J Miller
09-25-2004, 10:37 AM
Success at last. My last trip to the range with my Rossi Puma .45 Colt was a pleasent change from all the previous trips. All the rounds fired, not one misfire, all the cases ejected and departed the carbine.
Here's the story.
I got my pre-safety Rossi Puma .45 Colt November of 2002. It didn't take me long to figure out that it was a lemon. It was an early 90's vintage gun according to Mike at M&M Gunsmithing, new in the box with all the papers and instruction book. Beautiful and shiney and exactly what I had been looking for. To add frosting to the cake it was a good price, from a non dealer.
After getting it home I drooled all over it till I could get it to the range. Once at the range I quickly found out why it was over 10 years old and still NIB. It would not feed anything. Not even factory ammo. I was disapointed and unhappy to say the least.
So I contacted Mike at M&M, discussed what I wanted done and sent the Rossi to him. We had agreed on doing several things including: correcting the feeding problem and altering the action so it would feed cartridges loaded with longer Keith SWCs, and doing an action job.
Here is where the spring part comes in. Because the factory springs in the Rossis are so outragously stiff, it's common to just replace them with small, softer, lighter springs. This eases up the action significantly.
So that is what Mike did.
But right from the start I had problems with the ejector. The spring he put in was too light. The emptys would barely make it out of the gun and many times would simply do a sumersault and fall back into the action.
I also began to have misfires with some foreign primers I had purchased in Phoenix about 10 years ago.
Although I will never be tempted to purchase this brand of primers again, the fact that my Win 94, Ruger BH, and S&W 25-5 would reliably fire them, and the Rossi would not, was unacceptable. The one absolute rule for all my guns is reliablity, the Rossi wasn't.
As an experiment I purchased a Lee Gunsmithing Gunslinger spring kit for the Rossi hoping the springs would just a bit stiffer than the springs used by the gunsmith. They were not. As a matter of fact, they were vertually identicle.
Smaller diameter, more coils to the inch, smaller wire guage, and just as week. I removed them, put them back in the package and sold them to another Rossi owner.
I called Mike back and discussed the ejection problems. I got a factory spring from him and on another call a longer piece of the same spring he put in the ejector.
The factory spring was laid aside for reference, and I installed the longer light duty spring he sent. There was some improvement, but not enough.
As for the hammer spring, I installed a small square nut between the soft spring and the spring retainer in the lower tang. This increased the tension a bit, but again not enough.
So I started digging through all my extra springs. Over the years I,ve collected extra springs for lots of different guns.
I found that Ruger Blackhawk hammer springs will fit the Rossi Pumas perfectly and put a 19# Wolff spring in as the main spring. My goal was reliable primer ignition of ALL brands of primers, not a heavy action.
To fix the ejector I cut off one, maybe 1.5 coils from the factory ejector spring, flattened the end, and reinstalled it. I hate cutting factory springs, but I didn't have any other springs even similiar to it.
My testing with dummy rounds and empty cases previously fired in the Rossi showed my spring change was a success. Instead of a soft whimpy ejection, the emptys were ejected with vigor and flung clear across my work area. Excellent!
The shortened factory ejector spring gave just a bit of resistance as the bolt closed, just what it needs. From what I've found with this Rossi, if there is no feeling of resistance when the bolt compresses the ejector spring, there will not be enough spring to it to reliably kick the empties out and away.
The trip to the range was a success. All the primers fired, not one misfire. All the cases ejected and were flung well away from the carbine. I was pleased. I was standing there cranking the lever and fireing as fast as I could aim and pull the trigger and the gun never bobbled.
Just the different springs made a world of change.
The Rossi was filthy when I did the spring change, and is filthier now. I have one more box of the offending primers to shoot up. After these have been fired, then I'll clean it.
In conclusion I think the springs that the gunsmiths use are way too soft. The 92 extractor design needs a stiff spring to properly kick out the empty. Maybe I'm just to picky, but these soft springs were a waste of my money. I don't like soft and whimpy actions. And I rarely replace or alter factory springs. (This is the only gun I own that does not have it's original factory springs.) When I buy another Rossi or any of the current incarnations made in the old Rossi factory, I'll not use the soft springs. If I have to replace the springs, due to excessive tension, I'll use the Wolff springs. I'll have to do some more research about the ejector spring to see if I can buy a pre-made spring that will work like the cut factory spring does, but I think I'm on the right track.
Joe
Here's the story.
I got my pre-safety Rossi Puma .45 Colt November of 2002. It didn't take me long to figure out that it was a lemon. It was an early 90's vintage gun according to Mike at M&M Gunsmithing, new in the box with all the papers and instruction book. Beautiful and shiney and exactly what I had been looking for. To add frosting to the cake it was a good price, from a non dealer.
After getting it home I drooled all over it till I could get it to the range. Once at the range I quickly found out why it was over 10 years old and still NIB. It would not feed anything. Not even factory ammo. I was disapointed and unhappy to say the least.
So I contacted Mike at M&M, discussed what I wanted done and sent the Rossi to him. We had agreed on doing several things including: correcting the feeding problem and altering the action so it would feed cartridges loaded with longer Keith SWCs, and doing an action job.
Here is where the spring part comes in. Because the factory springs in the Rossis are so outragously stiff, it's common to just replace them with small, softer, lighter springs. This eases up the action significantly.
So that is what Mike did.
But right from the start I had problems with the ejector. The spring he put in was too light. The emptys would barely make it out of the gun and many times would simply do a sumersault and fall back into the action.
I also began to have misfires with some foreign primers I had purchased in Phoenix about 10 years ago.
Although I will never be tempted to purchase this brand of primers again, the fact that my Win 94, Ruger BH, and S&W 25-5 would reliably fire them, and the Rossi would not, was unacceptable. The one absolute rule for all my guns is reliablity, the Rossi wasn't.
As an experiment I purchased a Lee Gunsmithing Gunslinger spring kit for the Rossi hoping the springs would just a bit stiffer than the springs used by the gunsmith. They were not. As a matter of fact, they were vertually identicle.
Smaller diameter, more coils to the inch, smaller wire guage, and just as week. I removed them, put them back in the package and sold them to another Rossi owner.
I called Mike back and discussed the ejection problems. I got a factory spring from him and on another call a longer piece of the same spring he put in the ejector.
The factory spring was laid aside for reference, and I installed the longer light duty spring he sent. There was some improvement, but not enough.
As for the hammer spring, I installed a small square nut between the soft spring and the spring retainer in the lower tang. This increased the tension a bit, but again not enough.
So I started digging through all my extra springs. Over the years I,ve collected extra springs for lots of different guns.
I found that Ruger Blackhawk hammer springs will fit the Rossi Pumas perfectly and put a 19# Wolff spring in as the main spring. My goal was reliable primer ignition of ALL brands of primers, not a heavy action.
To fix the ejector I cut off one, maybe 1.5 coils from the factory ejector spring, flattened the end, and reinstalled it. I hate cutting factory springs, but I didn't have any other springs even similiar to it.
My testing with dummy rounds and empty cases previously fired in the Rossi showed my spring change was a success. Instead of a soft whimpy ejection, the emptys were ejected with vigor and flung clear across my work area. Excellent!
The shortened factory ejector spring gave just a bit of resistance as the bolt closed, just what it needs. From what I've found with this Rossi, if there is no feeling of resistance when the bolt compresses the ejector spring, there will not be enough spring to it to reliably kick the empties out and away.
The trip to the range was a success. All the primers fired, not one misfire. All the cases ejected and were flung well away from the carbine. I was pleased. I was standing there cranking the lever and fireing as fast as I could aim and pull the trigger and the gun never bobbled.
Just the different springs made a world of change.
The Rossi was filthy when I did the spring change, and is filthier now. I have one more box of the offending primers to shoot up. After these have been fired, then I'll clean it.
In conclusion I think the springs that the gunsmiths use are way too soft. The 92 extractor design needs a stiff spring to properly kick out the empty. Maybe I'm just to picky, but these soft springs were a waste of my money. I don't like soft and whimpy actions. And I rarely replace or alter factory springs. (This is the only gun I own that does not have it's original factory springs.) When I buy another Rossi or any of the current incarnations made in the old Rossi factory, I'll not use the soft springs. If I have to replace the springs, due to excessive tension, I'll use the Wolff springs. I'll have to do some more research about the ejector spring to see if I can buy a pre-made spring that will work like the cut factory spring does, but I think I'm on the right track.
Joe