Quantcast
? What years were "pre-RemMarlington" Marlin lever rifles? Model '92 in .357 - THR
THR  

Go Back   THR > Tools and Technologies > Rifle Country

Welcome to THR
You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have, access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!


If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please visit the help section.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old October 17, 2014, 12:02 AM   #1
200Apples
Member
 
 
Join Date: July 6, 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 311
? What years were "pre-RemMarlington" Marlin lever rifles? [Edit] Model '94 in .357

.
Ever since I shot a (recently-manufactured) .357 ReMarlington lever, I've wanted one for my own. I have a line on a "pre-ReMarlington" Marlin Model [Edit" Model '94] in .357 that appears to be in fine condition save for a couple bad knicks in the forend furniture. Saddle-ring, side-eject. I put a deposit on it.

[Edit: 10-17-12

I visited the rifle today at my local gun shop. It was indeed mislabeled. With my limited knowledge of most leverguns, I thought I'd stumbled onto something even "neater" than it is. I have a Win '94 in .30WCF, been wanting a '92, but it looks like I'll have to have it in a Winchester. Meanwhile, I'm going ahead with the purchase of this Marlin, 'cause I've also wanted a .357-chambered lever carbine.]

What can the Marlin lever cognoscenti tell me? Thank you very much! in advance.

:-)
__________________
.
"The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts." - Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson, 1943

"Surely you have noticed the extent to which thinking is going out of style." - Jeff Cooper, January, 2000

Last edited by 200Apples; October 17, 2014 at 08:10 PM. Reason: Not a Model '92
200Apples is offline  
Old October 17, 2014, 12:07 AM   #2
WestKentucky
Member
 
 
Join Date: February 1, 2014
Posts: 1,685
They are hardish to find for a reasonable price. I have seen them in similar condition to what you describe with 700 bucks on the pricetag.
__________________
"There is nothing wrong with America that faith, love of freedom, intelligence, and energy of her citizens cannot cure" -Dwight D. Eisenhower
WestKentucky is offline  
Old October 17, 2014, 12:10 AM   #3
DPris
Member
 
 
Join Date: November 4, 2007
Posts: 2,988
Not a 92, for one.
It'd be an 1894 if Marlin .357.

The pre-Rem cutoff is not an absolute guarantee, QC was going noticeably downhill the lest year or so before the Rem takeover.

If old enough, should be a nice gun.
Mine is over 10, very fond of it.

Some will cycle .38s, some won't.

Some will develop the lifter problem that causes unreliable cycling with .357s, most won't.

Keep the lever screw & the one in front of it tight, or you'll probably induce malfunctions.
Denis
DPris is offline  
Old October 17, 2014, 08:07 PM   #4
200Apples
Member
 
 
Join Date: July 6, 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 311
.
DPris/Denis is correct. The carbine had been mislabeled. See first post.

Going ahead with the purchase anyway, because a .357 lever carbine is a rifle I've wanted for a couple of years.

I'd love to hear more experiences with this make, model and chambering. Thanks again!


:-)
__________________
.
"The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts." - Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson, 1943

"Surely you have noticed the extent to which thinking is going out of style." - Jeff Cooper, January, 2000
200Apples is offline  
Old October 17, 2014, 08:25 PM   #5
Gordon
Member
 
 
Join Date: December 26, 2002
Location: central Kali.
Posts: 7,263
First year for the 1894 .357 was 1979 , I bought one that year and my son still has it it feeds .38 spls very well except full wadcutters. I think in 1985 they started putting on cross bolt safeties and those guns are not quite as nicely finished as the earlier ones IIMHO.
__________________
Bring me two 1911s,
I want one for each hand,
We'll set sail with Colonel Cooper,
Though we never leave dry land,
All the goblins, I've forgot 'em,
I buried them in the sand
So give me two 1911s,
one for each hand.
Gordon is offline  
Old October 18, 2014, 01:51 AM   #6
LocoGringo
Member
 
 
Join Date: February 9, 2013
Location: Knoxville, TN
Posts: 33
Remington's takeover of Marlin was in 2011, so rifles made before 2011 would be "pure" Marlin. Not sure about other models, but I've been looking at Marlin 1894 rifles in 45-70 and the Pre-Remington Marlins command a premium and also have a proof mark of "JM" on the barrels.
LocoGringo is offline  
Old October 18, 2014, 07:31 AM   #7
Lafitte
Member
 
 
Join Date: July 24, 2014
Location: East Texas
Posts: 33
1894 chambered for 45/70?? Check again, I think it would be a 1895. Quiet different from an 1894.

Lafitte
Lafitte is offline  
Old October 18, 2014, 08:33 AM   #8
Rodman579
Member
 
 
Join Date: October 17, 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 47
if you look on the barrel and it has a JM stamp then its not a Remlin. making one run with 38s is not difficult at all, but wacutters or semi-wadcutters are never going to feed reliably in a lever action rifle because of the sharp shoulder of the bullet. i have worked on a ton of Marlins as i tune guns for CAS. i have worked on several Remlins, they all had more tooling marks internally and took more work to get them to run correctly but all turned out ready to go.
Rodman579 is offline  
Old October 18, 2014, 10:07 PM   #9
1madss
Member
 
 
Join Date: August 10, 2011
Posts: 112
I have a 1894 in 357 that has a SN that starts with 22. Maybe just a very early 1979 gun, but I'm happy that it does run RN and SWC 38s no problem.

Where is the SN on the gun? Tang or side of the receiver. I don't recall off the top of my head when that changed, but it was far before the buy out/factory move. A gun with the SN on the tang pretty much guaranteed to be a JM gun. Apparently the years close to the factory move are very hard to ID. I was quite happy to score a early gun so it was a non-issue for me.

Head over to Marlinowners.com and you will learn volumes on how to ID a JM vs Remlin gun.
1madss is offline  
Old October 18, 2014, 10:30 PM   #10
RainDodger
Member
 
 
Join Date: August 20, 2009
Location: Great Northwest
Posts: 1,027
You're gonna love a carbine in .357. I ended up with a Uberti '73 in .357 and it's a gem to shoot. I think it's a really fun caliber in a lever action.
__________________
Roger
Life Member, NRA, since 1975
Hand Loading since '69
U.S. Naval Aviator, Retired
RainDodger is offline  
Old October 19, 2014, 08:09 AM   #11
Vince45
Member
 
 
Join Date: June 6, 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 9
I have a 357 Marlin 94 bought new in circa 2002 , its a gem will never sell it , shoots 38 semi wad cutters fine and handloaded with the Hornady 158 grain XTP projectile is effective on pigs and small deer breeds Fallow / Whitetail to 100 yards . Mine has a Burris 2x7 which is ideal .
__________________
177 22 357 303 30845 12g 223 next .....
Vince45 is offline  
Old October 19, 2014, 10:53 PM   #12
LocoGringo
Member
 
 
Join Date: February 9, 2013
Location: Knoxville, TN
Posts: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafitte View Post
1894 chambered for 45/70?? Check again, I think it would be a 1895. Quiet different from an 1894.

Lafitte
Yep, you're right. I used to have an 1894 in .45 colt for Cowboy Action and that's the number that popped into my head. It's hard to keep all the numbers straight...
LocoGringo is offline  
Old October 19, 2014, 11:23 PM   #13
stonecoldy
Member
 
 
Join Date: November 30, 2008
Posts: 335
Best place is to go to "MarlinOwners" forum, you will find all of the info you need on the 1894C there.
stonecoldy is offline  
Old October 20, 2014, 02:33 AM   #14
200Apples
Member
 
 
Join Date: July 6, 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 311
.
Thanks again, everyone.

Say, I just clicked onto Marlinowners dot com's forum index page and immediately, Microsoft Security Essentials went into red flag mode.

Don't have time tonight to sort it all out and I've a busy schedule the next two days, so... I'll get back over to M.Owners soon as.

The carbine is on layway; I expect to be able to start the paperwork in a week or two, beginning that wonderful 10-day wait to bring this home.

Cheers!


:-)
__________________
.
"The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts." - Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson, 1943

"Surely you have noticed the extent to which thinking is going out of style." - Jeff Cooper, January, 2000
200Apples is offline  
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation by vB Optimise.
This site, its contents, Shooting Reviews, and its contents are Copyright (c) 2010-2013 Firearms Forum, Inc.
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER
Although The High Road has attempted to provide accurate information on the forum, The High Road assumes no responsibility for the accuracy of the information. All information is provided "as is" with all faults without warranty of any kind, either express or implied. Neither The High Road nor any of its directors, members, managers, employees, agents, vendors, or suppliers will be liable for any direct, indirect, general, bodily injury, compensatory, special, punitive, consequential, or incidental damages including, without limitation, lost profits or revenues, costs of replacement goods, loss or damage to data arising out of the use or inability to use this forum or any services associated with this forum, or damages from the use of or reliance on the information present on this forum, even if you have been advised of the possibility of such damages.