Browning 92 or Winchester 94?

G

Goblin

Well-known member
Joined
May 15, 2014
Messages
1,601
Reaction score
1,153
Location
North Texas
I wanted to shop for a Browning 92 in 44 Magnum, but then saw a Winchester 94 so chambered, which I didn't know existed. Any opinions on which is better, and any comments from owners of either? I'd think the '92 since it was designed for the shorter cartridges. I have a Rossi 357 that I love to shoot.
 
Yes, the better design for the shorter cartridge is definitely the 92. I wish I could get my hands on either a Browning or a Winchester 92 in .357 magnum.
 
I had a Rossi 92 in .44 Magnum and it's one of the few guns that I've sold. With its steel buttplate it was just too unpleasant to shoot, and it wouldn't really feed .44 Specials well. I guess I could've downloaded .44 Magnums.
 
I had a Winchester Model 94AE Trapper in .357 for a while. A buddy loaned me his Browning repro Model 92, also in .357, while he was deployed.

I think that the smaller, lighter 92 is better suited to handgun rounds than the bigger, heavier 94.
 
I just bought a Winchester 94 in .44-40
only because i could not find a 92 with in my budget :o

The 94 have a history of stovepiping (in pistol caliber) if not handled correctly.
Mine was un fired when i got it, first round in? You got it, Stovepipe :D
Guess i'll have to make me some snapcaps and start working that lever.
 
Yep, only have two pistol caliber short-barreled leverguns. One is a Win. Trapper M94 in .45 Colt. The other a Rossi 92 in .357.
The M92-size receiver is so much handier and just feels right. The M94 is oversized and just sorta 'made to work' with handgun cartridges.
 
Not sure my experiences are valid here. I've got both, a Browning 92 in 32-20 and an early production 94 in 44 magnum. Nothing bad to say about the Browning. Made in Japan, and as with most Browning products the extra you pay is rewarded in flawless performance. The 32-20 round is very light and a pleasure to fire. Same in my 32-20 target K frame. You feel it go off, but its light. Could be my handloads, too. :)

I've not had any problems with the 94, but then I don't fire it often. I just have other long guns that need exercise more. When you own a gun you read all the articles and threads about them. You even seek them out for reading. A lot has been written about the 94 in 44. Most of it seems biased against the combination. Working the action seems to loosen it up just enough. A new, tight action might not be the one to form conclusions about. Its also not a gun you can smoothly and slowly crank in a round. If you want one up in the tube, you will find you need to do it rapidly. Crank that sucker in the elevator up to the chamber. When you do that its a totally different critter. If someone could draw a graph that shows time on one axis and flawless performance on the other, it would show you. Its not a lightweight, its been designed to work hard. Mine was made back in 69, which is good as I read it. By the time the 80s rolled around, some of the guns were shipped in less than working condition. None of the Brownings had that issue.
 
The Winchester '94 in .44 is a nightmare for feeding....No one uses them in SASS where feeding properly is mandatory. Now a '94 is fine with rifle length cartridges.....just not pistol caliber rounds.

A good friend of mine has one and it took three trips to the gunsmith to finally get it to run.

Get the '92!

Randy
 
I own a 20" blued Rossi 92 in .44Mag it is a very handy and accurate carbine up to 50yds, 240gr JSP regular factory ammo, 2" five shot groups rested in sandbags!!...
If you have a .44Mag handgun it is a very good complement!!!..if you reload it is a very good choice too..
Here in my Country it costs U$S 850 new blued.
Regards
Roberto Renauld
 
I've seen anger on some forums when I describe the Rossi 92 as a 'kit gun', ie, something that has real potential if you research what to do to it to make it smoother and nicer to handle. Even then, it'll never be a Browning or good ol' Win. M92.
It's at a price point, where IMO, not much more can be expected. Have to say, even before tweaking mine a bit, it fed nearly all conventional .38's and .357's, no problem.
 
Love the Browning 92 in 44 Mag. I have put hundreds of cowboy loads
and 44. specials through it in SASS competition . Construction and smoothness are top of the line. The only problem I have ever encountered was when I got a 45. colt in the action. Had to tear it down
to remove the round.
 
The Browning!!!!!!! It's designed for and is as size efficient as possible for pistol cartridges, particularly the .44 Magnum. The 94 has too much action going on and a waste of mechanics for such a small cartridge. The 92 is infinetly smoother, and the Browning is the premier Win. 92 copy in existence and it has no stupid safety on top. The Browning is of extreme high quality, made in Japan or not. My Browning is smoother than my orig. 1892 Winchester.
 
Last edited:
I have Winchester 94 Trappers in .44 magnum and .45 Colt. I've never had a problem with either one.
I also have an early Rossi in .357. I prefer the 92 action, but I did have to tinker with the Rossi to make it feed properly.
 
I bought a Browning M-92 in 44 mag when they first came out($300 new) and it was a good shooting rifle with no problems. the best load was using the Hornady 265 grain soft point and recoil was noticeable. it falls into the category of guns a person should have kept
 
I had one of the older Rossi 92s in .45 Colt, never shoulda sold it. I currently have a Winchester 94 in the same caliber and have not had any feeding issues with it. I did have a jacketed 250 grain target load that failed to exit the barrel......but that's another story!
 
The 1892 design is about a sleek and elegant as you can get. I have a recent production button mag sporter in .45 Colt that is perfect in every way.

In Browning's push to make a "small" lever action that uses longer shells, something was lost between 1892 and the 1894 models.
 
For smooth feeding, there's nothing like a Winchester 1873. Winchester has one for .357 Magnum, as does Uberti. Both are finely finished (and expensive).

I have a '94 in .45 Colt, which occasionally has stovepipe issues. The trick is to use the lever firmly, in one quick motion. The lifter only moves in the last 1/8" of the lever stroke, and snaps over center (there's a detent in the action). Good news is, there's a lot of space to clear a jam, if needed.

The '92 is much cleaner and smoother for pistol cartridges. I have one in .357 Magnum, and it feeds both .38 SPL and .357 Mag effectively. It's not as fussy as a Marlin regarding bullets, but I use RNFP or Hornady XTP (HP) with a roll crimp for best results.

The Winchester trigger is okay at 6.5#, but don't hope to improve it (compound action). On the other hand, you can drop a "Happy Trigger" into a Marlin and get a crisp, 3.5# or lighter break.
 
A small annoyance of mine with the '94 is the grip safety. My 30-30 you had to make a concerted effort to squeze the lever before firing.

I've got a Winchester '92 (Miroku) in 44, and it is just a fun slick gun to shoot.
 
Thank you to all hat have posted. I'm going to try for a clean 92. As others have mentioned, the Rossi is nice for what it is, but I think I'll look for a Browning. I think of it like a fine wine. That is, if I stay away from fine wine (AND cheap wine), I can buy a Browning 92.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
FS: Winchester 94 Trapper Custom Black Stocks
Replies
4
Views
654
geeollie
G
jsfricks
Winchester 1873 Lever 45 Colt
Replies
7
Views
444
Baxter6551
Baxter6551
chief38
MY INFAMOUS WINCHESTER WANNABE MODEL 62A ROSSI RIFLE
Replies
16
Views
946
alwslate
A
jsfricks
Winchester 1873 Limited Series Carbine- Updated Pictures
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
Ethang
E
chief38
I HAD FORGOTTEN JUST HOW MUCH I LIKE THIS WINCHESTER RIFLE!
Replies
19
Views
4K
Empe
E

Latest posts

Back
Top