Rossi lever gun

Usually good solid rifles that need some rough edges (literally) cleaned up.....
least that was my general assumption untill seeing my buddies new one. That things got all the sharp or rough spots taken out of the action, and with the addition of spring kit probably wont need any ither work to spiff it up.
Its a really nice gun!

I have some + a winchester 92
Their actions are easier to manipulate than the Winnie. I like them.

I love my Rossi 45 colt.

JCSC said:

I handled a stainless Rossi 357 lever yesterday at a gun shop. They had about 6 in various calibers. I always associated Rossi with garbage guns.

It appeared to be a nice rifle! Very good fit and finish.

Are they decent guns? I wouldn’t know a good lever from bad, aside from the name.

Click to expand...

They are shooter grade. Mine shot well out of the box. It even ate 38 semi wad cutters.
But I slicked it up with a trigger job, weaker ejector spring, action job, and Williams foolproof peep.
I want to thing down the forearm. To make it more like the old lever guns. But I haven't had time.

My next purchase (and I haven't bought anything new in a decade) is probably going to be a lever action rifle.

A stainless, 20" .357 would be my first choice and one I'm kind of holding out for.

Unfortunately, I've only seen two in person in the last 3 years; a 20" stainless Rossi with " hardwood" stock but it had a $900 price tag on it and one with laminated stock, large leather wrapped lever and rail instead of a rear sight for $949.

Both too rich for my budget.

Both had very good fit and finish.

Hopefully patience is rewarded and I'm able to find one at a better price.

Otherwise, I'll wait for Marlin to release their 1894 again.

That's what I have, a 20" in .357, but mine is traditional blue.

Worked with every type of .38 and .357 I had right out of the box. Great accurate light weight gun.

They are not without their blemishes, but they are very solid guns. I’ve owned half a dozen Rossi 92’s.

The one I have now is a 16” stainless in .45 Colt that had a very poorly finished forearm out of the box. I’m currently working on a project to strip the whole stock and refinish with BLO. Got the first coat on. So far so good.

If you strip them down, you’ll find things like this too. Poor machining marks, and various cracks where the forearm is thin. The question is, does it matter?

It appears they have upped their QC. Issues were always with finish rather than function or reliability. There are some improvements that can be made with spring changes and historically the loading gates were delivered with sharp edges to take the skin off. The Mystery Wood that they use for stocks comes slathered in some brown goop that seems a mixture of old coffee grounds and motor oil. Remove it and the wood will take a nice oil finish and look pretty good.

I like mine. Mental note, it fails to extract well at below zero temps. Hence, no extreme weather gun fights. Otherwise, it’s a kick asp rifle. Light and smooth. What’s really fun is ejecting hard and then catching the brass on the way down. Mine is in 45 Colt and stainless. Does not like 200 grain bullets.

Here is mine. Im happy with the finish.

I really like mine in .45 colt, great fun to shoot and didn't really need slicked up either. I did replace the buckhorn rear sight with a flat top, and made a couple other small upgrades (metal magazine follower for one). But definitely not garbage

Howdy

I won a Rossi replica of the Winchester Model 1892 chambered for 45 Colt about ten years ago in a raffle.

It was well made, but the action was a little bit stiff. I'm sure it would have slicked up nicely, but I had no intention of keeping it. I turned around and sold it and used the money as a down payment on my Uberti 1860 Henry.

There was nothing wrong with the rifle, other than the action being a bit stiff, I never fired it, just sold it to get some cash for the Henry.

I have owned one for awhile now in 357. It came nicely finished with matching wood too. The only slicking up I did on it was to it's insides as it was seriously over sprung. Now it has a nice trigger and drops the empties right at my feet. I found no errant tool marks inside while doing the slicking. The only thing it won't feed is 38 special full wad cutters and 357 hollow points with large holes. Round nose, small opening hollow points, and semi-wad cutters all feed fine. My only complaint is that the stock is slightly short and finding a slip on pad small enough to fit took some time.

Yes they are "decent" I think that would be a good overall description of them. As with many things some will be better than others.

I had a Rossi and I loved it. It was a .44 mag with a 24" octagon barrel, that I had cut to 17" so I could have what nobody makes... a short carbine with the heavy octagon barrel.



Then I found out somebody did make one... Chiappa... and it's a takedown.
I sold my Rossi to get one, but it was a damn good gun.
Got me another Rossi now, but in .357 mag... to go with the .44 mag Chiappa.

dh1633pm said:

Mine is in 45 Colt and stainless. Does not like 200 grain bullets.

Click to expand...

I wanted to ask - do you mean poor accuracy, or poor feeding?
Or both?
Thanks in advance.


I have a stainless 16" Rossi in .45C that seems fine to me. But then again I have only fired it a time or two and I am pretty easy to please.

Tallinar said:

If you strip them down, you’ll find things like this too. Poor machining marks, and various cracks where the forearm is thin. The question is, does it matter?

View attachment 1098995
View attachment 1098996
View attachment 1098997

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, I think either you got a really bad one, or maybe I just got a good one, because I have no metal or wood problems on mine.

The wood finish itself was nothing to brag about, a little time to refinish it paid off big.

Speedo66 said:

Unfortunately, I think either you got a really bad one, or maybe I just got a good one, because I have no metal or wood problems on mine.

The wood finish itself was nothing to brag about, a little time to refinish it paid off big.

Click to expand...

Thing is, when it’s put together, it shoots just fine. You wouldn’t really question it until you start looking under the hood.

I love my Rossi, but "Shooter grade" is a perfect description of this rifle IMO.

I have a Rio Grande in 45-70 and other than the ferocious recoil I have no qualms about fit, finish or quality. Thinking about plugging it for IL single shot rifle season if I get the DNR ok.

My LGS got one in recently, looked nice, it was an 1892 style. Safety or whatever it was looked stupid and ruined the looks to me but everything else looked good. I want a .357/.38 lever gun, this was $750, kinda have my heart set on a Henry but they are hard to get and about $300 more. I pretty much only have Henry lever guns and wondering if should give into the variety is the spice of life

I like my 16" SS .357. I didn't care for the finish on the wood. I stripped and refinished it.

Mars5l said:

My LGS got one in recently, looked nice, it was an 1892 style. Safety or whatever it was looked stupid and ruined the looks to me but everything else looked good. I want a .357/.38 lever gun, this was $750, kinda have my heart set on a Henry but they are hard to get and about $300 more. I pretty much only have Henry lever guns and wondering if should give into the variety is the spice of life

Click to expand...

I have a Henry Big Boy with side gate, 20” .45 Colt, blued, round barrel. Added a Ranger Point aperture sight to the receiver. Shoots great. Very pleasant. Have had no issues with it.

However, it’s much heavier than a model 92 with same barrel length. Lever stroke on the Henry is longer, length of pull is longer (can just as easily be a pro as a con depending on the user). I had a Chiappa 92 that had length of pull that was too short, but Rossi LOP feels about right for me in a carbine as a 5’10” man.

I much prefer the sight options on a Henry though. The side ejection makes a receiver mounted sight possible from the get go, which just isn’t the case for the top ejecting 92. There are various options out there (Skinner has a bolt-mounted sight that replaces the Rossi safety), but all require some form of modification to implement.

Overall, the Henry just isn’t as handy as the 92, and can’t be run as fast as a 92 (my opinion, and general consensus of cowboy action crowd). It’s great to shoot, but if I knew I was going to be carrying it all day, would definitely prefer a 92.

Anyway, I am thankful I can have both.