JustsayMo
Member
That is one sweet looking combo. I would have trouble deciding on which caliber. I solved that in the blued version by buying them all.
My leaning would be to buy the 357 first. It would be a nice lightweight and compact package. My blued 18" 1894C is a handy carbine, the wife enjoys shooting it and it's inexpensive to feed.
However, my FAVORITE 1894 is in 44 magnum. IMHO it is THE perfect deer hunting rifle. The performace of the 44 magnum really shines without the punshiment of an equally performing load in a pistol. Even at with the 20" barrel it's easy and handy to carry. So that 16" barrel in stainless... VERY attractive.
Now one in 45 colt would be nice as it would make a good pairing with my Ruger Blackhawk. I'm not as crazy about the 45 colt in a rifle as most of the loads that are comparable to 44 Rem Mag in velocity/performance are listed for Ruger/Contender only. I'm sure the extra few hundred feet/second the longer barrel adds to the 45 colt round would be plenty to zip through a deer, even north to southways.
Dang. Now I want three!
My leaning would be to buy the 357 first. It would be a nice lightweight and compact package. My blued 18" 1894C is a handy carbine, the wife enjoys shooting it and it's inexpensive to feed.
However, my FAVORITE 1894 is in 44 magnum. IMHO it is THE perfect deer hunting rifle. The performace of the 44 magnum really shines without the punshiment of an equally performing load in a pistol. Even at with the 20" barrel it's easy and handy to carry. So that 16" barrel in stainless... VERY attractive.
Now one in 45 colt would be nice as it would make a good pairing with my Ruger Blackhawk. I'm not as crazy about the 45 colt in a rifle as most of the loads that are comparable to 44 Rem Mag in velocity/performance are listed for Ruger/Contender only. I'm sure the extra few hundred feet/second the longer barrel adds to the 45 colt round would be plenty to zip through a deer, even north to southways.
Dang. Now I want three!