Legacy Sports Intl. / Puma M92 .480 Ruger

[Rowlock]

This week I took delivery of a shiny new Puma M92 in .480 Ruger. It's the blued carbine model, with a 20" round barrel and the wood stock and fore-end. I'm pretty excited, as I've wanted one of these beasties for a year or two. So when I saw that LSI had started importing new stock again, I jumped all over one.

The stock is a straight-grip carbine style, and feels good in the hand. As with other 1892-action carbines, it's quite a narrow gun, and is lightweight and very pointable.

The tubular mag will hold 9 rounds of the big .480 if you feed it by withdrawing the tube spring, or 10 rounds if fed traditionally through the loading gate in the side of the receiver. Given the standard 1892-style half-cock safety, it's possible to carry with a round in the chamber for a total of 9+1 or 10+1, depending upon your loading preferences.

Initial impressions...

It seems solidly put together. The action is a little stiff at first, but feels substantial and positive. I suspect with a good strip, clean and lube, and with a little use, it will slick right up. The finish in general looks good on all the mechanical parts. I'm not seeing much in the way of burrs or other manufacturing defects, and things seem to fit together snugly.

So far I've run some snap-caps through it a few times, and while they're a bit lighter than factory rounds, they load and eject positively. The ejection seems clean and consistent - even standing up, the rounds all fall in a little cluster on the floor. I'll be interested to see whether that's true of spent brass, too.

The barrel and receiver are blued pretty well. The finish seems deep and even for the most part. There are a couple of small areas on the sides of the receiver which are a tiny bit lighter in color, if you look at them under the right illumination, but it doesn't seem serious enough that it would affect the durability of the finish. While I didn't buy this as a display gun - it's definitely a shooter and a workhorse - it looks pretty good out of the box.

Trigger pull is crisp, and quite short. I'd ballpark it somewhere around the 3 pound mark, but I don't have a suitable measuring device to be sure. It feels good to my hand, anyway, which I suppose is really job number one. It's not up with the likes of the Savage AccuTrigger, for example, but it feels really good for what many would call a rough-and-tumble carbine. I'm impressed.

As for how it shoots - I'll have to wait and see this weekend. I'm going to a new range, so I don't know whether they'll let me put any jugs out, but if I have the opportunity I'll do some penetration and expansion tests on the .480 Ruger cartridge. Right now I have a box of Hornady XTP JHPs, and I hope to pick up a couple of other brands before I head out depending on local stock.

Pictures, range report, and maybe some water jugs o' truth to follow later this weekend.

[umloth]

I will be very interested in your results. Do you reload?

[tunder]

Rowlock-

One of the reasons the U.S. military never adopted a lever action rifle was the difficulty of disassembly/reassembly. I say that as a friend who has gotten into trouble taking things apart that, in retrospect I shouldn't have.

That said here's a couple of useful pages.

http://marauder.homestead.com/Rifles.html

http://stevespages.com/pdf/rossi_puma_92.pdf

I have a '94 Winchester Trapper in .44 mag and love it.
I lubed it at points I thought need it and the stiffness in the action was gone after a couple boxes of ammo.
It's nice and short, easy to carry, and a good companion for my S&W Mountain Pistol.

[mna]

Originally Posted by tunder

One of the reasons the U.S. military never adopted a lever action rifle was the difficulty of disassembly/reassembly. I say that as a friend who has gotten into trouble taking things apart that, in retrospect I shouldn't have.

Heh, in my case, I got the Winchester 1895 cheap, because the previous owner couldn't figure out how to put it back together...

Anyway, the Russians did adopt that thing in 1915. And didn't US forces use it in the Spanish-American war, too?

[Reddbecca]

Rowlock-

Congratulations on your newest plaything. We wants gratuitous pictures and an in depth report on how it functions.

That said, I have to disagree with you on the terminology. There's just no way I can call something a carbine when it has a 20" barrel on it. In my mind that fits the requirements of qualifying as a rifle rather than a carbine.

[tunder]

mna-

Did you ever get that '95 up and running?

The U.S. adopted the Krag as it's standard rifle from 1892-1903 when the '03 Springfield took over, and was the rifle used by the regular army that took part in the Spanish-American war.

[Absintheur]

I have been wanting to find a deal on a 460 S&W lever...just for fun. I look forward to a range report on your Puma...

[mna]

Originally Posted by tunder

mna-

Did you ever get that '95 up and running?

Yep... and used it too, see attachment.

Originally Posted by tunder

The U.S. adopted the Krag as it's standard rifle from 1892-1903 when the '03 Springfield took over, and was the rifle used by the regular army that took part in the Spanish-American war.

I've seen mentions that there'd been a US federal contract for of 10000 of the model 1895, going to the military. Was that not so?

[Absintheur]

Originally Posted by mna

Yep... and used it too, see attachment.

Very nicely done!

[wamba]

Originally Posted by Absintheur

I have been wanting to find a deal on a 460 S&W lever...just for fun. I look forward to a range report on your Puma...

In retrospect I kind of wish I had gone with the .460 S&W instead of the .500, I really like the idea of being able to chamber multiple calibers. As it stands I'd like to find a carbine in .500 S&W.

[Reddbecca]

Originally Posted by Absintheur

I have been wanting to find a deal on a 460 S&W lever...just for fun. I look forward to a range report on your Puma...

Is there any such animal?

[Absintheur]

I don't think anyone has yet but there is talk from a couple of manufacturers about doing so and I don't think it would be hard at all to customize a 45 Colt to make one.

[tunder]

mna-

Right you are.

There was a small U.S. military contract, but a much larger military purchase was with Russia.

http://world.guns.ru/rifle/rfl25-e.htm

http://www.collectorsfirearms.com/ad...4&subcatID=179

http://www.gunweek.com/2003/feature0101.html

Winchester's hopes were pinned on getting a government contract, but the only tender they received was a contract for 10,000 trial guns. Their largest offering was a contract from Russia for 293,818 "muskets." All of the rifles for the Russian contract were made in 1915 and 1916, and were chambered for the 7.62mm Russian. Of the total production of the original Model 1895, that contract represented 66% of the total.

There's some nice '95 for sale here, including both the Russian and U.S. military models.

http://www.collectorsfirearms.com/ad...4&subcatID=179


Nice Moose!
Tasty?

[mna]

Originally Posted by tunder

mna-
Right you are.
There was a small U.S. military contract, but a much larger military purchase was with Russia.

Indeed, and mine's from the Russian purchase. It's actually got Mosin-Nagant barrel and sights now - Sako m/39, factory job at Sako after the war from surplus parts, apparently.

Originally Posted by tunder

There's some nice '95 for sale here, including both the Russian and U.S. military models.
(url)

And every one of them several times more expensive than what I paid.
Sporterized Russian-contract Winchesters are fairly common around here.

Originally Posted by tunder

Nice Moose!
Tasty?

Tasty, but slightly tedious to cook. With a bull this old (some of the teeth worn to the bone, that old), cooking times need to be adjusted and...


Although, sort of back on topic, I wonder... we haven't seen any pistol-caliber moose guns worth mentioning here. And anything from .454 Casull on up should theoretically qualify, assuming our assumptions in another thread some time back do hold...

[umloth]

Originally Posted by mna

Although, sort of back on topic, I wonder... we haven't seen any pistol-caliber moose guns worth mentioning here. And anything from .454 Casull on up should theoretically qualify, assuming our assumptions in another thread some time back do hold...

At this point they're still scarce in the States too. Marlin and Henry are the last 2 American manufacturers making traditional lever guns I believe and neither produces a pistol calibre bigger than .44mag. The .454's and .480's are only being produced by Puma I believe.

[Rowlock]

Thanks for those links Tunder. The basic strip and clean should only require popping out the lever and removing the bolt and ejector, but it would be good to learn how to take it all the way apart. I think I'll go at it with some caution though, either way.

Anyway - on to part 2... The range report.

Two words: Wow. WOW. This thing will put a grin on your face, and an ache in your shoulder. But it's a good kind of ache.

I didn't have the chance to get any water jugs set up, unfortunately, but I will definitely try to find a range around here that'll let me do that. I have a couple of leads, so hopefully that'll be forthcoming soon. In the meantime I shot some Hornady ammo and some Federal, as detailed below.

Neither brand of ammo gave any feeding or extraction problems. Everything functioned flawlessly throughout.

The iron sights are adjustable for elevation only, and are of a very simple notch and blade design. Accuracy seems good, insofar as the first shot was within about an inch of the bull at 50 yards. Unfortunately, after that, I think I developed a bit of a flinch as things went a little sloppy. I'd say about a ten or eleven inch grouping with fifteen rounds - big enough that I didn't bother measuring accurately. Definitely need to do some drills to get the flinch under control. I'm just not used to that much recoil any more.

But it was a whole lot of fun, that much is for sure.

[Rowlock]

OK, on to the pictures.

Here is the ammo in question, with some .22LR for scale:



A 325 grain Hornady XTP JHP:



And a 275 grain Federal Vital-Shok. This stuff uses the all-copper Barnes X bullet, which seems to have a pretty good rep, but which I am very interested to test in water as soon as I can. It sure looks pretty, anyway:



Here's a spent casing from the Federal rounds. Looks like a good clean strike, without any primer deformation or other weirdness:

[Rowlock]

Next up, the boomstick itself:



It's a pretty no-nonsense tool.



Here's the loading port in the tube magazine. The knurled cap unscrews, allowing you to withdraw the inner tube and spring. You can only fit nine rounds here, because for some reason the port is cut further down the tube than the position of round number ten:



On the right side of the receiver, you can see the regular loading gate. Feeding rounds in here lets you get a total of ten in the magazine. At three to four hundred grains a pop, that's a lot of lead (and/or copper):

[Rowlock]

The rear sight has a simple adjustment mechanism for elevation. Just move the toothed slider back and forth beneath the sprung steel strip, and it ratchets up and down:



The safety is a bit controversial. Traditionally the 1892 has an effective half-cock notch, which is still present in the Puma design, but it seems they wanted to stick a little switch on there anyway:



A fairly effective recoil pad, thank goodness. Being a light carbine, at just a shade over six pounds, chucking dinner plates downrange would get pretty painful pretty fast with a steel buttplate or plain wood:



Here's the action opened up, and a better view of that side loading gate:



And there you have it.

To sum up, it seems like a fantastic rough-and-tumble carbine in a highly potent caliber. I'm looking forward to tons more fun with this little gem.

Oh, and yes, shooting things is a whole bunch of fun!

[Rowlock]

Oh, also, Umloth - No, I don't reload yet. But I intend to start some time soon.

I'm saving up all this brass for sure. At 25-35 bucks for a box of twenty (Or up to 60 bucks for CorBon DPX, and 90 bucks for Belt Mountain brass punch rounds) it feels like it makes a lot of financial sense to get a press and die set for these puppies.

[tunder]

Nice looking rifle.
I was going to suggest a butt pad to ease the recoil but I see it's already there.

[Old_Painless]

Nice rifle and good report.

One issue I'd point out, however....The dents on the base of your fired round can be indications of very high pressure. I know this is a "hot" cartridge, but the pressure signs can indicate over-pressure. I'd keep an eye on those loads, as a lever action is not an inherently strong action and over-pressure can be a problem.

[STW]

Always thought the '92 was one of the stronger designs in the levers and alot of the gun mags are always having articles about somekinda Alaskan giant killer made on a Marlin.

[wamba]

Good looking gun ya got there Rowlock, congrats. Nice camera work too by the way.

[Rowlock]

Thanks everyone.

Originally Posted by Old_Painless

One issue I'd point out, however....The dents on the base of your fired round can be indications of very high pressure. I know this is a "hot" cartridge, but the pressure signs can indicate over-pressure. I'd keep an eye on those loads, as a lever action is not an inherently strong action and over-pressure can be a problem.

I think some of that is from the extractor, perhaps... The snap caps showed a little denting after being run through the mechanism a few times. That said, however, I will definitely take the rifle and the spent brass to my local smith, and have him check everything out. Much better to be safe than sorry. Thank you for the advice.