Puma lever actions opinions
- Thread starter overland
- Start date
WyomingWhitetail
New member
I have a model 92 in 44mag that i bought a few years ago. Its seems to be a good gun and shoot very accurate and ive hunted with it. Its an absolute blast to shoot. I think that puma must have changed a little tho since i bought mine. when i bought mine i know i didn't pay much over 400 for it brand new and when i looked at their site the other day it seemed as if the price had went up to 800 or 900. Over all i like mine it will kick the crap out of you with hot loads but will whoop the 200 yrd gong consistently.
If I were looking for a Model 92, the first person I'd call would be Steve Young and see what he had in stock. He's the model 92 specialist and I recommend him highly.
Pumas are now made by Chippa or at very least made in Italy. The old Puma is the Rossi M92 which is a really good choice and I would ageree that you should check out Steve's Gunz linked above and at the very least get his DIY kit or get the gun from him. The M92 action is made for handgun calibers and is stronger than the 94 actions. nothing wrong with the Pumas but the Rossi seems to be the best option.
Last edited:
FWIW - While "Puma" might be the name of a snaekers making company, there's nobody named "Puma" making firearms.
"Puma" is a trademark/name, owned for many years by a US-based firearms importer, legacy Sports (LSI) - who contractually leases out the temporary us of it's property, to mark firearms they import into the US.
When LSI had a contract with Rossi (SA), Rossi marked the part of their model 92 clone production earmarked for LSI with the "Puma" name.
After the relationship between LSI/Rossi ended, and Chiappa (Italy) started to make their own model 92 clones, LSI contracted with Chiappa to likewise "Puma" mark/brand a portion of their M92 production - extending the "Puma" branding, recently, to a portion of Chiappa's Winchester Model 1886 clone production.
There are two differences, between Italian/Chiappa "Puma's", and other Model 92 clones:
The Chiappa's are very much more highly finished - to the point of becoming "blingy".
The Chiappa's cost 2x-3x more than Rossi-made Model 92's (regardless who imported them - Taurus, BrazTech, LSI, Navy, etc.
AFAIK, Chiappa had some very real production problems, vis-a-vis tooling/etc, making their M92's problematic.
Steve Young www.stevesgunz.com has been working with Chiappa on a consultation basis for the last year or so - but I don't know how responsive Chiappa has been to his suggestions.
(Steve is THE pre-eminent M92 gunsmith in the US)
.
.
"Puma" is a trademark/name, owned for many years by a US-based firearms importer, legacy Sports (LSI) - who contractually leases out the temporary us of it's property, to mark firearms they import into the US.
When LSI had a contract with Rossi (SA), Rossi marked the part of their model 92 clone production earmarked for LSI with the "Puma" name.
After the relationship between LSI/Rossi ended, and Chiappa (Italy) started to make their own model 92 clones, LSI contracted with Chiappa to likewise "Puma" mark/brand a portion of their M92 production - extending the "Puma" branding, recently, to a portion of Chiappa's Winchester Model 1886 clone production.
There are two differences, between Italian/Chiappa "Puma's", and other Model 92 clones:
The Chiappa's are very much more highly finished - to the point of becoming "blingy".
The Chiappa's cost 2x-3x more than Rossi-made Model 92's (regardless who imported them - Taurus, BrazTech, LSI, Navy, etc.
AFAIK, Chiappa had some very real production problems, vis-a-vis tooling/etc, making their M92's problematic.
Steve Young www.stevesgunz.com has been working with Chiappa on a consultation basis for the last year or so - but I don't know how responsive Chiappa has been to his suggestions.
(Steve is THE pre-eminent M92 gunsmith in the US)
.
.
wnycollector
New member
I had a Rossi/LSI Puma 20" .44 mag. It was a very nice little rifle. It was a cream puff to shoot with lightly loaded 240gr SWC's and it really barked when loaded with buffalo bore 320gr hard casts. I ended up selling it to a shooting buddy to finance a BCM upper. As usual, I kick myself for selling it...so I'm keeping my eyes peeled for a 16" puma .357 to go along with my half dozen .357 revolvers
+1 PetahW...In addition, LSI (Legacy) carried over the "Puma" name, in turn, from Interarms, which preceded LSI as the largest Rossi 92 importer - appx from the late 70s to early 90s. "Puma" is just a model name applied by these particular importers, but has come be be thought of as "any Rossi 92." Other Rossi 92s, as mentioned have included EMF and Navy Arms--without the Puma name--with Navy Arms eneding its 1892 run in 2006.
I don't know about the "blingy" part (havent viewed them as that) but the Chiappa made 92s (1892s)--available from LSI, as well as Cimarron and Taylors actually before Legacy--are at least cosmetically extremely nice pieces with a look and feel closer to the original Winchester in detail and wood type/quality, and supposedly have improved function over its introductory guns. As suggested, the jury is still out whether Steve Young's (Nate Kiowa Jones) suggestions have been taken to heart on some small operating bits.
So, no, the Brazilian-made (Rossi) 92 "Pumas" didnt all of a sudden jump 2-3x in price. Entirely different product from the Italian-sourced Chiappas, although confusingly LSI chose to retain the old Puma moniker for its new line. Some NOS LSI/Rossi Pumas can still be found out there, as well as some remnant new EMF (Rossi) "Hartford" 1892s. Rossi, now under the control/ownership of Taurus/Braztech, is currently the sole importer of its own 92 product.
Rossi 92s from any of its generations are fine guns. After about 2000 or so, re-tooling is said to have resulted in better fit, finish and operation from earlier models. I've had several earlier and later 92s and they've all been fun, reliable shooters--some smoother out-of-the box than others, but all ultimately pretty rugged and trouble-free.
I don't know about the "blingy" part (havent viewed them as that) but the Chiappa made 92s (1892s)--available from LSI, as well as Cimarron and Taylors actually before Legacy--are at least cosmetically extremely nice pieces with a look and feel closer to the original Winchester in detail and wood type/quality, and supposedly have improved function over its introductory guns. As suggested, the jury is still out whether Steve Young's (Nate Kiowa Jones) suggestions have been taken to heart on some small operating bits.
So, no, the Brazilian-made (Rossi) 92 "Pumas" didnt all of a sudden jump 2-3x in price. Entirely different product from the Italian-sourced Chiappas, although confusingly LSI chose to retain the old Puma moniker for its new line. Some NOS LSI/Rossi Pumas can still be found out there, as well as some remnant new EMF (Rossi) "Hartford" 1892s. Rossi, now under the control/ownership of Taurus/Braztech, is currently the sole importer of its own 92 product.
Rossi 92s from any of its generations are fine guns. After about 2000 or so, re-tooling is said to have resulted in better fit, finish and operation from earlier models. I've had several earlier and later 92s and they've all been fun, reliable shooters--some smoother out-of-the box than others, but all ultimately pretty rugged and trouble-free.
FWIW
Rossi 92s were/are clones, i.e. they look like a Model 92 on the outside, but the insides are very different. They use metric threads, stamped sheet metal carriers, coil springs, roll pins or wire, etc, instead of US Standard threads, cast or machined carriers, leaf spring, cylindrical pins, etc. Very rugged little carbines, but made cheaply.
The Chiappa Model 1892 rifles and carbines are reproductions of the Winchester 1892 rifles and carbines. As someone said above, the breadth of issues they have with quality is amazing. The same company that turns out 1892 presentation guns that look flawless also makes carbines that look darn cheesy. And the wood is pretty lousy. Go figure. I recently saw a dismantled Chiappa 1876 that looks almost like a real Winchester 1876, but they cut some major corners, and I am amazed they would let the rifle leave the factory. Anyway, I hope they start listening to Steve Young . . .
Rossi 92s were/are clones, i.e. they look like a Model 92 on the outside, but the insides are very different. They use metric threads, stamped sheet metal carriers, coil springs, roll pins or wire, etc, instead of US Standard threads, cast or machined carriers, leaf spring, cylindrical pins, etc. Very rugged little carbines, but made cheaply.
The Chiappa Model 1892 rifles and carbines are reproductions of the Winchester 1892 rifles and carbines. As someone said above, the breadth of issues they have with quality is amazing. The same company that turns out 1892 presentation guns that look flawless also makes carbines that look darn cheesy. And the wood is pretty lousy. Go figure. I recently saw a dismantled Chiappa 1876 that looks almost like a real Winchester 1876, but they cut some major corners, and I am amazed they would let the rifle leave the factory. Anyway, I hope they start listening to Steve Young . . .
Stillhunter
New member
My Rossi Puma 92 in a 454 casull, is one of my home defense firearms.I like mine,only complaint, mag tube needs a stronger spring.
Stillhunter said:
Rounds not feeding correctly or something? That is one of the things I love about both of mine (.44Mag) is that they are very easy to load/reload due to the spring not being so tight. I had a Marlin .44 that had a very stiff mag spring and hard to get rounds in the mag tube and I was tempted to shorten it, but sold it before I did any modifications.
Bear Claw Chris
New member
I traded for an 1892 Trapper Carbine today at a show, 16" barrel .357 with the large lever loop.
It has the Puma logo on the side, and Interarms on the barrel in one place, and Armando Rossi in another place.
Is this an LSI gun, or earlier one?
It has the Puma logo on the side, and Interarms on the barrel in one place, and Armando Rossi in another place.
Is this an LSI gun, or earlier one?
Last edited:
Denis is right. Interarms was appx late 70s to mid/late 90s. *Some* of the middle Interarms years' 16" and 20" saddle ring carbines had the logo (emblem). LSI (Legacy) exclusively (vs EMF and Navy Arms Rossis) carried on the Puma name, and unfortunately added the little safety switch from day one IIRC. EMF was a holdout on that "feature" 'til mid 2006.
Last edited:
Stillhunter
New member
Update-- I don,t need a stronger spring,according to stevesgunz.com,I need to replace the plastic follower with a steel one.I suggest any one that has a Rossi92 to visit his site.
Have 3 Rossi Puma 92s (.357, .44, .454) & just purchased a Chiappa Mare's Leg Takedown model in .44 Mag.
In my "hands on" opinion the Rossi guns are much smoother cycling out of the box than the Chiappa despite the fact that the Chiappa was almost 3X the money of a Rossi Puma 92.
The Rossis shoot good too.......very accurate......after you replace the cheap factory sights.
Haven't had a chance to range test the Chiappa yet.
Rossi has been making 92s for years & has most of the bugs worked out.
Sure would be nice if Rossi started putting decent quality adjustable sights on their rifles.
In my "hands on" opinion the Rossi guns are much smoother cycling out of the box than the Chiappa despite the fact that the Chiappa was almost 3X the money of a Rossi Puma 92.
The Rossis shoot good too.......very accurate......after you replace the cheap factory sights.
Haven't had a chance to range test the Chiappa yet.
Rossi has been making 92s for years & has most of the bugs worked out.
Sure would be nice if Rossi started putting decent quality adjustable sights on their rifles.