Notes and Thoughts, Rossi R92 357

Sharps40

Sharps40

Price, it's all about the price
Joined
Dec 18, 2016
Messages
2,596
Location
Pekin, NC.
Rating - 100%
32   0   0
Working with a very low mileage, new to me, Rossi R92, 357 Magnum.

A few notes as I become familiar with this dainty hard hitter and probably update any changes or corrections here in the future.

Light, quick, possessed of a decent everyday use trigger (4 lbs 4 oz and relatively creep and wall free.), smooth enough as is, well fitted, pretty non walnut wood. There is much to like.

125 rounds fired so far.... 50 each 38 special +P loaded with 125g Berries PJHP. No bobbles, no problems, like shooting a .22 LR. I suspect this will be the primary target diet. 50 each 357 magnum loaded with 125g Berries PJHP, no bobbles, no problems. 10 each Underwood 357 Magnum loaded with 158g JHP XTP. No bobbles, no problems. Finally, 15 each Blaser Aluminum 357 loaded with 158g JHP. No bobbles no problems.

Gun is rated for 8+1 in 357 mag. Some bullet configurations, namely the aluminum case blaser 158g JHP, allow 9+1 with reliable function.
 
Last edited:
Things I'll likely feel a need to work on.

Wood forend sticks out way too far beyond the barrel band. Just cosmetics but I'll likely trim it back a bit.

Sharp edges on loading gate and inside mouth of mag tube make loading a slight chore.

Rotating safety on top of the bolt, already fixed, see applicable thread in the gunsmithing section for a zero cost, reversible option.

No sling swivels.

Factory Iron sights are atrocious. Front sight is very tall and has a small dark brass bead that is invisible in any lighting conditions. Rear sight horns obscure peripheral view of the target. Rear site groove is too narrow for the front sight, e.g. no light side to side when properly indexing the bead. Rear sight elevator has a hump so tall that at when placed on the three (of 6) lowest notches your view of the front sight is fully blocked by the rear sight elevator. As such, more than half the adjustment range of the sighting system is unusable. (e.g. all short and mid range settings are effectively rendered unusable by the tall hump of the elevator itself- this may be why there are so many complaints bout shooting high, you're effectively sighting off the top of the rear elevator, not the rear sight blade.)

Buttstock to tang fit shows gaps. Long term and heavy use, it should be glass bedded.

The rifle will not feed upside down. (All my 94s and 336s will) While it may seem, on its face, a ridiculous statement, consider that the carrier dosn't capture the round as well as the 94 and the 336. As such, there may or may not be feed related issues if I'm a bit off kilter for cycling a fresh round, such as you often are worming your way through thick brush on that slow stalk and spot hunt....time will tell. In any event, I suspect it's unlikely to be an issue.
 
Last edited:
Yeah the best buckhorn rears are the marbles. The elevator is outside the sight body and doesn't block the view through the blade.
 
Last edited:
Those work quite well for some folks. My experience tended towards electric unreliability and not being able to come to grips with the greater distance from my eye. Where I can see them I stick with iron, otherwise I select for a traditional scope with uncluttered reticles. Low power seems to be my comfort zone for hunts and higher for target.
 
Last edited:
I shoot m92 for SASS/Wild Bunch and NCOWS. Great rifles. Just needs work to be where most people want them to be. Few hours of fitting and sanding and you can have a very slick rifle. I use my 92 in 45 colt for hunting. Rifle length with octagon to round barrel. Neat piece. Wish they did musket-length forends.
 
Is yours the 16" or 20" barrel? I had the large loop 16" version and would've loved it if I could've gotten it to shoot. Out of the box it shot a foot high. Ordered multiple sights and tried many different ammo types. Could get no better than 7" high. Google Fu showed it to be pretty common on the short barrel 357's .
 
45/70fan said:
Is yours the 16" or 20" barrel? I had the large loop 16" version and would've loved it if I could've gotten it to shoot. Out of the box it shot a foot high. Ordered multiple sights and tried many different ammo types. Could get no better than 7" high. Google Fu showed it to be pretty common on the short barrel 357's .
Click to expand...
My 16" shot to point of aim and still does with a red dot
 
Are there any good aftermarket sights for this gun? I have the same problem with these sights as mentioned. Worthless.

I have the same gun solely for my "have 2 guns for every caliber" goals. I'd like to be able to actually use it though.
 
Love my 20" M92. I ditched the buckhorn sights for a set of Skinner peeps, which work marvelously. With my .357 handloads of 158 gr. LRNFP's over 5.4 grains of Unique, it shoots 2 inch groups at 50 yards. Beyond that range exceeds the capability of my eyes for consistent groups. I also have a 16" M92 in .45 Colt that I love as well. People used to knock Rossi lever guns, but I've never had an issue with them.
 
Last edited:
Nice! I’ve got a 16” stainless .357 92 that’s been worked over. It’s a dream to carry and shoot. The 92 rifles are sleek and slender compared to marlins or Henry’s. Bought a rear pic rail and a 403c to put on it for hunting season for the kids to use. Waiting on rossi’s triple black rail with peep sight to come back in stock and I’ll swap out the rail I bought.

Check out https://bayougunsling.com/ for a sling. I don’t have one yet as I’m still on the fence about a sling.
 
Last edited:
45/70fan said:
Is yours the 16" or 20" barrel? I had the large loop 16" version and would've loved it if I could've gotten it to shoot. Out of the box it shot a foot high. Ordered multiple sights and tried many different ammo types. Could get no better than 7" high. Google Fu showed it to be pretty common on the short barrel 357's .
Click to expand...
16 in. See my notes about possible reason these shoot high.
 
DoubleOg said:
Nice! I’ve got a 16” stainless .357 92 that’s been worked over. It’s a dream to carry and shoot. The 92 rifles are sleek and slender compared to marlins or Henry’s. Bought a rear pic rail and a 403c to put on it for hunting season for the kids to use. Waiting on rossi’s triple black rail with peep sight to come back in stock and I’ll swap out the rail I bought.

Check out https://bayougunsling.com/ for a sling. I don’t have one yet as I’m still on the fence about a sling.
Click to expand...
Yes. The marlins and Henry's are very heavy and stocks look/feel like a club to me. The lil rossy 357 is slim, reasonably well balanced at 16 in and only 5 lbs 13 oz empty weight.

Probably won't sling the Rossi as it's primarily the house gun and yard yote getter.
 
Last edited:
Sharps40 said:
Yes. The marlins and Henry's are very heavy and stocks look/feel like a club to me. The lil rossy 357 is slim, reasonably well balanced at 16 in and only 5 lbs 13 oz empty weight.

Probably won't sling the Rossi as it's primarily the house gun and yard yote getter.
Click to expand...
It’s really so light and slim… I like the idea of a sling but it may be too much and not needed
 
My biggest problem with the Rossi is that the grain isn’t filled and the pores in the wood are the same size as my whiskers. Every time I shoulder it the stock tries to pull a few. I gotta get to refinishing it. BTW, I like the idea of removing some of the stock in front of the barrel band, it is excessive. Please do something cool so I don’t just chop mine off square on the bandsaw.
 
Darn. I was thinking SQ cut about 3/8 out from the band, ease the sharp edges and seal with shellac or satin urethane. Boring but a simple execution.....wish I had a bandsaw.
 
Last edited:
Sharps40 said:
Darn. I was thinking SQ cut about 3/8 out from the band, ease the sharp edges and seal with shellac or satin urethane. Boring but a simple execution.....wish I had a bandsaw.
Click to expand...
The stock probably isn’t square in any dimension, so it’ll take shimmin and fussin. Probably faster with a tenon saw.

Might round mine while it’s long, then cut it to length and repeat if I like the look, else just chop it.
 
clay_fv said:
Are there any good aftermarket sights for this gun? I have the same problem with these sights as mentioned. Worthless.

I have the same gun solely for my "have 2 guns for every caliber" goals. I'd like to be able to actually use it though.
Click to expand...

For lever guns , I’m not sure you can buy any better sights than Skinner
skinnersights.com

Rossi

Machined from Solid Bar stock, Skinner Sights offers improved function, durability, and appearance over factory sights. Specializing in Peep Sights - Aperture sights. Check out our innovative and expanding sights, optics and accessories product lines.
skinnersights.com skinnersights.com

Skinner Sights
 
Sharps40 said:
Pretty, in a sling swivel mount sorta way. :) Not a fan though.
Click to expand...
If you ever actually shoot a rifle with them you might see it differently- they are extremely popular among lever enthusiasts for a reason - they work very well.
Either way no big deal , just trying to offer you another option
 
I have. They are pretty but not for me. I'm sure Mr skinner has become slightly wealthy.


See post 1 for a clearer idea of what one forgoes with the purchase of a skinner, similar.

www.theoutdoorstrader.com

Chingachgook

Chingachgook.....Last of the Mohicans. 1893 Marlin. Smokeless steel barrel. 3030. Reblued. Rifle butt, steel. Wood refinished. Good + bore. Tight as nearly new. Issues. Replacement Rocky Mountain Front sight. This would NOT have been the original front sight as the gun was factory...
www.theoutdoorstrader.com www.theoutdoorstrader.com
 
Last edited:
Just to see what could be done with no polish, no cutting/grinding, etc.

Factory trigger pull was ok, 4 lbs 6 ounces and a touch of take up. (The trigger/sear of this model directly impinges the hammer, so no floppy trigger like the 94 and the 336.)

That trigger/sear spring in the middle is a beast. You can replace it with a $95 spring from a well known parts maker, thin the factory spring, shape the factory spring like an hour glass to reduce trigger pull.

Or, you can spend no money, ruin no parts.

I went out into the back yard and picked up a 28g shotgun wad and cut out a shim to go between spring and tang.

1 thickness reduced pull to 3.4 lbs with a touch of take up.

Folding over the forward end of the shotgun wad shim to make it 2 thicknesses, reduced trigger pull to 2 lbs 14 ounces, still just a touch of take up.

Experiment with shim material and thickness to see what might work safely.

Its back together now and functioning fine. I guess I'll spend that $95 + shipping on something else.


IMG_20231025_115852832.jpg
 
Last edited:
Sharps40 said:
Yes. The marlins and Henry's are very heavy and stocks look/feel like a club to me. The lil rossy 357 is slim, reasonably well balanced at 16 in and only 5 lbs 13 oz empty weight.

Probably won't sling the Rossi as it's primarily the house gun and yard yote getter.
Click to expand...
I feel the same, I had a 1894csbl and it was a thick heavy pig compared to the 92. Just put a 403c on mine for the kids to use for deer season this year. They are great little guns. I’ll probably switch the skinner pic rail out for the Rossi triple black rail that has the peep sight when they come back in stock.

IMG_3294.jpeg

IMG_3293.jpeg
 
Last edited:
I think somewhere I mentioned that the plastic magazine plug would probably last a lifetime, contrary to all internet reports, if it was kept cleaned and dry lubed.

But, then, I thought about it being the only plastic part in the entire gun. So....fixed it free. (At $25 plus shipping, I wasn't paying Steve and the Winchester 357 mag followers are much larger in diameter.....)

A bit of brass rod, bored .360 in the back to receive the spring. 2 diameters set up like the plastic plug and some wasp waist and semi wad cutter nose to reduce weight and friction.

I made it too long, so as to lock the lifter on the last shot. From there pared back the nose until the lifter was free to move on an empty gun. Its one way to get the length perfect and not have to measure anything.

The end of the mag spring was tapered 6 coils to freely compress in the new follower's base. This was done by carefully winding the spring around progressively smaller drill rod. When done, I created one dead coil on the end so it seats evenly.

Easy to load and reliable. No charge, no wait. Sorry Steve.

IMG_20231101_140535356.jpg
 
Last edited:
Loading gate was very stiff. I took it out and ground a half moon 1/3 of the way across the spring bottom. Polished the cut and the operating surfaces and now it's not a thumb buster and brass scraper. Easier to load and positive functionality.

IMG_20231124_093305665.jpg
 
Last edited:
While I had it apart I took out the very stiff ejector spring. It's .045 wire at .24 od.

Using some Brownells spring stock, same od, similar coil spacing but .035 dia wire, I cut a length with 1/2 turn less coil. Creating a dead coil on each end effectively shortens the spring one more full coil. After polishing the spring ends it was assembled and functioned. Good ejection (and lots easier to reassemble) and noticeably easier to close.

Sorry Steve.... 🤣
 
Last edited:
Thoughtful of Rossi to provide a rear sight centering reference mark.

IMG_20231127_112421574.jpg
 
Last edited:
Factory front sight provides limited adjustment and is too short (rifle shoots high with light bullets, it'll be worse with fast heavies)


IMG_20231127_113011871.jpg
 
Last edited:
With both front and rear adjustable for windage and elevation, and the ability to split settings between front and rear, I'll be able to put the gun dead on with about any load and/range.

If you're going to have sights, the movement on target should be something less than "1 1/8" off hi or low". That's a wide miss on a small target, finer is better.

I no longer burn time reloading, so, it'll pay to have adjustability against the fact I'll never be quite sure a particular load is available.



IMG_20231127_115514042.jpg
 
Last edited:
Math said to start here with the current hunting load, Underwood pn 125, 158g bonded jhp.


IMG_20231127_122646222.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom