Rossi 92 in 16, 20 or 24 inch?

[stagpanther]

Pure speculation here but I would guess that a Rossi might benefit by a bit longer barrels than most other guns (balsitically) Why you may ask? because of the slower twist rate. It takes a little less energy to go down the barrel than the typical 1 in 16 twist rate.

if I am wrong you can correct me. I admit I am guessing here.

I'm no expert either--but given the relatively low velocities and inherent terminal impact limitations of the pistol cartridges from 44 mag on down at ranges much beyond 100 yds--the longer barrel lengths--while maybe adding a bit to accuracy--probably aren't going to add all that much in terms of increased effectiveness at longer ranges would be my guess.

[iclypso]

There were some comments on the low noise of the carbines when shooting .38SPL. Can anyone comment on how the relative loudness of each barrel length? I assume the shorter the louder but is the difference noticeable? How about when shooting .357?

[mehavey]

It is a function of bullet speed, not so much barrel length (within the ranges discussed here).
If/when it exits supersonic, then you will get that characteristic "Crack!"
Subsonic/target 38 special can be had readily on the commercial market.
Not so 357 Magnum....

[drobs]

I could be wrong but I'd wager Subsonic 38spl out of a revolver length barrel (6 inches or less) will still make your ears ring.

Figure standard 230grn 45 acp is subsonic - I damaged my hearing when I was in my teens from shooting that through my 1911 w/o hearing protection.



The added length of a 16" + rifle barrel definitely helps on what volume a shooter will hear. Is there a sweet spot in barrel length - 16" vs 20" vs 24"?
W/O a decibel meter I wouldn't know. I would guess longer the barrel the less volume.

[mxsailor803]

I'm with you Drobs. Now I did see one of the 92's that was actually threaded for a can. That is just awesome as a close range hog gun. I wouldn't mind that on my Henry .44mag, even if I have to take the can off to reload it.

[drobs]

MX - that would be a pain...
I wonder if one of those 45 cal square-ish Osprey suppressors, mounted or turned 1/2 turn sideways would clear the magazine tube? Probably not but might be something to check out.

[mehavey]

Been there.
Done that.
See CatSneeze.

[kcub]

I agree that scopes on these lever guns is just wrong.

Can the 454 also shoot 45 LC?

[stagpanther]

I agree that scopes on these lever guns is just wrong.

You'll get over that fast once all you can see of the irons and target is a blur.

[kcub]

I'm already there. It's still wrong.

[stagpanther]

I'm already there. It's still wrong.

Scopes did exist back in the day when the levers came out--I can't seem to find much reference to them being "wrong" back then--I've always thought this a modern prejudice thing. If that's the case--then arguably anything other than original issue Winchesters are "wrong" IMO. 44 mag would be "wrong"...357 mag would be "wrong" etc.

[kcub]

Caliber mightn't be "correct" but it still looks ok.

Safeties are also wrong.

[mavracer]

It is a function of bullet speed, not so much barrel length (within the ranges discussed here).
If/when it exits supersonic, then you will get that characteristic "Crack!"

It's a function of pressure in the barrel when the bullet exits, the supersonic crack is talked about a lot because of suppressors, but the reality is most people can't even distinguish it from the report of even 22s.
With these longer barreled pistol caliber carbines and rifles when you use powders that reach peak pressure quickly the pressure starts dropping leaving little pressure when the bullet exits.

[candlejackstraw]

OP here. I decided to go with the 24 inch octagon in 44 mag. With regard to velocity, since they are mainly handgun rounds they will reach max speeds out of a 16 barrel. But if I reload with a slow burning rifle powder I may be able to keep the pressure building up and get more velocity past 16 inches. I don't plan on doing any rifle powder reloads atm though

[candlejackstraw]

I went with the longer barrel even though it will be heavier, hopefully with playing with loads the rifle will be more versitile and the weight will reduce recoil further. The extended length between iron sights will hopefully be beneficial. Most shooting will be done at rest at the moment and I'm anticipating that my powerlifting will help and carry over to holding heavier rifles

[candlejackstraw]

Btw in regards to loudness and longer barrels...my single shot 22s have about 28 inch barrels and they sound like a pellet gun.

[Targa]

Good choice OP, I have a Rossi .44 mag with a 16"barrel and although it is alot of fun to shoot, after about a 1/2 box of 240 grain magnums, I have had just about enough punishment and quickly turn to .44 special to let the beating subside a bit....

[mavracer]

But if I reload with a slow burning rifle powder I may be able to keep the pressure building up and get more velocity past 16 inches. I don't plan on doing any rifle powder reloads atm though

You won't need to go any slower than the good magnum pistol powders, H110/296 will make good screamers, I've got a 300gr lead that'll go 1500 from a 16" tube.

[mehavey]

With these longer barreled pistol caliber carbines and rifles when you use powders that reach
peak pressure quickly the pressure starts dropping leaving little pressure when the bullet exits.

Hence the " CRACK ! " sound -- which is quite distinctive -- when the round leaves
the muzzle supersonic as opposed to slower.

Demonstrated again & again w/ the super/sub 357 loads I've run out of the `92,
and with the same powder (231) which has long finished burning in both cases.

[stagpanther]

You won't need to go any slower than the good magnum pistol powders, H110/296 will make good screamers, I've got a 300gr lead that'll go 1500 from a 16" tube.

+1 on that--my 44 carbine is especially fond of 240 gr xtp's backed by 24.3 grs of H110 scootin along at somewhere at 1700+ fps. Love that Boom--Thwack!

[Super Sneaky Steve]

I have a really good iron set up on both of my 92's.

I've got a Skinner rear peep that I leave the aperture out of. For the front I use a Marble fiber optic.





With the .357 I'm getting a group under an inch at 50 yards with a cheap plastic rest.

I can't do any better with a scope.

[drobs]

candlejackstraw - blue or stainless?

[darkgael]

The test, as I recall, was done with the 16" barrel and iron sights. That fact is why I bought the model that I have.
Pete

[Radny97]

If you are going with the octagon barrel then definitely blue.

I've shot my 357 20 inch without ear protection a couple times and it was surprisingly quiet. About the same as a 22.

I don't find recoil on any of these guns unmanageable. The 454 has recoil similar to a 12 gauge shotgun shooting 3 inch high brass. Not light by any means but not unbearable. And yes the 454 will shoot 45 LC but can have a little trouble cycling. Also the 454 is such a high pressure round that I don't recommend shooting LRN 45 LC through it as you can get a residue ring that can lead to a dangerous spike in pressure. Also clean it regularly if you are shooting 45 LC.

You continue to get increased velocity with the longer barrel clear out to 24 inches. It's just that the increase in velocity is comparatively less from 20 to 24 as it is from 16 to 20. But you still get an increase. I can get some factory rounds to clock at 2400 fps out of my 20 inch 357. That is approaching 30-30 velocities though admittedly with a bullet that has a much poorer ballistic coefficient.

I'm not sure if the octagon barrels are drilled and tapped for a rail mounted scope like the round barrels are. Anyone know?

[Auto5]

I went with the 20" for the extra capacity because I was living in a jurisdiction that banned scary black rifles at the time and it could serve double duty in my home defense battery. I replaced the safety with this peep sight.
http://store.stevesgunz.com/index.ph...&products_id=5
That fiber optic front sight looks like just the thing for my aging eyes.