What to do... What to do?????

[MoMan]

O.K., last time I was kicking around buying an older Marlin 336. I decided to pass on that rifle and instead seek out my Rossi 92, in 357 mag, which is what I really wanted.
Here is my question:
I can get a new Rossi Model 92, blued 16" round barrel, in 357 mag right now for $529+tax (local WM has it right now!)
OR I can wait until my LGS gets his hands on a Rossi 92, blued 20" round barrel, in 357 mag for me. I can get this one for probably $500 OTD. The problem is he can't locate any at his normal distributors, and we don't know when they may hit.

SOOOO what do you Folks think? I kind of like the little 16" carbine, bit my M92, 45lc is a 20" blued round barrel, and I'm thinking I may want to match that.

Let's hear your thoughts on both the pros/cons of both my options.

Thanks for any, and all comments!

[7.62 Precision]

For practical reasons, I like the 16". You don't really need much more length to accelerate the .357 Mag. But I like the 20" ones, too. I would say just a matter of your personal preference, unless a longer sight radius or the difference in balance, or the extra capacity are important to you.

I would expect the next run pretty soon.

[MoMan]

7.62, Thanks for the input. The 16" is what I originally thought I wanted. It's a short little sucker, and seems quick to handle. But then I pick up my 20" 45lc, and think; this thing is nice to shoot. I think I am going to handle the 16" again and see what I think. I gonna keep an eye here to see what other input I get.

It is GREAT news that the others may becoming available soon. I really want to buy it from my Local Guy, that has been my hesitation to buying the 1st one I found.

[GRV01]

Well either you could make the two 92s match or you can differentiate them, make them more distinguishable

You already mentioned making them look alike, both in 20" but i feel getting the Trapper could be interesting, give them two different personalities even

Tough choice! But i feel availability goes a long way too because hey, who knows how soon or long itll be til we see new Rossi stock on our shelves. Could be months, could be next week but i know with us i opted to buy what i could when i could but mostly because i just couldnt wait

[MoMan]

Well either you could make the two 92s match or you can differentiate them, make them more distinguishable

You already mentioned making them look alike, both in 20" but i feel getting the Trapper could be interesting, give them two different personalities even

Tough choice! But i feel availability goes a long way too because hey, who knows how soon or long itll be til we see new Rossi stock on our shelves. Could be months, could be next week but i know with us i opted to buy what i could when i could but mostly because i just couldnt wait

GRV, Thanks for the reply. Valid points indeed.
I'm also of the: "I can't wait", camp. I get antsy, and want it now. I'm really trying to hold off, and buy from my local guy. Maybe I just need to take the M92, 45lc out for a day at the range to scratch that itch. MAYBE that will make me be more patient. OR.... maybe it will make me want the 357 mag even more. DECISIONS, DECISIONS!!

[Mauser69]

It is all personal preference. Personally, I think the little 16" guns are a total joke (but then, I am a tall guy).

The first R92 I saw was a tiny little .357 16" at the local sporting goods store. I picked it up and just snorted - I would have much rather had an old Daisy BB gun that that little ugly thing. Even my wife (who is over a foot shorter than I am) thought it looked like a toy. To top everything else off, the stock fit and finish on that thing was especially bad. I just walked out of the store laughing.

I eventually bought a 20" blued .357 from a mail order source, and I could not be more happy with it. Not only does it look great, but it has functioned perfectly too.

[Archer]

I'm a fan of the 20" barrel.
I have a several with that barrel length and don't find it to be a problem.
I have a bud with the 16" and find it a bit short. I'm told by several that it works well for getting into and out of vehicles and one poster on this site says it is excellent for his combine cab.

I find the 24" guns to slow down a bit on swinging on target and to be just a tiny bit more awkward than the 20" rigs. I have a couple of them and find them quite fun.

I may eventually pick up a 16" but I'm honestly in the market for another 20" .357 rather than go with a 16 or 24.

[GasGuzzler]

16" looks weird to me.

With 1:30 twist you can benefit from extra barrel length.

Get what you want.

[HarryAlonzo]

I can't swear to it, but I don't think extra barrel length makes the bullet twist any faster. I've heard great weeping and gnashing of teeth about the Rossi's slow twist rate on this forum, but the Winchester (Miroku) 92 isn't much better at 1:26 in the .44. I am also of the understanding that bullet stabilization is a bigger issue with heavier bullets, so I'm not sure it matters very much in a .357.

[Archer]

The bullet doesn't twist faster in terms of twist rate per inch BUT you will get a slight bit more velocity out of max powered rounds compared to the shorter barrel length. You should even get a velocity bump to medium powered rounds. Don't believe all the hype you will hear about handgun bullets reaching their maximum velocity out of a barrel around 16" and particularly don't believe it when it comes to magnum loadings. In any event a bump in velocity results in a bump in RPM which typically can bump your stability/range a mite.

You are correct in that faster twists better stabilize heavier bullets. Heavier bullets for caliber also tend to penetrate better and are often of heavier construction so are often better suited for heavier game when hunting. We have at least one member interested in pushing 180 grain pills out of his .357 model 92. I think we have at least one other who has rechambered and is pushing .357 Maximum.

(I'm not sure I'd want to make the claim that 1:26 isn't much better than 1:30 when it comes down to twist rates. Yeah it isn't a huge bump but I think we'd all take it given a choice. Marlin was even worse with the initial .444 Marlin guns at 1:38 which they later stepped up to 1:20. The older Speer manual I've got uses one of the older guns for their test weapon and claims it turned in some of it's best groups using the .300 grain bullet they offer. According to some figuring the heaviest bullet those guns stabilize very well is .265 grains hence the Hornady bullets available in that grain weight.)