Straight skinny

D

Doc Hoy

New member
I see some fairly good prices for Rossi 1892 Winchester clones on GB.

I understand that one gets what one pays for. But are these rifles worth the money (Right around 400.00 plus shipping anfd ffl)?

There is an EAA revolver on GB for a fairly reasonable price. Again...What is the reputation of EAA?

I saw a coupla Heritage Arms revolvers at the Gun Show last week end. They were very inexpensive, under three hundred, but they looked like junk. What is the story on Heritage Arms?
 
Rossi 92

Doc ; I just got one in 44 WCF. A little stiff when I got it but it smoothed out fine. Love it , well woth the money.
 
I've got a Rossi in 44-40. Great gun. It was very stiff when I got it but I filled the action with lithuim grease and worked it a few hours and now you can run cartridges through it with one finger as fast as you want to go.:cool:
 
Two votes for Rossi...

I load .45 LC and will probably move to .38/.357 as well.

I like the octagon barrel version that Rossi has out. Sounds like a good place to start with a rifle.

How about some additional thoughts on EAA and Heritage?
 
Right...But

IIRC the Chiappa goes for somewhat more money than the Rossi.

I will do a little more looking.
 
Yeah....

Went to gunbroker and a rifle of similar description is 350.00 more money than Rossi.

I like the 24 inch octagon barrel job for 479.00.

.45 LC or .38/357 doesn't matter.

Still looking.
 
I have a Rossi model 92 in .357.As with everyone else's it was stiff when I got it but some use has smoothed it out.Very accurate and functions well. I thought it a good buy for the money.The Heritage pistols I have handled seemed rather poorly fitted.
 
Well,I read the test.Where on earth did they get the idea that the 45 Colt round "did not exist in the nineteenth century"???
 
I have not examined the Gaucho

...but when you look at the Heritage Arms revolver, it appears as though the trigger guard and back strap are spray painted black.

I can't think of any part of my revolvers I would want spray painted.

Just looks bad.

Nice to note that the tester thinks they shoot well. Maybe a candidate for a refinish of the trigger guard and backstrap. As I recall the rest of the pistol was okay.
 
Out of the 3 guns you mention, the only one I have experience with is the Rossi 1892.

The jury is still out on mine. I have shot it very little primarily because it has been in pieces most of the time since I got it. I took the hand grip off to refinish the wood and found out it could not be put back on due to poor manufacturing. It took me a few weeks of looking for answers and modification of the barrel band screw to re-attach it.

I field stripped the action to smooth obviously rough fitting components and have yet to be able to reassemble it so that it works. Still don't know exactly what's wrong, but I am getting closer.

When I do get it working again, it will still have a front sight and rear sight dovetail that are not square with each other and there will be no way to fix that. The misalignment is only a couple of degrees but it is noticeable. At short range plinking, I think it will be OK, which is what I got it for.

Personally, I would gladly pay more for an 1892 lever action if I knew it was properly made and put together, and would shoot 38 spl. I don't think that rifle exists unfortunately.

Chaz
 
The Rossi is....

...a pretty good copy of the Winchester 92. Don't own one but have fired several and every one was smooth and a breeze to shoot. The .357 seems to be the best round as far as being able to do more with it.

The Heritage Arms are known more for their small bore revolvers than large bore. I have a Rough Rider in 22LR/22Mag that exactly matches what I paid for it. Suppose to be a scaled down copy of a Colt Single Action Army but I have trouble recongnizing it as such. The attraction is the two cylinders chambered in 22LR and 22 Mag, respectively, and the cheap price. Some people swear by their accuracy but mine shoots only so-so. They really do look like they were made in some third world country that just recently entered the Industrial Age. That being said they fit the purpose not unlike a golfer who takes only a driver to the range just to swat at a bucket of balls - they do use up a lot of cheap ammo when you need to get your mind off of things.
 
LZ

Thanks for the wink back.

I guess I am in the market for a Rossi 1892 with 24" Octagon barrel. .357 or .45 I don't guess I care.

My wife's birthday is October 25th.

How convenient!

Jury is still out on the Heritage.

Regarding a good replica, IIUC the new Henry Arms rifles are not reclicas of the originals. Eject from the side rather than from the top. Is that right?
 
The current Henry...

...Arms product is more of a copy of later Winchester models and they have no connection to the original Henry rifle. The new Henry does eject from the top (as do most lever actions) but has a loading gate on the side of the receiver, a feature that does not exist on the orginal Henry of 1860. In the calibre you are looking for the only model offered is the Big Boy which only comes in a 20 inch barrell, but is octagonal. It resembles the Winchester 1866 Yellow Boy. Have not a clue as to how well they handle BP, since I've never seen anyone use anything other than smokeless.

You seem to be on the same path as I, following a progression of C&B, to cartridge to reloading. I'm just a little ahead, started reloading 38Spl and 44Colt in January for my Mason Richards conversions. Next acquistion is a Uberti 1858 Army conversion in 45LC, so I can start reloading that round. After that I will add a Uberti Henry rifle in 45LC, but that will have to be after the 1st of the new year. The plan after that is to stop buying cartridge and go back to buying C&B when the need arises to quell the BP urge for a new toy.
 
LZ

Yep....You are pretty far ahead of me.

I am traveling right now and am curled up on the Amtrak with the latest edition of Handloader and Guns of the Old West.

BTW all,

Mike Beliveau has an Article in there on the 1862 Police. Very timely.
 
My teenage daughter has one of the early M92 replicas in .357/38 that was imported by Interarms. It's a 20" stainless saddle ring carbine that's part of some long-forgotten "limited edition" run, as its serial number is "19XX of 2000." It has the front sight inserted into the barrel band and has nice wood on it. Nothing too fancy, but dark and moderately figured. We bought it earlier this year from a fellow who bought it new back in the 90's and claimed to have never fired it. Based on a pre-firing teardown and inspection, I have no reason to doubt his claim.

Her rifle was slick as snot from day one. She fired 150 mixed rounds on its first trip to the range, finishing up with fifty of my .38 Special reloads using the Keith-style 158 grain SWC over 5.0 grains of Unique. We had zero jams or mechanical drama of any kind. Accuracy was on par with any original Model 92 I've fired, and it was awesome watching her adapt to the rifle's loading and firing requirements. Early in the session she was holding her shots inside the diameter of a paper plate at 100 yards, and her time between shots kept dwindling. This tells me the rifle is inherently easy to adapt to and learn to shoot well. I've not noticed this when she's tried out any of my black guns.

While the early Interarms version may not reflect the current production guns, I think it illustrates what all the M92 clones loosely represent. They may require additional work to function smoothly, and in the case of some, may require a significant commitment to ever get sorted out (my 44-40 comes to mind!), but they are wonderful rifles for those willing to do the necessary work to "get inside of them."

Pretty sure I need a 24" 44 Magnum, next...
 
My Rossi 92 in 44-40. The only thing that bugs me about it is the front sight on top of the barrel band. It should be behind the band. I did change the rear sight out for a Marbles full Buckhorn.

028.jpg


buckhorn.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top