Marlin 1894 in .357 or .44?

[roberth5050]

i have noticed that the .44 version of the 1894 is a lot easier to come across than the .357. is there really that big a difference between the two? i am not really going to be hunting, mostly plinking, i will be doing lots of shooting on a ranch and at the range, if i were to hunt the biggest would be deer, maybe pig. Basically my main question is are they really that different? Will the .44 be too much firepower compared to the .357 etc...etc.... Thanks! what about the 336? Thanks!

 

[oerllikon]

I know the 336 is a great rifle, but mine is 30-30 not a revolver round. I wanted to look into an 1894 in 357 as well. I dont have a huge interest in owning a 44 because I would like to have a revolver in the same caliber. Doing cowboy action?

 

[greyling22]

I have both. 44mag has a LOT more punch to it that the 357. not bad if I'm standing, but hurts me off a bench (skinny 155lbs guy, no padding on the shoulder). 357 makes a much better plinker, and is perfectly capable of taking a deer or hog out to 100 or so yds. I mostly bought the 44mag because I wanted a stainless 1894, and they didn't offer the 357 at the time. But if I was going to recommend 1 gun, I would say get the stainless 1894 357 with the 16" barrel.

My 115lb wife shoots the 44mag standing without a problem, though she finds i heavy, she loves the 357.

PS: 357 is harder to find than 44 because the cowboy shooters are moving away from big bore to small bore.

 

[teumessian_fox]

44mag has a LOT more punch

Now, that statement boggles my mind. Punch was one word I never used in relation to my 1894. I always felt like it was more akin to a pellet gun. And I reloaded some pretty hefty loads.

I sold it. Now my go-to lever gun is an older Browning lever in 308.

To the OP, the 1894 in 44 will never be too much firepower. Either caliber will be fine for your purposes.

 

[greyling22]

I'm recoil shy, what can I say? neither one kicks like a 30/30 though. My very unscientific guess puts 44mag recoil about 40% harder than 357, and 357 kicks about like a 223 but without the muzzle blast.

 

[hirundo82]

If it is for plinking and some deer and hog hunting, I'd definitely go with the .357.

They're hard to find because everybody loves theirs and would never consider selling it.

 

[epijunkie67]

They both have similar ranges and recoil for either shouldn't be a problem for anyone able to hold the weapon and fire it accurately.

The .44 will obviously have more downrange punch but either is fine for light hunting duty inside their effective range, about 125 yards or so. If you aren't really going to hunt with it you may want to consider the costs of ammunition into the equation. .44 mag tends to run quite a bit higher than .357. Over the life of the gun you'll spend a lot more feeding the 44 over the 357.

The other question is, do you have a revolver to combo with this rifle? If not then no big deal, but if you've already got a revolver then getting a matching carbine might make sense.

 

[roberth5050]

thanks everybody! i think i am going to order a .357 (on back order at the moment) from marlinfirearmssource.com. Does anybody have any experience with them?

 

[Nail Shooter]

Got both of those (most recently the 357 version). And you are right, it's very hard to find the Marlin in 357 as I looked for 5 yrs before finding one. If you can't find 'em and lots of people want 'em, the company needs to ramp up production, right? We'll see if Remington makes more. Luckily, I found one of the last New Haven, Marlin made ones.

The 44 mag version kicks HARD with magnum load rounds. The Marlin 1894 series is straight stocked and maybe that contributes to the recoil. So far, I find the 357 is much more enjoyable to shoot. I don't hunt but feel confident that either rifle would do well with a heavy hunting load up to deer sized animal. Regards,

Nail

 

[MyRoad]

I have both.

One thing to consider is that .44 ammo is more expensive, and .44 special is hard to find at all.

I would caution you to be very wary of buying any Marlin with a SMOOTH stock -- at this point I will only get the ones with the checkered stocks.

The smooth stock ones -- and I own one in .44 and had (sold) one in .357 -- were made to be sold at budget stores (here in Oregon, its "Big 5"), and they don't appear to be the same quality as the checkered stocks. Actually, in the last few years there have been a serious number of complaints about Marlin's falling quality in general, but there were a lot of specific quality issues with the budget models. I can be more explicit with my experiences if you like, but I don't want to hijack this into a Marlin-bashing thread. Safe to say, cycle the lever several times both slowly and quickly at the store before you leave with it, and make sure it cycles smoothly and properly.

My .44 mag is finicky about ammo, and won't cycle .44spl. at all. My .357 (with a checkered stock) works perfectly and will eat anything. If I saw a stainless .357 -- especially one with the laminate stock -- I'd buy that in a heartbeat.

 

[Dr.Rob]

The .44 kicks harder than the .357. Both are 100 yard guns. The 357 shoots a little flatter. The 44 drops like a rainbow after 120 yards or so.

The 336 has a lot more range in .30-30 or .35 Remington (over 200 yards) though it was offered in .44 mag for a brief time. The 336 uses a more solidly built action with a sliding bolt and a closed in receiver. The 1894 models use an open sided receiver. Both are plenty tough for pistol calibers but the 1894 cannot fire 'rifle' ammo.

 

[CraigC]

Some of the Cowboy models have smooth, uncheckered black walnut stocks. Certainly not a "budget" model. They are, however, less finished birch stocked 336's with pressed checkering so the presence or absence of checkering is not an indication of much.

The .357 becomes a different animal in a rifle. Much more appropriate for deer-sized game than when fired from a handgun. I'd consider the .357 a 75-100yd rifle but the .44 can carry its load rather well to 150yds.

Recoil is highly subjective. I've always found a .44Mag levergun to recoil very lightly, even with heavy loads and even when compared to the relatively mild .30-30.

 

[Dr.Rob]

If you pay the $$ for the cowboy model, expect nicer wood. And expect to pay $200 more.

 

[CraigC]

Not really nicer wood, you're paying for the Badger octagon barrel. Their wood is all the same grade of american black walnut. My "S" model has nicer wood than my Cowboy. It's all just luck of the draw.

I don't think I've ever seen an 1894 with birch either so really don't know what MyRoad is talking about.

 

[MyRoad]

...really don't know what MyRoad is talking about.

If you Google "Big5 Marlin Problem", you'll see posts from forums all over the net.

I bought my "Big5" 1894 about 5 years ago, maybe the problems have cleared up. At the time I tried to go back and get another one for my brother, but the lever on the second one they had would not cycle, right out of the box. My .44mag has a smooth stock and its had all kinds of issues.

There was a lot of speculation at the time, because it seemed doubtful that Marlin would produce two different levels of rifles, chances are they have one facility and all the basic parts on any model should be identical (that's just practical production logic). It was a $500 rifle that Big5 periodically put 'on sale' for $335, which was a great deal, but then problems started showing up with them. The one I had worked fine, I only sold it because I found one with a checkered stock (bought from another forum member) and I didn't need two.

In rereading my previous post, I realize that I might have been wrong in identifying all smooth stock 1894 as Big5 models -- sorry for that. That's just how I have differentiated them, but Marlin might have other smooth stock models I'm not aware of. It may have just been a bad run during a certain period of time, I was just suggesting that anyone buying one check it carefully before leaving the store.

 

[snakeman]

Go for the 44 if pig hunting is even a possibility. Unless you like a real challenge the 357 just isn't going to knock anything down. I want a 357 rifle but that's just because I like the challenge of up close and personal. If you are just plinking with it i would get the 357.

 

[hirundo82]

The other question is, do you have a revolver to combo with this rifle? If not then no big deal, but if you've already got a revolver then getting a matching carbine might make sense.

That's an excellent point. In my case there wasn't any question in my mind which I should get since I already had two revolvers in .38 and .357. My 1894C pairs perfectly with my GP100.

 

[Hanzerik]

I have two .44Mag rifles (Rossi/Puma) and both feed anything smoothly (never tried specials). I see no point in using specials since I can load down to special velocities/power in mag cases, My current load of choice is a Ranch Dog 265gr (270gr with a gas check installed) over a charge of 17.5gr of 2400. The bullets were designed for the Marlin .44/.444 and are a little larger, in diameter, then your standard cast bullets which are usually .430. The Ranch Dog bullets are cast to .432 which solves the problem Marlins had with over-sized bores, but work just fine in other .44Mag guns.

I thought of getting a .357 but decided on the .44mag because it would do a better job on the types of game animals I'm likely to hunt in this part of the country; Deer, Antelope, Elk, maybe even moose loaded with some heavy 300gr bullets.

I also had a Marlin .44Mag Cowboy Limited which was a fine rifle but sold it, because I prefer the 1892 action. Sure mounting optics is harder on the 1892, but I figure that iron sights will be just fine within the distance limitations/capabilities of pistol caliber rifles.

I also picked up a Ruger .44Mag SBH 4 5/8" barrel to go along with the two rifles.

 

[deacon8]

Without a doubt, I would go with the .44 mag. I would also probably never buy a rifle chambered for .357 mag. I've thought about it quite a bit, but I guess I don't see the logic behind it.

 

[epijunkie67]

Without a doubt, I would go with the .44 mag. I would also probably never buy a rifle chambered for .357 mag. I've thought about it quite a bit, but I guess I don't see the logic behind it.

I think that depends on where you live and what you plan on doing with it. If you are just going to be taking it to the range then the .357 is going to be cheaper to feed, especially if you don't reload. If you don't hunt anything bigger than rabbit and coyote then you don't really need anything bigger than a .357. And don't forget people that want a companion piece to their revolver.

All very valid reasons for a rifle chambered in .357.

 

[Dr.Rob]

In my experience the wood is a nicer on a CB Limited model than your average 1895 Guide Gun or 336, it's not circassian walnut, but more likely to have some figuring.

 

[Harley Quinn]

If you are interested in shooting a revolver round like 357, I would do a step up and shoot the 35 Remington, it is one that I have and like...

It can be loaded with the pistol and rifle bullets... Better than the 357 or 44 imho...