Any opinions on which rifle is the better product; a Rossi M92 in .357 mag. or a Marlin 1894C also in .357? Looking to have a good trail gun and back up deer rifle for close quarters hunting. Also am going with the .357 since the ammo is cheaper than the .45 LC or .44 Magnum. I don't reload and don't care for recoil after a lot of shooting.
Rossi M92 Vs. Marlin 1894C
- Thread starter DavidB2
- Start date
- Status
eastbank
Member
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2009
- Messages
- 5,021
i would go with a older marlin,i had a few rossie,s and to be frank i was not satisfied with them,they needed to be worked on and the cost difference is not great, could you may get a marlin that needes work, maybe. but it is easy to work on and parts are easy to get. the win 94,s are just a too long action for the pistol sized cartriges. eastbank.
Last edited:
I have looked at the exploded diagrams for 1892 actions and the disassembly instructions and a M92 is more complicated to clean than a M1894.
All you have to do to clean a M1894 is remove the lever screw, pull the bolt and ejector, and you can clean the barrel from the rear. You can still get in there and wipe some fouling out.
A complete take down of the Marlin is seldom needed.
I just looked at the Rossi page, they make a 92 in 454 Casull. That must kick like a mule!
All you have to do to clean a M1894 is remove the lever screw, pull the bolt and ejector, and you can clean the barrel from the rear. You can still get in there and wipe some fouling out.
A complete take down of the Marlin is seldom needed.
I just looked at the Rossi page, they make a 92 in 454 Casull. That must kick like a mule!
greyling22
Member
Rossi: nice trim gun, can be made to run silky smooth. smoother than a marlin. cheaper and lighter weight too.
the bad: you may not like the wood. the sights are so-so and not as easy to replace as a marlin. an action job is a lot harder to do yourself. (mostly because dis assembly is a bearcat if you don't know what you are doing.)
Marlin: less recoil (heavier), easier to take apart, easier to scope, peep sight, whatever. easier to do an action job on. better wood than a rossi. better resale.
the bad: marlin hasn't put out a decent 1894 in 5 years. avoid anything post remington buyout, as fit and finish went in the toilet. Supposedly it's getting better, but I haven't seen it yet. Older marlin with the microgroove barrel don't like lead bullets much. They were made for jacketed.
All in all, I sold my rossi to a relative and kept the marlin old 1894c. If rossi/taurus will make a stainless one with a synthetic stock (either brushed or bead blasted so I don't have to do it myself) I'll buy another one in a heartbeat. the 92 action fits 357 better, and the 1894 fits 44mag better.
the bad: you may not like the wood. the sights are so-so and not as easy to replace as a marlin. an action job is a lot harder to do yourself. (mostly because dis assembly is a bearcat if you don't know what you are doing.)
Marlin: less recoil (heavier), easier to take apart, easier to scope, peep sight, whatever. easier to do an action job on. better wood than a rossi. better resale.
the bad: marlin hasn't put out a decent 1894 in 5 years. avoid anything post remington buyout, as fit and finish went in the toilet. Supposedly it's getting better, but I haven't seen it yet. Older marlin with the microgroove barrel don't like lead bullets much. They were made for jacketed.
All in all, I sold my rossi to a relative and kept the marlin old 1894c. If rossi/taurus will make a stainless one with a synthetic stock (either brushed or bead blasted so I don't have to do it myself) I'll buy another one in a heartbeat. the 92 action fits 357 better, and the 1894 fits 44mag better.
Old judge creek
Member
I have (and use) both.
Frankly, what you're asking is whether we prefer Ford or Chevy.
The 92 clone is one of the strongest lever actions ever designed (John M. Browning) and in its natural state (not Rossi) is one of the smoothest actions of them all.
The Marlin 94 is superbly designed and IMO much smoother than the Rossi... and probably equally strong.
I have 2 Marlin 1894 models in 45 Colt (24" and 16"), 1 in 44 mag, and a 357mag Cowboy Limited that I gave to my son.
I have a Rossi 44-40 and one in 44 Magnum.
Today I'd prefer any Rossi over the Remington produced Marlin abominations. But I'd prefer any of the pre-Remington Marlins over the Rossi.
More often than not, when I head out into the big desert on a prospecting trip, the Rossi 44 mag is over the forks of my ATV, primarily because its 16" barrel makes it easier to "pack along".
Frankly, what you're asking is whether we prefer Ford or Chevy.
The 92 clone is one of the strongest lever actions ever designed (John M. Browning) and in its natural state (not Rossi) is one of the smoothest actions of them all.
The Marlin 94 is superbly designed and IMO much smoother than the Rossi... and probably equally strong.
I have 2 Marlin 1894 models in 45 Colt (24" and 16"), 1 in 44 mag, and a 357mag Cowboy Limited that I gave to my son.
I have a Rossi 44-40 and one in 44 Magnum.
Today I'd prefer any Rossi over the Remington produced Marlin abominations. But I'd prefer any of the pre-Remington Marlins over the Rossi.
More often than not, when I head out into the big desert on a prospecting trip, the Rossi 44 mag is over the forks of my ATV, primarily because its 16" barrel makes it easier to "pack along".
I'd even go for a remlin over a rossi, frankly. Granted, a real pre-takeover marlin is best, but Rossi is entry level with quality to match. For as much as people complain about the hit or miss quality of the new remlins, the same can easily be said for nearly any rossi.
16 or 20 inch barrel for Rossi?
What are the advantages/disadvantages in 16 inch Rossi m92 vs 20 inch barrel? I like looks of the 16 inch; but wondered about adverse affects on accuracy with the shorter barrel. Also, is there noticably more recoil with the 16 inch barrel?
What are the advantages/disadvantages in 16 inch Rossi m92 vs 20 inch barrel? I like looks of the 16 inch; but wondered about adverse affects on accuracy with the shorter barrel. Also, is there noticably more recoil with the 16 inch barrel?
greyling22
Member
you might lose a little velocity with some loads by using a 16 vs a 20, (maybe 100fps tops) you will lose a little sight radius, the muzzle blast will be 4" closer to you, the extra out front weight will help stabilize the gun a bit, and perhaps with a slow powder you might get a little more muzzle blast if the powder isn't all burned up by the time it leaves the barrel.
but all those things are going to be more theoretical than noticeable. What you will notice is the 16" is lighter and swings more quickly. I vote 16"
but all those things are going to be more theoretical than noticeable. What you will notice is the 16" is lighter and swings more quickly. I vote 16"
wriggly
Member
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2010
- Messages
- 308
I owned a pre safety Marlin in .357, and a Rossi too. I still own the Rossi, and the Marlin is gone. I have yet to ever handle any lever gun that is as slick as my Rossi. I do have to say, it didnt come that way. I had to spend a couple of hours on it. 
I have a older Marlin 1894 in 44 mag that shoots pretty good. In general I like it however; I do notice that the action isn't exactly smooth when feeding a variety of different styles of bullets. It doesn't jam or fail to feed but the cartridges just don't seem to chamber smoothly sometimes. The next rifle I buy is going to be a Rossi 92, probably in 357. The actions seem pretty tight and yet still very smooth. The rifles I've seen appeared to be well made and worth a try.
Not to jump the rails, but have you considered Chiappa's 1892 Winchester?
I have the 94Marlin in 45 Colt, and a Chiappa `92Win in 357.
The Marlin's built like an indestructable tank ()
The Chiappa's a finely-built steel magnolia.D)
Wouldn't trade either of them....
I have the 94Marlin in 45 Colt, and a Chiappa `92Win in 357.
The Marlin's built like an indestructable tank (
)The Chiappa's a finely-built steel magnolia.
D)Wouldn't trade either of them....
MrDig
Member
I have three Marlin Levers, 336, 1894c and an 1894.
I have worked on both the Marlin and the Winchester pattern lever guns. For field and detail stripping the Marlin wins hands down.
For shooting Marlins can have feed problems as the gun wears out. This is a simple fix as the gun is easier to disassemble than the Winchester. The problem is that the gun doesn't pick up the round and hit the feed ramp properly and as I said it is really simple to fix and takes quite a few rounds to present itself. If you aren't competition shooting and practicing often it will take a long long time to show up.
The other issue with Marlins in particular is Trigger Wobble. this too is a simple fix and is relatively inexpensive too. It involves replacing the trigger and seer with a part that incorporates both into one piece. It is called a "Happy Trigger".
I have worked on both the Marlin and the Winchester pattern lever guns. For field and detail stripping the Marlin wins hands down.
For shooting Marlins can have feed problems as the gun wears out. This is a simple fix as the gun is easier to disassemble than the Winchester. The problem is that the gun doesn't pick up the round and hit the feed ramp properly and as I said it is really simple to fix and takes quite a few rounds to present itself. If you aren't competition shooting and practicing often it will take a long long time to show up.
The other issue with Marlins in particular is Trigger Wobble. this too is a simple fix and is relatively inexpensive too. It involves replacing the trigger and seer with a part that incorporates both into one piece. It is called a "Happy Trigger".
ExAgoradzo
Member
As I noted in the other thread: the 357 isn't perfect in the 1894 Marlin. One poster said the 92 pattern was better for the 357, that may well be. I still pref the 44 mag for your use, but if you're set on the 357, then try the Rossi and let us know about it: I'd be curious.
BTW: I have a "Remlin" 1895 that the fit is fine on: but I got to hold it in my hands before I bought it.
BTW: I have a "Remlin" 1895 that the fit is fine on: but I got to hold it in my hands before I bought it.
chieftain
Member
I own three Marlins, used to own a Winchester 94 in 44mag 40 years ago, in the early 70's. I have shot a couple of Rossi's too.
Put me in the pro Marlin column. I haven't seen any of the new Remlins, so I have no opinion, other than what I see in the various forums.
My 1894cp is the 16" barrel in 357mag. The most 'fun' gun I own to shoot, and I own a bunch of guns. I also own a 336 stainless in 30-30 with 16" barrel too, something like the old Marauder.
I sure like the 16" barrel on my lever actions.
I have shot several Rossi's but not extensively. I did shoot a 454. It is a beast.
Good luck.
Fred
Put me in the pro Marlin column. I haven't seen any of the new Remlins, so I have no opinion, other than what I see in the various forums.
My 1894cp is the 16" barrel in 357mag. The most 'fun' gun I own to shoot, and I own a bunch of guns. I also own a 336 stainless in 30-30 with 16" barrel too, something like the old Marauder.
I sure like the 16" barrel on my lever actions.
I have shot several Rossi's but not extensively. I did shoot a 454. It is a beast.
Good luck.
Fred
loveluck456
Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2012
- Messages
- 5
Good for you David! I hope you really enjoy it!
Cheers!
__________________
ExAgoradzo
Just for fun!
Cheers!
__________________
ExAgoradzo
Just for fun!
R.W.Dale
Member
Having owned both I'm going to sternly suggest the Marlin
The Rossi is very much a "u finish it" kit gun that has its own cottage industry devoted solely to putting these things into somewhat usable condition. Mine as crude, rough as a rusty bumper Jack to operate and worse of all rather unreliable.
The Marlin in 357 that replaced it was flawless in every aspect.
The Rossi is very much a "u finish it" kit gun that has its own cottage industry devoted solely to putting these things into somewhat usable condition. Mine as crude, rough as a rusty bumper Jack to operate and worse of all rather unreliable.
The Marlin in 357 that replaced it was flawless in every aspect.
greyling22
Member
flawless in every aspect? what marlins are you picking up? The ones I've seen all need action jobs and have several design flaws that need to be addressed out of the box. the 2 piece trigger and 3 piece firing pin could go, the sharp edge on the cam needs to be rounded off of it cuts into the carrier and throws off the timing, the whole gun is over sprung, the extractors often need to be modified, and the nose of the hammer is too high. Then you get into cosmetics, the forend wood is too bulky, wood to metal fit can be improved, the finish on the stocks leaves a lot to be desired, the internals all need a good polish, and those are issues on a decent one. the crappy remington ones are much worse.
And I'm a marlin fan. I've had several, and think that as a general rule the marlins were finished out nicer than the rossi's but flawless is an awfully high bar, and I think a '92 may be a better action than a '94. maybe. now if only freedom arms would make a super high quality '92 with an 18" barrel, stainless and a laminate or high quality synthetic stock I'd be a happy happy man.
And I'm a marlin fan. I've had several, and think that as a general rule the marlins were finished out nicer than the rossi's but flawless is an awfully high bar, and I think a '92 may be a better action than a '94. maybe. now if only freedom arms would make a super high quality '92 with an 18" barrel, stainless and a laminate or high quality synthetic stock I'd be a happy happy man.
- Status
