1892 clones: Carbine vs. sporting rifle

Welcome to the Leverguns.Com Forum. This is a high-class place so act respectable. We discuss most anything here ... politely.

Moderators: AmBraCol, Hobie

Forum rules
Welcome to the Leverguns.Com General Discussions Forum. This is a high-class place so act respectable. We discuss most anything here other than politics... politely.

Please post political post in the new Politics forum.
Post Reply
Bill in Oregon
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8846
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 10:05 am
Location: Sweetwater, TX

1892 clones: Carbine vs. sporting rifle

Post by Bill in Oregon »

Naphtali's thread on the .45 Colt for elk has me thinking about Model 92s. I have had the handy little carbines in a couple of calibers over the years, but never had the 24-inch barreled sporting rifle. With octagon barrel, some sites list the rifle at 7 pounds vs. 5 pounds for the round-barreled carbine. That's still a pretty light, trim long gun. Anyone have experience with the two versions? How does the 24 feel in the field? Thinking that with maximum hunting loads it would be more pleasant to shoot -- and give a bit more velocity and energy.
User avatar
ollogger
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 2794
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 2:47 pm
Location: Wheatland Wyoming
Contact:

Re: 1892 clones: Carbine vs. sporting rifle

Post by ollogger »

Have 2 Rossi guns, one is a trapper & the other is a 24 in. octagon both in 45, I much prefer to carry & shoot the rifle
as it seems to balance & hang in there better for off hand shooting, the rifle shoots a ruger level load of H 110 or LIL Gun
very well with cast bullets of 250 - 300 gr. recoil off the bench is stiff, ( sore the next day but no kid any more ) Never have
shot a elk with a 45 but I know a 44 mag will put them down, so the 45 would do the job also



Brad
JerryB
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 5493
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 9:23 pm
Location: Batesville,Arkansas

Re: 1892 clones: Carbine vs. sporting rifle

Post by JerryB »

I have a 92 Rossi carbine in .357 and a1892 Winchester rifle in 32wcf. I have never had a problem carrying the 32wcf in the woods or brush, it comes to my shoulder as quick and smooth as the carbine does.
JerryB II Corinthians 3:17, Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.

JOSHUA 24:15
Bill in Oregon
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8846
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 10:05 am
Location: Sweetwater, TX

Re: 1892 clones: Carbine vs. sporting rifle

Post by Bill in Oregon »

Thanks fellas.
User avatar
earlmck
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 3423
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 12:10 am
Location: pert-neer middle of Oregon

Re: 1892 clones: Carbine vs. sporting rifle

Post by earlmck »

Bill, I just weighed mine: the 44 mag went 7 1/4 pounds and the 357 came in at 7 1/2. Take out for that bit bigger hole of the 45 and you are right at the 7 lb level. And it was the 44 that went on my walk up Grey Butte the other day and it didn't seem to be any problem. No, the 7 1/4 lb gun was no problem but the extra 20 lbs around the gut were unhelpful.
The greatest patriot...
is he who heals the most gullies.
Patrick Henry
Bill in Oregon
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8846
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 10:05 am
Location: Sweetwater, TX

Re: 1892 clones: Carbine vs. sporting rifle

Post by Bill in Oregon »

Earl, are your rifles round or octagon-barreled?
User avatar
earlmck
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 3423
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 12:10 am
Location: pert-neer middle of Oregon

Re: 1892 clones: Carbine vs. sporting rifle

Post by earlmck »

Bill in Oregon wrote: Thu May 25, 2017 10:31 am Earl, are your rifles round or octagon-barreled?
These are the regular Rossi 24" bbl, octagon versions. I really like 'em! Here's a pic of the 44 mag with lil' buddy Redhawk shooting the same cartridge (although they have preferences for different loads, of course!)
RossiandRedhawk8890.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
The greatest patriot...
is he who heals the most gullies.
Patrick Henry
Bill in Oregon
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8846
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 10:05 am
Location: Sweetwater, TX

Re: 1892 clones: Carbine vs. sporting rifle

Post by Bill in Oregon »

Earl, that's a nice set of sights you have on your 92. Lyman globe front?
User avatar
Canuck Bob
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1830
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 11:57 am
Location: Calgary, Canada

Re: 1892 clones: Carbine vs. sporting rifle

Post by Canuck Bob »

My Winoku 92 32-20 with the long octagon rifle barrel is too barrel heavy for my tastes. Very manageable but an irritant.
User avatar
Old Ironsights
Posting leader...
Posts: 15084
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 9:27 am
Location: Waiting for the Collapse
Contact:

Re: 1892 clones: Carbine vs. sporting rifle

Post by Old Ironsights »

I'm in the middle.

I prefer the 20" "short rifle" to either the 16" "carbine" or the 24" "Rifle".

In "pistol calibers" the 20" gets all the performance and capacity of a 24", from a rifle barely longer than a "carbine".

And the tube to barrel ratio looks better ta boot.
C2N14... because life is not energetic enough.
מנא, מנא, תקל, ופרסין Daniel 5:25-28... Got 7.62?
Not Depressed enough yet? Go read National Geographic, July 1976
Gott und Gewehr mit uns!
User avatar
Carlsen Highway
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 487
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 8:23 am
Location: Dunedin, New Zealand

Re: 1892 clones: Carbine vs. sporting rifle

Post by Carlsen Highway »

I used to be in the middle, I used to have Rossi carbine in .44-40, and also a Rossi Octagonal barrelled rifle in .44-40 too, with a tang sight. The rifle shot very well indeed, not just because of the tang sight either. I found the carbine more difficult to shoot well off the bench than the rifle, simply because it was light, and offhand it felt too short for me in the butt. The rifle I felt was a bit heavy for hunting, and I seem to remember weighing it and it came in at 8 lbs. (I might be remembering wrong though). It hung barrel heavy when shooting offhand, which was excellent, but all my hunting is backpack hunting, and so I never seemed to take it...

I put the rifle's buttstock on the carbine...but I used to wish I had a carbine length barrel that was octagonal like on the rifle, just shorter. I investigated shortening the barrel and mag tube and thought about doing it seriously. Then I decided to stop fussing. I sold the rifle and kept the carbine, which has become my expedition firearm, for exploring, canoe trips etc, and is now a veteran of many adventures.

This year I have bought a Uberti 73 short rifle; just realised now that I bought the thing I exactly was wanting to build...

But I wish Rossi would make a 24 inch barrelled '92 rifle that had a round barrel. I would buy one in a heart beat. I think the octagonal barrel is too large on their rifles.. If I got another Rossi '92 octagonal rifle I would cut the mag tube down to teh foreend, to a half magazine. In .45 Colt too. Maybe I will do that....

I dont have this fussy attitude towards the Winchester 94 carbine. The .30/30's fit me like they were were custom made.
A person who carries a cat home by the tail, will receive information that will always be useful to them.
Mark Twain
User avatar
earlmck
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 3423
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 12:10 am
Location: pert-neer middle of Oregon

Re: 1892 clones: Carbine vs. sporting rifle

Post by earlmck »

Bill in Oregon wrote: Thu May 25, 2017 11:39 am Earl, that's a nice set of sights you have on your 92. Lyman globe front?
Yes, that was a Lyman globe front. Fellow I bought it from had it slicked for cowboy action and also set for Lever silhouette I think. I swapped the Lyman out for a green fiber optic just because I have got half blind the last few years and I can really see that green fiber optic.

I have several of the carbines also, and yes they might get the nod if I were backpack hunting. But my backpack hunting days are behind me, and I find that when I go out for a day wandering with rifle, the rifle usually has 24" of barrel. Like ollogger says, they just feel better somehow for carrying and even better for shooting.
The greatest patriot...
is he who heals the most gullies.
Patrick Henry
Bill in Oregon
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8846
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 10:05 am
Location: Sweetwater, TX

Re: 1892 clones: Carbine vs. sporting rifle

Post by Bill in Oregon »

Carlsen: That is a pious idea about cutting the magazine back to a half-magazine. One could also turn the front half of the barrel to round if one wanted to spend the funds. That would yield a combination I have long admired.
Earl, what's that about sights you can actually see? I recently took delivery of a custom .40 flintlock I ordered four years ago. The sights are so fine that something's going to have to give.
:lol:
jd45
Levergunner 3.0
Posts: 935
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 7:29 pm

Re: 1892 clones: Carbine vs. sporting rifle

Post by jd45 »

I have both an Armi San Marco mfg'd EMF Hartford '92 rifle, (24" octagon) & a Rossi LSI Puma carbine, both in .45 Colt. My rifle is well balanced grabbing in front of the receiver. If I were to hunt big(moose,elk), game, I'd use the rifle, & with it I'd build a load with a 325gr bullet pushing it at about 1600fps. jd45
User avatar
earlmck
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 3423
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 12:10 am
Location: pert-neer middle of Oregon

Re: 1892 clones: Carbine vs. sporting rifle

Post by earlmck »

Bill in Oregon wrote: Fri May 26, 2017 12:00 pm Carlsen: That is a pious idea about cutting the magazine back to a half-magazine. One could also turn the front half of the barrel to round if one wanted to spend the funds. That would yield a combination I have long admired.
Earl, what's that about sights you can actually see? I recently took delivery of a custom .40 flintlock I ordered four years ago. The sights are so fine that something's going to have to give.
:lol:
Today was 38/40 day; tin cans at 20 to 50 yards. 38/40's won. But one of my 38/40's is a 24" round barrel m92 with half magazine as you fellers were drooling over so I weighed it to see how vastly lighter it is than those awful full octagon things with full magazine. 6 3/4 pounds vs. about 7 1/4 for a 44 in the full/full configuration. It seemed to shoot real nice and it carries nice so I'll leave it "as is" and won't need to get a full octagon barrel for it.

Sights you can actually see, Bill? Fiber optic if it wears irons. Green fiber optic works best for me: has serious "wow!" factor in the seeing category. I do have a rifle with ivory bead front sight and that still works fairly well for me, and the aforementioned 38/40 m92 has a red plastic insert with a little mirror to iluminate it, and it seems to work for me reasonably well. But everything else I have that has a dovetailed front is now sporting a green fiber optic. The other 38/40 out with me today is a Rem 14 1/2 and it arrived a few days ago with a nice old gold bead front with which I tried it out the first time but by today it has the bright green fiber optic. Nice shootin' little some beech.
The greatest patriot...
is he who heals the most gullies.
Patrick Henry
Bill in Oregon
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8846
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 10:05 am
Location: Sweetwater, TX

Re: 1892 clones: Carbine vs. sporting rifle

Post by Bill in Oregon »

JD: What do you think of the quality of the EMF/Armi San Marco vs. the Rossi? Very curious.
Earl, dang it, you just took in a stray Remington 14 1/2 in .38-40 and we have not seen copious photographic likenesses yet? Come on, man!
Post Reply