Ruger Forum banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Picked up the above with a 20" barrel in stainless on Friday. Spent a chunk of Friday evening cleaning off the cosmoline, and shot it yesterday. What follows are some observations.

Cosmetics: Really quite good, especially considering the price. The stainless is brushed, and in general finished well. The furniture fits well to the metal bits, is nicely finished and looks good. I have a Henry brass Big Boy, and I'd give the Henry an A-/B+ in terms of finish. The Rossi would be a B/B-.

Operation: the gun is new, and I would best describe it as "stiff". Not necessarily "gritty". It takes some force to move things, and you can definitely feel springs compressing, lugs engaging, etc. So it is much heavier than the Henry, and not as smooth (as you feel the different mechanical things going on).

Trigger: I don't have a gauge, but it is heavy. However, there is essentially no take-up, no creep--it breaks crisply. While heavier than the Henry, it may actually break a bit cleaner.

Cycling test: I loaded 6 .357 snap caps in it multiple times--no issue with loading the rounds and no issues with cycling.

Range: Using .357 semi jacketed soft tips loading was a challenge--not certain why. When I switched to .357 fully jacketed flat points loading was a breeze. There were no FTF nor any cycling issues (and my Henry occasionally hiccups). Accuracy offhand at 50 yards was not as good as the Henry, but I think the sights are to blame. First off (and this is my only criticism so far) the semi-buckhorn rear site will not stay set--after firing a couple of rounds the site resets to the lowest setting (the Henry stays put). Also, the Henry has a brighter bead and a white diamond on the buckhorn, which makes it much easier for my older eyes to see. The Henry also has the very heavy octagon barrel. I suspect this Rossi would be close with better sights--though I don't know if if would be as good.

Next: There are both spring kits and a fair amount of youtubes on slicking up the action and lightening the trigger pull. I intend to figure something out for a better iron sight, and do an action job and I'll report back.

Final thoughts. I really prefer the gate loading over the tube loading of the Henry. Although, in the Henry's favor it is never hard to put any round in the tube. But, I'm hoping my filing and polishing work to come will sort that out in the Rossi. I like the stainless steel look, and it is of course lighter than much heavier Henry. I think it will be a great and enjoyable plinker.
 

·
Righteous Dude
Joined
·
21,694 Posts
I'm glad you reported this. I've been thinking of getting one of these. I've really wanted a Marlin 1894css, but those are rare and expensive. It seems the Rossi carbine is a nice rifle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,156 Posts
64Chevy the more you use your Rossi Model 92 the more you will like it. Mine is the big loop Model 92 blued with a 16 inch barrel. Yours being newer does have better sights, put some bright dot of paint on your front sight blade. Could the spring tension on your rear sight be causing the elevation device to slip? My Rossi when I shoot at the indoor range of 25 yds the accuracy is one ragged hole. I think the Henry Big Boys are really nice but you pay for that. Now it's hard to find or Marlin doesn't make the 1894 in .357 I have seen new ones in .44 magnum. None the less I have both Rossi & my Marlin 1894 CB rifle limited in .357. I put a scope on it to shoot. But with the longer 24 inch barrel it weighs more. So I usually shoot my Rossi more. It's in my avatar pic. But give your Rossi a break in period your action will smooth up. I like the Win. 92 action much more then the Win. 94 action. I think in the long run you will really like your Rossi as much if not more vs your Henry......but hey both fine rifles!!!:D:cool:;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
549 Posts
I had one that I was really fond of and I even won a shooting contest with it. The fit and finish was excellent and the action was smooth. The trigger was crisp, and broke at about 4 pounds. I gave it to my grandson when Indiana made it legal to hunt deer with any rifle that shot straight wall pistol cartridges .357 or larger, and a box of 158 grain lead SWCGC bullets loaded with 17 grains od H110..........robin
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
64Chevy the more you use your Rossi Model 92 the more you will like it. Mine is the big loop Model 92 blued with a 16 inch barrel. Yours being newer does have better sights, put some bright dot of paint on your front sight blade. Could the spring tension on your rear sight be causing the elevation device to slip? My Rossi when I shoot at the indoor range of 25 yds the accuracy is one ragged hole. I think the Henry Big Boys are really nice but you pay for that. Now it's hard to find or Marlin doesn't make the 1894 in .357 I have seen new ones in .44 magnum. None the less I have both Rossi & my Marlin 1894 CB rifle limited in .357. I put a scope on it to shoot. But with the longer 24 inch barrel it weighs more. So I usually shoot my Rossi more. It's in my avatar pic. But give your Rossi a break in period your action will smooth up. I like the Win. 92 action much more then the Win. 94 action. I think in the long run you will really like your Rossi as much if not more vs your Henry......but hey both fine rifles!!!:D:cool:;)
I think it is the spring tension of the rear buckhorn--I can try drifting it out of the dovetail, bending it, and putting it back--might work. I know some aspects of the action will smooth out with use, but I can make it happen quicker and probably better by taking it apart and working it. I may purchase the spring kit suggested, or I may just try polishing the action and bending/shimming the trigger leaf spring.

Any suggestion on sites and/or a scope mount?

(I would have bought a Marlin had I seen one.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,156 Posts
Ok the leaf spring bent down as suggested will work. There is a scout scope mount setup for the Rossi. Part of this setup is that there are some holes drilled out under the rear sight. Then another part is the dovetail cut in the barrel for the rear sight. So what you have is a neat setup for a scout scope setup. I would do a search thru the optic section of the Ruger Forum. There is a thread that deals in a scope setup for a Rossi Model 92. So the scope base is threaten onto the barrel via the screw holes already tapped out and the other part of the base is held into place via the dove tail cutout. You need to check into this because the guy that does a detailed install is also from Oregon. I looked into doing this to my rifle but mine is a bit older and doesn't have the holes drilled and tapped into the barrel. Just the newer Rossi Model 92's have this feature. I have never considered doing a action job to my rifle because it doesn't need one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,411 Posts
Many years ago I had a Rossi 92 in .357 mag. The rifle was functional but pretty rough inside. After smoothing up the internal parts it was a very good rifle.

After several years of use it got traded for some other gun. Wish I had held onto that one. In my opinion the Rossi 92 has a lot of value.

Enjoy your new rifle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Update: drifted out the rear site yesterday to confirm the mounting holes for the scope base were present--they are. Bent the site back--I think this would fix the shifting sight issue, but it is a relatively crude (perhaps historically accurate, but crude) semi-buckhorn so I'm not interested in putting it back. I don't think scopes look right on levers (and the Rossi base plate is not available anywhere I could find, even from Rossi--several vendors listed it as in stock but I called them and no dice).

So I think I am going to order some fiber optic sites from Stevesgunz. Not historically accurate, but for me the fill the gap between looks and function.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,156 Posts
I hope your option works for you. I am not opposed to scope use, on a lever rifle my issue is I am not excited on a scout scope set up. Many will argue no matter. You know if I was in your situation I would check into a Skinner Peep sight. This would look better on a lever rifle then a fiber optic sight. Or get a different sight setup from Marble sights. But again strictly a suggestion! I find the newer sights used on the Rossi much nicer then the sight setup I have on mine, but a small dab of Valspar glow in the dark bright orange paint took care of my problem. Good Luck!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
225 Posts
I bought the dvd from Stevesgunz. After installing his spring kit and polishing up the internals it is very smooth. You can remove some metal on the leaf spring to lighten the trigger pull. I've got mine around three pounds. Liked my 357 so much I bought another in 45 Colt.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,246 Posts
I picked up one of the Skinner rear peep sights for my Rossi 92 (16" barrel). The Rossi dovetail is a different size and Skinner makes one that fits perfectly. The original buckhorn on my Rossi just fell out. Made it easy to find a reason to replace it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,411 Posts
Update: drifted out the rear site yesterday to confirm the mounting holes for the scope base were present--they are. Bent the site back--I think this would fix the shifting sight issue, but it is a relatively crude (perhaps historically accurate, but crude) semi-buckhorn so I'm not interested in putting it back. I don't think scopes look right on levers (and the Rossi base plate is not available anywhere I could find, even from Rossi--several vendors listed it as in stock but I called them and no dice).

So I think I am going to order some fiber optic sites from Stevesgunz. Not historically accurate, but for me the fill the gap between looks and function.
If you decide to hang onto the original sight here's a suggestion to fix the issue of the elevator moving under the sight.

The elevator really is nothing more than a wedge shaped piece of steel with notches cut into it. The user picks which of those notches elevates the rear sight to the desired level. By using a file to cut the notches at a steeper angle you can help to "lock" the sight into the notch. Remove the elevator, put it in a vise and file the notches into steeper "V's". Because the notches are really nothing more than arbitrary elevation adjustments there's no real danger in accidentally altering the bottom of the notch. If you cut one notch a little too deep you simply cut the next higher notch a bit less and use that notch for the desired elevation.

I've zeroed many ,22 rifles with those types of rear sights by customizing a particular notch in the elevator to the needed level.

The elevator is a cheap, easily replaceable, easily duplicated part. You really have nothing to lose by filing on that part to achieve the desired result.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
If you decide to hang onto the original sight here's a suggestion to fix the issue of the elevator moving under the sight.

The elevator really is nothing more than a wedge shaped piece of steel with notches cut into it. The user picks which of those notches elevates the rear sight to the desired level. By using a file to cut the notches at a steeper angle you can help to "lock" the sight into the notch. Remove the elevator, put it in a vise and file the notches into steeper "V's". Because the notches are really nothing more than arbitrary elevation adjustments there's no real danger in accidentally altering the bottom of the notch. If you cut one notch a little too deep you simply cut the next higher notch a bit less and use that notch for the desired elevation.

I've zeroed many ,22 rifles with those types of rear sights by customizing a particular notch in the elevator to the needed level.

The elevator is a cheap, easily replaceable, easily duplicated part. You really have nothing to lose by filing on that part to achieve the desired result.
Except that I can't see the damn thing very well. I already considered doing this, or even using a micro drill and pinning it in place. Either fiber optic or a peep will likely be a better thing for my eyes. But this is still good info for someone else with this issue--thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
277 Posts
Except that I can't see the damn thing very well. I already considered doing this, or even using a micro drill and pinning it in place. Either fiber optic or a peep will likely be a better thing for my eyes. But this is still good info for someone else with this issue--thanks.
Alpine Ice (white) finger nail polish works wonders on weapon sights....About $9.00 a bottle for the really good stuff, one application will usually last several range sessions. Just remember what it is when cleaning, or one application will not survive one cleaning.

Flame (orange) also works well on front sights...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,246 Posts
To me that's sounds like a good option do you still use the same front sight?
Yes. I had to do some adjustment on the Skinner, but once I got it dialed in it is fine. I have thought about getting one of the white dot front sights from the stevesgunz site or else a fiber optic from Skinner just because my "old eyes" need all the help they can get.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,156 Posts
I think there are a lot of us guys here with old eye's mine included. My answer for the time being was to paint my front sight blade with bright orange paint. It's glow in the dark paint I bought a few years back. My Rossi Model 92 is a older version that has basically a u notch rear sight. If the Skinner rear Peep sight will fit in the dove tail cut on a Rossi then this gives me another option for my Rossi. White Squirrel thanks for your information!!!
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top