Can a Rossi R92 45colt handle "ruger only" loads?


PDA






TennJed
November 12, 2012, 02:17 AM
I am thinking of getting a Rossi R92 lever action in 45 colt (24" barrel) as a companion to my Ruger revolvers. Will this gun handle a steady diet of "Ruger Only" loads?

If you enjoyed reading about "Can a Rossi R92 45colt handle "ruger only" loads?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Domino
November 12, 2012, 02:34 AM
Yes, I have seen mulitple M92's handle Ruger Only loads just fine. The M92 is a very robust design, I don't see it bieng a problem. However, for safety sake you will want to work your way up and verify no signs of overpressure in your gun.

USSR
November 12, 2012, 09:07 AM
As Domino said, the M92 is a very robust action, and it will handle anything your Ruger will and then some.

Don

CraigC
November 12, 2012, 12:29 PM
The Rossi 92 is as much as 18,000psi stronger than a large frame Ruger Blackhawk. About equal to the Redhawk, safe up to 45-50,000psi. It's 10,000psi stronger than the Marlin 1894.

Detritus
November 12, 2012, 02:17 PM
In load manuals "Ruger Only" for .45Colt is code for "Don't stuff this in a SAA or Clone" it might also mean not to put it through an Winchester 1873 (and i wouldn't) but mainly it's to keep bubba from looking at those pages of data going "Faster's Better" and turning grandpa's colt into a handgrenade

bergmen
November 12, 2012, 02:22 PM
My son has a Rossi Model 92 in .45 Colt (as well as a Ruger Blackhawk in the same caliber). We load the same for both (max loads) without issue.

I also have a Rossi Stainless in .454 Casull and has been mentioned, the action is very strong for high pressure loads.

Dan

TennJed
November 12, 2012, 02:59 PM
Thanks guys

Bill_Rights
November 13, 2012, 04:13 AM
I also own a Rossi M92 in .454 Casull, and I would like 2 or 3 more. :)

But it is REALLY hard to find the M92 in .454 Casull these days, and, if you do, it'll cost $700-$800, which is twice as much as they used to cost.

Can I just bore out the .45 LC firing chamber 0.1 inch deeper and have it chamber .454 Casull cartridges? Any special throat work? Or throat shape at the case-to-rifling step?

The M92 is readily available in .45 LC, and cheap. The question really boils down to, is the barrel metallurgy and dimensions, and the receiver metallurgy and dimensions, the same for Rossi's M92 .45 LC and .454 Casull?

CraigC
November 13, 2012, 11:06 AM
Absolutely not! Spend your money on handloading equipment and the need for the .454 immediately goes away.

TennJed
November 13, 2012, 12:52 PM
Absolutely not! Spend your money on handloading equipment and the need for the .454 immediately goes away.

I already load for 45 colt. Not looking for a 454. The question was can the Rossi handle the same 45 colt loads my ruger revolvers handle (redhawk and blackhawk)

CraigC
November 13, 2012, 12:56 PM
I was responding to this:
Can I just bore out the .45 LC firing chamber 0.1 inch deeper and have it chamber .454 Casull cartridges?

TennJed
November 13, 2012, 04:33 PM
I was responding to this:

Sorry my bad

Bill_Rights
November 13, 2012, 04:52 PM
Please excuse. I diverted a bit off topic to bring up the .454 Casull conversion of .45 LC firing chamber. I was somewhat playing off bergman, who brought up .454 Casull.

Staying on topic, I agree with CraigC that the Rossi M92 ought to be able to handle all .45 LC heavy pistol loads and beyond. I am not sure how I know this, but I think the .454 Casull and .45 LC Rossis are the same, except for the boring of the firing chamber. Why would a manufacturer have two different parts sets and designs? Just adds expense. Therefore, if the Rossi M92 receiver and barrel base can handle .454 Casull, it'll handle almost any wildcat .45 LC loading you can cram into that cartridge.

Going OT again, I was merely seeking confirmation for the .454-Casull-like-strength of the Rossi .45 LC receiver and firing chamber. Anybody?

1858
November 13, 2012, 06:35 PM
Going OT again, I was merely seeking confirmation for the .454-Casull-like-strength of the Rossi .45 LC receiver and firing chamber. Anybody?


I like these kinds of discussions. It would seem reasonable that you could re chamber a .45 Colt Rossi for .454 Casull if the only difference between the two from the factory is the chamber.

I load and shoot some fairly powerful .45 Colt loads in my Marlin 1894 using the logic that Marlin offers the same rifle chambered for the .44 Rem Mag which has a max SAAMI pressure rating of 36,000 psi.

CraigC
November 14, 2012, 12:46 AM
Every manufacturer in the business tried to adapt their designs to the .454 years ago. All failed. None lasted more than 100rds. Both the Marlin 1894 and 336 were not strong enough. Even the Winchester Big Bore with its strengthened receiver was no match for its pressure. The 1886 was plenty strong enough but too big for the cartridge to be practical. When Rossi introduced the 1892 in .454Casull, everybody was a bit surprised. To this day, we have no idea what changes were made, if any, to accommodate the cartridge. There are no apparent design changes, other than what had to be made to handle the longer cartridge. Metallurgy is unknown. What we do know is that the standard 1892 (Miroku Winchester or Rossi) in .45Colt is good to 50,000psi. Which makes the .454 unnecessary for the handloader. Most factory .454 ammo is 50-55,000psi and I don't think I'd feed one a constant diet of 65,000psi loads anyway.

No reputable gunsmith would do such a conversion.

It's unnecessary anyway.

Bill_Rights
November 14, 2012, 01:28 AM
CraigC,
Well, yeh, rechambering .45 LC to .454 Casull is unnecessary in this rifle, IF you hand load. Much as I want to do that, and am studying up to begin, and shopping for used equipment, I have other responsibilities and cannot do it right now. And I want a powerful big-bore rifle right now (or in short order).

And I agree that most .454 Casull factory loads are well below SAAMI max, which is fine, because in most applications the extra margin would not matter. Steve Young (Nate Kiowah Jones), whom you've somewhat dismissed in a related post, does advise some mods to the recent-manufacture factory Rossi M92 .454 Casull if you're going to use heavy .454 Casull loadings a lot. But these are for extending extending operational lifetime, not for metal-rupture safety.

Yes, so I suppose I could buy a factory Rossi M92 in .45 LC and use the most powerful factory +P factory .45 LC loads I can find. I gave a few examples over on a concurrent thread: Rossi .45 Colt....16" or 20"? at http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=684852, specifically post #7 (http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=8509531&postcount=7), which is about some offerings from Double Tap Ammo. Then, if those are not powerful enough, I can upgrade when I get into reloading, finally.

Or I could rechamber a .45 LC to .454 Casull and just use factory .454 Casull ammo, some of which I already have. You discourage that strongly. Other than the reason that it is innecessary, what other reasons do you have?

Anyway, until then, I am building up a nice store of once-fired .45 LC and .454 Casull brass! :D

Water-Man
November 14, 2012, 02:11 AM
The Rossi .454, when it was under the LSI Puma M92 name, had some problems when first introduced. What they were I can't recall.

I haven't heard anything about those problems in awhile so I guess they've been corrected.

Gryffydd
November 14, 2012, 02:18 AM
CraigC said it succinctly, but here's a great read on the subject:
http://www.leverguns.com/articles/paco/45coltlevergun.htm

Bill_Rights
November 14, 2012, 03:28 AM
Great article, Gryffydd. Do you know what year it was written? (There was no date on the web page.) I am a member over a Paco Kelly's Levergun Forum, but I don't go there often and somehow missed this article. I did see Paco's 2002 review of the M92 itself: http://www.gunblast.com/Paco_Legacy_454.htm. Anyway, up till now I wasn't concerned with .454 Casull conversions of .45 LC.

Yeh, I get the point: The old .45 LC case is so huge, there is no need to make it 0.1 inch longer (i.e., like a .454 Casull) to achieve 60,000+ psi chamber pressure, with modern powders.

Is there any difference in the brass design of .45 LC and .454 Casull? Wall thickness? Curvature at inside of the base? Whatever? Why did Robert Casull invent this cartridge/case? (Is it Robert?)

At the time I purchased my first recent-manufacture Rossi M92 (early 2010, S/N MA0207XX), I was unaware there was an issue with achieving the strength needed for full-power .454 Casull rounds. It may just be a matter of great care and quality control taken in the steel alloy blending, casting, rolling/forging, heat treating, etc. And followed up by modern, automated X-ray inspection to detect and reject any imperfect parts. Jet engine parts, and I am sure many other products, could not exist without this level of effort. Gillette's razor blade steel is a metallurigical work of art, for example. So it is not too much of a mystery that IT CAN BE DONE by Rossi. Just a mystery why it is so rare or why it is not done by other gun makers (and maybe it is, just not in lever rifles).

Detritus
November 14, 2012, 03:49 AM
Why did Robert Casull invent this cartridge/case?

Because he could??
others can correct me if i'm wrong, but the logic i was told back when i first heard about .454 Casull was that the round was at least partly developed as a way to market Casull's high(er) pressure .45 loads and the guns that were safe for them, without the risk of bubba stuffing one in an inappropriate firearm and the consequences of (repetitions of) such an act. so if that's the correct logic, then the extra 0.10" of case length is there ONLY to keep it from chambering in guns chambered for 45colt.

CraigC
November 14, 2012, 09:02 AM
Dick Casull, who is one of our most talented gunsmiths and entirely underrated, developed the .454 using .45Colt cases. He started by fitting specially heat treated Colt frames with oversized five-shot cylinders and eventually built his own sixgun from scratch. Which is what became the Freedom Arms 83. He was driving 260's at 2000fps. The .454 was brought about so that his loads would not find their way into Colt SAA's and New Services, which would've brought about catastrophic results.

1858
November 14, 2012, 11:17 AM
Is there any difference in the brass design of .45 LC and .454 Casull? Wall thickness? Curvature at inside of the base?

The .454 Casull uses a small magnum rifle primer whereas the .45 Colt uses a large pistol primer. Primer energy aside, the smaller primer pocket on the .454 Casull reduces the chance of cratered and dropped primers with the higher pressures generated in the .454 Casull.

CraigC, from a purely "academic" point of view, what would the difference be between a Rossi re chambered from .45 Colt to .454 Casull and a Rossi chambered at the factory to .454 Casull?

1858
November 14, 2012, 11:19 AM
Yeh, I get the point: The old .45 LC case is so huge, there is no need to make it 0.1 inch longer (i.e., like a .454 Casull) to achieve 60,000+ psi chamber pressure, with modern powders.

Would this be true given that the .45 Colt uses a large pistol primer?

CraigC
November 14, 2012, 11:40 AM
CraigC, from a purely "academic" point of view, what would the difference be between a Rossi re chambered from .45 Colt to .454 Casull and a Rossi chambered at the factory to .454 Casull?
We really don't know.


Would this be true given that the .45 Colt uses a large pistol primer?
Yep. Folks run their custom five-shot Rugers at 50-55,000psi without issue.

Bill_Rights
November 14, 2012, 12:19 PM
Detritus/CraigC,

I bet you're correct, about the longer .454 Casull OAL preventing catastrophe in .45 LC chambers, some of which chambers go back to the black powder days.

CraigC, Thanks for the tribute to Dick Casull!

Yeh, regarding CraigC, from a purely "academic" point of view, what would the difference be between a Rossi re chambered from .45 Colt to .454 Casull and a Rossi chambered at the factory to .454 Casull?the answer is, "we don't know", as CraigC said. I am hoping that the difference is "zero", technically. However, even if the metallurgy and steel thicknesses are the same between the Rossi .45 LC and the Rossi .454 Casull chamberings, it is possible that there is/was less quality control done for the .45 LC frame, in which case you'd have a safety issue up-chambering to .454 Casull.

BUT, I am coming from my commercial point of view, which is that I cannot find any .454 Casull Rossi M92 rifles to buy. That's a pretty profound "difference"!

1858
November 14, 2012, 12:55 PM
Yep. Folks run their custom five-shot Rugers at 50-55,000psi without issue.


I wonder if they're using large rifle primers rather than pistol primers for the thicker cups. Are they grooving the primer pocket too? Regardless, Bill_Rights was referring to 60,000 psi + and possibly up to SAAMI's MAP rating of 65,000 psi. That's a lot more pressure.

CraigC
November 14, 2012, 01:33 PM
Nope, usually CCI 350's. Large rifle primers are too long.

mavracer
November 14, 2012, 01:36 PM
As CraigC noted Dick Casull drove 250-260gr bullets 2000 FPS with his 454.I have read that this was "the goal" he had set out with.
I know Craig agrees with me that while it's a neat feet it's totally unnecessary as a 300gr bullet at 1200fps will shoot through any game in north america.

Gryffydd
November 14, 2012, 05:43 PM
I know Craig agrees with me that while it's a neat feet it's totally unnecessary as a 300gr bullet at 1200fps will shoot through any game in north america.
Except for that pesky subject of external ballistics...

CraigC
November 15, 2012, 11:35 AM
I know Craig agrees with me that while it's a neat feat it's totally unnecessary as a 300gr bullet at 1200fps will shoot through any game in north america.
Yep! I'd want a little more bullet weight for grizzlies but that's about it. ;)

Casull developed his load/cartridge back in the `50's and `60's when shooters were terribly obsessed with velocity. Almost as bad as they are now. We've learned a lot since then and owe a debt to Casull for sure. We've proven that bullets need not expand to kill reliably, which Elmer Keith taught us back in the 1930's. Cast bullets have really come into their own in the last 20yrs. More importantly, we've learned that there's not much reason to push a good cast bullet over 1200-1300fps (within handgun velocity ranges) and that sectional density has a FAR greater impact upon penetration than velocity. So these days, we (mostly) understand that the .454's velocity does little more than flatten trajectory. Most folks can't properly utilize that trajectory to make 150yd shots with a revolver so it's really unnecessary for most of us. We particularly don't need the .454 if we handload for the .45Colt, especially for a strong gun like the 92.

mavracer
November 15, 2012, 03:49 PM
Except for that pesky subject of external ballistics
Have you actually done the math on what that gets you:rolleyes:

Gryffydd
November 16, 2012, 02:22 AM
Have you actually done the math on what that gets you
Yes, I have. Have you? :rolleyes:
It's not huge, but it's enough that you can't make the blanket statement that it's "totally unnecessary".

muskoka4444
January 13, 2013, 01:23 PM
Hi all, I was reading this post and I just had to get into it.


The best way to find out if you can convert a 45LC to a 454Casull is to check the part numbers from Rossi and compare the part numbers.
If they are the same then there is no difference in metal and heat treating for the different calibres.
The receivers, locking bars and bolts are probably all made out of the same 4140 steel with the same heat treating.
If they didn't do this it would be very dangerous down the road when people start buying off the shelf components from firearm parts suppliers.

Marlin and Winchester do not use 4140 (chrome moly steel)for their lever action receivers.
I think they have used Ductile Iron and 1137 in the past.
Its the 92 design and the use of 4140 that allows Rossi to have very strong lever action rifles.
If someone is willing to sit on the phone with Braztech for a hour this issue could be resolved.
Best Regards

SaxonPig
January 13, 2013, 01:42 PM
Many, many posts over the years about hot-rodding the 45 Colt in one gun or another.

I guess I'm the only crazy guy in the world who doesn't see a need to jack the 45 Colt beyond its intended purpose? If a 250 at 1,000 (easy from a rifle) doesn't do it I'll get a bigger rifle. Call me kooky.

Bill_Rights
January 14, 2013, 12:17 AM
muskoka,

Good pointsThe best way to find out if you can convert a 45LC to a 454Casull is to check the part numbers from Rossi and compare the part numbers.
If they are the same then there is no difference in metal and heat treating for the different calibres.That would work for every part except the barrel, which I assume has the firing chamber machined into the receiver end of it, which therefore absolutely must be two distinct part numbers for the .45LC and .454 Casull barrels.

Has anyone ever bought individual Rossi M92 rifle parts? I have never noted them at, for ex., Brownells (but never looked too hard or called a tech there, either). I don't get the feeling that there is much of a supply chain for M92 parts. :scrutiny: I guess the right gunsmith might know. I have another reason to call Steve Young (AKA Nate Kiowa Jones) at Stevz Gunz (or whatever). I will ask him. Then let you know what he says....

But I just wondered if anyone on this forum had actually tried to buy parts from Braztech?

muskoka4444
January 14, 2013, 01:16 AM
I did check with a gunsmith who works on Rossi's and he advised the only parts with different numbers are Guides, carrier and loading gate and of course as you mentioned the barrel would be a different part number.
If this is true, its good to at least know, that whatever rossi you own it is very very strong. 45LC would shoot forever.

CraigC
January 14, 2013, 02:03 AM
I would absolutely NOT recommend anybody convert a .45Colt to a .454 for multiple reasons. Part numbers are irrelevant. It's the barrel that contains the pressure and that is most certainly going to be different. It's the receiver that must withstand the backthrust. Part numbers for the receiver? Probably not. The .45Colt typically has grossly oversized chambers so a .454 reamer probably won't clean up a .45Colt chamber and you wouldn't want to be running a 65,000psi cartridge in an oversized chamber cut from a generous .45Colt. I seriously doubt ANY reputable gunsmith would do such a conversion.

A handloader doesn't need the .454 anyway.


If a 250 at 1,000 (easy from a rifle) doesn't do it I'll get a bigger rifle.
Or drive that bullet 1000fps faster and double your effective range. :rolleyes:

muskoka4444
January 14, 2013, 11:48 AM
Yes I agree about converting 45LC to 454, dont do it.

I was just trying to find out if the receiver and locking bars are common on all versions.
For example, can a Rossi 44 Mag handle the 45,000 to 50,000 PSI Buffalo Bore +P+ loads?

CraigC
January 14, 2013, 12:49 PM
There are no 60,000psi Buffalo Bore .44Mag loads. Such loads would be suicide for Buffalo Bore. Even the .454 is typically not loaded over 55,000psi.

bergmen
January 14, 2013, 01:40 PM
CraigC is correct. According to SAAMI, the chamber dimensions for .454 Casull are much tighter than the SAMMI specs for .45 Colt:

[Images Deleted]

I had to remove these images because they are protected by Copyright. They can be downloaded by going to the SAAMI site.

Dan

Bill_Rights
January 14, 2013, 02:36 PM
OK, I agree that it is a bad idea to convert .45LC to .454 Casull. Bergmen's SAAMI dimension are pretty sobering. If I read correctly, the cartridge diameter is given in two places, 1) near the base/rim after any deformation from that is healed and 2) near the bullet crimp after any deformation from that is healed. Again, if I read correctly, the .45 LC firing chamber is bigger in diameter, as follows:

Location: ......Near Base .......... Near Crimp... Case Taper
.45 LC.......... 0.4862" ............. 0.4806" ....... 0.0056"
.454 Casull.... 0.4797" ............. 0.4779" ....... 0.0018"
Difference: ... 0.0065" ............. 0.0027" (.45LC is LARGER)

These (above) are from the bottom panel of each cartridge's SAAMI drawing. Apparently the top drawing panel for each cartridge gives a "CYL" dimension, which I take to be a nominal or average diameter. These are:

.45 LC.......... 0.4800"
.454 Casull.... 0.4775"
Difference: ... 0.0025" (.45LC is LARGER)

As I read it, all diameter dimensions are toleranced to allow for up to 0.004" larger than given. So the .45 LC chamber diameter could be as much as 0.0065" larger in diameter than a minimum-diameter .454 Casull chamber. And the minimum diameter of the cartridge casing could be even smaller than that, by how much? Another 0.004"? (That call-out of the tolerancing is an odd one, if my presumed interpretation is correct...)

OBSERVATIONS:
a) The .45 LC case taper is steeper than the .454 Casull's
b) If we take the 0.004" larger-diameter tolerance as some sort of a low-side indication of how much the case expands during explosion of the powder, then it might be reasonable to speculate that a .454 Casull case will expand to seal/grip in a .45 LC chamber. (This may strain and work-harder a .454 Casull casing faster than would happen in a true .454 Casull chamber...)

I have a .454 Casull Rossi M92. I might be able to measure what Rossi/Braztech is cutting these chamber diameters to. All I have is dial calipers, however, not really the correct measurement tool... But if it can reach into the receiver/chamber port, I will report the inside diameter of the rim-end of the chamber.

CraigC
January 14, 2013, 03:02 PM
The problem is the generous dimensions the industry has accepted for the .45Colt. Manufacturers run them on the large end of the range to ensure reliability. When custom gunsmith's build a .45Colt, they cut a tight .480" chamber. Which does not present a problem with factory loads or .45 dies. Unless they're loaded with incorrect .454" bullets. This is one reason why I prefer the .44's over the .45Colt. They tend to run right out of the box.

WardenWolf
January 14, 2013, 03:07 PM
Rossi stopped manufacturing their .454 Casull version because there were too many failures. Too many guns came back and it was proven that it just couldn't handle it longterm. Don't do it. You'll just ruin your gun.

Bill_Rights
January 14, 2013, 03:30 PM
So, WardenWolf, where did you hear this? How do you know this?Rossi stopped manufacturing their .454 Casull version because there were too many failures. Too many guns came back...

bergmen
January 14, 2013, 03:38 PM
Rossi stopped manufacturing their .454 Casull version because there were too many failures. Too many guns came back and it was proven that it just couldn't handle it longterm. Don't do it. You'll just ruin your gun.

What is the substantiation of this? Is there anything official anywhere that states this?

This is important since I have a new Rossi 92 in .454 Casull that I am just getting started with. If this were indeed the case I would think that Rossi would issue some sort of formal notice.

BTW, Rossi still lists two Model 92 .454 Casull models on their website (R92-68011, R92-68001).

Dan

CraigC
January 14, 2013, 04:15 PM
I also would like to see the supporting evidence for such a claim. :scrutiny:

muskoka4444
January 14, 2013, 05:54 PM
I think because there aren't any for sale anywhere, people think they stopped making them. Truth is they can't make them fast enough!

BCCL
January 14, 2013, 07:00 PM
If they have stopped making them there sure are a lot of them on their website and in their current catalog.

I just called BrazTech this morning with questions about my Rossi 92, from the Interarms days, and they sent me to this guy for warranty work and parts information.

http://www.mmgunsmithing.com/

WardenWolf
January 16, 2013, 05:51 PM
They may have fixed them and resumed production, then. They pulled them from their lineup for a while.

Bill_Rights
January 17, 2013, 12:02 AM
(I think) I heard, from a dealer on GunBroker.com who once sold me one, that the .454 Casull M92s were taken out of production when the Rossi/Puma/Legacy tooling was being moved to a Braztech factory. All inside Brazil, I guess. I think the association with Braztech (Taurus?) happened a few years ago and may have been a buy-out of the former owners of Rossi/Puma/Legacy (but wasn't Legacy always only the USA importer anyway, not an actual manufacturer?).

Anyway, this "explanation" doesn't really explain much... How could the .45 LC M92 be kept in plentiful production while the .454 ground to a halt? Wouldn't most of the factory tooling be the same? From here, my mind spirals into speculation. If there had ever been doubt about the strength of the Rossi .454 Casull receiver/chamber under prolonged 65,000 psi firings, and there appears to have been (see comments above), then it is possible the Braztech legal team did not want to take any chances with liability. One could further speculate that the metal for the .454 ought to have extra quality control, such as supplier certifications (ISO 9000) and x-ray inspection of every part, to check for voids, inclusions, micro-cracks and such in the machined/heat-treated final forms. I certainly would insist on that regimen, if there was any doubt. Maybe the QC/certs took a long time to get transferred? Again, the last three statements are wild-eyed :what: speculation :confused:. And I certainly can't vouch for the original "explanation" from my old dealer - it had to be third-hand, at least :scrutiny:.

WardenWolf
January 18, 2013, 01:16 PM
At least one person on this forum had their .454 Rossi fail, and he found out from talking with them that they'd had a number of them come back. Rossi's customer service was excellent, though, and let him exchange it for a .45 LC version when they replaced it.

CraigC
January 18, 2013, 01:24 PM
At least one person on this forum had their .454 Rossi fail, and he found out from talking with them that they'd had a number of them come back. Rossi's customer service was excellent, though, and let him exchange it for a .45 LC version when they replaced it.
So your claim that "it was proven that it just couldn't handle it longterm" is based on third-hand, non-specific, anecdotal information from an anonymous internet post??? :scrutiny:

WardenWolf
January 18, 2013, 04:49 PM
Look, when the person is praising Rossi's customer service by them replacing his gun AND letting him exchange it, I don't think he's going to lie about what they told him.

R.W.Dale
January 18, 2013, 05:07 PM
So your claim that "it was proven that it just couldn't handle it longterm" is based on third-hand, non-specific, anecdotal information from an anonymous internet post??? :scrutiny:

Craig you really need to get over this biased belief you have that EVERY levergun is a gift from the gods to be cherished and lauded with accolades.

Just like every other platform there's some pieces of crap out there scattered amongst the winners with a fairy large percentage coming from a certain south American firm.

Every time we have a Rossi -puma thread several of us will get on here and post our NEGATIVE experience with the platform. And every time we have a new thread you conviently forget about those posts and try to put forth this fantasy of 100% customer satisfaction amongst owners and get all torqued out of shape when we post about our experience.

Lets despense with the theatricals here and cut to the chase. Rossi puma leveractions are a hit or miss proposal at best.



posted via that mobile app with the sig lines everyone complains about

CraigC
January 18, 2013, 06:16 PM
Craig you really need to get over this biased belief you have that EVERY levergun is a gift from the gods to be cherished and lauded with accolades.
You need to understand that your couple of problem children are statistically insignificant. There's only ever two or at best three squeaky wheels in those thread, yet they pound their points as if it were gospel. Sorry but it ain't.

Henry's are certainly not gifts from the gods. Neither is the BLR. Those Rossi 92's are certainly not perfect and I say that in every thread. They tend to be a little rough but then again, so do Marlins. They also have zero provision for my preferred receiver sight setup but that is easily rectified. Biased, yes. Delusional, I don't think so. :rolleyes:


And every time we have a new thread you conviently forget about those posts and try to put forth this fantasy of 100% customer satisfaction amongst owners and get all torqued out of shape when we post about our experience.
I never said or implied such a thing. NOBODY has a 100% customer satisfaction rate but I've bought and sold enough guns to know that there is very little outright junk on the market. I've also spent 13-14yrs on internet message boards and learned a long time ago to take everything read with a grain of sand. This is the world's complaint department and opinions shared here are not necessarily a proper litmus test.

I had to send a Bearcat back to Ruger for replacement. Have I littered the 'net with tales of how all Rugers are garbage and not worth owning? No. I had to send a Cimarron back for replacement, have I berated them? No. Why? Because I have enough perspective to understand that those negative experiences are a tiny minority and that it is not fair to judge those manufacturers/importers by two guns which are, like I said, statistically insignificant. It's more fair to judge Ruger by the nearly three dozen that have been excellent, including the Bearcat's replacement.

If you enjoyed reading about "Can a Rossi R92 45colt handle "ruger only" loads?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!