NEED HELP DECIDING WHICH MODEL 92 AS MY 1ST ONE!!!

The Rossi Model R92, a lightweight carbine for Cowboy Action, hunting, or plinking! Includes Rossi manufactured Interarms, Navy Arms, and Puma trade names.
Turkey Huntsman
Posts: 54
Joined: 30 Aug 2012 18:34
Location: CA
Been thanked: 1 time

NEED HELP DECIDING WHICH MODEL 92 AS MY 1ST ONE!!!

Post by Turkey Huntsman »

Group, can you please help a newcomer?

I am looking to buy my first ever Model 92, in .44 mag - to use primarily as a pig hunting rifle where the brush can get pretty thick. I've hunted pigs with my scoped .30-06 deer rifle, and learned immediately that it is not an optimum weapon to use: too long for running through brush, too heavy to be holding in the hand for long periods, and too much scope to follow the herd after the first shot is fired and they scurry off. A semi-auto carbine or short lever action seems much better suited to the task.

Which leads me to these questions:

1) BARREL LENGTH SELECTION. I'm trying to decide between the 20" or 16" barrel. The 16" seems ideal for the quick-swinging action and brush-busting that pig hunters often must do. But my local Rossi dealer has tried to steer me away from the 16" and over to the 20", saying that the loss of accuracy and velocity is not worth the 4" length and slight weight savings. Having no experience with either rifle, I cannot judge his claims.

Typically, we are shooting the pigs at 100 yards or less. I'd imagine the 16" barrel should be able to maintain reasonable accuracy at that distance, or am I incorrect? And what about velocity? I imagine it would be less with a 16" barrel , but is the difference significant? If one can kill deer and pigs with a 7-1/2" Ruger Blackhawk .44 mag, I'd reason that a 16" barrel would be easily more than enough to get that bullet moving fast enough. Or again...am I mistaken?

2) SIGHT OPTIONS. As one ages this becomes a big issue(!), and here on the 92 I'm confronted with the same challenges. I'm now rather farsighted, and cannot see rear sights with reasonable sharpness - even the front sight on a short gun is somewhat blurry. Wearing my reading glasses makes the sights sharp but then the target is blurry! Such is old age! So, I have to use either a red dot or low-power scope on my turkey shotgun to see a sharp image and aim confidently. I'd imagine I'll need to do the same on this gun.

What are people doing on these guns for alternate sights, and does barrel length affect what options one has? Is it possible to SAFELY drill and tap the barrel to affix a scope mount in front of the receiver? I could put a red dot or 1.5x pistol scope up there. Or...are there mounts that bolt in place of the rear sight blade?

Another option, but somewhat less attractive from a far-sighted man's viewpoint, is that XS and Steve's Gunz offer ghost-rings for the rear. That might actually be enough sight for me out to 100 yards, but I don't want to remove the factory safety to install it - as here in CA that could land you in prison if anyone ever got hurt accidentally (no, I'm NOT fooling about that law).
-------------------------------
I realize that I've put two separate topics in this thread, but they do go hand-in-hand and affect each other when selecting a gun. Please bear with my ignorance on this subject, but I'm entirely new to lever-action guns. Any opinions, guidance, advice in selecting my first 92 will be greatly appreciated!

Thanks very much,
-TH
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: NEED HELP DECIDING WHICH MODEL 92 AS MY 1ST ONE!!!

Post by pricedo »

I have a 16" Rossi M92 round barrel in 44 Mag.
I went with the 16" barrel cause it's lighter to carry and faster on target.
The 44 Mag was designed as a hand gun caliber and is loaded with fast powders to achieve its design velocity in revolvers with 4"-6" "vented" (cylinder - forcing cone gap) barrels.
Won't be a significant velocity gain in any extra barrel length above 16" in my opinion.
Seems to be a popular misconception that shorter barrels are inherently less accurate.
It takes more concentration & skill to shoot accurately with a shorter barrel but it isn't about the barrel........it's about the shooter and his skill level.
LIFE MEMBER - NRA & GOA
User avatar
44-40 Willy
Founding Member
Founding Member
Posts: 285
Joined: 19 Apr 2012 21:05
Location: NW Tennessee
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 42 times

Re: NEED HELP DECIDING WHICH MODEL 92 AS MY 1ST ONE!!!

Post by 44-40 Willy »

I like longer barrels and handload using slower burning powders to make the most of them. But that's just me.
Navy Arms 1892 - 357 Mag - 24" Octagon heavy barrel.
Rossi 62 Octagon 22LR
User avatar
joec
Founding Member
Founding Member
Posts: 508
Joined: 08 Jun 2012 08:30
Location: Lexington Kentucky
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 39 times

Re: NEED HELP DECIDING WHICH MODEL 92 AS MY 1ST ONE!!!

Post by joec »

I have two lever guns a Rossi 92 and a Rio Grande. My 92 is 20" octagon barrel 45 Colt, however I got it for cowboy action shooting not hunting. That is covered by the 20" round barrel 45-70 RG. The 16" would be great as a brush gun in my opinion but not enough rounds for CAS shooting.
Joe
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: NEED HELP DECIDING WHICH MODEL 92 AS MY 1ST ONE!!!

Post by pricedo »

44-40 Willy wrote:I like longer barrels and handload using slower burning powders to make the most of them. But that's just me.
The 16" barrel for a relatively small case capacity revolver cartridge like the 44 Mag is plenty.
The add more slower burning powder theory is good to a point but the small case capacity soon becomes a limiting factor.
That's why they invented the 444 Marlin. :D
LIFE MEMBER - NRA & GOA
dpe.ahoy
Founding Member
Founding Member
Posts: 153
Joined: 15 Mar 2012 00:26
Location: Billings, MT.
Has thanked: 251 times
Been thanked: 11 times

Re: NEED HELP DECIDING WHICH MODEL 92 AS MY 1ST ONE!!!

Post by dpe.ahoy »

The newer ones are drilled and tapped for a scout mounted sighting system under the rear sight, order the mount from Rossi. A red dot or scout scope would work very well on the 16" barrel. No worries on the 44 mag in the 16" tube, you will have plenty of power. DP
User avatar
Ranch Dog
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 9398
Joined: 23 Jan 2012 07:44
Location: Inez, TX
Has thanked: 1837 times
Been thanked: 2281 times

Re: NEED HELP DECIDING WHICH MODEL 92 AS MY 1ST ONE!!!

Post by Ranch Dog »

I seem to be the "scope on a 92" guy here, I ran a search that I think bought up a most of the discussion topics. My desire for a scope is not so much eyesight driven but I am a hog hunter, averaging a hog a week throughout the year, and that means hunting in the lowest usable light. This week, I've been out in the middle of the night with the full moon and I do not use any type of artificial lighting but would take advantage of an ambient lighting available such as offered in my "shooting gallery".
dpe.ahoy wrote:The newer ones are drilled and tapped for a scout mounted sighting system under the rear sight, order the mount from Rossi.
I'm not sure if Rossi is drilling and tapping their 92's any more. I asked them specifically about the 92 chambered in 357 Mag and the answer was no, only the R92-56002 which is the Scout Rifle and it is in very limited runs. Yesterday, I looked at a bunch of new R92s, including rifles chambered in 44 Mag, and none where prepped for scout scope use.
Turkey Huntsman wrote:BARREL LENGTH SELECTION. I'm trying to decide between the 20" or 16" barrel. The 16" seems ideal for the quick-swinging action and brush-busting that pig hunters often must do. But my local Rossi dealer has tried to steer me away from the 16" and over to the 20", saying that the loss of accuracy and velocity is not worth the 4" length and slight weight savings. Having no experience with either rifle, I cannot judge his claims.

Typically, we are shooting the pigs at 100 yards or less. I'd imagine the 16" barrel should be able to maintain reasonable accuracy at that distance, or am I incorrect? And what about velocity? I imagine it would be less with a 16" barrel , but is the difference significant? If one can kill deer and pigs with a 7-1/2" Ruger Blackhawk .44 mag, I'd reason that a 16" barrel would be easily more than enough to get that bullet moving fast enough. Or again...am I mistaken?
As far as the difference in barrel length goes, I own the R92-55002 and R92-57002 scout rifles which are chambered in 44 Mag and 45 Colt respectively. These rifles have a 20" barrel. I also own a Marlin 1894P and an 1894S, both with 16 1/4" barrels and like the Rossi rifles they are chambered in 44 Mag and 45 Colt. I guess the best way to present my chronographed results is with this chart.

Image

In a nutshell and as far as the hog on the receiving end is concerned, I do not think the shorter barrel has a terminal ballistic disadvantage. I would handle both and make your decision based on how they feel to you.
Turkey Huntsman wrote:SIGHT OPTIONS. As one ages this becomes a big issue(!), and here on the 92 I'm confronted with the same challenges. I'm now rather farsighted, and cannot see rear sights with reasonable sharpness - even the front sight on a short gun is somewhat blurry. Wearing my reading glasses makes the sights sharp but then the target is blurry! Such is old age! So, I have to use either a red dot or low-power scope on my turkey shotgun to see a sharp image and aim confidently. I'd imagine I'll need to do the same on this gun.

What are people doing on these guns for alternate sights, and does barrel length affect what options one has? Is it possible to SAFELY drill and tap the barrel to affix a scope mount in front of the receiver? I could put a red dot or 1.5x pistol scope up there. Or...are there mounts that bolt in place of the rear sight blade?
The scope does present more of an issue if the your choice of rifle is not pre-drilled and tapped. It will cost $80 to $120 to do the work but make sure the fellow doing it knows what he is doing and has the proper jig. He should also have the Rossi P892 mount in hand before he starts the work. I would suggest buying the mount through Rossi USA rather than SG as they are half the cost. I would be happy to provide an image with the exact positioning for the mount based on measured distances from the receiver lip and aft portion of the barrel band. These measurements are important to match the taper of the base to the taper of the barrel.

You will also need a scout rifle specific scope. There is a difference in the eye relief in scout rifle scopes and pistol scopes. I tried both and what becomes most evident with the pistol scope is the amount of glare you are given back in the view. Bushnell explained this to me, something to do with the focal length or whatever. I did notice it in the field while hunting particularly when it was right at sunset. If that setting sun had any angle on the eye bell of the scope, good luck. That leaves three choices of scout rifle scopes and they are not inexpensive. I've detailed the choices in a topic on this forum. All told it is very easy to spend as much as the rifle cost, scoping a 92. I didn't mind the cost as it is simply a ranch tool for me and both my 92s have already earned their keep as each has racked up over a dozen kills this year. I also have a R92 chambered in 480 Ruger being prepped with the scout mount as this written so I have a very good grip on the cost of the work.

Finally, you should be prepared to epoxy your mount on to the barrel. Based on what I've experienced, I will not even second guess it now. Come to find out from the fellow working on my R92 480 Ruger, this is common now for any scout rifle with heavy recoil.
Turkey Huntsman wrote:Another option, but somewhat less attractive from a far-sighted man's viewpoint, is that XS and Steve's Gunz offer ghost-rings for the rear. That might actually be enough sight for me out to 100 yards, but I don't want to remove the factory safety to install it - as here in CA that could land you in prison if anyone ever got hurt accidentally (no, I'm NOT fooling about that law).
Here are all three of the Marbles Bullseye Sights through Buffalo Arms, same as the single sight offered by SG but at a cost significantly less. They also sell the appropriate front sights if you need a change it. The front sight I received from SG fit the dovetail but the base that sits above the barrel was too wide, very unsightly. I would need to refer to some notes in my shop for the appropriate width but Buffalo has a complete line in stock.

I've actually reinstalled the pigtails safety on my R92s. I'm hunting in a high humidity environment and decided I wanted the margin of safety it offers when uncocking the hammer.

Oh, where are my manners! Welcome to the forum and hope to see some pictures of hogs vs. R92 real soon!
Michael
Image
Turkey Huntsman
Posts: 54
Joined: 30 Aug 2012 18:34
Location: CA
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: NEED HELP DECIDING WHICH MODEL 92 AS MY 1ST ONE!!!

Post by Turkey Huntsman »

Michael and others,

Thanks very much for the welcome, all of the your responses and valuable information. Ballisticsbytheinch.com verifies Michael's findings, and actually reports the 16" tube to provide sightly higher velocity than the 20"!!! This of course is powder burn-rate dependent, but it adds up to the same conclusion: the velocity differential between a 16" and 20" are insignificant for one whom is hunting small to medium game at 100 yds and less. Shorter sight radius makes the 16" harder to put and keep on target vs. the 20" - that is a given. Balance and weight is a subjective thing that only I can decide. Unfortunately, here in San Diego we have very few gun dealers - and finding a 16" off the rack is not possible at the present time. It's frustrating as all hell sometimes, to be living in a place where guns and hunting are viewed with extreme political incorrectness. It makes it tough to pursue the sport and obtain equipment on a local level. We must often buy arms online, and sight-unseen - not exactly how I'd prefer to do it.

I was initially buoyed by dpe.ahoy's comment that the barrels were all drilled and tapped, then equally deflated when Michael reported otherwise. Total cost of ownership is a concern for this retired guy (think: fixed income), and paying over $100 to drill/tap the barrel is a definite downside. I searched the web dealers for the 20" Rossi scout rifle and couldn't find one anywhere. Perhaps there are dealers with large Rossi inventory that I've not yet considered?

If I can't find a Rossi scout model, the Marlin Model 1894 starts to look more attractive. With it's side-eject and drilled/tapped receiver, mounting a scope or red dot would involve no additional expense. That being said, the Marlins base price is quite a bit more expensive than the Rossi, and I've read many a horror story about poor quality in the new models since Winchester bought them out. I don't know what to think about all that. I will say this, in the store I hefted both the Marlin and R92 side-by side. The Marlin was WAY heavier than the Rossi, and that brings me right back to my original problem of hunting pigs with an overly-long and heavy .30-06.

There seems no overwhelmingly best choice in this matter, does there?

-TH
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: NEED HELP DECIDING WHICH MODEL 92 AS MY 1ST ONE!!!

Post by pricedo »

The generally accepted fact that in the cases of the relatively low case capacity revolver cartridges like the 45LC & the 44Mag the velocity gained by adding more barrel length over and above 16" is insignificant (3.5%) has been born out by empirical data.
The faster powders used in these cartridges have "done their thing" by the time the bullet reaches the 16" mark in the barrel and another 4" of barrel is just a longer snout to maneuver in & around obstacles and catch in the shrubs and branches & and generally be an additional PITB during transportation & in the hunting field.
In the higher case capacity versus caliber cartridges like the 444 Marlin the ability to pack the case with more of slower burner powders and stay within maximum chamber pressure constraints gives the longer barrel firearm a meaningful advantage ......again within limits.
Longer barrels are NOT inherently more accurate than shorter barrels.
All other things being equal shooting shorter barreled guns accurately generally takes a higher degree of concentration & skill...............be fully aware that the limiting factor is the shooter and NOT the barrel.
LIFE MEMBER - NRA & GOA
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: NEED HELP DECIDING WHICH MODEL 92 AS MY 1ST ONE!!!

Post by pricedo »

In regards to the scout scopes, mounts, rails & accessories there are also a lot of bargain priced choices on Amazon.com.
I find that scope fastening attachments with Torx screws are a lot more robust and "competent" that the usual shallow slotted flat head screws that have a tendency to strip out and bugger when tightening.
Using Loctite and Torx screw attachments does not result in the attachment becoming a permanent fixture of the gun.
I like to keep the "back door" open so that in the future I can remove an attachment that breaks, malfunctions or no longer meets my needs.
The higher quality Warne products use Torx screws.
LIFE MEMBER - NRA & GOA
Post Reply