" 18o4 "?? Don't you mean 1892?
I recently got one in .357 mag (with a 12" barrel- legal up here in Canada) but haven't had a chance to take it to the range yet. I've heard nearly all good things about them and my impression so far is that it's well made. Action out-of-the-box is really slick. I changed out the red rod in the FO sight for a green one because green seems to stand out better for my eyes. Also drilled out the .094 aperture to .154 as I found it a bit too small.
I'm not entirely "convinced" by the takedown feature. Not that it doesn't work- it does, very well, but it seems to me that you could take it down nearly as well by removing the tang screw and sliding the butt stock off. Of course, you need a screwdriver to do this (and maybe want to replace the slotted screw with hex head to reduce the chance of marring the slot) whereas the Chiappa has a folding lever on the mag tube. I've not heard any other comments about this, though, so definitely just my .02. In my case I doubt I'll need to take it down, as it's only 31" long.
Here's a recent comment on the .44 mag. version from someone on Cdn Gunnutz:
Have a taylor/chiappa alaskan td in 44 mag.
My handload using h110/w296 and the 265 gr hornady round nose cycle like [bleep] thru a seagull.
The bullet (designed for 444 marlin velocities) doesn’t expand but at .429/.430 cal doesn’t really have to.
Nice tight ‘one big ragged hole’ groups @ 50 yds.
Those skinner sights are excellent.
Compared to the rossi 92s I’ve owned it was slick out of the box with no grinding, fitting, deburring, polishing needed to make it function smoothly and dependably and NO pig tail safety on the bolt or rebounding hammers, tang safety or any lawyer nonsense.