Does Marlin not make a .357 Lever Gun Anymore?

Yep. The .22LR model 39 isn't on the Marlin website anymore either.

It would seem that Henry has taken that market from Marlin.

The lack of current production Marlins in. 357 has certainly propelled the used prices skyward....I bought a Rossi M92 instead.

chicharrones said:

Yep. The .22LR model 39 isn't on the Marlin website anymore either.

It would seem that Henry has taken that market from Marlin.

Click to expand...

A pot metal Henry can't hold a candle to a Marlin 39.

The Marlin .357 has been "suspended" for about four years.
Two years ago they said they were ready to bring it back & sent me a new sample.
Since then, they have not been able to get it back into a production basis, but they're trying.

The 39 has been suspended for about the same length of time & was also supposed to be back out by now.

As for the "pot metal Henry" not being able to hold a candle to a Marlin 39, how do you justify that statement?
Denis

I have noticed Marlin seems to be making 1895s again in 45/70, the one's I've seen look good to go.

Maybe their lawyers are worried about tube fed pistol caliber carbines.

DPris said:

As for the "pot metal Henry" not being able to hold a candle to a Marlin 39, how do you justify that statement?
Denis

Click to expand...

Just an opinion

I had a Henry. 17HMR for a period of time until the black coating on the Zamak "pot metal" started coming off near the ejection port and I could see zamak after about 200 rounds. Sold it and bought an Winchester 9422. The Henry was accurate enough and reliable but not even close to the quality of the older receivers in my opinion. The Henry's serve a great role as affordable lever guns, but my tastes run older, when steel receivers were the norm. I think if Henry would make their receivers out of forged aluminum the reception would be much greater.

The other thing that I can't get over with Henry is no side loading gates on their big bores. But to each their own.

Other than my personal opinions, Henry seemingly is a great American company, their products just don't do it for me.

Hell, does Rossi even make 357 lever actions anymore? Haven't seen one on Bud's for months.

Are not Marlins tubular mags? A lot of people seem to be wining about how the Henrys load. For us that are older if you can remember some 22s of the past that had a tube feed. Nylon 66 for one, and there are others. Never heard any one winning about loading those shooters. Please do not knock it untill you try it.

Question for DPris: I know you know a lot about Henry's, have you ever heard if there is any problems with Zamak shrinking to the point of problems? I'm ignorant to much of the Zamak properties but I was told that it will shrink over time.

0ne3 said:

Are not Marlins tubular mags? A lot of people seem to be wining about how the Henrys load. For us that are older if you can remember some 22s of the past that had a tube feed. Nylon 66 for one, and there are others. Never heard any one winning about loading those shooters. Please do not knock it untill you try it.

Click to expand...

Rimfires are tubular, big bore Marlins, wins, etc are side loading. The big bores for Henry are tube loading as well I believe, that is the distinguishment between manufacturers.

I traded for a Taurus Thunder Bolt/Colt Lightning copy. It is the 38/357 caliber also discounted. I took it off the table before I sold it. I have had that fun rifle for 2 years.
http://www.taurususa.com/product-details.cfm?id=403&category=Rifle

Mosin Bubba said:

Hell, does Rossi even make 357 lever actions anymore? Haven't seen one on Bud's for months.

Click to expand...

They come in waves. It seems they make a run and everyone has them, then they disappear for a while.

I don't care for Zamak but it is plenty strong for rimfires. I don't think Henry centerfires are made with Zamak.

I don't mind a tube loaded rimfire. Don't want one in a centerfire.

The Zamak 5 formulation that Henry uses in their RIMFIRES has such a minor "shrink percentage" that you'll never notice it & neither will your kids. It's a very stable material.
It won't affect function, it won't even be detectable without some very precise measurement capabilities.
Just not an issue.

As far as not holding a candle to a 39 goes, I have a 39 variant that's somewhere between 12 & 15 years old.
I also have the Henry Golden Boy that I personally ran 28,000 rounds through in three months last Fall.

The Henry busted one locking bar spring well into the test, easily replaced, and still functioned even with the spring in three pieces through several thousand more rounds to finish up.
I replaced the extractor late, but I'm not entirely sure it needed it.

The Henry was far slicker out of the box than the Marlin is now, after I don't know how many rounds I've run through the Marlin over the years.

The Henry was more accurate new than the Marlin, and I haven't fired the Marlin for accuracy in recent years, but I'd suspect the Henry still is more accurate.

Fit & finish are better on the Henry.

I also have my Grandpa's Marlin pre-39 .22 levergun, dating from 1910-ish.
My earliest memory of that gun as a kid was when it would have been roughly 50 years old, and it had a busted bolt (front inch cracked completely through) at the time.

The idea that a Henry .22 levergun can't hold a candle to a marlin 39 doesn't jibe with my experiences.
Just as accurate, if not more so.
More than durable enough for a lifetime of shooting.
And a quality rifle despite the alternative construction that bugs so many people.

Track down a copy of the 28,000 GB run in the current Guns Of The Old West Magazine.
The thing wasn't even cleaned till it got to 22,000 rounds & it was still running.
Try that with a Marlin & after 28,000 rounds through one, tell me again the Henry can't hold a candle to it.

As far as the finish on the "black" rimfire lever models goes, Henry offers a range of pricing & features that Marlin never has & never will.
The black receiver covers are used on the entry to mid-level models.
You get up into the higher-end Golden Boy & I'll tell you that brassy receiver cover coating is hellaciously tough.
Even using a glove through most of the endurance run, it shows no signs whatever of wearing off.
Denis

I thought I shoot a lot, but not 28k rounds in 3 months. That is over 300 a day, every day... I can't hold a candle to that.

Permanent wrist damage.
I wouldn't advise it, but the point there is that the "pot metal" holds up.
It was a STEEL part that broke.

The gun was shipped to Henry for an in-depth eval to see what had worn, with a request to ONLY replace parts either worn out or getting close to being worn out.
I got it back with a new spring, no charge.
They replaced nothing else.
Denis

@DPris: I've always wondered of the Zamak would shrink enough to be a problem on a 100 year old gun, just a curiosity. As there are lots of 100 year old passed down firearms out there.

When I first bought my Henry I was wanting a golden boy but decided on their varminter model, looks like I would probably still own it if I had bought the tougher brass coating. I'm still partial to the old iron, but the Henry's do serve a market.

Is there a black finish offered on the Henry's that's as tough as the brass finish or does one want to stick with brass if he wants a tougher finish?

ColtPythonElite said:

A pot metal Henry can't hold a candle to a Marlin 39.

Click to expand...

New gun sales is what I'm talking about. Both for the .357 and the rimfire Marlins.

I have a 39 that I bought new in the early 1990s for around $300. I wish I would have bought an 1894C years ago, but I never saw one in person when I had the money.

Hanzo581 said:

Side note, I looked at Henry, I am sure they are fine rifles but I don't want a tubular magazine, I much prefer side loading.

Click to expand...

Me too, but I sure have looked at the pros and cons of receiver loading versus loading in the tube. I've come to the decision that the fast and clean unload out of the Henry isn't a bad thing, just different. So, I'm really thinking of getting a Henry Big Boy Steel Carbine in .357 when my next gun purchase time comes along.

I was having lunch in the Valley (local slang for Ilion) and a project manager for Marlin was talking about 45 Colt or 357 lever guns. I reminded him that the 357 had such a small following that I wonder why anyone would make a rifle or pistol for it. He laughed a punched me in the stomach. Deservedly so. Just kidding.

I have a couple friends that work at the Arms and they both indicate that they are working on it. I just picked up an 1894 in 45 Colt. One does QA and said the only problems he's been finding with the 1894 is loose screws on the tube mag. I checked mine and it was good.

I looked at the Henry's and they seem very Marlin like. Side eject and also in the way the bolt locks up. They are pretty sweet. My dad has been looking for one, he has a kazillion pieces of brass and bullets for the 357.

Hanzo581 said:

They are side gate loading (though I guess technically into a tubular magazine). I have a Marlin Model 60 tube feed, love the gun, hate the reload procedure. If it works for you great, I like more efficient designs.

Click to expand...

I don't see how one could say one method of loading is better than the other. It all boils down to preference. I too have a Marlin Model 60 and the tube loading is fine. On a centerfire lever action I prefer gate loading so I'll never own a Henry, but sure wouldn't mind a Henry .22 mag non Golden Boy.

I also feel Henry's are a little slicker out of the box than Marlin, but I'll still take a Marlin 30-30 over a Henry strictly because of loading method.

Another line of thought. How could it be called a Henry if it wasn't tube loaded?