Stainless 357 Rifles: Ruger 77/357 vs. Rossi M92 Carbine?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have and love the 77/357. I can get 2" groups with 158grainers at 100yds and irons. I would and do feel confident with it out to 150~200yds. Only problem I've ever had with it was one magazine that not feeding reliably. Turns out the spring inside it had somehow worked it's way out the openning and after pushing the spring end back inside the magazine's worked reliably since. I have no hesitation either using or recommending it to others.
 
I have a 77/357, and its a cool little gun. They have become quite pricey now for some reason, and are going for close to $800 here. I only paid just over $500 for mine a couple of years ago.

I like the gun for the most part, and a lot better now that I lost the recoil pad and fitted a butt plate.

Mine shoots well, but seems to prefer the JHP's the best, and especially the 125 grain bullets. It doesnt seem to like LSWC's much at all.

The only trouble Ive had with the mags has been with .38's rimlocking. The .357's have been fine.

I find the bolt knob to be a tad small, but its usable.

With a scope mounted, the clearance between the scope and the bolt handle is pretty tight, and rather annoying. The bigger bolt knob would be even more of a detriment here.

I also found the bolt handle/knob interfered with the NECG peep I had tried mounting on the rear mounting point. It worked OK on the next point forward, but the sight works best on the rear most point.

I really didnt like the NECG peep. It works OK, but its pricey, and fiddly to adjust. You also cant take the aperture out to "ghost ring" it, as the aperture screws in to lock the elevation plate. Its well made, just not well thought out.

Right now, Im back to the factory irons, and seem to like it the best like that.

Ive only ever seen a couple of the Rossi's, and they were in shops. They really didnt impress me much from what i saw. I have both Winchester and Marlin lever guns, and the Winchesters are the smoothest working.

Ive had a number of .44 and .45 Trappers, and still have one in .45, and they were all great little guns. I wouldnt mind picking one up in 357 (assuming I could find one) now that Im shooting a lot more of that these days.
 
I'd go with the Rossi 92 because I already have one and love the way it functions. It's a great "all around" carbine with its ability to shoot heavy 357's which a deer-capable as well as light loads for small game. If they made one in stainless with a synthetic stock it would be about perfect for a camping gun. That said, a blued gun isn't that hard to maintain if you keep an oily rag handy.
 
The last time I hunted Michigan's UP I brought my blued JM Marlin 1894 in .44 Magnum. It has a 20" barrel and fully loaded it's pushing 9 pounds. The gun has never rusted, but I definitely had to keep on it with oil every night or it would have. I'm not at all afraid of maintaining my guns and other metallic gear (I quite enjoy it), but I also don't want to get home and find rust under a fore-stock or in the action.

I'm leaning toward the Rossi m92 if the stainless ones ever come back in stock... However the American-made Ruger is still very tempting.
 
I have a blued Rossi 357, about 15 years old. I like the rifle alot, it is very light and handy, considering the power it packs with full 357. What I do not like about it is the action is stiff (this may work out with use or I can get it worked on), and the factory sights are poor for me. I would have to have it drilled and tapped to put a receiver sight on it, or mount a rail on the barrel for a scout scope. The Rossis of this age does not have any holes tapped in the barrel for a rail, current models do though.

The rifle is very accurate and reliable (though stiff as noted).

I do not have any experience with the Ruger, but have have plenty of bolt action rifles to compare it with.

All this being said, I like the Rossi alot, and will likely send it out to be set up for aperture sights, and replace the springs myself to lighten the action.

The rifle is just so light and handy, and follow up shots are very quick. The action is very slim and it carries easily. With aperture sights, it would shoot well and be very light. Carrying it, it's as light and compact as a 22.

It may be that the Ruger is a more practical rifle, if the magazine functions reliably. If you don't care for iron sights, then the Ruger or a Marlin (but you won't find one in stainless) is the better choice. If irons and a light rifle are a priority, get the Rossi, and have the action worked.
 
I think if you put a Nikon omega 1.5 to 5 x32 with a 5" relief on the Ruger it is about perfect for packing. It is thin light and the longer eye relief helps me hold the short rifle better, and also helps my daughter with parallax.
I have that scope on my T/C Omega, and it works good on the smaller 77 models, be it a three fifty-seven or forty-four magnum.
This is coming from a huge lever gun fan as I have many. The Ruger just fills a niche that I thought didn't need filled until I got one. Then you see the benefits.

Also, you can get a nice aperture sight for the Ruger, and dit then scope and classic rear sight. Then you really have a good packing rifle. With spare mags to boot. :)
 
Had the Rossi 92 16" stainless in .357 and the Ruger 77/357. I've fired both and the Rossi got sold and the Ruger remains. My 12 year old used it for deer hunting and took a big 6-pointer with it at 80 yards. Double lung shot with a Hornady Leverlution factory load. Spent bullet recovered just under the skin on the opposite shoulder.

I find the Ruger to be much friendlier to pack and hunt with and is far easier to mount optics on. I've also had zero issues with the factory rotary magazines.

Overall its a really well thought out rifle and quite fun to shoot.

Don
 
I own a Rossi 16" 357 stainless and it is a fun little rifle to play with, especially with 38 specials loaded up. Sights are crap, but that's the only thing I can knock on it. I also have owned a 77/357 (and recently traded up to the 77/44 for a little more umph when hunting) The Ruger's are plenty accurate and the obvious advantage they offer is the ease of mounting a scope. For short range plinking or small game at less than 25 yards, I'd give the nod to the Rossi. For actual hunting where I'd want a little better accuracy and the use of a scope, the Ruger would be my first choice. If I'm stuck using iron sights and can only choose one.... have to go with the Ruger.
 
And now I'm leaning back toward the Ruger :)

Question: How realistic is it to use .357 on small game? If I were to load a LSWC to just under the speed of sound would that be quiet enough to shoot without ear protection? I shoot light game load 12ga with a bird barrel and .22 rifles when afield without ear protection and feel comfortable with that level of sound. I'm thinking a light load of W231 would do nicely to have all the powder burnt by the time the bullet leaves the barrel...

I'd imagine that would be effective on any small game I could hit, I've heard .38 Special in long, accurate revolvers is great for small game.
 
An interesting find: Ballistics by the Inch is showing some really interesting results... It appears a .357 Magnum has passed the line of maximum acceleration right at 16". It's not enough to sway me, but that extra 2" actually cost you about 40fps on average across the range of loadings and weights: http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/357mag.html

357mag.png
 
For me a .357 would not be practical to small game hunt with if you are talking about rabbits and squirrels. It is against the law in my state to use anything but rimfire for small game.
Now we can hunt Coyote, Crows, Pigs, Deer, Elk, Bobcat, with centerfire rifles, but if small game birds or small fur bearer you must use a shot gun or rimfire.
 
I have a 357 Maximum single shot. It is accurate and has sufficient power for deer sized game as it handles heavier bullets well. Never shot 357 mags out of it that I can remember but shot a lot of 38 specials and it shot those very well. Good accuracy with 38s under 50 yards. I don't know if anyone is making a lever gun in that cartridge now but, if so, it would be worth a look.
 
I have a Marlin 1894c .357. It is a great carbine.
However of the two choices in the OP I'd go with the Ruger... and I don't own a bolt.
 
Saleen322 - I'm not sure I understand your post. You say you don't know if anyone is making a lever gun "in that cartridge now, but if so it would be worth a look."

But the Rossi lever action Model 92 (and several others) in .38/.357 is precisely what you are looking for.
 
exdetsgt said:
Saleen322 - I'm not sure I understand your post. You say you don't know if anyone is making a lever gun "in that cartridge now, but if so it would be worth a look."

But the Rossi lever action Model 92 (and several others) in .38/.357 is precisely what you are looking for.
Click to expand...
He was talking about the .357 MAXIMUM. It's longer and faster than the .357 Magnum....
 
Oops. My bad. I actually did not know there was such a cartridge as a .357 Maximum. I thought he was referring to a model of a rifle.
 
Taylors Tactical/Chiappa makes an Alaskan Take Down in 357. Firesights are standard...much better quality than Rossi (but 2x the price).

pix336121233.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Cump
  • Locked
Inspecting a Rossi m92 in 357
Replies
9
Views
798
redbullitt
R
G
  • Locked
Rossi M92 Carbine what should I expect?
Replies
16
Views
2K
RPRNY
RPRNY
Maj Dad
  • Locked
16" vs 20" Rossi M92 357
Replies
1
Views
565
Texan Scott
T
W
  • Locked
Rossi M92 38/357
Replies
10
Views
1K
MCgunner
M
C
  • Locked
Rossi Puma M92 .357/.38 Stock length
Replies
1
Views
938
cpy911
C
Back
Top