I'm looking into getting a m92 of some sort just for fun shooting. Would it be better to go .357, or try to locate a 25-20? I'm having a crush lately over the 25-20 cartridge, but want a useful/useable rifle with low recoil, low muzzleblast, and easy reloading of low intensity ammo, close to subsonic if possible.

Anyone have any advice to offer?

It seems the 357 may be much more practical, even though the 25-20 has some cool factor working for it, in my opinion at least.

My choice would still be the 357. With the right loads it can do just about anything the 25-25 can and loading components are cheap, strong, and available. Which M92's are you looking at...originals, Rossi's, or the new M92's soon to be available from Winchester? Been considering one myself but none of them are inexpensive.

if he is looking for the 25-20 he is looking at an original.

I would go for a reproduction in 357 if not getting an original m92 in 25-20.

I useta know an old hermit who lived on garden truck 'n th' deer that tried to eat it outta his garden--when he wasn't jist livin' offa beer; he took 'em all with a 25-20. He said it was pretty much a given; shoot 'em thru th' lungs, 'n they'd scamper off about fifty yards 'n lay down; never git up. Fella was a bit strange 'bout calibers, though; he kilt grizzly b'ars offa his mining claims with a 7.35 Carcano, which he said'd shoot thru 'most anything. Hard ta argue with a feller that had as much experience, and success, as ol' Dale.
mind yer topknot! windy