16" LSI Levers???

[Poohgyrr]

Is anyone shooting one of LSI's 16"ers? I'm looking for a .44/.45LC and like the M92 package.

[Warhawk]

I just bought this one two weeks ago, a 45 Colt.

http://www.hunt101.com/img/476069-big.JPG

I've had it to the range once, and hunting once (didn't see any hogs).

It's smoother than I expected, and tighter (more solid). The trigger is pretty good, and it functions flawlessly (so far). I've shot two handloads in it, a 255 gr Keith style bullet over 22 grains of 2400, and a 305 grain gascheck BRP WFN bullet over 24 grains of WW296. These are some "Ruger only" loads that I had left over from my last Blackhawk. I also shot some 260 grain JHP Buffalo Bore factory ammo.

The 255 Keiths and the Buffalo Bore ammo both shot into roughly 3 inch groups, which is as good as I can do with the crude sights on the Rossi. The Buffalo Bore stuff shot slightly higher, and required one click of elevation on the rear sight to get zeroed. The Keith bullets were dead on with the rear sight bottomed out.

I only had a few of the 305 BRPs and they shot low, off the paper. I didn't have enough to hunt with anyway, so I didn't try to zero these. Even though on paper these are the hottest of the 3 loads, the recoil was the mildest. I intend to experiment more with heavy bullets.

Only two things that I didn't like about the Rossi, the little safety is useless and the lawyer that inspired it should have one installed on his ... ummm ... business.

The other thing is the top edge of the forearm wood is very sharp. Sharp enough that it was painful in recoil and I have a blood blister from it on the tip of my left thumb. A little sandpaper will take care of it, but I shouldn't have to.

Speaking of the wood, this rifle does NOT have the black tar looking stock finish. I will probably strip and refinish it with Tru Oil when I fix the forearm.

The recoil, or I should say lack of, was a pleasant surprise. I was also zeroing a new scope on my Marlin 1895 so the 45/70 recoil probably helped make the little 45 seem to kick less. It obviously has some recoil, but was not punishing to the shoulder at all. The fingers wrapped around the forearm were another story!

[NickSS]

I have a Rossi in 45 Colt that I love to shoot. I mostly shoot 250 gr flat nosed bullets with 6 gr of Red dot when I use it for cowboy shoots. However, I did use it for deer and I wanted a hot load that a game warden in this state would not question (we have law that requires 900 foot pounds retained energy at 100 yards to be allowed) So I went to the store looking for JSP bullets and could only find some Speer 225 gr ones. I loaded these in shortened 454 Casul brass with 31 gr of AA 1680 powder and a heavy crimp. They were very accurate and more than met the state requirements (I got around 1850 fps with them) The rifle did kick a bit but the deer I shot went down like right now. I also used the same load to kill a wild pig that weighed in at 250 pounds hanging weight.

[jim4065]

I like the look of it - other than the stupid safety. I'm thinking of a 45 Colt plinker and the 454 when I want to abuse and be abused. Never had a 16" carbine and I've got some reservations. Am I going to hear LOUDER crickets? Is my ancient shoulder going to force me to trade it off? The one I'm looking at was "only fired 14 times". Never had a Casull either - are they that rough? Had a Marlin 450 for awhile that was kinda FUN to shoot - is the 454 Casull that much worse? We've got a group buy going that would be great with this gun - if I'm not too late already. I really hope one of you has some comparative experience with these so I can learn what I'm getting into. Thanks,

Jim

[Scrounger]

I like the look of it - other than the stupid safety. I'm thinking of a 45 Colt plinker and the 454 when I want to abuse and be abused. Never had a 16" carbine and I've got some reservations. Am I going to hear LOUDER crickets? Is my ancient shoulder going to force me to trade it off? The one I'm looking at was "only fired 14 times". Never had a Casull either - are they that rough? Had a Marlin 450 for awhile that was kinda FUN to shoot - is the 454 Casull that much worse? We've got a group buy going that would be great with this gun - if I'm not too late already. I really hope one of you has some comparative experience with these so I can learn what I'm getting into. Thanks,

Jim

The .450 Marlin COULD be rougher... or it could be lighter. You know that it all depends on how heavy they're loaded. Loaded to max, the .454 Casull is near the top of the Trapdoor .45-70 loadings; the .450 Marlin is at the top of the .45-70 loadings for the lever action guns. Both can be downloaded to low .45 Colt level.

[Poohgyrr]

Thanks for the pic and all the info so far. That "safety" can be dealt with.

[Boomer Mikey]

Doesn't the .454 Casull shoot 45LC ammunition too?

I've been thinking along the lines of the 454 but I shot one a while back with full power factory loads and didn't like it. The high intensity of 60,000 psi was a shock to say the least, but hand loaded was fine @ 40,000 psi.

Anyone have experience with the accuracy of 45LC loads through the 454?

On the other hand, the M92 action is plenty strong and loading the 45LC to brutal recoil levels as a 45-70 "short" is possible as well, and everything in between.

I think I just talked myself out of the 454 but if there was one at a great price, I could change my mind.

Boomer :Fire:

[felix]

If it were me with the experience that I have with these rifles, I would have the guy making me the 454 just run the reamer in just far enough to make it a 45LC. The 45LC brass is actually a little fatter in diameter, and the material the case is made out of is just as strong. The reason to do this is that the 454 reamer should be slightly less in diameter than that of the 45LC, say about 0.005 in totum. That does make a difference on the fired brass. In fact, in the 45LC winnie I have, the Casull cases actually micro cracked just above the web with a full power 300 grainer load. The same load in the LC cases (TopHat brand) just puffed them out to the "real" diameter of the chamber. The reamers made for the LC are just too big for the case diameter, no matter the headstamp, Casull or otherwise. ... felix

[Boomer Mikey]

I have 4 of the M92's; 2 in 44 Mag and 2 in 357 Mag. The chambers are real sloppy size wise. Maybe I'll take a couple of new 45LC cases with me and see how they fit in a 454. The selling price is the same for either caliber. All my M92's shoot well. The western rifle versions make a nice long range rifle with 24" octagon barrel but it isn't available in 454.

Another consideration is the twist rate. M92's are 1:30 for the 45LC and 454. Marlin's twist rate for the 45LC is 1:16 for the 1894 Cowboy.

Boomer :Fire:

[felix]

16 twist is a mite fast for the 45 bore. Keep in mind the "long range" 45 rifles only have 18 for an ideal twist within a gale through 1000 yards worth. 16 twist is what the 50BMG uses when shooting 750 grainers at 3200 in a WWII dog fight. ... felix

[Poohgyrr]

Hmmmm, OK...... Anyone know the twist on the Win M94's in .45LC??

[felix]

Late isssue, say 5 years, 26 twist which is absolutely perfect for up to 325 grains at just about any range within reason. ... felix

[Dale53]

Reading this thread, I wondered what the discussion was about [.45 Colt vs .454 Casull]. Well, I looked at Starline's price for each and learned that the Casull brass is $100.00 more per thousand than the .45 Colt. Jeez!! Now, I understand...

Dale53

[Poohgyrr]

Dale,

Right... both 45s have their good points and I keep looking at both trying to decide which one to get....

And I generally prefer the 16"ers, but have heard lots of good things about the 24" .45LC M92s as well............

[Boomer Mikey]

Dale,

Right... both 45s have their good points and I keep looking at both trying to decide which one to get....

And I generally prefer the 16"ers, but have heard lots of good things about the 24" .45LC M92s as well............

Another consideration is that the 454's COAL is longer allowing bigger bullets to use more/slower powder.

I like what Buckshot did with the Lee .457-340 bullet, sizing it down to .454 for a 45-70 "short" in 45LC brass in his M92 45LC.

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showpost.php?p=154530&postcount=1

My 44 Mag M92's shoot 300's ok at 100 yards and 200 meters with its 1:30 twist, Buckshot's M92 45LC appears to be doing fine and the 1894 Cowboy was really designed for CAS with everyone using 185- 250 grain bullets with it's faster twist.

I'm a big guy and the 20" carbine is real handy with it's 13" length of pull.

My ideal M92 is a Stainless Steel 20" octagonal barrell (short rifle configuration,) with the stock from the 454 with its rubber butt pad, and then I wouldn't care if it was 454 or 45LC, I'd have one.

I think Navy Arms has this configuration. STAINLESS 1892 SHORT RIFLE (Not Shown)
The stainless steel version of the "Short Rifle" features a carbine length full octagon barrel and American walnut stocks.
Bbl. Length: 20"; O.A.L.: 37 3/4"; Weight: 6 lbs. 4 oz.; Caliber: .357 Mag. or .45 Colt.
Refer to list for model numbers. - $489.95 (FFL Required) 1892 Short Rifle, Stainless, .45 Colt S92S45 $490.00

I have one of these in 357 Magnum, an excellent rifle!

Now to see if I can find one!


Boomer :Fire:

[longhorn]

A little follow-up note on Felix's comment on .45LC chambers-yeah, I too think they're sloppy big-fired cases from any of my misc. .45's won't easily go into either of my .454 revolvers (one Ruger, one FA). Or, alternatively, maybe the sizing dies are too blamed small! Any practical way to slightly enlarge a carbide sizing ring? Other than pure wear, of course--which tends to be out of round wear, at least on the 2 I've worn out.

[felix]

Carbide needs to be diamond dusted to a larger size. All the die vendors do this. Tell them to open it a thou or two or three inclusive. ... felix

[Boomer Mikey]

Get a round diamond grit file, turn the die in a lathe and open up the die to whatever size you want.

I open all my carbide dies to return fired cases to the same size case as when they were new, unfired cases.

Boomer :Fire:

[jim4065]

Mikey,

"My ideal M92 is a Stainless Steel 20" octagonal barrell (short rifle configuration,) with the stock from the 454 with its rubber butt pad, and then I wouldn't care if it was 454 or 45LC, I'd have one."

What about the Puma's? Are they chopped liver? I'd like to know before I bid on one. Round barrel - anything else?

Jim

[Boomer Mikey]

Mikey,

"My ideal M92 is a Stainless Steel 20" octagonal barrell (short rifle configuration,) with the stock from the 454 with its rubber butt pad, and then I wouldn't care if it was 454 or 45LC, I'd have one."

What about the Puma's? Are they chopped liver? I'd like to know before I bid on one. Round barrel - anything else?

Jim

The Puma's are fine, (M92's are PUMAS) I have both 20" carbine round and 24" octagon western rifle versions in 44 Mag and 357 Mag. But I like my Navy Arms 357 Mag 20" short rifle best. Better sights (Buckhorn & Bead), wood (Walnut), and the same action (Rossi). But the Short rifles are harder to find.

Boomer :Fire:

[Poohgyrr]

I think Navy Arms has this configuration. STAINLESS 1892 SHORT RIFLE (Not Shown) :::: I have one of these in 357 Magnum, an excellent rifle! Boomer :Fire:


Boomer, is that a brass bead front sight on your Navy Arms?? My 16" EMF was a 20" short rifle originally, and has a good brass bead on the front. From what I understand, the LSI's sights aren't the same.

[NH_Sharpshooter]

Dang, why did I have to see this thread? It made me buy a Puma .45 LC 16" on gunbroker about an hour ago. $350 :-D

[Poohgyrr]

That's a lot of gun for the money. :drinks:

[Warhawk]

I was looking for a stainless 16 inch 454, but have been told by several sources that they are discontinued. I couldn't find any left in the pipeline, but did find a 16 inch stainless .480 Ruger.

If you're going to hunt with it, the stainless PUMAs are awfully shiney and I can't imagine that they wouldn't spook game unless you were very well hidden.

I decided that I have 45/70s for when I need some real horsepower, and this .45 and my other 357 lever guns will do the trick.

[Boomer Mikey]

Boomer, is that a brass bead front sight on your Navy Arms?? My 16" EMF was a 20" short rifle originally, and has a good brass bead on the front. From what I understand, the LSI's sights aren't the same.

The LSI's sights are the same for the octagon 25" "western" rifle, otherwise they come with a cheap stamped blade and post. The Navy Arms came with a nice brass bead and the best buckhorn I've ever used.

I decided to get an EMF Hartford Stainless 20" octagon Short Rifle in 45LC. It has the same configuration as the as my Navy Arms 357 with it's walnut stock, brass bead, and buckhorn rear. I'm going to wait until the end of May to pick one out of EMF's stock while I'm in Santa Ana. I'll add a Marble's tang sight, folding rear blade and replace the small 1/16" bead with a 3/32 large brass bead as I do on all my cowboy lever guns. The folding rear blade is set for 50 yards as a reference for the tang sight.

I found a deal on a Dan Wesson 375 SuperMag revolver I can't refuse, and that's depleating my play toy budget this month.


Boomer :Fire:

[Poohgyrr]

I expected .45LC to run fine in a .454, and that stainless 16"er looked promising.

A 16", FP sighted, beadblasted stainless M92 in .45LC would work well for me as a general all weather outdoors gun. I forget who on the Leverguns Forum already has a tuned 16"er like that, but the pictures of it look good.

And yup, this project was delayed by a real sweet 1911/.45 that was much too good to pass up. It will take me a while to recoup, but maybe the carbine I want will be in stock by then.

[jim4065]

Still looking for a 480 with a 16" stainless bbl. The only ones that I've seen on GunBroker and AuctionArms were either new at $550 plus or had a 20" bbl. Don't know why I'm hung up on the 16", but guess it's cause I don't have one that short.
Oh well - there's still time.........:(