Marlin 1894 vs. Marlin 1895...why bother with the 44 Mag. or 45 Colt??


PDA






saturno_v
August 9, 2010, 03:19 PM
I'm trying to understand the practical reasons for someone to choose the Mod. 1894 in 44 Mag or 45 Long Colt over a Mod. 1895 in 45-70.

The 45-70 can be loaded (or bought over the shelf) from light loads at moderate velocity up to very heavy bullets at relatively high velocity capable of busting big dangerous animals....the 45-70 in a lever action can almost reach 4000 ft/lb of muzzle energy.....it has a versatility that the other 2 chamberings cannot even remotely match.

If you do not reload, the price difference for regular commercial ammo between the 45-70 (the typical cheap Remchesteral is already ballistically more capable than a 44 Mag or a 45 Colt) and the other two cartridges is not that significant....and, however, these are not plinking rifles anyway.

If you reload, cost of ammo difference is basically a moot point.

The price of the 2 rifles is basically the same.

The only couple of reasons I can immagine for choosing a Mod. 1894 over a Mod, 1895 is extreme sensitivity to recoil or just the desire to own a rifle chambered for the same cartridge of one of your revolvers (hardly a practical reason nowadays)

Any thoughts or opinions?

If you enjoyed reading about "Marlin 1894 vs. Marlin 1895...why bother with the 44 Mag. or 45 Colt??" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
ArmedBear
August 9, 2010, 03:22 PM
Handling. Those rifles are dramatically different in weight and pointing characteristics.

rcmodel
August 9, 2010, 03:26 PM
Around these parts, a 45-70 is over-kill for about 99% of the hunting & shooting I do.
I have an 1894P .44 Mag Guide Gun that is even smaller, shorter, & lighter then any 45-70 Guide Gun. It's hardly heavier then some of the big magnum hunting six-guns.

A fast 180 grain JHP .44 Mag bullet is great coyote medicine, and less likely to richocet across a cow pasture into the next county then a 405 grain slug.

BTW: Mine IS a fun plinking rifle, more then anything else.

rc

saturno_v
August 9, 2010, 03:33 PM
Handling. Those rifles are dramatically different in weight and pointing characteristics.


There is between one and half pound of weight difference between the 2 rifles (depending on barrel length).

I did shoot few rounds with both and I haven't noticed, in my opinion, very big differences.

Maybe it's different once you are in the field.

ArmedBear
August 9, 2010, 03:34 PM
Short of something like a moose or a bison, .45-70 is overkill for just about anything at the ranges that call for a light straight-grip carbine.

WRT noticing the difference, that's why people haul out their big 12 Gauges to shoot quail, and go home empty-handed. They don't notice the difference at the range.:)

saturno_v
August 9, 2010, 03:38 PM
Short of something like a moose or a bison, .45-70 is overkill for just about anything at the ranges that call for a light straight-grip carbine.

In the regular commercial offerings (for example Remchesteral) the 45-70 is almost comparable in power to a 44 Magnum and caliber is basically the same.

Badlander
August 9, 2010, 04:00 PM
There is no comparison between .44 or .45 rifles and 45-70 rifles. The handgun rounds top out at 300gr bullets. The 45-70 starts at 300gr and goes up to well over 500gr.
You may load the 45-70 down to .44 .45 power but you will never load the .44 .45 even close to 45-70 power levels.

saturno_v
August 9, 2010, 04:02 PM
There is no comparison between .44 or .45 rifles and 45-70 rifles. The handgun rounds top out at 300gr bullets. The 45-70 starts at 300gr and goes up to well over 500gr.
You may load the 45-70 down to .44 .45 power but you will never load the .44 .45 even close to 45-70 power levels.


That was exactly my point....you can match a 44 Mag with a 45-70 but not the other way around....

rcmodel
August 9, 2010, 04:07 PM
+1
You can't compare energy figures of slow 45-70 and fast .44 Mag loads.


Like I said in post #3, a 180 grain .44 JHP will not likely skip across a section of land and take out farmer Brown's bull.
A 405 grain 45-70 moving slower will.

rc

Cosmoline
August 9, 2010, 04:09 PM
Handling is more than just weight. The pistol caliber carbines have quicker actions and cycle much shorter rounds. They're also much faster with followup shots.

As far as whether it's worth it, much depends on whether the carbine will be a companion piece. If you're already shooting .45 Colt or .44 Mag in handguns, the carbine is a natural match.

336A
August 9, 2010, 05:22 PM
I'm trying to understand the practical reasons for someone to choose the Mod. 1894 in 44 Mag or 45 Long Colt over a Mod. 1895 in 45-70.


Because the pistol cartridge firing 1894 are lighter than the Guide Guns and handle like a charm in the real thick stuff. Also due to the shorter cartridge length one can cycle the action quicker on the 1894 and the 1894 can be loaded with 10 rounds vs the 4 or5 of the .45-70.

The 45-70 can be loaded (or bought over the shelf) from light loads at moderate velocity up to very heavy bullets at relatively high velocity capable of busting big dangerous animals....the 45-70 in a lever action can almost reach 4000 ft/lb of muzzle energy.....it has a versatility that the other 2 chamberings cannot even remotely match.

That is true however as I stated in another thread the Marlin 1894 rifles are more of a general utility type rifle. More of a jack of all trades master of none rifle so to speak. They fill a multitude of roles well such as camping, woods bumming, farm/ranch rifle and HD. For strictly hunting, the larger centerfires are better no doubt unless that is you live in a state that confines you to hunting with pistol firing carbines. As for the the 4,000ft/lb statement read my signature line. There is a fella over at Marlin Owners from Wyoming IIRC that uses his 1894 .44mag to fill his elk tags, he is quite succesful too. I guess all of his elk didn't know that cast .44 bullets are supposed to bounce off their shoulders:D

If you do not reload, the price difference for regular commercial ammo between the 45-70 (the typical cheap Remchesteral is already ballistically more capable than a 44 Mag or a 45 Colt) and the other two cartridges is not that significant....and, however, these are not plinking rifles anyway.

If you reload, cost of ammo difference is basically a moot point.

Actually the price difference where I'm at is pretty wide. I can either spend $40 dollars for 20 .45-70 cartridges or get a box of 50 44 mags for around $30 or less. That gives one plenty of ammo to sight their rifle in with and still have enough left over to hunt with. Not only that .357mag, and .44 mag is widely available pretty much anywhere. While .45-70 ammo really isn't that hard to come by it is more difficult to find than is either .357 or .44mag. Not only that there is a lot of versatility in the .44 mag loading. You can get Hornady225gr LE, Win 250gr Platinum Tip and Dual Bond, Fed 280gr Swift A frame. Fed 300gr Cast Core just to name a few. For really deep penetration (if those 300gr cast core bullets can't cut the mustard) if one has deep enoough pockets one could get some .44 mag loaded with punch bullets, or reload the new 300gr Barnes Bear Busters.

Reloading is way more economical for the pistol cartridges in terms of powder consumption. The trap door .45-70 loadings alone use almost twice as much powder than my 44 mag. Once you get into the modern lever gun loadings then powder consumption for the .45-70 can easily double a full house 44 mag with H110/W296 and a 240gr bullet.

The other benefit one gets is less recoil as you already pointed out.

Anyway in terms of ammo cost/availability, weight, savings in powder consumption, camping gun, woods bumming gun Farm/Ranch gun, HD gun and rifle weight the Marlin 1894 makes a lot of sense.

jmr40
August 9, 2010, 05:24 PM
The 44 holds 10 rounds in the magazine VS 4 for the 45-70. Much lighter, shorter and with a much shorter lever throw for repeat shots. The 44 ammo is much cheaper and for 99% of all hunting situations it will be just as effective.

But I ain't selling my 45-70.

Runningman
August 9, 2010, 06:06 PM
Back in the early 90s sold a Winchester 94 30-30 bought a Marlin 1895 22" barrel back in the early 90s. After about two or three hunting seasons with it decided it wasn't my cup of tea for hunting. Seemed like a step backwards from the handy 30-30. The 45-70 also seemed somewhat worthless as a plinker. So I sold it after 5 years of owning it.

In the late 90s I bought a Marlin 1894P with a 16" barrel in 44 Mag. Talk about a handy, light weight, quick handing lever action. I use this for Deer hunting occasional black bear hunting and lots of plinking. Get far more use out of this combo than I ever did the 1895 45-70.

Interesting enough in the 44 Mag I've had the Sierra 220 & 250 grain FPJ Silhouette bullets go right on thru just about every animal I've shot with them including black bears. Same with the excellent but no longer made Hornady 240 Grain Silhouette bullet.

CraigC
August 9, 2010, 06:46 PM
If all you need is a 150yd deer/general purpose rifle, what's the point in buying a .45-70? Pistol cartridges are more efficient (less powder), offer less recoil, tons of bullet options at lesser prices than .458's, can be reloaded with carbide dies, fit into smaller and lighter rifles, etc. A 300gr is a light bullet for the .45/70 but moderately heavy for the .44 and .45 and more than is necessary for deer and most hogs. Standard weight cast bullets are plenty for those purposes. Thus, I have five different pistol cartridge leverguns but exactly zero .45/70's. Why? I have no need for a 200yd sledgehammer. Only bought my .405 for Africa because I was gonna take a Kudu.


The handgun rounds top out at 300gr bullets.
On what planet???

RatDrall
August 9, 2010, 06:50 PM
The only couple of reasons I can immagine for choosing a Mod. 1894 over a Mod, 1895 is extreme sensitivity to recoil or just the desire to own a rifle chambered for the same cartridge of one of your revolvers (hardly a practical reason nowadays)


What changed, that a rifle that fires the same ammunition as a sidearm, only with more authority and faster followup shots, isn't handy?

wanderinwalker
August 9, 2010, 06:55 PM
My 1894PG is much faster handling than the 336/1895 frame. That pound and a half is HUGE! I have an 18.5" barreled 336 .30-30, and while it is fairly short and handy, my .44 levergun is handier, even with a 20" barrel.

The .44 Magnum plus a reloading bench can do all kinds of crazy things. While I can't match a .45-70 for raw power, I can throw 300gr chunks of lead at useful speeds. I can also make uber-cheap and low-recoil .44 powder-puff loads that you can see flying through a spotting scope. This makes the '94 a pleasure to shoot, and I have wasted a few afternoons just plinking away this way. Never wanted to try that even with the lightest .45-70 loads I've cooked up for my Encore (6-lb single-shot with a 20" barrel, FWIW, handy like the 1894, stronger than the 1895 and kicks like a mad mule on crack :eek: ).

My 1894 cycles a lot faster and smoother than the longer actions do. It also gives me double the capacity between reloads and would make a fine HD weapon, IMO. Not the latest and greatest, but it is paid for and something I am familiar with. Trumps something new I haven't saved the money to afford yet.

They each have their places and uses. In my mind the little pistol caliber carbines are handy utility guns, whereas the .45-70s are dedicated hunting guns, plain and simple.

Finprof
August 9, 2010, 07:21 PM
For some of us who shoot lever action silhouette, there are three classes, rimfire, pistol cartridge, and rifle cartridge. An 1895 in 45/70 is not the optimal gun for rifle and is not legal (obviously) for pistol. Almost everyone has a Marlin 19894 for psitol cartridge, usually in .357 magnum. A couple of my fellow shooters use the 44 mag for both pistol and rifle, since it is legal for both. They just load milder fo pistol and heavier for rifle, with the heavier targets farther away. Shooting one gun has some advantages over switching between relays.

CoastieShep
August 9, 2010, 07:33 PM
Because different people want and need different things. It's not hard to figure out.

Maj Dad
August 9, 2010, 07:44 PM
I bought an 1895 in 1974 because I liked it. Still have it, shoot it every now & then, just like my Trapdoor (1879, mfg Jul 83). I also have a Win 92 Half-Magazine carbine in 44-40 that I handload 44 mag level loads for deer hunting. Both have killed deer like they were RPGs, but the one that kicks most is the Winnie. Short, very light and just slaps the snot out of me. I don't need either one, but having both gives me options that one alone would not. I also have a 24 ft pontoon boat with a porta-potty and 90 horse 4 stroke that will put it on a plane & top out over 30 mph. My wife will tell you that I damn sure don't need it, either... :D

SlamFire1
August 9, 2010, 07:49 PM
or just the desire to own a rifle chambered for the same cartridge of one of your revolvers (hardly a practical reason nowadays)

That is why I got mine, had a 44 Mag Super Blackhawk.

As stated earlier, the M1894 had ten rounds. Still, don't underestimate the punch of a 44 Magnum out of a carbine at 100 yards.

I was gettting 1700 fps out of 240's with my M1894, and that packs a heck of a wallop.

Neither cartridge is exactly flat shooting, so the range limitations are about the same.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/Rifles%20various/M1894FullLength.jpg

Ridgerunner665
August 9, 2010, 07:54 PM
In my opinion...the best reason for the 1894's is CASS (2 guns in one caliber, ammo consolidation)

1858
August 9, 2010, 08:26 PM
I'm trying to understand the practical reasons for someone to choose the Mod. 1894 in 44 Mag or 45 Long Colt over a Mod. 1895 in 45-70.

All I can say is it's a good thing that we don't have to choose ... we can have both! I have two '94s (.45 Colt and .357 Mag) and three '95s (.45-70 Govt.) and plan on adding a '94 in .44 Mag and SOMETHING in .454 Casull. The only thing I don't understand is why the heck Marlin doesn't make a '94 or '95 in .454 Casull. I bet they'd sell like hot cakes.

:)

Ridgerunner665
August 9, 2010, 08:33 PM
why the heck Marlin doesn't make a '94 or '95 in .454 Casull. I bet they'd sell like hot cakes.

Neither action will stand up to the abuse of 60,000 psi...I like the .454 Casull, but its too much for these old designs to handle.

saturno_v
August 9, 2010, 08:56 PM
Neither action will stand up to the abuse of 60,000 psi...I like the .454 Casull, but its too much for these old designs to handle.


+1

And performance wise it would still be inferior to the stout 45-70 loads already available in the Mod. 1895

Same reason for the lack of a lever action chambered in 500 S&W, as far as I know...

336A
August 9, 2010, 09:04 PM
Same reason for the lack of a lever action chambered in 500 S&W, as far as I know...

Nope there is a lever action rifle currently chambered for to 500 S&W but it will require deeper pockets than I have.
http://www.bighornarmory.com/products/carbine.php

saturno_v
August 9, 2010, 09:33 PM
Nope there is a lever action rifle currently chambered for to 500 S&W but it will require deeper pockets than I have.
http://www.bighornarmory.com/products/carbine.php


That web site doesn't even mention the price...:D

However, performance wise, it would not surpass the 45-70 high loads available for the Mod 1895....if you ask me it's a pointless rifle....it adds to the variety of available options with no real advantage over a regular Marlin 45-70 lever action...and I suspect it's even heavier (the action has to be really beefy to withstand 65k psi of pressure)

Edit...the Big Horn Mod. 89 has a MSRP of $1889 vs. a street price for a Mod 1895 of ~$530 (roughly 3 times the price) and the rifle is slightly heavier.....as I said before, pointless IMHO...

Ridgerunner665
August 9, 2010, 09:39 PM
By the numbers (which mean very little IMO)...the 500 can match the 45-70 with bullets up to a certain weight (around 350 grains), even the hot 45-70 loads.

But bullet performance is quite different between the two.

No personal experience, but I read that somewhere...and the cost of that rifle above is right around $2,000, depending which model you want.

1858
August 9, 2010, 09:42 PM
Neither action will stand up to the abuse of 60,000 psi...I like the .454 Casull, but its too much for these old designs to handle.

The .444 and .450 Marlins are 44,000 CUP cartridges and the .308 Marlin Express is a 46,500 psi cartridge. I'm not sure about the .338 Marlin Express but it's probably similar to the .308 ME.

Dave Emary of Hornady is quoted as saying ...

“We load [the .308 Marlin Express] to 46,500 psi ... the 336 action will handle a bit more, but extraction can get sticky. We insist on smooth function.”

Leaves me wondering how much more. If the weak link is the locking lug on the lever, how much work would it take to make it safe for the .454 Casull. I notice that PUMA doesn't seem to be offering the .454 Casull M-92 rifles anymore.

:)

Ridgerunner665
August 9, 2010, 09:47 PM
Not much more...I have a number for that, but I'm reluctant to post it 1858, for safety reasons.

The locking lug isn't the weak link (at least not as weak as many seem to think it is)...its the slim and trim design of the action.

1858
August 9, 2010, 09:56 PM
Not much more...I have a number for that, but I'm reluctant to post it 1858, for safety reasons.

Damn!! I guess I'll stop thinking about a Marlin chambered for the .454 Casull. :cuss: I even considered having one custom made by converting a '95 but if the action isn't strong enough then that presents a problem.

:)

Ridgerunner665
August 9, 2010, 10:00 PM
The next best thing is the 1894 in a 45 Colt...it will handle the hot 45 Colt loads.

1858
August 9, 2010, 10:04 PM
I have one of those and it's a GREAT rifle but I'd really like a .454 Casull to go with my Ruger Alaskan. There aren't many .454 Casull lever guns around it seems. :(

:)

JK47
August 9, 2010, 10:15 PM
How about a 1894 in .45 ACP ?

http://www.marlinowners.com/forums/index.php/topic,65695.0.html

Maj Dad
August 9, 2010, 10:58 PM
The 45-70 will shoot bigger bullets faster than the 454; that's fact. The 454 can be chambered in a smaller rifle, also fact (may be expensive, but...) But short of Grizz and the really big animals, and with range in mind, the 454 will kill just about everything else. If I had to, I'd shoot Grizz with it, or use a rock, but if going looking for him, I'll choose a 338 mag of some sort, maybe bigger. If that's not a factor, buy the one you like and consider the dia(-logue/-tribe) as informational polemics... :evil:

CraigC
August 9, 2010, 11:51 PM
The only thing I don't understand is why the heck Marlin doesn't make a '94 or '95 in .454 Casull. I bet they'd sell like hot cakes.
Everybody tried to adapt existing designs to the .454 cartridge but none were strong enough and also small enough to warrant it. The modern 1886 is plenty strong enough but too large to make any sense. Only the 1892 proved strong enough to handle the pressure without a major redesign.


Edit...the Big Horn Mod. 89 has a MSRP of $1889 vs. a street price for a Mod 1895 of ~$530 (roughly 3 times the price) and the rifle is slightly heavier.....as I said before, pointless IMHO...
Apples and oranges. The 1895 is a great rifle and a lot of gun for the money but it ain't a fifty. How about comparing the cost of the Big Horn to the cost of converting an 1886 to .50Alaskan? Not to even mention the significant difference in fit and finish between either and a $500 Marlin. Pointless to you maybe but fortunately, you don't get to pick everybody's guns.

R.W.Dale
August 9, 2010, 11:52 PM
Why is it the instant a grown man buys a 45/70 every last ounce of common sense he might have had about guns instantly flies out the window.

Why do you guys hold 45/70 as some kind of gold standard of power? Why mess with the 1895 at all when you can get a repeater in 458 Lott.

On topic
COST even if you handload a 45/70 will cost you about 3x the money to shoot using comparable projectiles. Pistol bullets in .452" are soooooooo much cheaper than .458" bullets not to mention the fact your powder consumption per shot is much much higher.

The other factor is handling. The much larger 1895 is a unwieldy club in comparison to a 1894 carbine.

1858
August 10, 2010, 12:18 AM
Why do you guys hold 45/70 as some kind of gold standard of power? Why mess with the 1895 at all when you can get a repeater in 458 Lott.

I don't think we do ... and because I for one have no interest in killing an elephant or water buffalo ... or any animal in Africa for that matter!

The '95 chambered in .45-70 Govt with an 18.5" barrel is a compact, rugged, powerful and manageable rifle suitable for taking down just about anything in the US inside of 150 yards and probably a good bit further. What's wrong with that or with appreciating that? I have rifles chambered for more powerful, longer-reaching, flatter-shooting cartridges as well. My enthusiasm for the .45-70 doesn't blind me to its limitations or the advantages of other cartridges. In much the same way, my enthusiasm for the '95 doesn't blind me to the use, advantages or practicality of the '94.

:)

PT1911
August 10, 2010, 12:25 AM
I have a puma 92 in 45 colt that i have every intention of reloading for to tailor some loads... BUT... I still have every intention of adding a 45-70 to the mix... Problem is, I am not sure whether or not to get the Marlin guide gun (I want it so bad) or go with with the H&R Buffalo Classic... I hear good things about both of them.

Why do I want a 45-70? Why the hell not? It is a classic cartridge that has an incredible amount of versatility. There is nothing deer size and up in the continental US that cannot be humanely taken down with it AND, one can reload to shoot accurately at some pretty incredible distances.... relatively speaking!

Ridgerunner665
August 10, 2010, 12:26 AM
+1 to what 1858 said.

Have you bought or reloaded any 458 Lott ammo lately...I have a 458WM, its kinda spendy to shoot it though.

saturno_v
August 10, 2010, 02:34 AM
Why do you guys hold 45/70 as some kind of gold standard of power? Why mess with the 1895 at all when you can get a repeater in 458 Lott.


That is an apples to oranges comparison....a slow, heavy, bolt action, "north of $1500" rifle compared to a handy lever action ~$500 rifle.

The cost of 458 Lott ammo (or brass) is nothing short of insane....do not get me wrong I will buy a 458 Lott (I love the interchangeability with the 458 WM) just for sake of completing my collection (I want a true elephant rifle in my stable) but I'm not planning to shoot it that much.....on the other side I plan to shoot my future 45-70 quite more....

Apples and oranges. The 1895 is a great rifle and a lot of gun for the money but it ain't a fifty. How about comparing the cost of the Big Horn to the cost of converting an 1886 to .50Alaskan? Not to even mention the significant difference in fit and finish between either and a $500 Marlin. Pointless to you maybe but fortunately, you don't get to pick everybody's guns.

Functionally it's a perfect oranges to oranges comparison.

I do not have hard data on hand but in terms of pure energy, the hot 45-70 loads should outperform the best 500 S&W loads out of a rifle barrel, with the 45-70 having better SD...however, let's assume they are equal in practice when it comes to killing power.

Then you can argue about fit and finish and it is ok with that....however the basic ~$500 Mod. 1895 is well finished...sure it may not have the Big Horn attention to detail but from the functional standpoint this is not relevant....again a perfect adequate functional comparison.

In the woods I rather getting a scratch on a $500 rifle than on a $2000 rifle....

Dr.Rob
August 10, 2010, 07:12 AM
1894 = Fast handling out to 125 yards or so before it drops like a rock. Mine won't chamber some 300gr handloads. Fun fun fun when doing CASS type shooting, plinking, trying to blow the guts out of a bowling pin. Unless you are shooting cowboy save the $$ and get the round barrel, adjustable sights and sling swivels on the standard model.

1895 = bigger thump, longer range, still like throwing a football, and you only get 4 shots. Still anything that needs more than 4 shots of 405gr ammo probably lives in Africa not the lower 48. Also available in a 'cowboy' octagon barrel full magazine version. Heavy as hell. Useful for shooting deer hiding behind 40's vintage Dodge sedans. Guide gun versions very popular in places where your daily commute involves a bush plane.

336 = probably does everything both of the above can do for most people. 3" 200 yard groups are possible, plenty of pop up close, and with 170 gr ammo suitable for most lower 48 game. What it lacks in sex appeal it makes up for in reliability and freezers full of game for century or so of use if cleaned and oiled regularly.

I have all three.

natman
August 10, 2010, 09:29 AM
If you shoot at the range over bags, there's not much reason to forego the potential extra power the 45-70 offers.

However, some people actually hunt and carry their gun all day and for them the light weight and fast handling of an 1894 are worthwhile advantages.

Old Time Hunter
August 10, 2010, 11:29 AM
The .444 and .450 Marlins are 44,000 CUP cartridges and the .308 Marlin Express is a 46,500 psi cartridge. I'm not sure about the .338 Marlin Express but it's probably similar to the .308 ME.

Dave Emary of Hornady is quoted as saying ...

“We load [the .308 Marlin Express] to 46,500 psi ... the 336 action will handle a bit more, but extraction can get sticky. We insist on smooth function.”

Leaves me wondering how much more. If the weak link is the locking lug on the lever, how much work would it take to make it safe for the .454 Casull. I notice that PUMA doesn't seem to be offering the .454 Casull M-92 rifles anymore.

:)
'Course you could go to a Winchester BB 94 and get a little more peace of mind:
When I thought I had the 444 all figured out, and tested, and game proved...Winchester tosses us a curve. Winchester brought out two versions of the 444 on the fatside ‘94 Big Bore. One is the Black Shadow with a synthetic stocks...and the other with wood. My synthetic stock B/Shadow has a 1 In 12 twist...wow does it like long heavy bullets, now the others have a 1 in 20 twist. The first several hundred Black Shadow 444s were fitted with 1 in 12 rifling... I’m not sure why Winchester then went to 1 in 20. Also the Big Bore 94 Winchester action is a lot stronger then the Marlin SS. Marlin has to have pressure around 40,000 to 45,000+lbs where the Winchester BB can go substantially higher 50,000 to 55,000 lbs. Might be a curve thrown by Winchester but it is a nice curve...



Back to the subject at hand, the reason for the .44 in a 1894 Marlin vs. a .45-70 in a Marlin 1895 is: Balance and handling, same caliber as your side arm...did you ever shoot a .45-70 hand gun? Under 150 yards, the critters don't know the difference unless you just wound them.

CraigC
August 10, 2010, 12:16 PM
Functionally it's a perfect oranges to oranges comparison.
Functionally you can compare an RG to a S&W Registered Magnum, a Ruger to a Freedom Arms, or a Henry to a Japanese Winchester. They all go bang when you pull the trigger. But anybody with any knowledge knows what the VAST difference is between the two. Same here. If you don't see the value in what amounts to a scratch-built custom rifle, thendon't buy one. Just don't tell me that there's no difference between a Uberti and a USFA, S&W and RG, Henry and Winchester, Ruger and FA, or Big Horn and Marlin.


In the woods I rather getting a scratch on a $500 rifle than on a $2000 rifle....
I'd rather get a scratch carrying whatever gave me the most pleasure to hunt with, regardless of what it costs. There are some people for whom the details of fit and finish are important. Some for whom it is critical and they are willing to pay for it. For me, I'd much rather have the joy of carrying a svelte little 5 1/2lb Merkel 28ga and impart wear on a $4000 work of art than to tote a synthetic stocked and soulless 870 because I'm worried about scratches. YMMV.

glockman19
August 10, 2010, 01:56 PM
As you mention the calibers have similar ballistics.

My choice was easy...I have a S&W 629 .44mag and the 1894SS pairs with it beautifully.

saturno_v
August 10, 2010, 02:23 PM
Functionally you can compare an RG to a S&W Registered Magnum, a Ruger to a Freedom Arms, or a Henry to a Japanese Winchester. They all go bang when you pull the trigger. But anybody with any knowledge knows what the VAST difference is between the two. Same here. If you don't see the value in what amounts to a scratch-built custom rifle, thendon't buy one. Just don't tell me that there's no difference between a Uberti and a USFA, S&W and RG, Henry and Winchester, Ruger and FA, or Big Horn and Marlin.



Again, no functional difference which was my point....then we can discuss about all the bells and whistles and I do recognize the differences there.

I'd rather get a scratch carrying whatever gave me the most pleasure to hunt with, regardless of what it costs.

You are one of the few ones, I tip my hat to you......I see so many times people bringing they Perazzis or other high end shotguns (or rifles for that matter) at the range and being literally paranoid about it.

Recently one fellow somehow got a mark on his highly customized Kimber 1911 and he was more hysterical than a teen ager girl at the concert of her favorite pop star.

Guns are machines not piece of jewellery IMHO....meant to be used and the use involves wear and the occasional scuff and scratch...if they are accurate, robust, reliable, with good triggers and ergonomics is all I need.

In the Marlin Lever case, they are a nice looking rifles, accurate, robust, ergonomic, well balanced and reasonably well finished, proven in the field for decades....I have no need to go higher than that in the same category.

Another aspect to consider (at least for me) is that Marlin is a big company with good and reliable customer service, there are millions of rifles everywhere and you can expect to be around for many more decades....I'm wary of shelling out thousands of dollars to a mom and pop firearm manufacturer in the middle of the nowhere (many firearm makers are very small operations) that may not be around 5 years from now.

I know more than one case of people that ended up having their high end piece as wall hanger (or having lots of trouble fixing it) because the company folded and there were no parts available.

jkingrph
August 10, 2010, 03:51 PM
My 1894 cowboy, 44mag is worlds apart from the 1895 cowboy, 45-70.

As said earlier bullets for the 44 top out at about 300 gr, and start at 300-350 and up for the 45-70. Really light loads in the 45-70 recoil more than moderate to heavy loads in the 44, plus it's a lighter handier rifle.

CraigC
August 10, 2010, 04:25 PM
I see so many times people bringing they Perazzis or other high end shotguns (or rifles for that matter) at the range and being literally paranoid about it.
I've seen it plenty of times too and it makes no sense to me either. While I do get pleasure from looking at my guns, regardless of what they cost, the real pleasure for me comes in using them. I am of the mind that I prefer to spend money on the guns I use the most and I have zero that I 'just' look at, let alone any that I don't shoot. I remember when I first noticed some wear on the fences of my little Merkel, I was actually excited. I am anal about taking care of them but not at the expense of the enjoyment I get from using them. IMHO, they cost too much NOT to use them. Life is too short!!!

ohwell
August 11, 2010, 01:03 AM
I have the 1894 Cowboy in 45 Colt I bought it to go along with my 45 Colt Blackhawk, I can share reloads between the 2 guns and I just plain liked the looks of the 1894 Cowboy

If you enjoyed reading about "Marlin 1894 vs. Marlin 1895...why bother with the 44 Mag. or 45 Colt??" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!