag, .454 Casull or anything bigger.
I cup my right shoulder into the curved butt plate and my left index finger goes into the curved spud located below the trigger guard.
Gotta scrunch a bit to get a good sight picture.
Think I'll mount a scout scope on it .........NOT !..........just kidding.

It's very risky placing any part of your body parallel to or forward of the cylinder vent of any firing revolver without the risk of incurring injury or burns from hot gases and high velocity particulate material.
I don't know how you'll avoid doing that with your Rossi rifolver.
My guess is you won't. I most certainly wouldn't fire the thing with a short sleeved shirt on.
From the looks of your Rossi I suspect that you'll be getting nipped from time to time by the hot gases and particles expelled through the revolver cylinder vent during firing.
Can't see how it can be avoided.

[Ranch Dog]

t's very risky placing any part of your body parallel to or forward of the cylinder vent of any firing revolver without the risk of incurring injury or burns from hot gases and high velocity particulate material.
I don't know how you'll avoid doing that with your Rossi rifolver.
My guess is you won't. I most certainly wouldn't fire the thing with a short sleeved shirt on.
From the looks of your Rossi I suspect that you'll be getting nipped from time to time by the hot gases and particles expelled through the revolver cylinder vent during firing.
Can't see how it can be avoided.

DANGER:The Circuit Judge has "SIDE BLAST" or "CYLINDER BLAST", hot gases and particles escaping at high speeds to the sides of the gun from the clearance gap between the cylinder and barrel. Keep people behind and away for you and keep you hands and body clear of the sides of the gun when firing.

Not sure how you are to "keep you hands and body clear of the sides of the gun when firing" but in reality your support arm is not out to the side but below the "blast line". The metal Gas Deflectors to a good job of directing the "blast" forward to the stock and the stock is shaped to push it up and away from your hands.





During my range session, the wind was lightly behind me and I experienced no debris other than the hammer spur departing the hammer as noted at the top of the topic. I purposely held the forearm during the shooting session. The shot at the hog was different in that the slight breeze was floating into me. I felt the blast against my arm, below my wrist. What surprised me the most was the noise. I usually keep two foam plugs in my T-shirt pocket and when I saw the hog I went to worm them out but they were not there. Not one to miss a shot at a hog, I found this rifle REALLY loud in that bottom. Holy cow!

It would be nice if I had my original CJ4510 for comparison as I think the deflector cut of the stock is stronger on this later model rifle as well as the butt stock being a little thicker where it meets the frame. I also know that the cylinder gap is tighter on this rifle at something less than .0010". The CJ4510 was .0012". Still the best news is the cylinder is not compromised by a shotgun shell chambering.

[pricedo]

The guy who designed the 1873 revolving carbine had his thinking cap on (and wanted it to stay on when he fired the gun ) and put a finger spud under the trigger guard which enabled shooters to fire the gun with no part of their anatomy forward of the trigger guard. There's no weight up front except the barrel so "hold on target" stability is not a problem.
Once you get used to it the gun is doggon accurate and with the adjustable target sights I'd have no problem taking the gun on a pig hunt and in fact have every intention of doing that very thing this fall.
If you're going to do a thing it''s best to do it right so I'm going to jury rig a tang rear sight for that little rifolver and will be putting the "scout scope crowd" to shame with my marksmanship .
Actually the adjustable target sights that are on my particular model now do a pretty good job..........I might just leave it at that.
And a carry weight of 3 pounds loaded !............how can that be a bad thing ?

[Ranch Dog]

Well, may be you can go ahead and call me quitter! I've thrown in the towel on my CJ44. It has insurmountable issues, as far as I'm concerned, that cannot be resolved at the reloading or shooting bench.

With my CJ4510, I never could get past the cylinder length. My interest in the rifle was that, just as a rifle and not a shotgun. The extra cylinder length to accommodate the 410 scattergun creates huge issues with the rifle side of the arm.

As I noted earlier in this topic, my CJ44 was "minute of hog", even proving it, but at the bench I found it downright sloppy in delivering any accuracy performance. I also could not hit any of my velocity predictions by a wide margin. The CJ always delivered 7% to 10% less velocity than those predicted by QuickLoad. Both my 1894P and R92 hit the projections offered by the software. The cylinder gap on the firearm is great at .005". This gap could not be responsible for this large of velocity loss.

I started to look at the rifle closely like I would any other rifle with accuracy issues. No issue with the cylinders, the problems start at the forcing cone. Before I move further let me show you my Taurus M44C self defense handgun, it too is chambered in 44 Mag.



The is a awesome handgun that delivers outstanding accuracy despite it's 2" barrel. Everything is right about it. In the above picture, I've take my 300-grain 44 Mag bullet and shoved it into the forcing cone as far as it can go. As you can see, the base of the bullet is fully supported by the cylinder as the contact is made.



The same cannot be said for the CJ44. I tried to take a picture similar to the one above but I couldn't. In this picture the very same bullet has been dropped into the forcing cone of the CJ, and it has disappeared! You cannot see it as it is 1.700" forward of the mouth of the cone. The base of the bullet is at the arrowhead.



The mouth of the forcing cone is .490"! Ahead of it is 1.700" of freebore, slowly tapering 1.01° to the leade. The initial portion of this barrel is offering no bullet support. It is just rattling through this airspace after jumping the cylinder gap, and then slamming into the bore/grooves. Not good.

I called Braztech on Thursday morning as I wanted to return the rifle as this just couldn't be right. Bottom line is that it is cut to the Braztech spec. They said I could send it back but it would be returned a month letter stating the same as my measurements match the cut they are delivering. Unbelievable! They are obviously using this airspace to correct or catch mechanically alignment issues and rapidly relieve pressures.

I never got this far with the CJ4510, couldn't stand the issues the cylinder length was creating but there is no doubt in my mind that the freebore is the same or greater. I was writing it's low velocities off to cylinder length but I suspect the freebore was part of the issue. The CJ22 has the same issues and is documented on Taurusarmed.net. The freebore will swallow a 22 Mag cartridge!

The rifle was moved to my FFL's consignment rack within the hour of talking to Braztech. My CJ ventures are over. Despite wanting to make this rifle work, Braztech has put too many factors against any hope of it's success. I can't really say I didn't try as I've purchased a thousand dollars worth of CJs! I took a $20 loss on the CJ4510 and hopefully will not see much more on this one. I did get the T-shirt!

[pricedo]

I've taken the heads off walking Ruffed Grouse at 20 yards with this old girl.........head & neck shots with a solid bullet mean no lead shot in the body to poison me or break my few remaining natural teeth.........& she's deadly accurate.
I have no doubt with the right bullet & load it'd lay a hog to rest.
That 3 pounds carry weight is easy to take & I have a double choker-loop sling rigged up for it.
It gets the odd chuckle from passers-bye on the way out to the hunt but when I'm coming back with my limit of rabbits & grouse slung over my shoulder the grins aren't quite so wide.
Didn't get a shirt though.........just solid reliable performance from this very unorthodox looking weapon.

[DrDyno]

...The mouth of the forcing cone is .490"! Ahead of it is 1.700" of freebore, slowly tapering 1.01° to the leade. The initial portion of this barrel is offering no bullet support. It is just rattling through this airspace after jumping the cylinder gap, and then slamming into the bore/grooves. Not good.

I called Braztech on Thursday morning as I wanted to return the rifle as this just couldn't be right. Bottom line is that it is cut to the Braztech spec. They said I could send it back but it would be returned a month letter stating the same as my measurements match the cut they are delivering. Unbelievable! They are obviously using this airspace to correct or catch mechanically alignment issues and rapidly relieve pressures.

Hi All,

This is my first post on Rossi-Rifleman. I'm new to Rossi rifles (having bought a .22 Circuit Judge just yesterday) but not new to Rifles nor to Taurus. I'm a member of the Taurus forum and, having read about the forcing cone issue on both sites, decided to add a couple of cents to the discussion.

A close friend of mine owned a Colt Python for several years with a six inch barrel (.357 Magnum). At the range, you could easily stand to his left as he fired with complete immunity. However, if you stood to his right, you were almost sure to catch some lead in the face. Obviously, his cylinder was out of alignment with the forcing cone or the forcing cone needed a ream job. However, he, as the shooter, was unaffected by the problem and the gun was an accurate shooter. Additionally, I own a Taurus 944 revolver in .22 Magnum which is as accurate a pistol as I have ever fired (revolver or semi-auto). It's astoundingly accurate, even with these old eyeballs. Additionally, it has no lead shaving issues. It only has a four inch barrel with a forcing cone that you can drop the bullet completely into (not the round, just the bullet). I haven't measured to see how far in the bullet picks up the rifling but, for the purpose of this conversation let's call it a half inch.

After reading up on my Circuit Judge, last night, I checked its forcing cone. As stated in this thread, my .22 Magnum round (shell and all) easily fell out of sight into the barrel. (I also noticed that the barrel/cylinder clearance is very tight.) Again, I haven't measured to see where the bullet picks up the rifling but, let's say it's the same distance as RanchDog's .45 Long Colt, 1.70 inches. I haven't fired it yet so I don't know what the gas will do but, for darn sure, the bullet is going into that hole! And, although I don't yet know it's accuracy let's just say it's equal to the average of the several reviews we've read on the .22 CJ at 2.5 inches at 50 yards. Comparing my very accurate 944 with a reasonably accurate [reviewed] .22CJ, 1/2 inch is 12.5% of of my 944's 4" barrel while 1.70 inches is 9% of my CJ's 18.5" barrel. From a design perspective these numbers may be related.

All of the above brings me to my point: With a revolver, every part of the shooter (as previously stated) is behind the barrel/cylinder alignment point, the entry to the forcing cone. The liability to the manufacturer is minimized by that fact. Bullets may shave and gasses may fly but the shooter, out of harm's way of gasses and lead, will probably wind up unscathed. However, with a revolver style rifle, the forearm is definitely in harm's way. So, from a liability point of view, how do you manufacture and market a revolver styled rifle with an acceptable level of liability? The easy answer: be damn sure the bullet can't contact the barrel at the forcing cone's entrance... by sinking the forcing cone down into the barrel; while keeping the barrel/cylinder clearance as close as possible for minimum gas loss. We know it will slow the bullet down a little but how does it affect accuracy? I don't think anyone really knows! I did a Google search for "forcing cone" and, although there are several shops that say it's extremely important for accuracy, I also found a couple of smiths who didn't appear to think so. My friend's Colt Python and my Taurus 944 would seem to support the latter. (similarly: http://www.grantcunningham.com/blog_fil ... b7-412.php)

I am not looking for a fight here. I really have no investment either way. I just think Taurus/Rossi came up with the most expedient way to safely market their wares, experimented with it, found out the bullet wasn't slowed enough to make it ineffective, the accuracy was acceptable for a carbine plinker and... they're manufacturing it to meet that criteria.

Respectfully,

John G.
St. Petersburg, FL