Feeding of out of spec rounds

[Rasputin]

I am trying to get an out of spec round to feed in my Rossi Model 92 Octagon SS .357. All normal rounds feed without a problem, including this bullet profile when loaded to spec. The round I am having trouble with measures 1.674 inches col. It feeds from the tube, but the carrier doesn't lift it to enable it to chamber.

For those who may be wondering, the bullet is the Beartooth 185gr FNGC. I am seating and crimping it to the bottom of the lube groove that is just below the crimp groove. Loaded by hand, single-shot style, the bullet barely misses contacting the rifling.

Since I know that someone will ask, "Why?", there are two reasons. I've read that this bullet's profile was modified to permit smoother feeding in our guns. (I know, I'm breaking something that Marshall Stanton fixed.) The current bullet now sits deeper in the case.

The second reason is that I really like the idea of the .357 Maximum in a rifle. Now, before you hurt yourself rolling your eyes, yes, I've read all of the threads explaining why trying to re-chamber one to that cartridge is a bad idea and not what I'm trying to do. I'm just trying to increase the powder capacity of the round a tad. Call it a ".357 Magnimum".

Call this a third reason, but I also want to try to get the most out of my 24 inch barrel by using a larger charge of Lil Gun instead of the more standard H110/W296.

My hope was that there may be some adjustments that I can make before I begin "carefully" filing away at the cartridge stop. I've been told that this modification will do what I need.

Any suggestions on the best method for milling/filing the cartridge stop would be greatly appreciated.

I know that this post is a bit long. I just wanted let those trying to help know that there is nothing wrong with the rifle. It's just me and my inability to leave well-enough alone.

Thanks for your help.

[Tuco Ramirez]

Oh one of those fix it when it not broke kind of guys...... Don't think for one minute you have a reserved spot at the front of that line.. I was here first..

I can't help you with the 92 as I don't own one yet. Just be carefull when making modifications to get this round to work because it may have an adverse affect for the ones that work now. So you have the the 357 Maximum bug..... me too. Only I am going the H&R route. Keep us posted on your progress good or bad.

[Ranch Dog]

I durn sure wouldn't chop on anything until I had a spare part in hand. Make sure you can at least get the replacement on the way. I actually shoot my 190-grain bullet in my R92 on occasion. What I do is use 38 Spl brass but load it to 357 Mag pressures.

[akuser47]

I durn sure wouldn't chop on anything until I had a spare part in hand. Make sure you can at least get the replacement on the way. I actually shoot my 190-grain bullet in my R92 on occasion. What I do is use 38 Spl brass but load it to 357 Mag pressures.

Agreed do not touch until you have a bcakup so you do not end up with a unusable gun for a while. Also keep us posted to your results.

[Rasputin]

Just be careful when making modifications to get this round to work because it may have an adverse affect for the ones that work now.

If I can get it to work, this will be the only round that I use in this gun.

I durn sure wouldn't chop on anything until I had a spare part in hand.

Yeah, that was the plan. I was hoping someone in here might have had a positive experience with this type of modification. Sufficient at least to nudge me into going for it. The plan is to buy a spare, and experiment on that. Looks like I'll just have to "bite the bullet" so to speak.

Time to find parts.

Thanks for the input.

[Ranch Dog]

I am trying to get an out of spec round to feed in my Rossi Model 92 Octagon SS .357. All normal rounds feed without a problem, including this bullet profile when loaded to spec. The round I am having trouble with measures 1.674 inches col. It feeds from the tube, but the carrier doesn't lift it to enable it to chamber.

I'm back home and the weather is too bad to go outside so I thought I would revisit this topic.

Kind of wondering why the measurements come up at 1.674? SAAMI spec brass should be 1.290" and the bullet's nose to crimp length is .320". The sum of the two should be 1.61 or am I missing something? I noticed that Marshall does not offer this bullet at .357". The two R92s I've owned, both of Braztech manufacture, where right on the SAAMI groove spec of .355" so I sized my big bullets at .357". I found the difference of the fit between .357" and .358" very critical with the heavy bullets and their long noses (175 and 190-grains). It might be worth investing in a Lee .357 Lube & Size Kit to uniform the bullets at .357" before you start trimming down metal.

I personally think that anything beyond 1.61", give or take a thousand or two based on bullet ogive, is not possible with the standard R92. I cannot see that trimming the parts will make up the .064" you need. Rossi ran into this with their 454 Casull and it requires a different lever with a cam cutout to get the bolt further back.

Your interest in 357 Maximum performance is understandable but of course there is no way to achieve the 1.990" cartridge overall length in R92 that would be needed. If I wanted more out of my 357 Magnum rifles, I would just bump up the pressure that I'm loading to. The case density with Lil'Gun allows it.

I've worked Lil'Gun in depth and it is my powder choice for revolver type cartridges. I can also tell you that a little means a lot with Lil'Gun so working up to a load and measuring is important. I do not use volumetric loading with Lil'Gun, I weigh the load for every cartridge. In the range of charge that I am discussing here, a 1/10th of a grain is huge. I have also gone through quite of a few pounds of this powder and each lot has been different so the loads must be reevaluated with each lot. Because of that, I now buy Lil'Gun in the 8# jugs. I do have the benefit of pressure trace equipment when I work up loads.

I've offered the above advice because I wanted to offer a sample of loads to support simply loading the 357 Mag hotter without modifying your rifle. There is no doubt the R92 can handle 40.0K PSI as it is doing it with the 44 Mag, 454 Casull, and 480 Ruger. It is the Lil'Gun I worry about. Use a chronograph and stop if the suggested velocity is reached.

R92_lilgun.jpg

Personally, I would load the bullet at the intended 1.610" at 40.0K PSI and call it quits. The use of this data is at your own risk.

[donhuff]

Rasputin,

I have filed back the little tit on the rear of the carrier on my 357/92. Note! this is NOT called the cartridge stop, thou sometimes people (including me ) refer to it as such. I don't want you to be getting good info about how to fix....the part your not working on!

Anyways, I filed it back until the carrier would swing up with my favorite bullet for this caliber, loaded in the crimp groove. I shoot the Lyman 358429 which is a SWC but is pretty long too. It will not work in a S&W revolver but is ok in a Ruger Blackhawk. Because of the longer cylinder of the BH.

I just went out and loaded one long to check for you, and 1.680 was where it was short enough, that it would clear enough for the carrier and round to swing up. But it would make a little hiccup going into the chamber, but would go if "persuaded" to do so. That is just long nuf to not crimp in the groove correctly. IIRC the proper length when in the crimp groove and butted all the way to the forward band, is around 1.665-.670, and at that length it cycles perfectly. I did not have to do any work to the guides to make it work right there but that is the absolute limit. At 1.7 you can snap the lever hard and that will mash the nose a little, and it WILL raise the carrier. But then the rim will not clear the guides before the nose of the round hits the top of the chamber and the case hit the bottom of the chamber mouth (which is part of what makes the rim end come up through the guides) and so, it jams. Yes I could file on the back edges of the notches in the GUIDES to allow the rim to rise sooner and that should eliminate that problem, but I'm afraid it might mess up the guns ability to feed 38 special cases, which it does very well now. Don't know for sure, but until I have another set of guides, I aint gonna try it. IF... the long one was the only bullet that I would ever use I would not hesitate to file them.

But now, all of this is with my SWC which has a smallish meplat compared to the RF style bullets that are so popular. Before moding you carrier tit. Try dropping a round in from the top with the carrier all the way up. Work it through the guides until it is under them like it would be if cycled up from the bottom. Now see if it will feed into the chamber without jamming. Do that several times to be sure. It would be a shame to fix the coming up part, only to find out that the going in part, won't go.

I too would like the max in a 92 but there just is not enough length for it to fit. I have a 454 which has a longer carrier deck so to speak, and it will feed a 357 @ 1.725 - .750 pretty easy. This would be using 360 Dan Wessow brass (1.4" brass). And I have trimmed a max brass to 1.480 and with a 158JSP it will feed well too, but that would be a lot of trouble to go through to still be shy of the max's performance.

Like has been said before, the 357/44 Bain and Davis would give you max or slightly better, performance.And would feed wonderfully because it is a bottleneck. And also you would not have to modify parts but would have to put a 357 barrel onto a 44 action. And of course ream the chamber, but you would have to do that anyway. Plus, there is a little bit of loading data out there for the B&D.

[Rasputin]

Wow, lots of good info. Thanks.

Kind of wondering why the measurements come up at 1.674? SAAMI spec brass should be 1.290" and the bullet's nose to crimp length is .320". The sum of the two should be 1.61 or am I missing something?

the Beartooth 185gr FNGC. I am seating and crimping it to the bottom of the lube groove that is just below the crimp groove

I'm not seating the bullet in the crimp groove, thus the extra length.

The two R92s I've owned, both of Braztech manufacture, where right on the SAAMI groove spec of .355" so I sized my big bullets at .357".

That's really interesting, because my Braztech Rossi Model 92 slugged out at .357". FWIW, my .44 Magnum slugged at .429", which is SAAMI spec. How old was your .357? I bought mine about two years ago. Just wondering if they changed anything recently. I would automatically doubt my slugging, except that the .44 came out at spec. I'll have to slug the .357 again.

Thanks for the heads-up regarding Lil'Gun, Ranch Dog. I've never used it but it looked like the logical choice from the loading manuals. I will definitely be very careful when I use it.



donhuff, thanks for sharing your experience with this. As you and Ranch Dog both pointed out, there is not enough room to fit a Maximum length cartridge in the 92 action. For that matter, I don't think the round I have loaded is ever going to feed either. When I would try to feed one from the magazine it would, of course, get stuck. I used a paper clip bent into an "L" shape to slip under the round and "pop up" the nose end; leaving the round in the ready-to-chamber position. As you have guessed, the shoulder of the bullet hits the top of the chamber wall and stops. It had been my hope that in starting from a more rearward position that this could be avoided, but this obviously won't lower the angle of the carrier and still would not permit the round to feed.

Not really sure what I'm going to do now; I am not generally one who gives up. I will probably just single feed the round from the top and keep normal rounds in the magazine for quick follow-up shots. I realize that this will change the point of impact, I'll just have to see how much.

Thanks for all of the great info and advice.

[Ranch Dog]

That's really interesting, because my Braztech Rossi Model 92 slugged out at .357". FWIW, my .44 Magnum slugged at .429", which is SAAMI spec. How old was your .357? I bought mine about two years ago. Just wondering if they changed anything recently. I would automatically doubt my slugging, except that the .44 came out at spec. I'll have to slug the .357 again.

I bought two 357 Mags in 2012, both right off the boat.