Rossi Rifleman

Conman wrote:I just love the egos that go along with modern firearms owners!!

John Moses Browning spent, I'm guessing, months - or maybe years, figuring out just how to make all the parts of the lever action rifle work together and last a few live times.

Now, along comes twenty-first century American who gets upset because he was not born with the knowledge to take it apart and put it back together the FIRST TIME. Give me a break people!

I cannot think of one reason to take the rifle apart!! Is something broken?? If NOT I never take my firearms apart. It certainly is not needed to clean them ....

Just my rant for the day,

One notable reason is to replace the ejector spring with one which doesn't launch brass into the next county. I also had to get at the lifter detent on one rifle, because it was so fouled from the factory that the lifter just wouldn't. Crud gets into places that aren't accessible just by opening the bolt. It's better to clean from the breech if you can (and with this rifle disassembled, you can). Plus, it's just fun to know how things work when all's well, then when something doesn't work, you have some idea how to fix it.

I took mine apart to slick it up and I used the Steve's gunz video for the modifications. I thought it was very simple but had just one issue and that was when putting the lower tang assembly back in. On his video he says to hold the trigger back to line it up and I thought he meant pulling it all the way back and I had nothing but trouble until I realized that I just needed to hold it back just enough to get the hammer and trigger to lock up. The video posted above helps and shows a tremendous amount. I have to say Steve's video helped to really slick up my 92.

I've never had a gun I didn't disassemble to at least clean but usually improve.

John Browning didn't build my Brazil made SRC92 or my Brazil made RIA 1911.

Brazilians did.

Bill Ruger didn't want my Blackhawk to be hard to load or have a crappy trigger but the lawyers did so I fit my own free spin pawl, fixed the trigger, installed a Bisley hammer, and rebuilt some old grips.

I doubt Mossberg cares much about a Maverick 88 but I do so I refit some parts and added a heat shield.

Bill Ruger didn't want my MKIII 22/45 to have a crappy trigger but it did. Volquartsen helped me fix that.

Marlin likely thought the 336 had good sights in 1951 but I elected to mount a vintage Redfield peep. Its firing pin was broken so I replaced it.

Bill Ruger likely didn't want my 10/22 to have plastic parts so I found metal ones from the days when he called for metal. I also fixed its ugly stock and replaced almost all the poorly designed internals.

My Rossi M88 had a DA pull well over 12 lbs, SA over 8. I spent no dollars fixing it.

I could go on but my point is you have no point. I fix my washing machine, dryer, ovens, cars, home HVAC, dishwasher, refrigerator, etc. why wouldn't I make improvements in my firearms?

I learned along time ago, after fighting with my first Ruger M2, to just Flush out with gun scrubber then relubricate. Taking some firearms apart and putting them back together,unless your a gunsmith and do it on a regular basis, is fun for the feeble minded!

cazio wrote:I took mine apart to slick it up and I used the Steve's gunz video for the modifications. I thought it was very simple but had just one issue and that was when putting the lower tang assembly back in. On his video he says to hold the trigger back to line it up and I thought he meant pulling it all the way back and I had nothing but trouble until I realized that I just needed to hold it back just enough to get the hammer and trigger to lock up. The video posted above helps and shows a tremendous amount. I have to say Steve's video helped to really slick up my 92.

Your experience with the lower tang and Steve's video is exactly the same as mine.

So now because I'm a layman that can take them apart and reassemble them I'm feeble minded? This topic is getting weird.

yep, I'm kinda the feeble minded sort too ... I just forgot how many brain cells are required to advance to the feeble minded stage. Is one enough?.... Are two too many?...... ? .... never mind, I think that was originally referring to something else ....


jd

I've got it down to about an hour to get it back together. It is pretty fiddly, trying to get everything lined up and to keep the guts in the bolt together. I wouldn't have taken mine apart except I had a case break off in both my .44 and .357 as well as the firing pin broke in my .357. I sure wouldn't take one apart for the fun of it! Taking it apart is child's play, it is getting it back together that ends up in cussing through clenched teeth. Once I've run out of cuss words it slides back together.

GasGuzzler wrote:So now because I'm a layman that can take them apart and reassemble them I'm feeble minded? This topic is getting weird.

Roger Dodger on that comment.

These aesthetic little machines are like puzzles. if you are good at puzzles and can visualize the outcome, then it works easier.

If you think a 92 is difficult for ya, then have somebody hand ya a John Browning Winchester 1897 shottie in a couple of pails and ask you to re-assemble. It will have ya studyin' the exploded drawings for a bit to understand.

I happen to find it all fascinating and useful.

Arroyoshark wrote:
I happen to find it all fascinating and useful.

So do I. I've entertained myself taking guns apart and putting them back together since I was ten or twelve. I'm 74 and still find it fun.

Part of the elegance of Browning's designs is how parts secure parts without the need of additional pins or screws. This requires sequential disassembly and assembly, but it makes sense. The same principle holds true for Ruger's Mark III pistols and 10/22 rifles. These guns receive a lot of abusive language from those who find them "impossible" to reassemble. They're not if one comprehends the sequence.