Rossi M92 owners-any regrets?

A 16” .357 would have a high probability of following me home if I saw one. I missed a great deal on a used one by 10 minutes recently.
 
My only regret is not buying one when they were commonly available everywhere online. I ended up buying a Marlin to get my lust for a .357 lever taken care of, but I still want a Rossi 16" r92.
 
I bought a new SS 20" in 357 last week.
Action was a bit stiff ootb, but a bit polishing of the bolt edges improved the action much.
Also absolutely no feeding problems with any type of .38 and .357 (factory and handloaded)
 
I checked earlier and the .45 Colt Rossi's only seem to be available in the 20 inch version. I was wanting to get one with a 16 inch barrel and nobody outside gunbroker has them and those on gunbroker have an inflated price tag.

For the hot "Ruger Only" .45 Colt loads, how much of a velocity difference is there between 16 inch barrels and 20 inch barrels? If it's significantly more, I may just go with the 20 inch.
 
For the hot "Ruger Only" .45 Colt loads, how much of a velocity difference is there between 16 inch barrels and 20 inch barrels? If it's significantly more, I may just go with the 20 inch.
Click to expand...

Probably 100 FPS, no more than 200. Is four inches of barrel length really going to make any difference in handling? It wouldn't for me, not even in thick brush.
 
Hawg said:
Probably 100 FPS, no more than 200. Is four inches of barrel length really going to make any difference in handling? It wouldn't for me, not even in thick brush.
Click to expand...
100 fps is significant to me. I'm gonna have to think about the 20 inch now. Already have a 20 inch Henry and it feels unbalanced, but I got it because Henry doesn't make the .327 with a loading gate.

With a loading gate, 16 inch rifles are just fine. Can load a couple rounds thru the gate and not have to take prolonged breaks due to loading the Henry.
 
Is four inches of barrel length really going to make any difference in handling? It wouldn't for me, not even in thick brush.
Click to expand...

Same here. The barrel length on a Winchester Model 94 carbine is 20". I've never seen any practical reason to go any shorter than that for hunting deer or bear, even in the dense, heavy cedar swamps like the habitat regularly encountered in northern Michigan. Losing some velocity (however small) and getting a lot of extra noise and muzzle blast for a perception of better handling doesn't seem like a good tradeoff to me.
 
I would go with the 20” with out a second thought. I have a .44mag 92 with a 16” barrel only because there was a good sale going on and they didn’t have any 20” barrels left. Don’t get me wrong, it is one of my favorite guns to shoot but after getting hold of a 20” version, it just fit me better and felt better balanced.
 
Last edited:
I had a Rossi 357 with 20" barrel way back in the mid 1980s imported by Interarms. It shot jacketed bullets really well. I could keep 5 shots on the target at 100 yards you could cover with the bottom of a coffee cup. But it would not shoot any lead bullet loads I tried.

Not light loads with WC bullets or full bore 357 loads. I tried every load in between and by 30 yards the bullets were starting to tip. I called Interarms and they told me all their guns were rifled with a 1/30 twist no matter the caliber.

I don't think the twist was the problem but that the rifling was very shallow. I sold it and bought a Marlin 357 and never regretted selling it. Maybe I just got a bad example but I have never wanted another. The Marlin has been a much better gun.
 
Rossi did offer a .454 Casull in 16" at one time, although I can't say if it's currently available. And, of course, you can shoot .45 colt out of a .454 Casull.
 
I'll ask this again.

Have you handled a 16" and a 20" version side by side yet? They feel and handle differently enough that you'll know immediately which one you actually want.

I already have handguns for when "short, light, and handy" is the order of the day. The 20" felt more like a rifle to me. Perhaps you should look for an antique Luger or Mauser Broomhandle that still has its shoulder stock holster.
 
the possum said:
I'll ask this again.

Have you handled a 16" and a 20" version side by side yet? They feel and handle differently enough that you'll know immediately which one you actually want.

I already have handguns for when "short, light, and handy" is the order of the day. The 20" felt more like a rifle to me. Perhaps you should look for an antique Luger or Mauser Broomhandle that still has its shoulder stock holster.
Click to expand...
Since nobody has a 16 inch, I can't say I have. I do have a 20 inch Henry and can't say I'm enamored with the length of it.
 
Rossi

I have had a 16 inch Rossi Puma .357 for the last 25 years. It has always been a gun that I shoot well. Handy and accurate.
Pete
 
As you can see in my post above, I have both a 20" and 24" Rossi and while I don't own one, I have handled and shot a 16" trapper .357 mag model. I found it to be too buttstock heavy to feel properly balanced for my tastes. I wandered around the target rather than sighting on it and staying put. I prefer the overall balance and shootability of the 20" much better than the 16" but to each his own.
 
I have a 16" .44 magnum. very pleased with it. Cycles magnum and special caed round no problem. I put a 2.75 Burris Scout Scope on it with a rail made by NOE bullet moulds of Utah. Very pleased with this set up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top