Rossi 92 in 16, 20 or 24 inch?

So, I'd guess that a sight-in at 100 yards with a 44 cowboy load would have full-power loads hitting a foot higher, if not more.
Click to expand...
I push my 44 mag loads nearly twice as fast as the cowboy action stuff--I'd be surprised if they would hit within 1.5 to 2 ft of each other at 100 with the same zero--though I'll admit I haven't verified that with a ballistic calculator--just based on experience.
 
Case in point--I'm embarrassed to say I misjudged drop myself today.

I had just walked my dog and upon returning to my road there was a large doe staggering around in the middle of the road--I thought she caught a buzz from the piles of rotten apples lying on the ground. However--she soon recovered enough to walk off across a neighbor's field and was headed into the woods. I knew she was in for a long, drawn out death and since she was limping likely had a broken leg from a car impact.

In took over an hour to get clearance from the state to take her out (deer hunting is prohibited where I live) and by that time she was into the woods--but obviously handicapped, so I found her without to much trouble. My rossi 44 was the only weapon I had ready to go in the truck--and even at a point blank range of 15' (I had my red dot zeroed for 100) my first shot hit her in the jaw--I had to aim high above her head but within a minute I put one through her brain and she was done. In the heat of the moment I had simply forgotten about the longer distance zero.

My first kill BTW--even though it was sorta a cheat since she was injured. The amazing thing is that her fur was immaculate--but a fair amount of meat is blood-shot where she obviously was broadsided by a vehicle. She's pretty big.



Also totally forgot ear protection--needless to say my ears are ringing.
 
Last edited:
Congrats! The are beautiful, aren't they : ) I highly recommend getting a fairly large range of ammo at different power levels--like any rifle rossi levers have their likes and dislikes. Mine shoots most "fairly OK" but when I use one of my high power hand-loads it really comes together. I know there are many who "pooh pooh" on the use of scopes--but with a really good scope I think you'll find noticeable differences in your grouping results at longer ranges (that you might not otherwise discover shooting unmagnified only), once you find a really good one you can go back to the "trad thing" of irons only. Just a suggestion. Look forward to seeing your target results.
 
That's a good idea. I took it out yesturday and shot at 15 yard about 20 rounds of cowboy magnum loads 10 rounds of cowboy special loads (240 grain) and about 5 rounds of my 44 special 200 grain hand loads. They all grouped about the same, but I need to practice my rifle shooting and my hand load cases were all black (I think they are underpowered even for specials)

I then shot the magnum cowboy loads at 100 yards. About 30 shots. I had to raise it to the second to last notch on the leaf to get it close vertically to where I was aiming. I definately need alot more practice with it and to put some higher powered rounds through it
Also, Over the next few days I'm rubbing some Tru oil wax into the wood.
 
So far with what I put through it there really hasn't been any kick. These loads I've been using can definately be shot all day without any discomfort.
 
IMHO I think you would be happy with either the 20 inch or the 24 inch barrel. But I would lean very hard towards the 24 inch barrel if You are even thinking of shooting targets at 100yds. Again IMHO, a 100yds is a long shot with a 45LC even with a rifle, and it is an even longer shot to try to shoot groups on a paper targets at a 100yds.The 45LC in a Rifle or Pistol is one of my all time favorites. And My Son and I shoot them alot.
ken
 
Was at a shop this past weekend, that had at least a half dozen Rossi's on display. I took a very close look at each and was pleasantly surprised to see the wood to metal fit on every one great. As each had a trigger block lock, I could not cycle the rifle to check for smoothness.

As I said I was pleasantly surprised with the fit (wood also looked good-not great, but good). It has been a long time since I've handled a Rossi, except for a single Model 92 in .45 Colt, that I've ruled out in favor of a Henry .45. Reasons for ruling out the Rossi was the non-descript wood, and metal to wood fit could have been better. With the current round-up, I would definitely consider the purchase.
 
So far with what I put through it there really hasn't been any kick. These loads I've been using can definately be shot all day without any discomfort.
Click to expand...
I believe you have found the main draw to the pistol caliber 92s and such.
Versatility from plinking, to small game, to short range medium game they do it all with ease.
 
But these revolver pistol calibers are better and more powerful than the auto pistol calibers (save maybe the 10mm).

Subjectively they are way more fun.
 
Finally got around to rolling some hand-loads today--been since last season since I did a batch. My go-to preferred loads have always been 240 xtp's driven by 24.3 grs of H110 and nosler sporting handgun 240 grs driven by 23.8--both loads pretty much on the warm side.

last time I did these the xtp's proved to be more accurate out of my rossi--but for some unknown reason when I tested the rounds today the situation had reversed and the noslers were more accurate. Not quite sure what's up with that.
 
Last edited:
Took a really close look at the Rossi Model 92 in .357 today. I did not buy it, as I have problems with the butt-ugly safety on top of the receiver. Anyone here alter it so as to not be so ugly?
 
Beauty is as beauty does.
I tend to ignore the criticism of safety "esthetics" so common to internet lore on Marlins and (now) Rossi.
Personally I like the availability of a blocking safety. And if it's "ON" when that critical shot comes round, that's my fault... not the designers.
 
It is not the safety as much as the cheapness of the materials & appearance. For a $500 rifle, the maker could do better.
 
Beauty is as beauty does.
I tend to ignore the criticism of safety "esthetics" so common to internet lore on Marlins and (now) Rossi.
Personally I like the availability of a blocking safety. And if it's "ON" when that critical shot comes round, that's my fault... not the designers.
Click to expand...
I too am totally mystified by the overwhelming prejudice against the safety on the rossi--it's very small--easily switched on and off and has already once done it's job when I was out hunting and bumped the hammer which easily dropped. There I said it!
 
Again, it ain't the safety, but the aesthetics of the safety! Simply bluing the steel would make the gun look better.
 
I agree with you^^^, I really enjoy my Rossi but when I saw and felt the safety lever I didn't even think the safety would function. It does function but man it is cheap and just feels flimsy.
 
Scopes did exist back in the day when the levers came out--I can't seem to find much reference to them being "wrong" back then--I've always thought this a modern prejudice thing. If that's the case--then arguably anything other than original issue Winchesters are "wrong" IMO. 44 mag would be "wrong"...357 mag would be "wrong" etc.
Click to expand...

Un-so .....

The first published mention of a telescopic rifle sight was in 1844, and by the civil war, scoped rifles were in use by both sides ..... the first rudimentary reapeating levergun (Volition RocketBall) did not hit the market until 1848 ...... though by the 1860's there were several successful repeating leverguns .... Henry, Spencer ...... others?


Just because most folks did not commonly put a telescopic sight on a levergun does not mean they did not, in fact, exist .....
 
Unread Today, 09:08 PM #119
jimbob86
Senior Member


Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: All the way to NEBRASKA
Posts: 7,761 Quote:
Scopes did exist back in the day when the levers came out--I can't seem to find much reference to them being "wrong" back then--I've always thought this a modern prejudice thing. If that's the case--then arguably anything other than original issue Winchesters are "wrong" IMO. 44 mag would be "wrong"...357 mag would be "wrong" etc.

Un-so .....

The first published mention of a telescopic rifle sight was in 1844, and by the civil war, scoped rifles were in use by both sides ..... the first rudimentary reapeating levergun (Volition RocketBall) did not hit the market until 1848 ...... though by the 1860's there were several successful repeating leverguns .... Henry, Spencer ...... others?


Just because most folks did not commonly put a telescopic sight on a levergun does not mean they did not, in fact, exist .....
__________________
TheGolden Rule of Tool Use: "If you don't know what you are doing, DON'T."
Click to expand...
I didn't say "when the levers first came out"--but I appreciate the history lesson anyway.;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top