Quality of 2016-2017 Rossi 92's

The Rossi Model R92, a lightweight carbine for Cowboy Action, hunting, or plinking! Includes Rossi manufactured Interarms, Navy Arms, and Puma trade names.
Sarge
250 Shots
250 Shots
Posts: 291
Joined: 23 Mar 2014 22:56
Location: US
Has thanked: 118 times
Been thanked: 128 times

Quality of 2016-2017 Rossi 92's

Post by Sarge »

Howdy folks, hope you're all doing well.

I was considering a new 20 inch round barrel Marlin 1894 in 45 Colt. I posed this question about 94 Marlins over on the Leverguns forum, and in six posts heard about two barrels with bores so oversize they were keyholing badly.

Regarding function, I'm batting .500 on Rossi 92's but at least all of them were accurate. I like the 94 Marlin for it's man-sized stock so if any of you have experience, good or bad, with a Rossi 92's made in the last couple years I'd sure like to hear about it. Caliber is irrelevant for the purposes of this discussion. Thank you all in advance for any replies.
User avatar
zippy
250 Shots
250 Shots
Posts: 416
Joined: 05 Mar 2015 20:34
Location: Upstate South Carolina
Has thanked: 103 times
Been thanked: 103 times

Re: Quality of 2016-2017 Rossi 92's

Post by zippy »

My 92 is 2.5 years old. It's a 24" .357, and was fully functional straight from the box. The overly strong loading gate spring made loading unnecessarily slow, but narrowing the gate spring took care of it. Working the action a few thousand times smoothed it nicely.

I think I read somewhere that 45 Colt rifles have bore specs that differ from handgun bore specs.
ver2cal
Posts: 29
Joined: 14 Sep 2017 14:51
Location: USA
Been thanked: 11 times

Re: Quality of 2016-2017 Rossi 92's

Post by ver2cal »

My 20" .357 had a relatively smooth action, feeds .38 & .357 without a hitch and was very accurate when I bought it new. Box it came in has a September 2016 date on the label. Only complaints so far is as mentioned above an overly stiff loading gate and the forearm looks like it was pulled from the unfinished bin.
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: Quality of 2016-2017 Rossi 92's

Post by Ranch Dog »

zippy wrote:I think I read somewhere that 45 Colt rifles have bore specs that differ from handgun bore specs.
It is the 44 Mag that has a pistol and rifle SAAMI spec. There is only one spec for the 45 Colt but, all this being voluntary, a manufacturer can do what they want. My Rossi is a 2011 rifle; it was cut precisely to the SAAMI spec as measured by a chamber cast & slug. If I were doing this from the beginning, my comparison would be between the Rossi and the Henry Boy Steel.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Michael
Image
blaze
Posts: 2
Joined: 12 Sep 2017 17:08
Location: Vermont
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Quality of 2016-2017 Rossi 92's

Post by blaze »

Bought an R92 new six weeks ago. 357Mag w/16" bbl. It was the only .357 I could find at a decent price, under $500. The fit and finish are very very good. Feeds .357 mag and 38 Spl. (not full wadcutters) very well. And the accuracy is better than I expected for a new rifle with factory loads (under 2" with .357mag. 158 gr. JSP at 25 yds with a little support, not a real rifle rest and with open factory sights. As a youth, years ago, I had several Winchester 92's in .32-20 that were not as accurate or put together any better than this Rossi 92. I bought this Rossi to bring back all the good memories I had with those Winchester 32-20's.
Ohio3Wheels
1000 Shots
1000 Shots
Posts: 1599
Joined: 31 Jul 2014 15:18
Location: Dayton Oh
Has thanked: 227 times
Been thanked: 328 times

Re: Quality of 2016-2017 Rossi 92's

Post by Ohio3Wheels »

My 45 Colt is a few years old but has been trouble free from the git go. It feeds everything I've ask and seems equally accurate with jacketed and cast bullets. Shows a preference for "fat" cast.

My 357 is fairly new, it was a late 2016 build. Seems to feed everything I throw at it in 357 cases and a 357 OAL.Seems to prefer cast bullets in the 359 region. I would say fit and finish is very good, with the proviso that the "stain" is the usual water soluble Rossi stain.

With the current factory change in Brazil I'm not sure there are any 2017 production guns out there. They may be building some from earlier parts but I'm sure any one up here knows for sure what's going one.

Make smoke,
Curt... makin' smoke and raising my carbon foot print one cartridge at a time Image
m-saunoras
Posts: 75
Joined: 23 Sep 2017 15:37
Location: Pittsburgh PA
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: Quality of 2016-2017 Rossi 92's

Post by m-saunoras »

My .357 blued 20" has 2017 stamped on the underside. Also the "braztech" markings are etched more deep and not as bright and noticeable as the others I've seen.

I have no complains so far from my new one compared to the Puma I have. The only negative is the loading gate is a lot stiffer than my puma 44.

Since we're speaking of quality when I got my puma which I suspect is from the mid late 2000s it had a broken screw head on the rear barrel band AND the front screw was not even started into the threads. The wood has multiple dings and the ejector spring was much too stiff for even the best extractor to hang on to. I thought it might need some work but I was very surprised. My new 92 is a league ahead of the old one. I did eventually correct all the issues on the Puma
Me163b
Posts: 7
Joined: 29 Jul 2017 21:42
Location: Texas
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 6 times

Re: Quality of 2016-2017 Rossi 92's

Post by Me163b »

I bought mine stainless steel R-92, made in 2015, second hand. Fit and finish is pretty good and function flawlessly with both 38 special and 357 Mag. Loading gate is stiff and it's not stainless steel. Loading gate also have some surface porosity from casting.
User avatar
GasGuzzler
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2745
Joined: 02 Nov 2015 19:54
Location: Cooke County, TX
Has thanked: 310 times
Been thanked: 451 times

Re: Quality of 2016-2017 Rossi 92's

Post by GasGuzzler »

m-saunoras wrote:Since we're speaking of quality when I got my puma which I suspect is from the mid late 2000s it had a broken screw head on the rear barrel band AND the front screw was not even started into the threads. The wood has multiple dings and the ejector spring was much too stiff for even the best extractor to hang on to. I thought it might need some work but I was very surprised. My new 92 is a league ahead of the old one. I did eventually correct all the issues on the Puma
Your old one is not an OLD one though.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
I've always been crazy but it's kept me from going insane.
Sarge
250 Shots
250 Shots
Posts: 291
Joined: 23 Mar 2014 22:56
Location: US
Has thanked: 118 times
Been thanked: 128 times

Re: Quality of 2016-2017 Rossi 92's

Post by Sarge »

While it's a small sample of both, your collective experience with later R92's is better than that of late Marlin 94 owners. RD is probably laughing because I'd about sworn off Rossi's awhile back. I'm headed out today and will hit a few shops in my travels. If something falls in my lap, you folks will hear about it.

Thanks again for the input.
Post Reply