a lever action 44mag ?
- Thread starter Wildbillz
- Start date
- Status
Badlander
Member
Your first instinct is right on! They can be converted to takedown. Wild West Guns can do it. Also hubble hadaway did some Not sure the latter is still in business.
Here is A link to A hubble hadaway 1894. http://www.marlinowners.com/forums/index.php/topic,29966.0.html
Here is A link to A hubble hadaway 1894. http://www.marlinowners.com/forums/index.php/topic,29966.0.html
Last edited:
WardenWolf
member
The Rossi / Puma 92's are available in .44 Mag. They're a fine choice. The 1894 is a bit larger and heavier, and was originally intended for light rifle cartridges like the .30-30 instead of pistol rounds.
Al Thompson
Moderator Emeritus
Excellent rifle/cartridge combination. I have the Marlin.
harrygrey382
Member
The Marlin 1894 is actually designed for pistol cartridges like the 1892 winchester. The 336/1895 action is Marlin's version of the 1894 winchester designed for rifle cartridges. So although the 1894 Marlin is more hefty than the 92 styles due to it's heavier build, it's still a lighter small action than the full length rifle actions.
Dave P
Member
Marlin Cowboy, with Skinner rear sight.
If you are getting the Marlin don't plan on shooting heavy bullets. I would look at the Rossi, I have one and it is a good shooting rifle. I like my Marlin 336 but the micro groove and twist on the 94's is only good for bullets under 250gr.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
The 1-38" twist of Marlin .44's is good up to and including 300gr bullets.
Funny thing, everyone seems to be pretty happy with theirs CraigC is right mnhntr. Your particular rifle may not shoot 300gr bullets well but that don't mean that other 1894 rifles don't. You should do some research before making false claims. That is like me saying that becuase my Marlin .30-30 don't shoot Y weight bullet that all Marlins won't shoot Y weight bullets well. All firearms are laws unto themselves some just don't like a particular combination that is just a fact of life.
Read this article by Glen Fryxell he has no problems with bullets up to 320gr out of his Marlin 1894 .44 mag.
http://www.lasc.us/FryxellMarlin1894.htm
Have you tried shooting cast bullets from your 1894 mnhntr?
Last edited:
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
Why do you think I posted, because I read it in a Marlin catalog???
I say this because it has happened with three different rifles that I kniow of and more that I have been told of. That does not make it a false claim. The fact is that a faster twist stabilizes a heavier bullet better. I offered my opinion to the OP, if you don't like my opinion get over it.
gathert
Member
I'll put another vote in for the Marlin. Lots of fun to shoot, recoil aint so bad, and I knocked a deer over with one. That was actually the first deer I shot and he went right down. Mine shoots minute of coke can over 100 yards.
Smaug
Member
I paid for a Marlin 1894 in .44 Magnum this week. Will pick it up in a couple more weeks.
I read up a bunch on them in the meantime. Most folks are happy with theirs. But there is the occasional mention of "The Marlin Jam" due to poor finishing.
Google it up. It I'd good reading.
Edit: it was not enough to scare me away from the gun. All it takes is some disassemble and cleaning up an edge here and there. It seems that Remington is not so great about their finishing of Marlins, since they bought them.
I read up a bunch on them in the meantime. Most folks are happy with theirs. But there is the occasional mention of "The Marlin Jam" due to poor finishing.
Google it up. It I'd good reading.
Edit: it was not enough to scare me away from the gun. All it takes is some disassemble and cleaning up an edge here and there. It seems that Remington is not so great about their finishing of Marlins, since they bought them.
Last edited:
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
Yours is the first claim I've heard of such inaccuracy. Thing is, if most of them will shoot bullets up to 300gr accurately but yours won't, it ain't the fault of the twist rate. My "S" model piles the 270gr Gold Dot in less than an inch at 100yds and does almost as well with 300gr XTP's.
Asherdan
Member
Not stabilizing bullets up around 300g, I've heard this a few times.
I have a pet theory about it, but it's theory only until someone can gather enough slugged barrel info and matched heavier bullet performance to compare. The Marlin 44 barrel can run a bit large (well, the New Haven barrels could), with some sampling up there over .431". The 1:38" twist can work with heavier bullets but when you combo that twist rate with a 300g bullet that's under groove size by .002 or more, well...
Like I said, just a theory.
BTW, my 1894's barrel is .4305" and it likes .432" cast and the .430" XTP's just fine, though the 240 does better than the 300 for me.
I have a pet theory about it, but it's theory only until someone can gather enough slugged barrel info and matched heavier bullet performance to compare. The Marlin 44 barrel can run a bit large (well, the New Haven barrels could), with some sampling up there over .431". The 1:38" twist can work with heavier bullets but when you combo that twist rate with a 300g bullet that's under groove size by .002 or more, well...
Like I said, just a theory.
BTW, my 1894's barrel is .4305" and it likes .432" cast and the .430" XTP's just fine, though the 240 does better than the 300 for me.
trstafford
Member
How does the Ruger 96/44 stack up?
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
Perfect twist rate but unfortunately the short magazine inhibits use of heavy bullets due to their length.
I think the M1894 is the way to go.
I am the original owner of a 44 Magnum M1894, I purchased it for $173.25 dollars, May 1983 at a K-Mart in Texarkana Texas. (I keep good records). You can gauge the level of inflation we have had over the last twenty years, because these rifles are now in the hundreds of dollars higher.
The microgroove barrels on these rifles were in a word: horrible. I sent the rifle back twice to replace, in my opinion, defective barrels. The first barrel clearly had some machining ring in the tube and both barrels varied in tube diameter. You could push a patch down the barrel and feel it stop and start as the barrel interior alternately grew larger and smaller. Discussing barrel quality with the factory guys , they verbally expressed contempt about their 1980’s barrels. I stopped sending the action back for barrels at the third microgroove barrel. While Marlin replaced two barrels for free, none of them were really better than any other and it was a futile experience and a waste of my time and effort.
I owned this rifle with the microgroove barrel for 18 years but I did not shot it much. Microgroove barrels, it would not accurately shoot lead bulleted pistol ammo. I do not cast my own, I purchase thousands of commercial cast bullets at gun shows, load them, and go shoot. The standard 240LSWC .429” lead pistol bullets would strip out at velocities greater than 1000 fps in a microgroove barrel. It was dismaying to compare 25 yard targets between the rifle and my pistols. Generally the pistol group at 25 yards was equal to or better than the rifle group with the same ammo. This was awful.
Jacketed bullets however shot reasonable well, about 4 inch or less groups at 100 yards.
In 1999 I found out that Marlin was making new “Ballard” barrels. I called up the factory and discussed replacing the microgroove barrel with a Ballard barrel. The gentleman at the factory told me that it would cost $130.00 to get this rifle rebarreled. When I mentioned that I was firing .429 cast bullets, the gunsmith informed me that the rifle barrels were made to SAAMI specs which called out for rifles a barrel interior dimension of .431”. Marlin claimed that their specifications for the barrels were 0.431 +- .001”. The factory guys were very positive about the quality of these late 90’s era barrels. I asked the gunsmith to find me a good barrel made to the minimum dimension. The gun smith air gaged a number of barrels and claimed that none were on the low end, I got the basic understanding that the barrels were all .431 with very little dimensional variation. Well that shows that production processes had improved in 18 years.
Marlin had not changed the 1:38” twist of the microgroove barrels nor was the groove depth significantly deeper than the microgroove barrel. In my opinion the difference between a Ballard barrel and a microgroove is a bunch of lands. This is a mistake in my opinion as my Ruger pistol barrels had much quicker barrel twists and were much deeper grooved, and shoot cast bullets very well.
When I received the rifle back from Marlin I noticed that the gunsmith had inserted small strips of cloth tape on the front inside of the handguard. The handguard had always been loose and I believe that this was his attempt to take out some of the movement.
When I took this rifle out and shot it, it shot horribly with lead bullets or jacketed bullets. I was very unhappy at this point.
First thing I decided to do was some load development. The rifle did not like commercial cast bullets, the best groups came with H110 and I was using standard 240 JHP’s. Any brand. Group size with the best ammunition was unimpressive.
I took my data before the powder manufacturers revealed they had been playing corporation games with us. H110 and W296 are the same. I came to the conclusion after examining my data, there is no essential difference between the two, grain for grain.
I decided to try to tighten things up in the hope that my group sizes would reduce. First thing I did was to soft solder the hanger bracket to the barrel. There is a bracket that keeps the foreend in place. The bracket fit into a dovetail on the bottom of the barrel. That dovetail was not very tight and the bracket would rotate/move within the dovetail. Using the copper pipe soft solder and fluxing paste with a blow torch permanently fixed the bracket in place. I only heated the bracket to the point where the solder melted. And then I took the heat off. I might have wrapped the barrel around that area with a wet towel to remove heat quickly. I did not want to get the barrel hot as I did not know if it was heat treated.
Next I decided to replace the cloth strips that the gunsmith put in the foreend with something more permanent. In the end I tightened up the forend using Accur Glass gel. I poured gel over the cloth strips, in between the handguard cap, and the butt of the forend. I wanted to take out any longitudinal and rotational movement between the forend, its mounting pieces, and the front of the receiver. Overall it worked. The forend is very solidly mounted.
Accuracy was improved but not as dramatically as glass bedding a bolt action. The rifle will shoot into four MOA at 100 yards. I am using a Williams rear and a post front.
I have noticed that pulling or pushing on the foreend greatly affects accuracy. Even though my forend is quite tight and does not rattle it is possible to pull it and move it out maybe a card thickness out from the receiver. Groups moved left and right on the target by at least eight inches depending on whether the forend is in or out.
I am the original owner of a 44 Magnum M1894, I purchased it for $173.25 dollars, May 1983 at a K-Mart in Texarkana Texas. (I keep good records). You can gauge the level of inflation we have had over the last twenty years, because these rifles are now in the hundreds of dollars higher.
The microgroove barrels on these rifles were in a word: horrible. I sent the rifle back twice to replace, in my opinion, defective barrels. The first barrel clearly had some machining ring in the tube and both barrels varied in tube diameter. You could push a patch down the barrel and feel it stop and start as the barrel interior alternately grew larger and smaller. Discussing barrel quality with the factory guys , they verbally expressed contempt about their 1980’s barrels. I stopped sending the action back for barrels at the third microgroove barrel. While Marlin replaced two barrels for free, none of them were really better than any other and it was a futile experience and a waste of my time and effort.
I owned this rifle with the microgroove barrel for 18 years but I did not shot it much. Microgroove barrels, it would not accurately shoot lead bulleted pistol ammo. I do not cast my own, I purchase thousands of commercial cast bullets at gun shows, load them, and go shoot. The standard 240LSWC .429” lead pistol bullets would strip out at velocities greater than 1000 fps in a microgroove barrel. It was dismaying to compare 25 yard targets between the rifle and my pistols. Generally the pistol group at 25 yards was equal to or better than the rifle group with the same ammo. This was awful.
Jacketed bullets however shot reasonable well, about 4 inch or less groups at 100 yards.
In 1999 I found out that Marlin was making new “Ballard” barrels. I called up the factory and discussed replacing the microgroove barrel with a Ballard barrel. The gentleman at the factory told me that it would cost $130.00 to get this rifle rebarreled. When I mentioned that I was firing .429 cast bullets, the gunsmith informed me that the rifle barrels were made to SAAMI specs which called out for rifles a barrel interior dimension of .431”. Marlin claimed that their specifications for the barrels were 0.431 +- .001”. The factory guys were very positive about the quality of these late 90’s era barrels. I asked the gunsmith to find me a good barrel made to the minimum dimension. The gun smith air gaged a number of barrels and claimed that none were on the low end, I got the basic understanding that the barrels were all .431 with very little dimensional variation. Well that shows that production processes had improved in 18 years.
Marlin had not changed the 1:38” twist of the microgroove barrels nor was the groove depth significantly deeper than the microgroove barrel. In my opinion the difference between a Ballard barrel and a microgroove is a bunch of lands. This is a mistake in my opinion as my Ruger pistol barrels had much quicker barrel twists and were much deeper grooved, and shoot cast bullets very well.
When I received the rifle back from Marlin I noticed that the gunsmith had inserted small strips of cloth tape on the front inside of the handguard. The handguard had always been loose and I believe that this was his attempt to take out some of the movement.
When I took this rifle out and shot it, it shot horribly with lead bullets or jacketed bullets. I was very unhappy at this point.
First thing I decided to do was some load development. The rifle did not like commercial cast bullets, the best groups came with H110 and I was using standard 240 JHP’s. Any brand. Group size with the best ammunition was unimpressive.
I took my data before the powder manufacturers revealed they had been playing corporation games with us. H110 and W296 are the same. I came to the conclusion after examining my data, there is no essential difference between the two, grain for grain.
I decided to try to tighten things up in the hope that my group sizes would reduce. First thing I did was to soft solder the hanger bracket to the barrel. There is a bracket that keeps the foreend in place. The bracket fit into a dovetail on the bottom of the barrel. That dovetail was not very tight and the bracket would rotate/move within the dovetail. Using the copper pipe soft solder and fluxing paste with a blow torch permanently fixed the bracket in place. I only heated the bracket to the point where the solder melted. And then I took the heat off. I might have wrapped the barrel around that area with a wet towel to remove heat quickly. I did not want to get the barrel hot as I did not know if it was heat treated.
Next I decided to replace the cloth strips that the gunsmith put in the foreend with something more permanent. In the end I tightened up the forend using Accur Glass gel. I poured gel over the cloth strips, in between the handguard cap, and the butt of the forend. I wanted to take out any longitudinal and rotational movement between the forend, its mounting pieces, and the front of the receiver. Overall it worked. The forend is very solidly mounted.
Accuracy was improved but not as dramatically as glass bedding a bolt action. The rifle will shoot into four MOA at 100 yards. I am using a Williams rear and a post front.
I have noticed that pulling or pushing on the foreend greatly affects accuracy. Even though my forend is quite tight and does not rattle it is possible to pull it and move it out maybe a card thickness out from the receiver. Groups moved left and right on the target by at least eight inches depending on whether the forend is in or out.
Code:
[SIZE="3"]M1894 Marlin, Ballard Barrel
240 Nosler JHP 24.0 grs W296 WLP Fed cases
23-Mar-05 T = 65° F
Ave Vel = 1725
Std Dev = 7
ES = 21
Low = 1715
High = 1736
N = 5
240 Nosler JHP 24.5 grs W296 WLP Fed cases
23-Mar-05 T = 65° F
Ave Vel = 1752
Std Dev = 12
ES = 28
Low = 1735
High = 1763
N = 5
240 Nosler JHP 24.0 grs H110 WLP Midway cases
23-Mar-05 T = 65° F
Ave Vel = 1710
Std Dev = 3
ES = 9
Low = 1705
High = 1714
N = 5
240 Nosler JHP 24.5 grs H110 WLP Midway cases
23-Mar-05 T = 65° F
Ave Vel = 1745
Std Dev = 12
ES = 45
Low = 1723
High = 1768
N = 10
240 Rem JHP 24.0 grs H110 WLP Midway cases
23-Mar-05 T = 65° F
Ave Vel = 1719
Std Dev = 10
ES = 29
Low = 1705
High = 1734
N = 10[/SIZE]doc6798
Member
44 mag
Check out rossi. I did, and i'm glad i did. Bourht one several months ago. They are priced right
Check out rossi. I did, and i'm glad i did. Bourht one several months ago. They are priced right
- Status
