The accuracy you get from your Puma/Rossi/Taurus will be at least as much dependent upon how well you're capable of aiming it with those sights and of finding which loads it prefers as it might be of any theoretically inherent mechanical limits for a long while, IMO.
Also just MO, but the single biggest determining factor when it comes to the relative accuracy demonstrated by about any weapon is the skill of the person behind it.
This has been proven to my personal satisfaction many times by other folks being able to deliver better groups on a given day with my weapon and my ammo. The only logical conclusion is that the difference was due to the shooter rather than the weapon.
The only way I know of to establish a valid basis for stating a figure as being the inherent mechanical accuracy limit of a particular weapon is through systematic testing with a machine rest fixture.
And even that's only going to give you an answer for that individual weapon, and it may be very different from that found in another example, even if it was the very next one off the line.
All I can state from my own experience with my two .357 M-92s is that they've been more limited by what I can do than anything that they might be theoretically "capable" of. If I miss what I'm aiming at, it's a lot more likely to have be my fault than theirs.
