Need advise on a 92

[Lovesbeer99]

I'm heading to a gun show next weekend and always wanted a 92. I'm not too particular about the caliber as long as it's one of the standard calibers, I just want a fun gun to shoot and plink.

I do understand that the caliber, year, condition, etc all play a part, but I'm looking for ballpark numbers and reccomendations. Things like, "Stay away from the early numbers" , or " don't buy with the serial number prefix of...".

Any info would help.

Thanks.

Lovesbeer99 (but shoots safe)

 

[Wes Janson]

A 92? You mean a Beretta 92 9mm semi-automatic pistol? If so, this thread needs to be moved to Handguns: Autoloaders. If not, I'm kinda confused as to what rifle you're referring to.

 

[grizz]

I'm thinking he means a Winchester '92, or '92 clone. Right?

 

[HPJeep]

I'm sure he meant a Winchester 1892 rifle or carbine. If its 1892 Winchester you can't go wrong with any of them. High quality and good shooters. You'd have to have a ballpark of what you are willing to pay. They range from $300rusty beaters that are missing parts on up through the roof depending on the special order options.

 

[Lovesbeer99]

Yes, I meant a Winchester 92. Sorry for any confusion, but I thought since this was a rifle thread, the 92 was obvious, but I'm new here so please be kind.

Ok, so the winchesters are all pretty good? What about the clones like puma, or rossi? Which are ok and which should I stay away from?

Thanks.
Lovesbeer99 (but shoots safe)

 

[Lovesbeer99]

Actually, what's the difference between a Winchester 92 and 94? I think a 94 is what I really meant to say.

Lovesbeer99

 

[Gordon]

I know where there is a nice 25-20 92 for $800 I am lusting after. Also they have a perfect Win. factory reconditioned (about 20 years ago then stored) former prison 1892 in 44-40 for $1400. 831-722-6945

 

[enfield]

Winchester 92's (and clones) are short-action rifles chambered for pistol calibers. The 94 is chambered for rifle calibers, like .30-30.

 

[HPJeep]

All Winchester 1892s are great guns. One of the smoothest cycleing lever guns around. Very well built and very stout but slim contours. You cannot go wrong with any of them and that is true for the clones such as Pumas. Only drawbacks to the 1892 clones are the finish is not as good, the wood to metal fit can be poor at times and sometimes the edges needs to be deburred. Just depends on the manufacturer of the clone. Mechanically they work great and the prices are more reasonable. They are all in pistol calibers which is fine depending on their use. I shot a whitetail deer with my 45 Colt Puma clone last year. Worked fine. What are you going to do with this gun?

1894 Winchesters are pretty good too. Some folks poo poo the post 1964 winchester 94s though. Prices on those are cheaper than the pre 1964 examples. I'd go for the pre 64 from a quality standpoint and collectibility stantpoint. All of the will go boom though. What are you needs and wants? Price range you want to stay in?

 

[bubbygator]

The '92 design is very strong and reliable - I'd focus on price and condition. There are some very pretty ones out there, so don't pay any premium for a dinged-up gun. Also, stay away from the cowboy customized ones unless you're gonna play - the customizing is expensive & only makes a difference to fast shooters.

 

[ZeSpectre]

Bubbygater gives good advice.

I have a Rossi (Puma) 92 SRC in .357 Magnum. I do cowboy action shooting so I've slicked it up some for competition reasons but didn't go too far with it and it would be a perfectly acceptable hunting gun (if I were the hunting type).

It's hard to say what a good price is because the demand from cowboy action shooters has driven the prices up some. However $300-400 for a used gun in nice shape is not at all unusual.

The rest of this post is excerpted from a review I typed up for a CAS page. Keep in mind there is a specific slant to the article and that a lot of this "slicking up" is to keep wear and tear down when shooting CAS because we put a lot more rounds through the guns in a couple of years than most hunters and such would do in a lifetime. If you aren't shooting CAS the "slicking" is really unnecessary and you can just skip to the last paragraph for my summary.

Rossi 92 "Puma" - Lessons learned
by J.P. Withers

Hopefully I'm not re-inventing the wheel here but I thought I'd pass along some experience gained from working on the like-new Rossi “Puma” copy of the Winchester 92 SRC I picked up a while back. This carbine is chambered for .38 special/.357 magnum.

First, Marauder's webpage is a great resource, just saying in case you haven't already found it.

1) Make sure you pin the hammer spring before attempting to remove the hammer screw. If you don't do this you can still get the screw out but you will bung-up the threads (embarrassed shrug).

2) As others have said, the magic word for this rifle is "SPRINGS"! I would never have believed how great the impact of the ejector spring is to the overall functioning of this rifle. I thought the hammer spring would have a big impact but was very surprised about the ejector spring.

The original (heavy) ejector spring made the rifle pull, chamber, and eject everything I fed it (including some step nosed LSWC rounds) but made the lever action so heavy I had to put a leather wrap on the lever to keep from bruising the back of my index finger. Looking at the rifle you'd think the resistance was coming from the locking bolts... it doesn't, it's totally the ejector spring inside the bolt.

(Safety tip, DO NOT MESS WITH THE LOCKING BOLTS they set the headspace for the rifle)

A much lighter aftermarket ejector spring made the rifle cycle as slickly as you can imagine. It also caused my particular rifle to have trouble cycling the longer .357 rounds and also have random trouble ejecting any type of rounds. (EDIT: found a burr on the bolt face that was causing the trouble, the spring is, in fact, just fine for the rifle).

I don't personally recommend this, but if you intend to try the "cut and expand" method on your springs (see Bull Schmitt's instructions about 1/2 way down the page here...) Bull Schmitt's Instructionsthen have extra ejector springs handy -BEFORE- you start experimenting or you'll sit idle for a while - while you get new ones. WEAR SAFETY GLASSES when working with springs!

The original hammer spring is too damn heavy. Don't bother messing with it, just buy a replacement at Brownells.

If you feel the need to remove the cartridge guides, inspect the left one (with the swivel on it) carefully before re-installing. If the swivel pin drops down even a tiny bit the part will NOT seat back in correctly (even though it looks like it's in place it acts like it is shimmed out) and NOTHING will feed. I spent about an hour of frustration before I figured that one out.

Morgan Astorbilt made a very good suggestion about thinning the extractor just a bit to reduce the resistance it creates just before the bolt finishes closing. In my particular case I like that last solid "click" as it slams home so I didn't modify that at all on my gun.

Guess that's about it for now.

JP

EDIT: more to the adventure. Let me tell you about the wonder of White Lithium Grease! Most of this rifle works fine with your favorite oil but if you take some white lithium grease and put a thin film all over the locking bolts (especially the front where they "lock" the bolt forward), the sides of the bolt, and the swivel pin for the hammer, you will suddenly have the slickest 92 you ever imagined. My 92 now cycles as smoothly as it did with the "too light" ejector spring.

Final Edit 7/3/2006 - Post shooting range testing. Took the 92 to the range and the final verdict is 5 stars and two thumbs up! I ran 20 cowboy .38 special RNFP and 20 cowboy .357 RNFP through it as fast as I could with nary a hiccup. Then I put 20 full power .357 mag JSP then followed with 20 full power .357 JHP. I had one JHP round catch slightly on the edge of the chamber but a gentle shake and it dropped right into place and we were off and running again. Cycles smooth as a baby's bottom and kicks those shells right out of the way when it's done with 'em. Accurate as hell too especially considering how fast I was shooting.