Which Marlins are best to avoid?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Their story was that Remington had to basically reverse engineer the 1894 after the initial problems to finally get it right

I think that this is correct. There are differences inside in mine and I think that they actually function better as a result.
An older JM Marlin Cowboy in .45 Colt that I owned from a few years before the Remington takeover had the rim of the cartridge actually drag along the inside of the receiver (which had been polished smooth) when extracting and ejecting. (Kind of like a Lee Enfield, if you are familiar with them) This resulted in weak ejection, though it did work.
Marlin rifles are supposed to hold the rim of the empty case enclosed in the breechface like the 1894 .44 and .357 versions and like the 336 versions in .30-30, .35 Remington, and .375 Winchester. Then the side-sprung ejector is able to pop the empty case out even if you operate the action slowly.
My new Marlin Cowboy in .45 Colt actually DOES hold the rim enclosed like it is supposed to.
Perhaps the bolt is very slightly wider to allow a lip on the ejector side, where the JM version was unable to do this when they originally adapted it from .44 magnum.
The cartridge lifter also seems more carefully shaped and fitted inside the receiver, although it looks like that is the result of careful automated machining.
 
Last edited:
I bought a Marlin 1895 SBL on Tuesday. Made in Sept 2019. I haven't shot it yet but I inspected it carefully and I'm very pleased. It's the smoothest Remlin I've handled and the fit and finish are fine.


20191001_155747.jpg
 
I bought my Remlin 444 (used!?)before they even had made it to distributors. The story is that the gun was acquired at SHOT Show by an acquaintance of someone who worked at Remington. That is who the person I got it from had gotten it from. This rifle changed hands 3 times before they were ever released. I got wind of a new production 444 that was in town through a few Marlin enthusiasts (I guess I have a reputation as a lever gun addict) and tracked it down on a classifieds site.

Their story was that Remington had to basically reverse engineer the 1894 after the initial problems to finally get it right more recently. Apparently they also preemptively did that with the 444 and that is why the release was about 5 years after the announcement.

How is the new 444? I have to say, I'm pretty keen on getting one of the new ones but have been wary of the Remlins. I know these are cut rifled but what twist rate ? I was actually checking load and zero on a n H&R 444 Handi Rifle that I will use for one of my sets elk hunting this year. This one has visible tool marks in the bore but it is scary accurate. My load is a Matt's Bullets 325 grs soup can over IMR3031 for 1820 fps. My first five shot group was the first cold an clean 3/4" high and the next three almost a perfect clover with the last just right of touching. All four five shot groups were under 1.5 MOA.

A repeater would be nice.
 
How is the new 444? I have to say, I'm pretty keen on getting one of the new ones but have been wary of the Remlins. I know these are cut rifled but what twist rate ? I was actually checking load and zero on a n H&R 444 Handi Rifle that I will use for one of my sets elk hunting this year. This one has visible tool marks in the bore but it is scary accurate. My load is a Matt's Bullets 325 grs soup can over IMR3031 for 1820 fps. My first five shot group was the first cold an clean 3/4" high and the next three almost a perfect clover with the last just right of touching. All four five shot groups were under 1.5 MOA.

A repeater would be nice.

1:20 Ballard rifling

I’m also getting about 1.5” groups with Hornady Superformance 265 gr FP

04A122D8-D7B3-4630-812B-2EEC16B190EF.jpeg

4” with 240 gr Remington. I keep getting a flyer in every 5 shot group with the Remington ammo that I cannot blame on myself.

With some Accurizing to the rifle and some handloads I think I could get sub-MOA.
 
I bought a new Marlin 1894 in 357 ten years ago. Hunted with it once and returned to my beloved 30-06. Sold it at auction and was pleased I got $875 for it
 
A .357 could never replace a 30-06.

For some reason the used .357 rifles carry a premium. Never even considered one myself when a .44 is available.
 
For some reason the used .357 rifles carry a premium. Never even considered one myself when a .44 is available.
I don't completely understand that either. My 1894C was a impulse purchase, NIB at a 50% off sale, and largely because I had a full crate of Lapua .38 +P "Gendarmerie" surplus ammo I much rather plink with a rifle than a revolver. Not a bad gun at all, a lot of fun to shoot and hunt roe deer with, but I definitely wouldn't have bought it for full price at the time, not to mention what they go for these days.
 
Their story was that Remington had to basically reverse engineer the 1894 after the initial problems to finally get it right more recently. Apparently they also preemptively did that with the 444 and that is why the release was about 5 years after the announcement.

There's some of the new ones on gunbroker, and out of curiosity I took a look. And they had pretty obvious fit and finish problems.

Looks like Remington still has a ways to go.
 
I don't completely understand that either. My 1894C was a impulse purchase, NIB at a 50% off sale, and largely because I had a full crate of Lapua .38 +P "Gendarmerie" surplus ammo I much rather plink with a rifle than a revolver. Not a bad gun at all, a lot of fun to shoot and hunt roe deer with, but I definitely wouldn't have bought it for full price at the time, not to mention what they go for these days.

You hit the nail on the head. Few people are hunting either, and the .357 is a superior plinker.
 
I bought a new 1894C in 357 this past Spring and love it so far. I previously owned an 1894CS that I bought used in the late 90's and sold around 2007.

Fit and finish are good on the new one and is about the same as the older model.

I can honestly say function wise the newer rifle is much better than the older rifle. The lever is much smoother. So much smoother it surprised me when I tried it at my LGS. The newwr model is also completely reliable with 38 spl ammo so far.

The only negative is the loading gate on the new gun, which is much stiffer than the older gun. Due to the stiffness you have to enter some hp rounds just right to get them to enter the gate properly.
 
There's some of the new ones on gunbroker, and out of curiosity I took a look. And they had pretty obvious fit and finish problems.

Looks like Remington still has a ways to go.

There are a few fit problems. Not so much finish....unless you count their atrocious “checkering”.

Here is my 444 wood to metal fit on the stock.
487E661B-2582-430E-B9DD-F809A001D749.jpeg B06975CE-7B55-46E2-A08D-379A90E43A3C.jpeg

I bedded it with Acraglas which I would have done regardless of the gaps
 
I bought a 336W on sale at Academy in 2009. It was everything you could hope for in a horrible rifle and more. I do believe the issues have pretty much been fixed and would buy another now.
 
1:20 Ballard rifling

I’m also getting about 1.5” groups with Hornady Superformance 265 gr FP

I recall that in the 1970s I bought one of the first year or two of production 1895 Marlins in .45-70.
(These had a straight grip stock and a half magazine with a slightly crescent shaped plastic butt plate.)

I mounted a really nice new Leupold 4X scope on it and hand loaded some 350 grain JSP bullets in new cases.
I must have lucked out with the load that I chose because I quite literally did shoot cloverleaf groups with that rifle at 100 yards.

So I'm not surprised that you are achieving the tight groups that you are with your .444 rifle.
 
I bought a Marlin 1895 SBL on Tuesday. Made in Sept 2019. I haven't shot it yet but I inspected it carefully and I'm very pleased. It's the smoothest Remlin I've handled and the fit and finish are fine.


View attachment 863451

That's a beauty! I read somewhere that the move Wind River helped boost Marlin sales, & lever actions in general, significantly. Jeremy Renner uses that exact rifle in the movie.
 
I can honestly say function wise the newer rifle is much better than the older rifle. The lever is much smoother. So much smoother it surprised me when I tried it at my LGS. The newwr model is also completely reliable with 38 spl ammo so far.

The only negative is the loading gate on the new gun, which is much stiffer than the older gun. Due to the stiffness you have to enter some hp rounds just right to get them to enter the gate properly.

I noticed that the loading gate seemed stiffer on my 1894C than with my .45 Colt and .44 magnum versions too.
However I think that it's just the fact that the cartridges are smaller in diameter, which gives you less surface area for your fingers to push against, which makes it a bit more difficult. The loading gate on all of them has the same amount of spring tension.

As for the difficulty in loading some rounds into the tube, that again has more to do with the smaller diameter of the cartridge. I can't say if JM Marlins had this problem or not, but it seems like there is a step on the hole inside the end of the receiver that cartridges pass through into the magazine tube. If this step exists in the .44 and .45 versions it is much smaller and doesn't seem to cause any problems.
However, with fairly blunt-ended .357 cartridges, or with really soft-nosed JSP rounds, the bullet can catch on that step unless the cartridges enter fairly straight through the loading gate.

I did read an article about CAS shooters bevelling this step in their .357 Marlins as part of the tuning process for faster reloading against the clock.

I found that with rounder-nosed bullets or my SWC rounds it was much easier.
Also, I think that the edge of this step wears down with use, which helps.
Also, I found that with practice it was not a real problem.
 
Last edited:
I noticed that the loading gate seemed stiffer on my 1894C than with my .45 Colt and .44 magnum versions too.
However I think that it's just the fact that the cartridges are smaller in diameter, which gives you less surface area for your fingers to push against, which makes it a bit more difficult. The loading gate on all of them has the same amount of spring tension.

That was the only mechanical gripe on mine too. I have noticed that after a couple hundred rounds it's getting better.
 
I noticed that the loading gate seemed stiffer on my 1894C than with my .45 Colt and .44 magnum versions too.
However I think that it's just the fact that the cartridges are smaller in diameter, which gives you less surface area for your fingers to push against, which makes it a bit more difficult. The loading gate on all of them has the same amount of spring tension.

As for the difficulty in loading some rounds into the tube, that again has more to do with the smaller diameter of the cartridge. I can't say if JM Marlins had this problem or not, but it seems like there is a step on the hole inside the end of the receiver that cartridges pass through into the magazine tube. If this step exists in the .44 and .45 versions it is much smaller and doesn't seem to cause any problems.
However, with fairly blunt-ended .357 cartridges, or with really soft-nosed JSP rounds, the bullet can catch on that step unless the cartridges enter fairly straight through the loading gate.

I did read an article about CAS shooters bevelling this step in their .357 Marlins as part of the tuning process for faster reloading against the clock.

I found that with rounder-nosed bullets or my SWC rounds it was much easier.
Also, I think that the edge of this step wears down with use, which helps.
Also, I found that with practice it was not a real problem.
My JM 1894 .357 was extremely difficult to load when I first got it a couple of years ago. I took the magazine tube apart and discovered that there was quite a bit of rust inside the tube, which wasn't a surprise since it was a 33-year-old rifle. I cleaned it, lubed it, replaced the steel follower with a brass follower, and slightly shortened the tube spring and that solved the problem. You want to be careful shortening that tube spring too much, but a coil or two shouldn't have any negative impact.
 
The loading spring upgrade from Ranger Point Precision is probably the very best upgrade you can do to a Marlin lever gun.

I have one on my 1894SS and will get one for every other Marlin I use regularly.
 
I would not buy one that wasn't made by Marlin. Remington is making plans to shut down it's Ilion plant & move to Arkansas as I understand it. The union is all upset & there is no way I would buy one now, not even a Remington.
 
Check out over at www.marlinowners.com
There is a thread on serial numbers that allows you to determine year of manufacture.
The last two years of Marlin production, and first 4-5yrs of Remington production are the ones to be suspicious of.
For the last two years, it’s the “droop” you have to be mindful of. (Misaligned lathe used to mill barrel channel) Remington “may” replace the reciever. Depends on model/caliber.

Remington production suffers from rough internal and external finishing, poor assembly, misalignment of sights, careless assembly, and cheap, poorly finished wood (stamped checkering on laminated wood, Or no-grain mystery wood).

I have a “Remlin” .338 MXLR. The rifle was sent back as part of a partial recall. Reciever was replaced with one with original serial number with a “B” suffix, also spline milled bolt was replaced with a plain one. But, it IS a .338MXLR. Perhaps only 5,000 were made. (I have two!). Got a DEAL on it as no one in middle Georgia knew what it was...
Yes! I suffer from marlinitis....over a dozen relapses, not to count the ones I’ve sold or traded...

These two are “Illion’s. ‘16 mfg. Bought two at $264 after rebates from walmart on clearance. Sold one NIB for $500. Second one shot the 3-shot 1-hole group at 50yds with 400gr Lee FN over 24.0gr of #2400... Bushnell 2-7x shotgun scope.

Very helpful. Thank you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top