Surprised by the recoil of the old '92 in .44 Magnum!

Joined
Jan 24, 2007
Messages
10,358
Reaction score
51,879
Location
Arizona
Well, today I went out with my new old Model 1892 Browning carbine, chambered in .44 Magnum. Here's the gun:

Browning92PS-small.jpg


Now I have some other pistol-caliber levers, namely a Rossi Puma '92 in .357, and a Winchester trapper in .45 Colt. So I was expecting relatively mild recoil.

WOW. This baby stung with full power .44 mag loads. I was wearing just a light knit shirt (no padding to speak of), and I had to call it quits at about 15 rounds off the bench.

When I got home, I broke out an old BASIC program I put together about 20 years ago for calculating recoil. With the gun at 5.3 pounds and a muzzle velocity of about 1400 fps with a 240-grain bullet, the .44 mag develops 11.16 foot pounds of recoil energy at the butt. Just for comparison:

Same gun - '92 in .357 mag: 5.28 FPE
Model '94 in .45 Colt: 5.78 FPE
1903 Springfield in .30/06: 14.42 FPE

That means that effectively, the .44 mag '92 generates about twice the recoil of its .357 magnum brother. A rough rule of thumb is that 15 FPE is about the "comfort limit" for most folks.

Now I'll have to admit, I'm getting older, and I'm more recoil shy than when I was younger. Of course, a lot depends on how you are dressed, and what the shape of the butt is.

Lesson learned: For adequate power in a '92 and much more comfort, I'll stick with .357 magnum. If I have to shoot that .44 Model 92 again, it'll be stoked with .44 Specials!

John
 
John, I could have told you that. I have a Win 94 in 44 and with magnum loads it kicks like a mule. I much prefer the lighter loads.
 
the bullet that shot the best in my Browning M-92 was the Hornady 265 grain sp. the recoil was very snappy. in a brain fade moment I traded it away
 
[donning flamesuit]
That's what you get for not getting a Marlin.:-)

Seriously though, I had both a Marlin 1894S and a Winchester '94 Trapper at the same time. After experiencing the recoil of each, I still have the Marlin. I gotta say I somehow liked the look of the Winchester a little better. Prob'ly all the Duke movies, I guess.

If you should get the chance, try some 'Specials in your '92. Still chuckin' a big bullet but with less masochism. Or even some Magnums but loaded with about 11 or so grains of Unique.
 
Assuming I ever have another job, I plan to get one of the Cimarron 92s in .44 Magnum. Of course I'll shoot hot 200gr. .30-06 loads out of my Savage 112BVSS all day long without concern for recoil.
 
The original Winchesters could be had with a flat "shotgun" buttplate. That was supposed to let it kick less.

And they were in .44/40. Does that reduce recoil, too, having only a 200 grain bullet? Has anyone here tried one?

T-Star
 
Where are you placing the butt? Try holding it a little more in towards the chest area, in the more fleshy part. I've mistakenly put my Marlin 44 in the crotch of the shoulder and it stings a little, but inward just a little more and it's a pussycat, even in a t-shirt. My 7mm rem mag, now that smarts in a tee no matter what I do.
 
Last edited:
The shotgun style buttplate is much easier on the shoulder than either the crescent or carbine buttplates.
 
I have a Rossi that bruised me with the butt in my shoulder, in the crook of my arm and on the joint. I bought a lace up recoil pad that it wears when it isn't in the safe.
 
A nice lace-up butt pad should do the trick and look good doing it.

Mine's an old 1978 vingage Marlin and I shot 265g cast out of it @ 1700fps at the muzzle, so far no big whoop.

I shot a newer one in stainless and I'd have to say it kicked pretty hard.

Odd when you consider the new one had a soft butt pad and mine has the hard plastic, who knows?

I bought an 1895 45-70 and recently got my mould for a 350g bullet over the weekend, so I'm going to try some of those out at 1400 and 1800fps this week. Never shot a 45-70, so this should be educational. :)
 
John, here are those lace up pads. I have your exact same guns, even as to caliber. I bought my pads from buffalo arms. They are about $28s apiece. They helped with LOP and recoil. If you get some get the very small rifle. Even those run just a little loose.

http://www.buffaloarms.com/browse.cfm/2,169.html

35744mag.jpg
 
Last edited:
i have an 1895 marlin in 45-70 and w/ the factory winchester 300 grain loads, it is in the same league of recoil as i remember in my .44 mag lever marlin.
it always amazed me how the pistol cartridges could "frog" you in a full sized carbine.
 
I find shooting the 44 Mag in a light carbine like the 1892 or 1894 just about like shooting a .30-30 in the same rifle. Not fun without some extra padding.
 
I always felt that for it's power the 30-30 has the worst kick in my
94 of any rifle I can remember. Especially from the bench.
 
I was surprised by the recoil of my Ruger 99/44 carbine in
44 Mag. It felt more than a Ruger Redhawk. A little annoying,
but it's just so cute, that I put up with it. TACC1
 
Factory 44-40 in a Win. 92 is much more pleasant. I had a Ruger carbine and after 5 rounds it went away.

Regards,

Tam 3
 
I thought I was the only one that thought the 1894 44 mag was a little stout. I was surprised at the recoil. I am getting older and I notice recoil more than when I was younger.
 
I found the same thing to be true in a pre-safety Marlin 94 carbine in .44Magnum some years back; it sure surprised me. I think I had the same program you had which sort of explained it to me. Between that and the poor accuracy (?) of the gun I sent it down the line.

I probably should have opted for the .357 but the .44 has a mystique about it, I guess.
 
Your comments would also apply to the old Ruger .44 Magnum "Deerslayer" carbine! That little Ruger had felt recoil far out of proportion to the performance it delivered and was one of the reasons I soon got rid of the one I bought years ago.
 
Back
Top