Henry single shot or Rossi r92 in 357. Which one?

[Pat Riot]

I voted for both , a long time ago. View attachment 1185085

I like both of them , but they are two different rifles with different uses . My Henry is a lot more accurate, and a little on the heavy side . The Rossi is light and handy.i take it on walks down
To the river or around in the UTV.. View attachment 1185086
If I had to do it again , I'd still have them both.

What scope do you have installed on that Henry?
Also, are those Warne low profile rings?
I am considering putting an LPVO scope on my Henry single shot 45-70.

Both your rifles look great.

 

[codytrucker]

What scope do you have installed on that Henry?
Also, are those Warne low profile rings?
I am considering putting an LPVO scope on my Henry single shot 45-70.

Both your rifles look great.

Thanks . it has a Leopold VX2 1X4X20 on it with Leopold rifleman vertical split rings , and I believe a weaver base , uses the same bases as an H&R single shot . and a GrovTec hammer extension .

I've been pretty happy with this Henry . It has shot under a half an inch at 50 yard with some loads .I wish they would make it in 32 H&R or 327 federal .

The base is actually a Leopold 1pc rifleman scope base weaver style matte , Leopold # 56515 , midway # 916060 , compatible with H&R New England muzzle loader.

 

[Pat Riot]

@codytrucker Thank you very much.

 

[courtgreene]

I have the Rossi in 16” .357 mag, and while I LOVE Henrys, the R92 is the hands down winner in this role as far as I am concerned.
Yes, the sights are terrible, until you figure them out. Once you figure out the sight picture it becomes very intuitive with a few trips to the range. The Henry has more precise sights overall, but with practice one can make the r92 a very precise hunting rifle out to 100yds.
The lever action is what really differentiates them when considering what one wants out of a plinking gun.

 

[adcoch1]

So far the overwhelming majority of votes are for the Rossi, and I will admit that the Henry would probably become a 357 maximum if I had it, and so defeat my purpose of a 38 special shooter.
So both is obviously the right answer.

The next question is if there are reasons to go with the 16" Rossi, or is the 20" a better choice. I also had a stainless 20 r92 in 44 mag that handled really well, is the 16" not as comfortable due to how short it is?

And stainless or blued?

 

[Mosin77]

The 20” Rossi is a very light, handy gun. I can’t imagine it would be that much better cutting off 4 more inches of barrel….

 

[Pat Riot]

The next question is if there are reasons to go with the 16" Rossi, or is the 20" a better choice. I also had a stainless 20 r92 in 44 mag that handled really well, is the 16" not as comfortable due to how short it is?

And stainless or blued?

Capacities:
16” - 8 rounds
20” - 10 rounds

Overall length:
16” - 33.2”
20” - 37.2”

Weights:
16” - 93.9 oz
20” - 98.9 oz

Metal depends on location and what you want to do with it.
Stainless appears to knock 4.5 oz off weight of the 20”.

If the gun is for plinking I would probably go for the stainless 20”. You get 2 more rounds in the magazine and just a tad heavier than a blued 16” and it won’t rust as easily on the outside and bore. Internals probably aren’t stainless.
In your location, definitely stainless.

​

 

[Armored farmer]

So let me start by saying, I HAD a 357 Rossi r92 24" octagon rifle that was amazing, and quite heavy. A blast to shoot

I think you answered your own question in the opening post.
I would probably choose Henry.....but it would be a levergun Henry.
Smooth out of the box.
Parts and service.
Easier to scope.
My $.02

 

[CraigC]

I couldn't vote for any of the choices. I own a 357 Rossi '92 but with a 20" barrel and want nothing shorter. After replacing it's springs with ones from Steve's gunz and complete new sight system it is a very user friendly little gun. Great plinker although I have no interest in rapidity and also a jeep gun. I have always liked single shot rifles, just not those based on a single shot shotgun design, so no Henry in my future. Pick what you want is my advise as you will be the one using it.

I think the 16" guns are overrated. A 20" carbine is plenty short without being stubby and has plenty of sight radius. Had a late model Winchester 1892 Trapper .45 and sent it down the road. No doubt 15yrs of hunting with very long muzzleloaders had an influence.

 

[adcoch1]

I think the 16" guns are overrated. A 20" carbine is plenty short without being stubby and has plenty of sight radius. Had a late model Winchester 1892 Trapper .45 and sent it down the road. No doubt 15yrs of hunting with very long muzzleloaders had an influence.

I hunt in thick nasty brush, so short is nice, but I usually have at least a 20" barrel, so that isn't a big issue. My 20" 44 Rossi would swing great, and the 24" 357 was even better, but a lot heavier because of the octagon barrel. I haven't shot a 16" yet, the compactness seems useful, but not enough to make my decision. I guess I just want to try a 16". guess all three is the answer right?

 

[CraigC]

I guess I just want to try a 16". guess all three is the answer right?

I never hurts.

My new Citadel .45 is a 16" but it's also a suppressor host.

 

[fotog54]

I just got the Rossi in 20" Stainless. It's a keeper. Is it perfect, no but I can make it better without too much work. PMC factory loaded .357 were showing 1700fps out of the 20" barrel.

 

[adcoch1]

I never hurts.

My new Citadel .45 is a 16" but it's also a suppressor host.

That is a future possibility too...

 

[halfmoonclip]

Funny you should ask.
-First, forget about full wadcutters in the Rossi; they won't feed in a buddy's R92. Not that it is a deal breaker; just feed RNFPs.
-Barrel length...just spent some money having a 20" whacked to 16". (Full disclosure; it was a 20" Miroku Winchester, simply because I couldn't get a 16", and it's a .45) But I had a 16" Rossi, and really did like it. Both were set up the same way, with a tang sight, which solves the sight radius loss.

Capacities:
16” - 8 rounds
20” - 10 rounds

Overall length:
16” - 33.2”
20” - 37.2”

Weights:
16” - 93.9 oz
20” - 98.9 oz

Pat summed up the differences here; the 16" is just that much lighter and handier than the 20"...less than 6lbs counts as a KISS carbine in AR-speak.
Understand the desire for the single shot .357 (there's a great LoWall replica at a nearby shop, but it's a bunch of money).
Adcoch1, there is just something satisfying working a lever action, and the Rossi is something of a bargain. Enjoy.
Moon

 

[adcoch1]

Funny you should ask.
-First, forget about full wadcutters in the Rossi; they won't feed in a buddy's R92. Not that it is a deal breaker; just feed RNFPs.
-Barrel length...just spent some money having a 20" whacked to 16". (Full disclosure; it was a 20" Miroku Winchester, simply because I couldn't get a 16", and it's a .45) But I had a 16" Rossi, and really did like it. Both were set up the same way, with a tang sight, which solves the sight radius loss.

Pat summed up the differences here; the 16" is just that much lighter and handier than the 20"...less than 6lbs counts as a KISS carbine in AR-speak.
Understand the desire for the single shot .357 (there's a great LoWall replica at a nearby shop, but it's a bunch of money).
Adcoch1, there is just something satisfying working a lever action, and the Rossi is something of a bargain. Enjoy.
Moon

I hope my next one will run wadcutters cause my 24" did rather well. And no recoil plus quieter than a 22lr

 

[chicharrones]

The next question is if there are reasons to go with the 16" Rossi, or is the 20" a better choice. I also had a stainless 20 r92 in 44 mag that handled really well, is the 16" not as comfortable due to how short it is?

I haven't shot a 16" yet, the compactness seems useful, but not enough to make my decision. I guess I just want to try a 16". guess all three is the answer right?

Logically, the best reason for a 16" barrel anything in my personal usage is the shorter gun simply needs to fit into a smaller space. But, I also own 16" guns just because I've wanted them, too.

 

[P89DCSS]

I went with the 16" 357 Rossi r92s. I did a side-by-side comparison of the 16" and 20" at an LGS.
I prefer the shorter 16" barrel for better handling over 2 extra rounds the 20" offers.
I'm just plinking and thinking about CAS, no hunting.
I do consider my r92s as backup in the case that my state goes after ARs.
16" is better for HD.

 

[halfmoonclip]

I hope my next one will run wadcutters cause my 24" did rather well. And no recoil plus quieter than a 22lr

Mine is a single, indirect experience, and the .38 WCs in question were originally loaded for a Smith 52. Understand your desire for a powderpuff load, though you'll have to adjust your hold or sights.
Let us know. Love '92s (briefly, just reflect on the ingenious action of the rifle, Browning's genius on display).
Moon

 

[doubleh]

I tried wadcutters in my '92 Rossi The would not feed. I could have used by pushing the cartridge into the chamber each shot I suppose. It would have been a kind of single shot affair and I just went to SWC loads. Mine's accuracy is best with close to max 357 loads and Hornady HP's. Of course this increases wear and rear on your shoulder and cheek in this light weight little rifle. I usually trade off a little accuracy for a more pleasant shooting experience. I was never big and am far past the tough part of my life.

 

[Alaskamike]

One of the things about the Rossi 92s that most people don't realize when they talk about "mine won't do x but my buddy's will" is that there are several generations, each manufactured by completely different companies.

I've been very lucky with my 3 Rossi 92s (.357, .44 and .454 Casull). Each one of mine is a different generation and has significant differences, but they are all very reliable when it comes to feeding different bullet styles. I have never tried to shoot full wadcutters through my .357 carbine, but I'm pretty confident it would handle them in .357 mag brass just fine, and probably also .38 special brass.

 

[adcoch1]

One of the things about the Rossi 92s that most people don't realize when they talk about "mine won't do x but my buddy's will" is that there are several generations, each manufactured by completely different companies.

I've been very lucky with my 3 Rossi 92s (.357, .44 and .454 Casull). Each one of mine is a different generation and has significant differences, but they are all very reliable when it comes to feeding different bullet styles. I have never tried to shoot full wadcutters through my .357 carbine, but I'm pretty confident it would handle them in .357 mag brass just fine, and probably also .38 special brass.

Very true, the ones I've owned have been braztech or whatever you call it that Taurus currently calls them. The 44 had a few little issues that I fixed right off, but it wouldn't shoot the heavy buffalo bore hunting ammo I wanted to shoot in it, and it wasn't accurate with my generic 44 mag cast load that my handguns eat by the handful. I got frustrated and traded it away. I'd give the 44 another chance, and my 357 which came later was great! I may have made up my mind... Really want a r92 in 454 casull too...

 

[pintail]

Have a small tackle box full of sight purchases. I like the bullseye with a skinner black file the height front. The original sights aren't crap. Our eyes are. 15 years ago they were fine

Nothing to do with eyesight, recoil consistently caused the rossi step elevator to "bump" to its lowest setting, that doesn't happen with the marbles one, the front sight is invisible in certain lighting conditions. The gun is excellent apart from the sights which are crap, my win 94 30/30 NEVER did this, neither does the marbles one now.

 

[Remington1911]

People are liking the new Ruger/Marlin levers.

As to what to get, the lever is just a hoot, and so much fun to play John Wayne. The single shot, and I would like one, but the henry does not have what I am looking for. I want a more "vintage" look and feel. It is a single shot after all.

 

[wmgeorge]

I thought the OP question was about single shot??? I see all the Lever action answers and wonder. Anyway for what its worth, single shot If CVA made a 357 I would vote for it, as it is my CVA 45-70 Scout V2 in stainless is beautiful and a tack driver. Henry seems over priced and Rossi maybe.

 

[CraigC]

I thought the OP question was about single shot??? I see all the Lever action answers and wonder.

The Henry in question is a single shot. The Rossi is a modern replica of the Winchester 1892 levergun.