Rossi Rifleman

lol, I guess sometimes "hand fitted" doesn't really mean all that much.

The problem is probably a combination of Hand Fitting and parts wear.
The previous iteration of the Colt action REQUIRED hand fitting and as the gun wore the fitting went out of time.

With a Smith the fitting was simpler and mostly a matter of parts swapping. Less wear over time and easier to replace the part without having to assemble and disassemble the gun a dozen times as you were sneaking up on it. Easier to screw up the Colt replacement part in the process. If you needed a little extra length then you smashed the tip of the hand with a hammer which doesn't exactly help it last longer.

The new Colt revolvers supposedly have much less hand fitting required, if any, and are supposed to last much longer before the parts wear out. I like the idea but for me the jury is still out. IF the new Colts last like they claim then they've done a good thing. IF it's also easier to replace parts as well then these guns may turn out to be excellent. I'm kinda hopeful that they reintroduce the Diamondback.

The Ruger has a reputation for NOT wearing out. Maybe but I've seen a couple Security Six weapons that could skip time or that simply didn't quite fully lock up before the hammer dropped. I own a GP100 and it is rock solid. They have a rep for outlasting the Smith but the Smith IMO is a bit smoother gun overall.

With any of them I recommend getting a good set of grips if the factory ones aren't comfortable.
My Smith 29-2 with the factory target grips slammed the web of my thumb and simply hurt to shoot.
Replaced the grips with a set of Hogue Monogrips and it became a pure pleasure to use even with magnum rounds.