Seeking B-Western rifle advice

[Nostrum Damus SASS #110702]

When I started cowboy shooting, I started in the B-Western category and I still like it; not always, but frequently.  Initially, my .357Mag Browning B-92 worked fine -- because I didn't shoot very fast.  As I've increased my skills and lowered my times, I've run into the apparently well known feeding issue with the B-92, as well as the speed limitation resulting from the very long lever stroke.  I could live with the speed limitation -- I don't shoot to win buckles, I just shoot for the fun of it -- but the feeding problem is getting to the point that it is more aggravating than fun to shoot that rifle.  Some pards say it is a function of cartridge length and I need to do some careful experimenting to figure out the exact COAL that my gun likes to eat.  Others say it is inherent in the 92's action, there's no hope, and I should just get a Marlin 94.  But everything I've read about the Marlin 94 indicates that I will merely swap one issue for another because the carrier of the Marlin 94 wears out and "good luck replacing it" is what I hear and read.

 

Any words of wisdom?  Doing the COAL investigation is simple enough: make 10 dummy rounds each of 10 different overall lengths (with the particular bullet I'm loading, of course), and just cycle them through until (hopefully) I find a length that feeds reliably.  Any other advice?

[DeaconKC]

I've had two of the Rossi 92s, the first hated any 38 Special under 140 grains, it would run anything in 357 brass. The second is not as fussy. Talk to @Widder, SASS #59054 here about the Marlins.

[The Original Lumpy Gritz]

Marlin 94 is much easier to service and repair. 

Fixing/adjusting the carrier timing isn't that hard.

[Not Dead Ed]

25 minutes ago, Nostrum Damus SASS #110702 said:

Any words of wisdom?  Doing the COAL investigation is simple enough: make 10 dummy rounds each of 10 different overall lengths (with the particular bullet I'm loading, of course), and just cycle them through until (hopefully) I find a length that feeds reliably.  Any other advice?

Sounds more like your guide rails are out of spec.   I had a 92 that only like one length, and only 147 TCFP bullets.  Then I read this…. I shimmed the rail to spec, fixed the feed gate, and it became omnivorous….  I just needed the length 1.49- 1.52. http://marauder.homestead.com/files/Rossi_92_cartridge_guide.htm

[Doc Fill 'Em 67797]

Marlins are my favorite rifles. It’s unlikely you will wear out the carrier. The carrier plunger and spring could possibly give out but they are available and easy to replace. 

[Bad Bascomb, SASS # 47,494]

  Another vote for Marlin '94, as it appears you are speeding up.  I started with '92 Winchester and ran into the speed limit it had.  Had it worked over by Lee's Gunsmithing of Orange, CA, and it (and I) improved considerably.  Thought that in order to get faster I needed a '73.  That helped with a Codymatic.  Then I had shoulder surgery, and also experimented in B-western class, and tried a Marlin.  Always had thought of the '73 v Marlin discussions as a "Ford v. Chevy" preferrence, but found out it was lighter and helped my shoulder.  THEN as I learned more about how to maintain it I really began to appreciate it.  Got 2 genuine Spur short-stroked '94's from pards on the Wire, and couldn't be happier.

Hold out for a JM marked .357/.38.  It's worth it.

[Nostrum Damus SASS #110702]

Thanks, pards, for all of the sage advice.  I'm sold on the switch, now on the prowl for a well-maintained JM-marked 94, preferably (strongly so, in fact) in 45LC.

[doc roy l. pain]

Get yourself a pedersoli lightning. 

[Nostrum Damus SASS #110702]

1 minute ago, doc roy l. pain said:

Get yourself a Perdesoli lightning. 

Why? What are the pros and cons?  Why is it a better choice than the Marlin 94?

[Eyesa Horg]

@Gunner Gatlin, SASS 10274L can do an inexpensive fix for the Marlin carrier. It will never wear out after his fix. Sent Ellie's to him a few years ago. Excellent and quick work.

[Anvil Al #59168]

My wife shoots B Western. Marlin is the ONLY way I would go.

 

I would not even go short stroke on it.

 

The Widder Mattic is the way to go on that.  

[Sedalia Dave]

Any one that tells you a 92 cannot be run fast hasn't seen one set up properly.

 

 

I have set up 5 and they all run flawlessly. I don't suffer from stovepipes, cartridges being pitched out the top of the action, or any of the other issues people claim a 92 will always suffer from. 4 of the 5 were 38/357 and the last one is in 44-40. Getting ready to do another 44-40 soon.

If you don't want to do one yourself then contact Nate Kiowa Jones at Steve's Gunz and have him set up your rifle. If you are mechanically inclined then go over to his store and buy his DIY Action Job Kit.

[Not Dead Ed]

First remember like any gun community there are people who will tell you all day why their type of gun is better, why it runs better, or why yours is a lesser choice in comparison.  (Except we all don’t like Henry Big Boys LOL) 
if you have a 92’, before you toss it and invest in something else, fix it up, fix the rails and get the kit and Video from Steve’s Guns.  
if you then get itchin’ for a Marlin, do it.  Not because what any of us here say, or don’t say, but because you like it.  
In them modern fancy-shooting pistols there are Glock guys, and there are anti-Glock guys.  But I find myself in the category of the IIGBILI guys (that’s   If It Goes Bang! I Like It).  
So do what makes you happy, not someone else’s version of your happiness.  

[Sedalia Dave]

 

A couple videos of me and my 92.

 

BTW I am not the fastest by a long shot but my 92 is not the reason.

 

 

 

[Nostrum Damus SASS #110702]

This is all great info but I don't have a Rossi 92 -- I understand that there were/are issues with those and that they can be slicked up to run just fine.  I own a Browning B-92.  The rails in which angled slots allowing the cartridge rim to be lifted are fine and perfectly aligned to the best of my ability to determine.  The innards of the rifle are squeaky clean and properly lubricated.  I did notice just the slightest bit of surface roughness inside the angled slots so those got some extra TLC.  In any event, I'm now doing the case length experiment.  I currently load to COAL of 1.588 +/-, making sure none are over 1.590.  I will load batches of dummy rounds at 1.580, 1.570, 1.560, 1.550, 1.540, 1.530, 1.520, 1.510, and 1.500 COALs and then run each batch through the gun to see if any run smoother than any others.

[Colorado Coffinmaker]

 

Damus,

 

The problem is not the angle of the guide slots.  The problem is usually the clearance between the right side cartridge guide and the cartridge case.  The right side guide need to just "kiss" the cartridge case.  The rest of the problems are spring related.  The OEM springs are well "over-sprung" and need to be reduced or replaced.  The extractor is also too heavy.  I believe your rifle also has a "rebounding" hammer and that needs to be eliminated.  Your Browning 92 can run and run righteously fast.  Most of the information on the DVD from Nate Kiowa Jones.  Don't give up just yet.

[Griff]

2 hours ago, doc roy l. pain said:

Get yourself a pedersoli lightning. 

2 hours ago, Nostrum Damus SASS #110702 said:

Why? What are the pros and cons?  Why is it a better choice than the Marlin 94?

It's decidedly different!  Can be run smooth and quickly once you develop the muscle memory.  I have an AWA in .44-40 I use in Wild Bunch.  No loss of contact with the firearm throughout its manipulation.   Like shooting a SA with two hands, neither has to move out of contact with the gun to cock or pull the trigger.   If you can shoot a '97 reasonably fast, you've already mastered the technique.

 

[Colorado Coffinmaker]

Ah Yes!!  The marvelous Lightning.  Good Luck.  The real problem with the Lightning is finding one that "works."  Not that "runs fast" but just works at all.  Of current lightning rifles, the only ones that actually work are Pedersoli.  The rest are strictly money pits.  There will be more money in making it work than the original purchase price.

[Nostrum Damus SASS #110702]

22 minutes ago, Colorado Coffinmaker said:

 

Damus,

 

The problem is not the angle of the guide slots.  The problem is usually the clearance between the right side cartridge guide and the cartridge case.  The right side guide need to just "kiss" the cartridge case.  The rest of the problems are spring related.  The OEM springs are well "over-sprung" and need to be reduced or replaced.  The extractor is also too heavy.  I believe your rifle also has a "rebounding" hammer and that needs to be eliminated.  Your Browning 92 can run and run righteously fast.  Most of the information on the DVD from Nate Kiowa Jones.  Don't give up just yet.

No rebounding hammer.  That (and the tang safety) were added by Miroku for the Miroku Winchester 92 when Browning ceased production.  The B-92 is an exact reproduction, even dimensionally, of the original Winchester 1892.  That is actually one of its faults -- it was not designed for the straight-walled .357 Magnum cartridge.  The rifle was originally chambered in .32-20, . 38-40, and . 44-40 WCF, all tapered, necked cases.

[Cheyenne Ranger, 48747L]

Remember to check you screws often if you get a Marlin.  They tend to loosen during a match.  

 

I carry a couple of screwdrivers with me and end of 3rd stage tighten them--beats losing them while firing

 

cr

 

[Sam Sackett]

I run both an old Interarms Rossi and a Browning 92 in 357. The Internals are identical as far as I can see. The Browning has collector value, so it’s my backup gun. I was getting into issues with the Rossi. It’s my main match gun and was a main match gun for another shooter when I got it. I played around with bullet nose profile and cartridge length until I was about worn out. Then I dropped a cartridge onto the carrier and measured the clearance between the cartridge guides as it came up through them. It measured around 12 thousandths. I installed a shim behind the right cartridge guide so that there is now about 2 thousandths clearance. Using found flat nosed bullets, OAL of 1.545”, I can’t get the gun to mess up. And I can run it fast. 
 

remember, before the short stroke kits were developed for the. 73’s, the 92 ruled in CAS. They will still hold their own if they are set up right. 
 

Good Luck,

Sam Sackett 

[Cinch]

A 92 not being g mandatory for B western is one of the bungled areas of CAS. You can start watching B western movies non-stop between now and next Christmas and you might pick out a marlin in one of them. 

[Nostrum Damus SASS #110702]

8 hours ago, Cinch said:

A 92 not being g mandatory for B western is one of the bungled areas of CAS. You can start watching B western movies non-stop between now and next Christmas and you might pick out a marlin in one of them. 

In fact, according to the Internet Movie Firearms Database -- which may or may not be accurate -- the Marlin 1894 shows up in exactly three films: Darkness Falls (2003), The Good, the Bad, the Weird (2008), and Kajinek (2010).  If you know of others (including the actor holding it), you can submit that information to add to the database.  In contrast, the Winchester 1892 appears in more than 150 films, the earliest being Tarzan of the Apes (1918).

[Cholla Bob]

If you want to be competitive get a 94.  I have all three (lightning, 92, and 94) and I am consistently faster with the marlin.   If you are going for style points get a lightning. 

[Nostrum Damus SASS #110702]

A big THANKS to SAM SACKETT and anyone else who suggested that cartridge OAL might be the culprit, despite not exceeding the specified maximum OAL.  I went to the bench today and made a pile of dummy rounds with OAL of 1.547" give or take, and they practically fly into the chamber by themselves!  I can't get them to fail to feed or jam in the gun, either.  

And here's what I saw when I ran my bad 1.588" OAL cartridges with RNFP bullets VERY SLOWLY -- the highest point of the flat circle on the front of the bullet was hitting the top of the chamber, just inside the breech face, just BEFORE the rim of the cartridge was completely and fully clear of the angled slots in the cartridge guides.  Thus, the cartridge itself became a wedge preventing me from smoothly closing the action to feed the round; to actually close it, I was levering hard enough to scrape coating and even shave lead on a few occasions from that upper side of the bullet on its way into the chamber.  So, shorter COAL = problem solved.  The other good news is that I can very easily and quickly run the hundreds of rounds I recently loaded to 1.588" through the seat/crimp stage on the Dillon XL750 to push the bullet down another 0.040" or so with no ill effect whatsoever -- I tried it with a few and it worked great.

And now that the feeding jam problem is solved, I'm sure that the gun will once again run faster than I can!

[Pb Mark]

Just a recent 1892 feeding experience:

 

A couple weeks ago, took apart a basically NIB Cimmaron 1892 saddle ring carbine 357 for a CAS friend who was having no luck with it.  Double feeds and the resulting jams.  Was using 38 cases and 140 grain TFP bullets crimped at the crimp groove.  The rifle was pretty nicely finished and had no issues I could locate with the ejector spring or any other of the internals...

The answer was inside the Cimmaron manual which stated:  WARNING: for a smooth loading, we advise to use FLAT NOSE cartridges. As to cartridges cal. 38 for model 1892, please make sure the minimum length is 39 mm (1,53 in).  

This required he roll crimp into the lead, below the crimp groove.  Runs just fine at the correct minimum COL.  

[Nostrum Damus SASS #110702]

At this point it has been told to me a good number of times, both here and by others elsewhere: you need to tune your cartridge length to your 92's particular liking.  I guess it must be true.

[July Smith]

I have a B-92 and my sister runs a Rossi 92.  Both rifles run flawlessly with 357mag length ammo (1.580-1.590").  Assuming your rifle is otherwise fine and just not liking short 38sp length ammo you have two options... (1) Use 357 brass/ammo.  (2) Load a long 38.  I have a custom mold from Accurate that casts a 38cal bullet with a crimp groove low enough on the bullet that when loaded in a 38sp it has the same COAL as a 357mag.   

[Nostrum Damus SASS #110702]

"Your mileage may vary" seems especially apropos here, July Smith.  My 357Mag B-92 jams hard on 357mag brass loaded to 1.588 OAL with 125gr RNFP coated bullets.  The rifle is "otherwise fine."

[WymoreWrangler SASS 46187L]

On 2/27/2023 at 6:56 AM, Nostrum Damus SASS #110702 said:

In fact, according to the Internet Movie Firearms Database -- which may or may not be accurate -- the Marlin 1894 shows up in exactly three films: Darkness Falls (2003), The Good, the Bad, the Weird (2008), and Kajinek (2010).  If you know of others (including the actor holding it), you can submit that information to add to the database.  In contrast, the Winchester 1892 appears in more than 150 films, the earliest being Tarzan of the Apes (1918).

I saw one the other day on an old Rawhide episode....