New Puma 92's

Norrick · October 10, 2009, 07:59 PM

Well I found them in Rossi's E-catalog for 2009 on the main Taurus page. I haven't seen any yet for sale anywhere online, and none of the gunstores I've ever gone to have ever carried them in the first place (i.e. all marlins, etc).

Do you guys think the quality has changed at all since they were bought by Taurus? I've heard equal amounts of good and bad on these guns, it just doesn't seem to be very consistent. Then again, as far as revolvers go, I always think of Ruger or Smith and Wesson before even considering a Taurus.

I am curious because I like the sound of a 16" stainless in .454 Casull

Check it out yourself.
http://www.rossiusa.com/2009catalog/?catalog_page=23

P.s. am I correct in assuming that Rossi and Puma are essentially the same rifles?

or if link does not work:

Taurus main page > Rifles > 2009 Rossi E Catalog > Page 23 > item # R92-68016

ATW525 · October 10, 2009, 08:36 PM

I have two Puma 92s in .357 Magnum which were made by Taurus. I can't really compare them with pre-Taurus Pumas, but I can say they are among my favorite rifles.

Crosshair · October 10, 2009, 08:37 PM

I have handled them at one of the stores I stop by at in my travels. They are smooth and tight mechanically, but I have never fired one.

The safety on top of the bolt looks weird, but it's easy enough to deal with. The Puma can be had in 454 Casull while a Marlin tops out at 44 mag. The Marlin can more easily mount optics than the Puma.

wnycollector · October 12, 2009, 03:40 AM

I have a newer rossi/taurus 20" .44 mag. The action and trigger were very good right out of the box. Overall fit and finish were very good. My only problem with the rifle are the sights...they suck! I plan on ordering a skinner low pro peep and upgrading them ASAP.

iamkris · October 12, 2009, 05:02 AM

I have a Rossi-era Puma 92 in .45 Colt. It is a fine rifle...after I worked on it for a while.

24", octagonal barrel, stainless.

The wood had an awful, almost black stain on it. I removed it and tung oiled it. The sights were bad..replaced with with Marbles bead front and full buckhorn rear. I have Steve Young (known as a great 1892 gunsmith) take off the safety on the bolt and fill in the hole with a plug.

I've used this rifle for several seasons in Cowboy Action Shooting. It has never failed to feed, fire, eject. It is handy and accurate. With hot loads, I would be comfortable shooting game at reasonable ranges. I think a .454 would be the cat's meow.

Bigfatts · October 12, 2009, 04:43 PM

Quote:

I am curious because I like the sound of a 16" stainless in .454 Casull

I'd find one and shoot it before you buy one. I had a Rossi era '92 in .454 with a 20" bbl and it was brutal. Only rifle that ever made me flinch, and I've shot some big thumpers. I can't imagine a lighter/shorter one. If it would reliably feed .45 Colts I'd say go for it, mine didn't but I haven't handled a new one yet.

gak · October 12, 2009, 09:49 PM

There are zillions of the new Taurus (Rossi labeled) guns on the market right now (just take a look at Gunbroker). Do not confuse these or other Brazilian/Rossi made "Pumas" with the new Pumas imported by Legacy Sports (LSI). LSI ended its near 20 year relationship with Taurus/Rossi last year but was able to retain the Puma name it used for its 92s (and which was a holdover moniker from some Interarms era Rossis). LSI is now re-using the name for its more expensive line of Italian (Armi Sport/Chiappa) made 1892s, also imported by Cimarron and Taylors.

Otherwise, yes most "Pumas" you see and "Rossis" are essentially the same gun.

Most of the new "Pumas" you see now are either leftover/NOS Brazilian/Rossi LSIs or the newer Taurus (Rossi- labeled) 92s. Other than the ambiguous safety these and the older (pre Italian) LSIs--and post 06 EMFs--have had, these new Rossis seem ok. Like the Rossi-made LSIs, the generic-stained wood on the new ones I've seen leave something to be desired--nothing terrible, just unremarkble, including "unfinished" (sharp-sawn forearm ends, etc). Other than the "black stain" era Rossis mentioned, some of the older Interarms era 92s and some EMFs had much better furniture. This can always be rectified aftermarket of course with some nice walnut stocks, or--for about the same net outlay--by going the Italian route.

Ed. Want better iron sights? - find a nice EMF (or harder to find Navy Arms) 1892. Pre-06 also did without the safety.

Huntergirl · October 12, 2009, 09:53 PM

Just can't trust anything Taurus anymore, via my personal experience. My friend had a Rossi made lever in .38/357 that was extremely accurate. She used it in SASS.

October 10, 2009, 07:59 PM	#1
Norrick Senior Member Join Date: April 1, 2008 Posts: 577	New Puma 92's Well I found them in Rossi's E-catalog for 2009 on the main Taurus page. I haven't seen any yet for sale anywhere online, and none of the gunstores I've ever gone to have ever carried them in the first place (i.e. all marlins, etc). Do you guys think the quality has changed at all since they were bought by Taurus? I've heard equal amounts of good and bad on these guns, it just doesn't seem to be very consistent. Then again, as far as revolvers go, I always think of Ruger or Smith and Wesson before even considering a Taurus. I am curious because I like the sound of a 16" stainless in .454 Casull Check it out yourself. http://www.rossiusa.com/2009catalog/?catalog_page=23 P.s. am I correct in assuming that Rossi and Puma are essentially the same rifles? or if link does not work: Taurus main page > Rifles > 2009 Rossi E Catalog > Page 23 > item # R92-68016 Last edited by Norrick; October 10, 2009 at 08:04 PM.

October 10, 2009, 08:37 PM	#3
Crosshair Senior Member Join Date: December 16, 2004 Location: Grand Forks, ND Posts: 5,333	I have handled them at one of the stores I stop by at in my travels. They are smooth and tight mechanically, but I have never fired one. The safety on top of the bolt looks weird, but it's easy enough to deal with. The Puma can be had in 454 Casull while a Marlin tops out at 44 mag. The Marlin can more easily mount optics than the Puma. __________________ I don't carry a gun to go looking for trouble, I carry a gun in case trouble finds me.

October 12, 2009, 05:02 AM	#5
iamkris Senior Member Join Date: December 3, 2002 Location: SW Michigan Posts: 296	I have a Rossi-era Puma 92 in .45 Colt. It is a fine rifle...after I worked on it for a while. 24", octagonal barrel, stainless. The wood had an awful, almost black stain on it. I removed it and tung oiled it. The sights were bad..replaced with with Marbles bead front and full buckhorn rear. I have Steve Young (known as a great 1892 gunsmith) take off the safety on the bolt and fill in the hole with a plug. I've used this rifle for several seasons in Cowboy Action Shooting. It has never failed to feed, fire, eject. It is handy and accurate. With hot loads, I would be comfortable shooting game at reasonable ranges. I think a .454 would be the cat's meow. __________________ NRA Life Endowment Member SAF Life Member NRA Certified Rifle Instructor Ultima Ratio Civis - the last method of a citizen

October 12, 2009, 09:49 PM	#7
gak Senior Member Join Date: February 28, 2005 Location: Aridzona Posts: 2,767	There are zillions of the new Taurus (Rossi labeled) guns on the market right now (just take a look at Gunbroker). Do not confuse these or other Brazilian/Rossi made "Pumas" with the new Pumas imported by Legacy Sports (LSI). LSI ended its near 20 year relationship with Taurus/Rossi last year but was able to retain the Puma name it used for its 92s (and which was a holdover moniker from some Interarms era Rossis). LSI is now re-using the name for its more expensive line of Italian (Armi Sport/Chiappa) made 1892s, also imported by Cimarron and Taylors. Otherwise, yes most "Pumas" you see and "Rossis" are essentially the same gun. Most of the new "Pumas" you see now are either leftover/NOS Brazilian/Rossi LSIs or the newer Taurus (Rossi- labeled) 92s. Other than the ambiguous safety these and the older (pre Italian) LSIs--and post 06 EMFs--have had, these new Rossis seem ok. Like the Rossi-made LSIs, the generic-stained wood on the new ones I've seen leave something to be desired--nothing terrible, just unremarkble, including "unfinished" (sharp-sawn forearm ends, etc). Other than the "black stain" era Rossis mentioned, some of the older Interarms era 92s and some EMFs had much better furniture. This can always be rectified aftermarket of course with some nice walnut stocks, or--for about the same net outlay--by going the Italian route. Ed. Want better iron sights? - find a nice EMF (or harder to find Navy Arms) 1892. Pre-06 also did without the safety. Last edited by gak; October 12, 2009 at 10:19 PM.

October 10, 2009, 08:36 PM	#2
ATW525 Senior Member Join Date: March 14, 2005 Location: Concord, NH Posts: 2,723	I have two Puma 92s in .357 Magnum which were made by Taurus. I can't really compare them with pre-Taurus Pumas, but I can say they are among my favorite rifles.

October 12, 2009, 03:40 AM	#4
wnycollector Senior Member Join Date: April 22, 2007 Posts: 1,996	I have a newer rossi/taurus 20" .44 mag. The action and trigger were very good right out of the box. Overall fit and finish were very good. My only problem with the rifle are the sights...they suck! I plan on ordering a skinner low pro peep and upgrading them ASAP.

October 12, 2009, 09:53 PM	#8
Huntergirl Senior Member Join Date: January 8, 2005 Location: Wyoming Posts: 907	Just can't trust anything Taurus anymore, via my personal experience. My friend had a Rossi made lever in .38/357 that was extremely accurate. She used it in SASS.