Win92 buttstock: why crescent steel brute?

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jamesjames

Member
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
434
Location
Southern Oregon Coast
I've admired the double locking lug/bar design of the Winchester 92 and its clones. Its an elegant. smooth, efficient action for cycling pistol caliber rounds.

My vexing questions is this: Why, why, WHY would manufacturers continue to build this rifle today with a crescent steel buttstock? I can imagine that the buttstock design had some utility 100 years ago for trappers to dispatch a small animal in a trap without wasting a round.

But today, chambered in .44 magnum, this buttstock is a brutal meat grinder to place against one's shoulder and detonate. I am in the process of fitting an old Winchester 94 buttstock onto a Rossi 92 and pitching the '92 buttstock into the cornfield.

Is there anyone else out there who feels the same way? Just because it was the original configuration doesn't make it right. I can't even put a slip-on Limbsaver on it because of the crescent shape. Between the horrible comb of the Rossi and the steel crescent on all '92s, why not just manufacture with a '94 buttstock and a recoil pad?
 
I agree. I have an original shot out 38-40 my brother and I bought in the sixties and had converted to .357. It can bite you.
 
I'm with you on that. I'm 6'3" tall and the most painful thing I've ever shot was a Winchester 94 with that crescent butt plate.
 
The firearm industry is greatly resistant to change. It has its own corporate structure, the guys at the top do not understand their customers, and they just duplicate previous practice. Corporate executives dislike change, what they want is a guaranteed profit level, no conflict, and no competition. Rocking the boat will get you fired! Take a look at the movie industry as an example. If a movie is a hit, there are up to, five follow on versions.

My major complaint is the 1:38 twist rate on 44 Magnum rifles. It is too slow for bullets greater than 240 grain. However, because that is what was done, it becomes what will be.

The culture of the customer base does not help. There are entire forums where the posters have made a religion of "mil spec". Specially, the M14 rifle forums. I have asked makers why they don't make their receivers from an improved steel over the 8620 that the military used. The reason is, the customer base wants Mil Spec. I also asked an action maker, who was making modern versions of 19th century BP rifles, why he was using 8620 and not something like 4140 or 4340. His customers wanted a case coloring finish and they could not get that with 4140. To the customer, a metallurgically inferior steel is better because it has a pretty surface finish.

Well, I used to carry mechanical watches because I liked the ticking noise, so no one is perfect.
 
Why make the rifle at all? There are newer, better rifle designs and cartridges. The rifle is still in production for nostalgic reasons, and as such should stick to the original design. If you replace the original design with something more modern, then why bother with the rifle at all.
 
I like the recoil reducing steel butt-plate on my Rossi M92. :D Yeah it doesn't do a lot to help recoil but I do like the steel butt-plate on that little gun. I think its more than aesthetics there are some functional pluses to a steel butt-plate. The steel butt-plate never hangs up on a shirt or jacket as you bring it up the way a rubber one can. It's tough and can take the abuse of being set down in some ruff and tumble places. For the way I use my M92 I think I like the steel better than rubber, but I am also using a standard A2 stock with waffle butt-plate on my 450 Bushmaster too. :D
 
For my Rossi '92 (44 mag with crescent butt plate), I simply exchanged the butt stock with one made for a Rossi '92 in 454. It comes with a flat rubber pad and made a world of difference.
 
Crescent butt plates are meant to fit inside the shoulder, not on it. Dominant elbow is horizontal to the ground and the off hand nearly vertical. If done correctly, the crescent fits snugly into your shoulder socket and is very accurate. Most people don't shoot this way, thus the crescent feels awkward.

Ever shoot a M48 mauser? It's steel butt is much worse feeling than any lever gun I've shot, and its flat like a shotgun.
 
Like a couple others have said, you are doing it wrong. When used on a stock with proper cast off and toe out I would say that a crescent butt plate is superior to a flat one for off hand shooting. Matter of opinion of course. When held properly with a straight stock they are a bit awkward. They became popular about 200 years years ago when just about every rifle was custom built. Crescent butt plate on a stock that is made right for them is great, but you are not likely to ever see it on a production gun.
 
The crescent, as mentioned above, is meant to be fired in a different shoulder position.

Today it's mostly for cosmetics, and it does look classic.
I dislike them.
Only owned one '73 with a crescent & sold it.

In other leverguns since, I simply buy either a flat shotgun type or a lightly curved carbine type.
Steel's traditionally used to protect the stock's butt from damage, and in calibers below .45-70 I don't find it a problem.
Denis
 
BigBlue 94 said:
Crescent butt plates are meant to fit inside the shoulder, not on it. Dominant elbow is horizontal to the ground and the off hand nearly vertical. If done correctly, the crescent fits snugly into your shoulder socket and is very accurate. Most people don't shoot this way, thus the crescent feels awkward.

Ever shoot a M48 mauser? It's steel butt is much worse feeling than any lever gun I've shot, and its flat like a shotgun.
Click to expand...
Yes. A Mauser will leave a bruise in a hurry. I like the crescent better than flat is both at metal.
 
I don’t do crescent buttplates, margarine, rap music, light beer, quick grits, handgun cartridge rifles, Facebook, Twitter, poodles and frozen french fries but don’t have a problem with those who do with the exception of poodles. But I also add pineapple when cooking a pot of beans so to each his own.
 
Last edited:
BigBlue 94 said:
Crescent butt plates are meant to fit inside the shoulder, not on it. Dominant elbow is horizontal to the ground and the off hand nearly vertical. If done correctly, the crescent fits snugly into your shoulder socket and is very accurate. Most people don't shoot this way, thus the crescent feels awkward.

Ever shoot a M48 mauser? It's steel butt is much worse feeling than any lever gun I've shot, and its flat like a shotgun.
Click to expand...

Those skinny steel Mauser buttplates are punishing.
 
Having shot rifles of every shape and form for sixty some years, I know how to hold the crescent butted levers and many muzzle loaders. It doesn't make them any more comfortable to shoot, especially after tearing a biceps head in a roofing accident a few years ago. I shoot several thousand rounds at trap each year and feel no pain. All that said, crescent butts are nuts for fun. I'm actually watching for a carbine 92 Win stock with the shotgun buttplate. Hurt, no. Fun, not either. Worst gun of several in the pain inducing category was an old Remington pump in 30-06 with no pad on the under one inch wide butt I sighted in for a friend who was taking an Alaska fishing trip and was going to carry 220 grain loads. 458 No 1 Tropical was better. Worst ever was a 6 gauge flintlock shotgun from station eight high house at skeet. The 92 with steel crescent plate is not painful, just not comfortable.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for all the replies. Yes, I was doing it wrong, even though I have black powder rifles with steel crescent butt plates, and 1917 (Enfield pattern) rifles with steel butts.

Still, there are rifle makers out there now making pistol caliber carbines (can’t say if they are win92 actions) without the crescent steel butt plate.

There have been a lot of Winchester 92s and clones purchased and dumped after 1 outing because of the brutal buttplate. But the 92 action is so beautiful that the gun could be vastly improved with a modern update to the buttstock. Just sayin...
 
I see three 92s currently offered by Winchester with either carbine or shotgun-style buttstocks.
Look around, and you can find the same offered by Rossi (when they get back into volume production) and Chiappa.

Maybe you need to separate your issues.
If you want non-crescent leverguns, they're widely available.
If steel itself is your problem, then you have two choices: Either locate one of the "modernized models" from whoever makes one, or have somebody R&R the steel plate on your favorite levergun & have a rubber pad installed.

Most of us like the classic configuration in classic leverguns, and that means a steel plate.
Many of us like the steel crescents for their classic looks. I don't.
I had one steel crescent, in a caliber with very little recoil, and sold it. Could not tolerate the way that thing felt on my shoulder & was not about to adapt my shooting style to accommodate it.
Many of us won't own a crescent. I'm one.
There ARE easily-found alternatives to the crescent, by three different makers of classic Winchester leverguns.

If you can't tolerate steel in a 92 action, your options are much more limited.
I personally would have no problem firing ANY steel-butted 92 action below the uncommon .454 Casull.
The .44 Mag is the heaviest kicker of the tribe, and it's do-able, WITH either a carbine or shotgun-style plate.
My 94 .30-30 is a year older than me. It has a flat shotgun-style checkered steel buttplate. Been shot that way since 1951.

Handgun-calibered 92s are viable with steel plates, as long as they're the RIGHT steel plates.
Otherwise, you'll just have to buy & modify, or look for the expensive modernized options generally by specialty makers.
Denis
 
I got to acknowledge the great idea of replacing with Rossi 92 buttstock for .454. Brilliant solution!

I’m nearly finished mounting an old Winchester 94 stock on this Rossi 92. The fit isn’t perfect, because the top tang flange mates with the wood in a slightly different way. And the donor stock has a chip out along the top tang. Dang. Still, the walnut is better than the Brazilian hardwood. This is my truck gun and woods gun. Someday a grandson will treasure my mismatched Rossi and Winchester parts.
 
jamesjames said:
Thanks for all the replies. Yes, I was doing it wrong, even though I have black powder rifles with steel crescent butt plates, and 1917 (Enfield pattern) rifles with steel butts.

Still, there are rifle makers out there now making pistol caliber carbines (can’t say if they are win92 actions) without the crescent steel butt plate.

There have been a lot of Winchester 92s and clones purchased and dumped after 1 outing because of the brutal buttplate. But the 92 action is so beautiful that the gun could be vastly improved with a modern update to the buttstock. Just sayin...
Click to expand...
And there are those who wouldn't buy them without one. Personally, I ain't paying for a traditional 24" octagon 1892 with a friggin' rubber buttpad.

If you don't want the crescent, get the carbine. If you can't handle a steel buttplate on a pistol cartridge carbine, I'd say you were very sensitive to recoil and shouldn't expect the industry and other shooters to adapt to your liking but rather the other way around.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
Lever action newbie questions, help me choose a lever gun...
Replies
23
Views
869
bubbygator
B
T
  • Locked
Bearly an excuse for a lever action
2 3
Replies
56
Views
3K
stevekl
S
C
  • Locked
"Out with Bang" amazingly fair article on Winchester from Washington Post
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
carebear
C
B
  • Locked
Why I Hate Lawyers
Replies
17
Views
834
Coronach
C
2
  • Locked
Safer Vehicles For Soldiers: A Tale Of Delays And Glitches (Long)
Replies
11
Views
646
Rebar
R
Back
Top