When did CBC start 92's and are they better?

The Rossi Model R92, a lightweight carbine for Cowboy Action, hunting, or plinking! Includes Rossi manufactured Interarms, Navy Arms, and Puma trade names.
Umpire
Posts: 27
Joined: 06 May 2014 11:29
Location: Calgary - AB
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: When did CBC start 92's and are they better?

Post by Umpire »

GasGuzzler wrote:A Puma is not the same as an original Amedeo Rossi R92.
Yes they are the same, Amadeo Rossi pumas bring a puma logo beside the saddle ring and says “Puma” on the box
Archer
2000 Shots
2000 Shots
Posts: 3942
Joined: 04 Feb 2014 05:30
Location: SoCal Loco
Has thanked: 137 times
Been thanked: 610 times

Re: When did CBC start 92's and are they better?

Post by Archer »

Amadeo Rossi 15 May 1862 - 18 Jan 1956

Puma appears to be a trademark of Legacy Sports International which was the company founded by former Interarms employees. Interarms imported firearms were known to have the high relief Puma medallion so it might be assumed that LSI got the trademark from Interarms. Later LSI models did not include the medallion but were marketed as 'Puma' rifles. I think LSI 92s produced by Rossi were more or less finished sometime around 2010 or so as Braztech came on line for Rossi. At about that time you could go into a gunshop and see Rossi 92 rifles side by side with LSI Puma rifles and BOTH of them might be marked with the Braztech markings. As that contract finished up there was a large difference in the prices between the two brands regardless of the fact that he rifles were identical.

I am not at all certain that early Armandeo Rossi rifles were marked with the Puma emblem or name.
I had the impression that Rossi might have been copying the El Tigre rifles that were produced in Spain by
Gárate y Anitua starting around 1923. They had previously produced a 92 copy but the Tiger motif and name started ~1923. A lot of these guns got exported to Latin America and thus the transition to a home produced Puma might make sense. That said, I am not sure enough about Trademark law to know if Interarms and LSI could hold a trademark for something Rossi had potentially been producing and marketing outside the U.S. and potentially through other importers as well.
User avatar
GasGuzzler
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2745
Joined: 02 Nov 2015 19:54
Location: Cooke County, TX
Has thanked: 310 times
Been thanked: 451 times

Re: When did CBC start 92's and are they better?

Post by GasGuzzler »

Umpire wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:A Puma is not the same as an original Amedeo Rossi R92.
Yes they are the same, Amadeo Rossi pumas bring a puma logo beside the saddle ring and says “Puma” on the box
No they are not the same. An original Amedeo Rossi R92 has no puma emblem and no mention of puma anywhere on the rifle, the box, or the paperwork. So to say an original Amedeo Rossi is known for feeding issues when you're talking about a Puma gives an incorrect perception.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
I've always been crazy but it's kept me from going insane.
Archer
2000 Shots
2000 Shots
Posts: 3942
Joined: 04 Feb 2014 05:30
Location: SoCal Loco
Has thanked: 137 times
Been thanked: 610 times

Re: When did CBC start 92's and are they better?

Post by Archer »

Umpire wrote:
trekker wrote:Fellas are CBC the new makers of Rossi 92's? When did they start making them? I keep hearing folks say "get a new CBC one, they are better than the old Braztech and Taurus" but searches on the internet have references to CBC all the way back to 1992.... so how does this timeline work?

I ask as I have a friend wishing to buy a new rossi 92 357 stainless 20" barrel from the LGS and I was wondering how to tell who made it, and whether its worth waiting/hunting for a CBC made version to hit the shelves?
Rossi CBC made are by far the best Rossi rifles ever made, I had the Amadeo Rossi Puma, the Rossi Taurus and the CBC. The Amadeos and Taurus both had issues feeding 357 magnum and the Taurus doesn’t work with any Winchester ammunition either 38 spl or 357 , my new CBC works smooth with all 357 ammunition like works with 38 special
I'm glad you finally got a good rifle. I am not ready to accept the conclusion that the new production is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

I can write a paper on firearms that appear at the gunshop New In Box that have some sort of problem from the factory. I recommend that ANY firearm someone is thinking about buying get a complete checkout before the paperwork is done. You may not find everything that might be wrong with it but you will be surprised a lot less.
trekker
Posts: 109
Joined: 05 Feb 2019 09:03
Location: various
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: When did CBC start 92's and are they better?

Post by trekker »

Its getting worse too. In Australia its often not possible to handle things prior to buying- due to the distances involved many purchases are mail order from bigger cities. We tend to be highly critical of functional issues as a result- if you check Aussie reviews on youtube they tend to be brutally honest about failings. Its almost a national duty to report issues to save the next guy ordering junk from 2000 miles away. By the same token , rough finishes and sharp edges are not something we get overly worried about at low price points.

Several remote dealerships are not even stocking certain brands anymore due to the recent surge in quality issues, I wont mention any names to avoid being sued. :)

Rossi incidentally has a good reputation here, the figures would have to be that 19 out of 20 out of the box are good or the brand would never survive here. The biggest issues to me are whether they feed the shorter cases...44 special in 44 rem and 38 special in 357. But seems you cant get away from that problem with any brand, its always a crap shoot what your particular gun can do.
User avatar
GasGuzzler
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2745
Joined: 02 Nov 2015 19:54
Location: Cooke County, TX
Has thanked: 310 times
Been thanked: 451 times

Re: When did CBC start 92's and are they better?

Post by GasGuzzler »

To each his own but I'm never going to shoot .44 Special in a rifle nor will I shoot .45 Colt in a Casull rifle and I quit using .38 Special for anything other than a Special only gun years ago...
__________________________________________________________________________________________
I've always been crazy but it's kept me from going insane.
Archer
2000 Shots
2000 Shots
Posts: 3942
Joined: 04 Feb 2014 05:30
Location: SoCal Loco
Has thanked: 137 times
Been thanked: 610 times

Re: When did CBC start 92's and are they better?

Post by Archer »

I don't shoot a lot of .38 SP out of magnum chambered guns.

That said, I DO shoot a little .38 SP out of .357 Mag guns including the Rossi particularly as a training aid.
Even when you tell someone what you are doing there's a sort of %@*&$ factor when a new shooter encounters their first magnum round in a gun they've just shot a few specials out of. I try and make it a point not to shoot a lot of it and to clean out the chamber well.

I very much prefer to load both heavy and light loads in magnum cases for general use but to be perfectly honest I don't load much in the way of powder puff loads in any caliber. Even my LSWC target .45 ACP loads are significantly warmer than most so called 'match' levels.

To be perfectly honest, I can't think of much of a reason to shoot .44 SP in a .44 Mag chambered weapon. The Special ammo costs more than the Magnum rounds. I rarely see .44 SP ammo on the shelf. I can load light magnum and there's even a few manufacturers to get light loads from if you want them. (I know Remington USED to offer such a load. I've seen a few others on the market.) I can roll my own loads in magnum shells to various power levels.

I DO wish Ruger would make their .44 Special Bisley guns in .44 Magnum. I've dodged at least a couple specifically because I really don't much care to start loading .44 SP and have to have yet another set of brass around. I don't know if they make them in .44 SP because they have weakened the frames on the Vaquero line or if it's because the same little people who got them to adopt the slim grips on potential cowboy action guns got them to offer it specifically in a round they were already loading to paper roll cap levels. There's something wrong with downloading to mouse flatulence levels, particularly in .44 or .45 calibers.

Of course IF I were to get one of the clones of the Schofeild I think .44 SP might be the right caliber to get it in. I know it's not period correct but technically neither is .45 Colt, .38 SP nor .44-40 and .44 Russian while correct is even more of a pain.
Post Reply