Rossi R92 fan club

[ldmay375]

I guess, I joined the R92 club. I bought a stainless 20" R92 454 Casull. I have not fired it yet. But, did cycle a few Buffalo Bore & Grizzly Ammo 360 grain hard cast and Grizzly Ammo 335 hard cast. All seems fine with the feeding.

Honestly I had only just recently had given these Rossi stainless rifles a second look. The local gun store has had some 44 mag & 45 Colt rifles. I handled a few. And was actually pleased with the actions. Yeah, some visual aspects as the stock shape and the bolt safety, and not a big fan on the buckhorn sights. But those items can be changed.

Anyways, I thought a 454 would be neat. IF it would cycle the bigger hard cast. I have a couple of finicky feeder 45 Colts from the big
brands. Frankly a POA, and was about to move on from the pistol cartridge lever guns.

I took another chance. This 454 seems to digest what I would feed it. If it shoots decently, I will be very pleased. The action operates very smoothly. I hope to fire a few rounds this next week.

[lar4570]

Excellent, hope you like your new rifle. I have a 24" stainless Octagon 45 colt and a 20" blued 357.
Just closed the deal on a 20" blued 480 also.

[ldmay375]

I am looking forward to shooting this one.
Without having fired rounds down range, I am pleased with the rifle.

There are somethings that are aftermarket available, that I will change to my personal preference. But if she shoot's respectably and handles the upper mid-range 454, it will definitely see some use.

I would be very tempted by a stainless 480. I looked at a Rossi 480 a couple of years ago. I honestly don't recall if it was stainless or blue. But, we wanted more than I was willing to pay at the time. I am definitely a fan of the cartridge and the revolvers that I have in it.

[ldmay375]

Aug 11, 2023 21:58:34 GMT -5 lar4570 said:

Excellent, hope you like your new rifle. I have a 24" stainless Octagon 45 colt and a 20" blued 357.
Just closed the deal on a 20" blued 480 also.

I have only had the chance to have fired a couple of quick 2 rounds of Buffalo Bore 45 Colt through it. I have fed / cycled a few different types of 45 Colt & 454 Casull through it. They were mostly hard cast 320-360 grain loads. No issues on the feeding with the types that I have on hand. I am leaning towards putting a red dot type sight on it.

I am optimistic that it will give decent / satisfactory accuracy. Optimistic enough to have ordered a stainless 16" version in 45 Colt. I have revolver cartridge rifles in newer version Winchester 94's and a 92, and a Marlin 1894. This Rossi in stainless is a plus to me. The stock and forend, I will probably change to laminated. The safety may stay or be deleted. I have the replacement plug. I have pretty much become accustomed to seeing it.

I will be interested in your thoughts on that 480 version. I have only seen one of those. I think it was stainless. But, it has been a few years ago and could be wrong. I do remember that they wanted more than I was willing to pay at the time. The 480 Ruger is solidly in my favorites of revolver cartridges.

[dobegrant]

I have an older blued 92 .45 colt with a 2" octagon barrel, very smooth and accurate

[z1r]

I recently came into a 92 in 454 as well. I've not shot it yet but was so impressed with how much better the quality of the newer made examples are over the older Interarms imports I have. SO, I picked up a couple of SS .44 mags. One with 16" bbl the other 20".

I'm thinking of a blued 20" .357.

Currently have a .357, .44-40, .454, and the two .44 mags.

[jeffh]

I'm a fan!

I was much ore a fan when they were going for about half what they are now, and that wasn't that long ago! My preference is for the 16" 357, which is a super light, short and handy, mild-mannered, all-'round gun. Maybe not the best for bigger game, but boy are they useful for so many other things. Everyone who ever shot mine got a big grin on their face and with cat-sneeze loads, they came right out and giggled.

Love the design.

They seem to be putting a bit more care and effort into them these days. As I understand, they retooled after I got mine and they were super-scarce for about a year until back up and running. They really do look like it was worth that short dry spell from hat I can see.

[LeverGunner]

I like them, though I don't own a Rossi 92.

I have 2 friends that each have one in 357 Magnum. One of them had such an excessive throat that it bulged brass so badly that they wouldn't resize enough to chamber in another firearm. Rossi replaced that gun for him after a year.

The replacement, and my other friends gun aren't as bad and they love them. When I've fired them, I must admit that where fun and fast. A bit over sprung, they sling empties into low earth orbit. They don't have any problem digesting my RCBS 38-150-SWC handloads.

The rear sight is garbage from my perspective, but a Marbles semi-buckhorn would cure that real quick. I prefer no safety, but my buddy likes it for dry firing, so I suppose it has a purpose.

I'd certainly pick one up for the right price. I'd love a stainless in any caliber, but especially 357 Magnum. I didn't know they ever made a 480! I'll be on the lookout for one of those.

[jeffh]

This is what it has come to - an imported arm for half to two thirds of what is being asked for US-made (or imported under a US name) rifles, but in need of a few tweaks. That a Ruger-Marlin costs over $1k, a few short years since I saw a Remington Marlin for $400 seems a bit excessive to me. Hard pass on the Ruger-Marlin or Winchester from wherever they make them today.

Some will argue for "American jobs" and others blame union labor, but corporate GREED is the bottom line in this debacle. Rossi makes one heck of a nice gun for one heck of a lot less than those we've stood by for decades (or even generations) are asking. The last new Ruger I bought needed a lot more attention than any previous and cost more than any I'd ever paid to boot. Not sure I'd trust them with the Marlin to the tune of a thousand bucks to be "right." No, not after a $750 77/357 that was hurried through production such that the function, fit and finish was about worth half that in what amounted to a KIT comprised of unfinished parts conveniently pre-assembled.

I actually like the more slender and lightweight form of the 92 anyway.
If I have to tweak a Rossi a bit to make it behave especially well, I feel a lot better than if I'd paid 30%+ more.