I have to ask this question-
Is there much (any significance) difference as far as strength issues between the Model '92 and Model '94 Winchester or the Replicas? Is a '92 chambered for 45 LC have the same strength receiver as a '94 in 45 LC? 44 Mag?
Or is the '94 superior because it is also chambered in larger calibers?

TIA

Believe the question is a little like comparing apples to oranges. The two rifles were not originally designed to chambered the same cartridges and so comparing the strength of their actions is a little one-sided. The '94 has the stronger action. Suffice to say, both rifles are sufficiently strong for their respective cartridges.

The '92 Winchester and it's clones are chambered for handgun sized cartridges and are accurate enough for ranges up to about 100 yards. In the .44 magnum chambering, expect to work with mv of about 12-1300 fps and pressures up to 36000 psi.

The '94 Winchester is chambered for a true rifle cartridge with longer range capabilities. In the .30-30 Winchester chambering, mv are about 2500 fps and pressures up to 38000 cup.

Either rifle, chambered for the .45 Colt can easily handle the 15000 psi generated by that cartridge.

Having to make the choice between the two, the question "what are you going to use the rifle for?" needs to be answered.

Marshal Kane- thanks for your reply. After reading what you wrote I can see what your point is. I guess what I should have asked was if the M'92 could safely shoot "plus P" loads. ie, Cor-bon, Buffalo Bore or Grizzly loads that more or less says "use only in Ruger, Freedon Arms revolvers, T/C, Win '94 or Marlin '94". Sense it doesn't state "Win '92" then I would error on the side of caution and not fire them in a M'92. However, (sorry I don't have a reloading manual/s handy) could a M'92 safely handle regular loads more powerful that typical of todays "Cowboy" loads? I realize that todays "Cowboy" loads were designed to be used in all rifles/pistols chambered in said caliber. The M'92 is significantly stronger than a M'66 or '73, but as you mentioned, not as strong as a '94.
I like the M'92 or should I say, prefer a '92 over '94 (in pistol cartridges) but wanted to know how limited I was as far as shooting "plus P" loads.

Thanks again

Don't mean to ruffle any feathers here, but the popular opinion is the modern 92 action is stronger,hence the 454Casull and 480Ruger in the Puma.I don't own a 92 in any brand so I can't offer any loading data,but I've shot 335gr cpb in my 94 Winc. with a healthy dose of H110 and encountered no problems.

Have not fired plus P loads in either of my '92 clones (.44 WCF and .45 Colt) but would not hesitate to fire any other handloaded or commercially loaded ammunition in those calibers that do not exceed max. Know from experience that '92s can easily handle more than "cowboy loads". My current favorite .44 WCF load consists of a 200 grain lead round-nose flat point, 9 grains of Unique, large pistol primer and Winchester brass. This gives a mv of about 1,200 fps out of a 24" barrel. Would not be surprised if it will take more but for my purposes, don't need it.

"Sometime after World War II, handloaders figured out that the Model 92 .44 WCF was capable of significant improvements over factory loads by using heavy charges of IMR-4227 and 2400. Velocities as high as 2,100 fps with a 200-grain jacketed bullet from a 24-inch barrel were reported at upwards of 33,000 psi." Exerpt taken from Rifle Magazine, The Legacy of Lever Guns, page 24 by Dave Scovill. Have not tried to duplicate this performance.

No, Copen you would not ruffle any feathers by stating that the '92 action is stronger than the '94. In fact, I would rather welcome the idea since I am a '92 fan however it would certainly help if you could provide us with some data. As for the 454 Casull and 480 Ruger chamberings in the '92 Puma, overall cartridge length may make this more adaptable to the '92 than the '94.

Hi Marshal...I wish I could provide you some experience data,
but I can't.Only that the 454Casull and 480Ruger are higher
pressure cartridges than what were offered in the 94Winc.
However there are some folks at www.leverguns.com that have
some experience with the cartridges and 92's.
Paco Kelly has a great article on the 45LC.
You can find it in the article section on the website.
I believe it's "The 45 Colt in leverguns"

Thanks for the link, copen. Will check it out. While I'm partial to the '92, my son has a '94 angle eject and I reload for both. Believe both rifles are strong enough to handle some serious loads including the new chamberings that you mentioned. Your comments are appreciated.

I have a Rossi Puma 1892 replica and I can attest that it is a very strong action.

I shoot some real thumpers outta it. I load 27 grains of H-110 in a Starline case behind a Laser Cast 255 grain LSWC bullet for a velocity of ~1,730 fps and about 1,700 fpe. It'll kill anything I might find in the woods in the lower 48.

The M92 Win is miniature M1886 Browning/Win design. The locking lugs are the secret to the strength over the M94 design. I believe it was Mic McPherson that tested the M94 against the M336 Marlin and determined that the Top Eject Winchester is stronger in this category. This was a test to destruction.
www.levergun.com/ and www.leverguns.com/ are two good sites to glean more info on.

The modern Rossi 92's are the strongest leveraction out there for pistol length cartridges. I dont have the links but there has been plenty of discussion about this over on www.leverguns.com (http://www.leverguns.com)