Author Topic: NOS 2009 Rossi R92 .45 Colt stainless trapper (16.5"bbl) review...  (Read 1179 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Bob Wilkins

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Short version is it has a bit of hitch in its get-along while chambering which.will require me to slightly chamfer/ramp chamber entrance, the loading gate as always oversprung where backing.off its mounting screw a full turn worked wonders, rims hang on frame interior where entrance needs a slight chamfer...

Past that, it is made and finished as good as anything, past the common bizarre wood from Brazil, but as a CZ owner the wood almost looks normal. The metal finish is better than anything Ruger does, including my premium SRH..454/.45, and better than anything Marlin.did.in the last 50yrs.

Hit the range at dawn yesterday.to.see how it shot and.to.hopefully zero with minimal whacking.or off-center sights. It shot high first shot, so adjusted elevator where second shot was a bit low, went up a single click and.fired four more shots at 25yds. I'd say it shows promise and makes any other required tinkering worthwhile. The load is a 255grSWC doing 1215fps from the trapper.





« Last Edit: August 11, 2023, 06:39:29 PM by Wobbly »

Offline Bob Wilkins

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: NOS 2009 Rossi R92 .45 Colt stainless trapper (16.5"bbl) review...
« Reply #1 on: August 11, 2023, 03:21:17 PM »
Before anyone feels like running out and buying one, keep in mind materials and finish may currently be well above price, but Rossis often have problems. Look up Rossi .357/.38 problems for example, or .44 magnum/special.

I have heard of .38/.357 with chambers oversized leading to bulging.. My .45 Colt chamber was polished out to where brass from it will only seat halfway in.Ruger/Colt chambers, them done that way maybe to relieve binding at feed where chamfering bottom edge of chamber might be the.normal fix.

They CAN be a fine gun out of the box, but a crap shoot on that, and the remainder CAN be a.fine gun with tinkering, but a crap shoot on that, too, and there are no parts past aftermarket and stripped guns.

Their quality was crude but generally functional from early 70s to late 80s where tooling wore out....new tooling/factory not built until 2000....2009 CBC bought them along with Rossi import arm Braztech (which CBC produces MagTech ammo) and CBC then acquired MEN ammunition in Germany, Sellier and Bellot, and Taurus in 2015, where Rossi was put under Taurus branding, where hammer safety was added and maybe later deleted.
« Last Edit: August 11, 2023, 03:42:08 PM by Bob Wilkins »

Offline Bob Wilkins

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: NOS 2009 Rossi R92 .45 Colt stainless trapper (16.5"bbl) review...
« Reply #2 on: August 15, 2023, 03:28:51 PM »
Forgot to mention as for R92 tinkering, am not trying to.frighten away.prospective buyers, as the guns are VERY nice for the price, most components (frame/lever/bolt/lower tang and possibly hammer/trigger) APPEAR to be machined forgings rather than castings, exceptions.to that would be for sure the cartridge guides/shell latch which appear MIM, and shell carrier/lifter MIGHT be cast but also possibly a forging. No cheap rough screws, even. The plastic magazine follower can be swapped for a stainless one from Palo Verde Gunworks for an affordable $14.

Biggest problems generally found are the guns are oversprung, especially in magazine spring (you want 6"-8" protruding from magazine when cap plug removed, and excess trimmed).

Ditto oversprung is the loading gate where mounting screw can be backed off a single fine thread/1-turn, as well as removed and SLIGHTLY tweaked to remove a bit of bend. In between the magazine spring and loading gate as supplied, loading can otherwise be very difficult...and a sharp thick corner inside frame at front of loading port catches rims and could use a slight bevel to break corner.

Worst oversprung problem is the ejector in bolt face, which all by itself can cause feeding problems ranging from hard to impossible, as it exerts so much pressure on cartridges that the rims bind against the cartridge guide rim slots stopping cartridge rise and that misalignment causes lead and brass up front to bind on sharp edged/cornered entrance to chamber.....if hard feeding, the very first thing.to do is swap the spring. An affordable/easy to find replacement can be bought at True Value or through Amazon at circa $6 for 6 springs, the Century Spring C-530 compression spring, which is 1" long,.7/32" O.D. of 0.020" wire.

If more than one shell feeds at a time, a good chance a prior owner or even the factory installed the flat shell latch spring improperly, the end should be under the latch (hinge pinned to end of cartridge guide) and arch in spring against the cartridge guide and NOT against the receiver.

Those few things account for 95% of problems encountered in the R92....
if a rare bird where working the lever tosses cartridges free, there would be excessive clearance between cartridge guides and the guide without the shell latch can be shimmed with brass shim stock cut with a paper cutter and clamped to wood for prick-punch starter hole and drilling, clean up hole to remove raised burring, hole size not critical as guide nests in receiver slot.

Another rarer problem is the lifter/carrier pops up violently enough to flip cartridges where they cannot feed, and this simply is because the lifter has a spring plunger protruding from the side which engages a slotted detent groove milled in receiver sidewall (to keep lifter from flopping up and down), and plunger is simply hanging and suddenly releasing on a too-sharp upper edge of slot, where breaking that edge is all which is required.

There are several good guides on the net for dis/re-assemhly, none are identical, as there are good things missing from one which might be found in another. It is not hard, but practice helps.
Sticking points might be finding buttstock stuck, where covering front of comb with a rag and whacking with a soft mallet will back it off.

The lower tang/trigger plate might also be hard to back out of receiver where same mallet and a wooden brush handle or dowel used to drive it back and out. The trigger pin is a loose fit, and can fall out, or protrude at reassembly and stop seating in frame, so before whacking harder at reinstall, look at the pin.

It generally is not necessary to disconnect locking bolts/blocks from the lever when dis/re-assembling.

The ejector/spring/collar can spring free on bolt removal/reinstallation, especially if you are needing to whack on other parts such as lower tang prior to securing bolt/ejector to lever with the stop pin, and you will save yourself a world of frustration if you simply place an empty case in the chamber, carefully insert bolt in receiver, slide it forward until in contact with case and then tap back of bolt to seat extractor on the case rim, the case retains the ejector and its parts, then you can slide bolt back enough to insert lever into the bottom (WITHOUT fully extracting case or it and everything goes flying) and then slide bolt forward enough to pin it all back together. Alternately, and perhaps better, you can stuff ejector/spring/collar in front of bolt without engaging collar in notch, insert empty in bolt face with ejector flush with same, and use a hooked scribe to pull collar forward and engage in notch (only possible with lighter spring), and again hold empty in place while inserting bolt. When repinning bolt/lever/extractor and empty catridge in place, if hammer strut/spring captive pinning is undone (pinned with very small nail or heavy paper clip) and hammer against bolt or in safety notch under normal pressure, it keeps the bolt from moving while bolt/lever/ejector secured by stop pin...as for that stop pin, you will need a very small diameter punch of 1/16th" for removal so don't even think of starting bolt removal without one. Several other sizes or subs handy for aligning holes.

By way of closing, will simply say that major components, the steel of which they are made, and their machining and finish, is on par with pre-64 Winchesters, while smoothness rivals my Browning/Miroku B53, on post-2000 R92s....it is a gun worth any of the above, or all of the above, tinkering, while odds are it will only require one or two of the above remedial steps.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2023, 04:54:11 PM by Bob Wilkins »