How many Rossi 92's have you had?

[Warhawk]

I have had several Rossi 92's over the past few years.

The first one was a 16 inch blue trapper in .45 Colt. Accurate reliable gun, my only complaint was that the sight settings changed drastically with different loads. And with 300+ grain bullets it needed a taller front sight. Definitely a gun that needs to be dialed in with one specific load. It also kicked like a mule, the recoil with heavy 300 and 325 grain handloads was worse than my Marlin 45-70s. I decided to consolidate my calibers and the 44 Mag won out over the 45 Colt, and this one got sold.

Next I picked up an EMF Hartford 20 inch saddle ring carbine, this one was blue with a case hardened receiver. It also had a bead front sight and a semi buckhorn rear, which I didn't care for at all. It sure was a beautiful gun though. I did shoot a coyote and a couple of armadillos with it. A good friend talked me out of this one, and it's on duty in San Antonio now.

When I learned about Steve Young, of Steve's Gunz, I ordered a stainless 44 trapper from him, complete with his action tune up. This is one of my all time favorite guns, I've shot a few hogs with it, all one shot kills.

I liked the .44 so well that I ordered a .357 just like it and got on Steve's waiting list to have it tuned up. (it's cheaper that way) This one really needed the tune up, very rough out of the box. This was an early Braztech import, the .44 had come from LSI. It's all tuned up and ready to go now, minus that silly safety that went into the round file on all my Rossi's.

I caught a big sale on the last of the LSI guns, and bought a 20 inch octagon/blue/CCH .44 magnum. These have the crescent buttplate and I get beat to a pulp by these. The .44 had just enough recoil to be very uncomfortable for me. It was a beautiful gun, but no fun to shoot so I sold it.

And finally, just a few weeks ago I ran across a Ranch Hand in .357 for sale online for $325. I'm a big fan of 357 leverguns, and couldn't resist. For some reason Rossi put the EMF Hartford type sights on these, I haven't shot it yet but I know I'm changing the sights. I need to write myself a note to call Steve Young tomorrow to order some goodies for the Ranch Hand, mag follower, safety plus, sights, etc.

[Ranch Dog]

Greeting Warhawk and welcome to the forum. It sounds like you are quite familiar with them! I've just bought my first R92, the 44 Mag Scout Rifle (R92-55002).

I been a Marlin guy, die-hard, pretty much have all the 336 and 1895 rifles. Purchased a Rio Grande 45-70 and have been hooked on the brand. The 45-70 has become my daily rifle here on the ranch, it is truly a light-weight carbine. Anyway, I decided I wanted to take a look at the Scout Rifle and had intended to try to find the 357 Mag but ran across the 44 Mag first. I figure this will be a great ranch rifle. I'm also anxious to shoot it against my 336-44 and 1894P.

[Warhawk]

I have a few Marlin lever guns too <G>

1973 39M Octagon
1967 39A - my dad's gun, and my only pistol grip lever
1982 1894c .357
200? 1894SS .44
1967 336 Texan
1972 336 Texan
1989 30TK
1981 30GT
1975 336 .35 - conversion to straight grip in progress
1975 1895
2001 1895GS

I won't buy one with the safety unless that was the only way it was made. When I do end up with a crossbolt safety, I add the delete kit before it ever goes to the range.

The 1967 Texan is the most worn of the bunch, and could use freshening up. I'm discussing a .50 Alaskan project with Regan Nonneman.

I'm also interested in getting a .444 to play with since the .44 Magnum is my favorite caliber. Might convert one of the 30-30's to a .444. I don't see myself ever using a 30-30 to hunt with, and if I did it would be one of the Texans or more likely the 30GT, I really like that little 30GT.

[pricedo]

I have 3 pre-safety Rossi 92 Pumas:
1) a 16" bbl .44 Mag - 4.8 lbs. - hard to beat that power/weight ratio
2) a 16" bbl .357 Mag. - a bit heavier that the .44 Mag cause you gotta remove more steel to make the .429 dia. bbl
3) a 20" bbl .454 Casull - less than 6 lbs with the power of a .45-70

Then the execs at Braztech had a meeting about what would be the stupidest thing they could possibly do that would stop them from acquiring too much market share from their competitors and they did IT.
IT was putting that hideous and absolutely useless and insulting firing pin safety on top of the receiver of future R92 rifles.
I for one WON'T be buying any of the R92s with the safety on it.

[Warhawk]

I wasn't aware they made any .454s before the safety came along. Good to know.

How often do you shoot full power loads in the 454? I had a .45 Colt trapper and with 45 Colt heavy loads it was brutal. I expected the stock to be broken after every range trip.

[pricedo]

I wasn't aware they made any .454s before the safety came along. Good to know.

How often do you shoot full power loads in the 454? I had a .45 Colt trapper and with 45 Colt heavy loads it was brutal. I expected the stock to be broken after every range trip.

Yup, there are a few, very few pre-safety Rossi Puma 92 .454s.
There was a small overlap between the .454 and the no safety era.
I won't buy a Rossi with one of those safeties on it.
If they want to put useless "Nanny knows best" stuff on their products I ain't buyin em.
Seems that Chiiappa & Pedersoli saw no need to clutter up their guns with superfluous silly safeties.
The double threaded magazine tube on the .454 model is an immensely strong contrivance and permits tube loading ammo like a Marlin 39A in addition to the loading port on the RS of the receiver.
With the recoil pad I don't find the recoil the least bit bothersome.
The wife fires the gun with .45 LC ammo.

[pricedo]

I wasn't aware they made any .454s before the safety came along. Good to know.

How often do you shoot full power loads in the 454? I had a .45 Colt trapper and with 45 Colt heavy loads it was brutal. I expected the stock to be broken after every range trip.

I'm on the scout for a .480 Ruger Puma 92 sans the silly safety.........preferably a 16" variant.

No big rush but if I find one on an used rack someday with a decent bore I'll buy it.

If the wood's crappy I'll adapt one of Brownell's Walnut stocks with the old fashioned pointed at the bottom butt plate and jury rig it to fit.

As I said I won't buy one of the Braztech R92s with that stupid safety.

[insector]

I have the M92 in a 16 inch barrel chambered in a .45 Colt...........I am presently shooting a 300 grain +P double tap factory load that claims about 1300 fps in a 7.5 inch pistol........so:

It does have significant recoil- but I don't mind it more than in my 30-06 (180 grain in a ruger no.1). I love the rifle and use it with a red dot for close range shots at big game (100 yards or less).........

I think I may be ready for that rossi in a 45-70 and then shorten the barrel to 16 inches..................I'm real curious as to how the guide gun feels first since I have not shot it yet................I can deal with that safety no problem..........

It's a well built piece (the rossi) every bit as good as a marlin 336 or 1894 - just different..........the "winchester" action locks up very nicely...........

[pricedo]

I wasn't aware they made any .454s before the safety came along. Good to know.

How often do you shoot full power loads in the 454?

Lots..........my wife shoots the .45LC stuff.......the Hornady LeveRevolution 225 grain factory loads.

I had a .45 Colt trapper and with 45 Colt heavy loads it was brutal. I expected the stock to be broken after every range trip.

The Rossi 16" models weigh 4.8 pounds.........a lot heavier than most revolvers which don't have the benefit of a shoulder rest..........the recoil can't be that bad unless you're a small guy.......if that's the case install a recoil pad like the .454 Casull model has and adjust the LOP accordingly.

[pricedo]

I wasn't aware they made any .454s before the safety came along. Good to know.

How often do you shoot full power loads in the 454? I had a .45 Colt trapper and with 45 Colt heavy loads it was brutal. I expected the stock to be broken after every range trip.

The Rossi 92s earmarked for the New Zealand & Australian marketplace apparently DO NOT have the silly safety on top of the receiver.