Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by sabbfan, Oct 21, 2021.
Me?…I want 25-35 and a 38-55…probably in the same boat
several Midwest states don’t allow deer hunting with anything but straight-walled cartridges. I live in Ohio, so I like what .45/70 offers me for deer. I have a JM Guide gun in .45/70, but I typically hunt with my Winchester 1885 in .45/70.
Good point. I would rather have a 444 Marlin than a 45-70. Maybe thats one they will bring back. Hopefully with a 1/20 twist.
I hope to see one offered, but only if
it's working man affordable
If it's collector priced, I won't be interested
in the least.
I'll just keep looking for an older Marlin
built Marlin and they can keep the
The ones I've had/still have were built
right and will outlast me by more than a
few lifetimes with minimal care
“Run with a can” sounds like a David Allen Coe song.
It is, ol Dave is all about threaded stainless steel barrels.
Seems all the young whippersnappers want to be the next hidden James Bond style type what with their cans and whatsits and silencers. Back in MY DAY we shot magnums and centerfire rifles with no ear pro, and we LIKED it!
We can use straight walled cartridges in the "shotgun only" southern portion of Michigan, but they also put a case length restriction, so no 45-70. Pretty much limited to 45 Colt or 44 mag on the high end of the spectrum, 357 mag on the low end. 350 Legend and 450 are also allowed. Northern 1/2 of the state, no size limits, exvept that it must be a Center fire cartridge, I believe .223 or larger, for deer hunting
I'm like my name, oldschool. Blue and walnut for me. I've had a couple of laminated stocked rifles and they are ok. Personally, I just can't warm up to a composite stock. I understand the reasoning behind them, as well as stainless, just not my cup of tea.
the problem with most laminate stock are there shape, there never done as nice as a good rifle stock. Look at boyds there soulless. I hunt so I like ss and synthetic stocks.
It's what killed chrome plating.
Another reason for not blueing is rust, pure and simple. The newer generations wouldn't tolerate what we see in our older guns. There view is not only should they be proof against neglect, they shouldn't even wear in. I read posts from new handgun owners who are amazed cerakote wears off on rails, or the barrel lock up loses its finish where it contacts the slide. Their singular issue is simply no familiarity with moving parts and how those gain a patina of wear.
With that frame of mind handing them a blued firearm would be a CS complaint every time. Limited editions would sell out, but not a dedicated line.
Its in the very first post. Did you even read the thread before you posted?
A lot of people buy the short .45-70s because they are cool and shoot BIG BULLETS. 30-30s are not half as cool.
That's not so hard to beat.
I too am looking forward to a new Ruger Marlin in 444 Marlin. Huge fan the 45-70 but my flavor is a big heavy RB reproduction throwing 535 grs Postells over black powder. For a lever gun, I want the 444 throwing 300/325 gr pills over smokeless.
The later Remlins built with all new tooling and TDPs were fine. It was the earlier ones that they tried to produce on old, worn equipment after firing all the people who knew how to run said equipment that had major issues.
I can't see that coming. Ruger already did them, and box fed Lever guns have never been popular. I love lever rifles, have 17 of them. None are box fed, and I have no intention of adding such a critter. Among all my friends and family, there are many more levergun fans, and again, no interest in box magazine versions.
I wouldn't bet on these ever going that route. They didn't drop 30 million to acquire the TDPs, machines and tooling for billet receivers just to scrap it all, and a lot of folks would not want a cast receiver Marlin.
Small parts are likely, maybe even levers, but I doubt they'll go to cast receivers. Just no reason to completely redo everything when the CNCs that came with the purchase can turn an inexpensive block of steel into a finished receiver in minutes using the CAM files they also paid for which have heat treatment and surface treatments accounted for. Redoing all that stuff is not a small thing, would require all new machining fixtures in addition to the molds, and cast parts behave differently, so no part of the TDP would be salvageable.
Literally throwing away millions in tooling and development costs they already paid for to maybe save a nickel per receiver with casting over billet would make no sense, especially when it might cost sales.
It's a common misconception that younger generations dislike older things. They may not want rotary phones and carbureted engines, but there's no shortage of millennial and Gen Z shooters who like wood and blued steel lever guns.
Wanting to suppress lever actions is certainly not exclusive to "youths", either. Lever actions are particularly suitable hosts for a number of reasons.
I'm with ya on that, have an 1889 .32-20, two 1894s in .25-20 and an 1893 .25-35. But I think the odds of seeing any of those produced are pretty slim. There were some newer .25-20 and .32-20 1894 rifles, but IIRC, the .25-35 and .38-55 haven't been offered in a Marlin since the 1893 was discontinued in the 1930s.
Browning continues to make them, and now Henry has started, too, so I'm assuming some people are buying them. I thought my Browning BLR in .308 was a great Eastern woods gun; short, light, accurate, and powerful.
If Ruger can economically produce them, they could steal some of that market. It may not be big, but who can afford to leave anything on the table anymore?
The only hope I see is that Hornady is producing the 25-35 (along with 30-30 and 32 Win) in their LEVERevolution ammo. The case is the same for these three as well as the 38-55. It should not be very difficult to produce these four calibers with not much more than a barrel change….https://www.hornady.com/ammunition/rifle/#!/
I was unaware, that's good news! I handload, so don't much care about factory ammo availability, but brass has been expensive and difficult to find, and I always like to see nice old cartridges like that stick around, even get some revival. It's a great moderate range deer round. I'm probably going to use mine to harvest mulies on my property this year, as I live my quarterbores, but my beloved .25-06 is just too dang destructive at these close ranges. I also have a model 14 in .25 Rem and a Standard Arms G in .25 rem that I'm tempted to use, but those two aren't suppressed, so.....
Separate names with a comma.