bhk
Member
The fact that the 92 is not chambered for the .444 or .450 is due to it's physical size, not it's strength. The large-action design equivalent to the 92 is the Winchester 1986, an extremely strong action.
I have yet to see a 92 chambered in .444 or .450 Marlin or .45-70. Just looking at the Marlin action as opposed to a '92 or '94 will make it obvious which is the stronger.
One thing I've noticed particularly with '92's and '94's is that sometimes you'll get that little "puff" of powder grains you can feel on your cheeks when you're shooting. It doesn't instill confidence in trying to shoot something stout that will handle big or dangerous game like a .45-70 will.
The 357 is one of those guns that make you sorry you ran out of ammo.
The 357 is one of those guns that make you run out of ammo.
Arnold, this is my opinion and nothing more, but If I'm going to go to the trouble of carting 7 or more pounds of rifle around, it will be chambered for a rifle round. A rifle is going to cost you X dollars regardless of what it's chambered for. Why not broaden your capabilities? Why be wedded to only one cartridge? A lot of people do this, but I've never understood why. Any 30-30 in a rifle will FAR exceed the capabilities of the hottest .357 mag.
I'm sure not pounding on you, I just don't get it.
Any 30-30 in a rifle will FAR exceed the capabilities of the hottest .357 mag.
If I'm going to go to the trouble of carting 7 or more pounds of rifle around, it will be chambered for a rifle round