Has the Rossi 92 Safety Been Discontinued ?

[Bruce Scott]

According to the 2018 article at this link: https://www.rifleshootermag.com/editori ... l-92/83720

"Topside you have the traditional twin locking bolts, followed by a safety lever forward of the hammer and basically between these lugs. Simply rotate the lever either way to place the gun on Safe or Fire. Future versions of the 92 will not feature this safety lever, but those currently on dealer shelves do have it."


Has this actually happened?

[AJMD429]

.
Not seen it yet but would be a nice change.

Sixer will probably trade his Winchesters for 'em so they may not hit dealers shelves.

[Scott Tschirhart]

I'd sure like to see that. I have an older gun that had no such safety from the factory and I'm pretty happy with it.

[piller]

I hope so. Mine had that safety from the factory. It didn't stay in position very well and was not reliable at all. I prefer to not have it there. I can do a better job of being safe than a safety which flops around can do.

[AJMD429]

.
One could argue the safety is the most important part of the gun...

As such, it should work positively and NEVER be sloppy. It's operation should be intuitive as well.

The best is the 1911 pistol, the AR-15, the Garand, and...the exposed Hammer with a halfcock notch.

The Rossi safety is unnecessary due to the hammer safety, and if you want redundancy like the 1911 it needs to be well done and positive. The Marlin safety is an example I can live with, and actually have grown to like.

[piller]

I have nothing bad to say about the Marlin safety nor the 1911 safety. I have only ever heard one time of a 1911 going off with the safety on. That time was because of the pistol being thrown butt first and the hammer catching the edge of a desk just right. Nothing broke, but the impact caused the firing pin to set off the round in the chamber and the person who threw the pistol was killed. I have a hard time calling that an accident or a failure due to the intentional hard throw.
The safety on my Rossi was not likely to stay in place when the action was cycled. It might or might not change position from cycling, or it could move when the gun recoiled. I had to do something about it. It no longer moves at all.

[Old Savage]

Well now that makes the safety model a collectible now

I think 006 is President of the Rossi Collectors Association, I’ll check with him.

[piller]

Hmmmm! Collectible is not what comes to mind for me. Useful after a bit of modification is more like it.

[DaveInPA]

Current production Rossi 92s have the bolt mounted safety. A friend bought one (20" stainless .357) last month and it has the safety.

[CowboyTutt]

It's pretty easy to eliminate and not necessary. -Tutt

[yooper2]

Its a redundant and poorly executed feature, would be glad to see it gone. Had an early stainless 357 R92 that my wife hunted with for several years. No complaints after I went through the action.


Eric

[CraigC]

The new ones I've seen have the safety.

[kaschi]

I got mine just before the bolt mounted safety was introduced, a stainless steel SRC in 44-40. Really nice little carbine. We all know that the extra safety isn't necessary but lawyers unfortunately call the shots.

[Carlsen Highway]

The ones they used to import into New Zealand did not have a safety whereas the ones in the US did at that time, so I think it depends on the market. (However, now they import ours from the US, so we are getting the US market ones with the safety too...)
So, this being the case, I suspect it is your importer that is insisting on or has chosen to import the rifles with the safety.

[Crazy Horse]

My new Rossi 454 has the ugly little safety on top.