Among my greatest gun "regrets,"'selling two Marlin 1894s (JM stamped) years ago. Found this Marlin 1894 at a shop in Matthews, NC today. It is modern production / Ruger era Marlin. Looks great. Smooth action. We'll not let this one go. O can shoot it this summer.
There is a minor flaw in the design. On 357's only after many hundreds/thousands of rounds, The elevator gets a groove worn in the bottom by the lever extension. It continues to work fine with 357's but the 38's no longer function correctly. I had 2 over the years that did that. I suggest you use a grease instead of oil to lube the under side of the elevator and the "Thumb" on the lever.
J.B.Wood in his book "Troubleshooting Your Rifles and Shotguns", says the repair would be to epoxy a thin, hardened piece of steel over the worn groove, He recommended a short piece of worn out (toothless) hack saw blade.
Personal experience has taught me the instructions are correct when it says; Don't use 38 Special full wadcutter ammo or 38 S&W cartridges (Long and Short Colt either!). It ends up jamming the action with the second cartridge and you have to disassemble the tube magazine to clear the jam. Did I say repeated personal experience.
I hope you enjoy your new Marlin for years to come.
I have three JM 1894's myself. 1982 in 357 ,1981 in 44 mag, and a 1990's Limited Cowboy in 45 Colt. All keepers for life! Winchesters are nice too.
I'll take the old JM Marlins over the Winny!
I hear good things about the Ruger Marlins!
Congratulations on your 1894. I lucked into a great deal on my JM 1894 .357 a few years ago. If I didn't have it then I would buy the Ruger/Marlin in a heartbeat.
There is a minor flaw in the design. On 357's only after many hundreds/thousands of rounds, The elevator gets a groove worn in the bottom by the lever extension. It continues to work fine with 357's but the 38's no longer function correctly. I had 2 over the years that did that. I suggest you use a grease instead of oil to lube the under side of the elevator and the "Thumb" on the lever.
J.B.Wood in his book "Troubleshooting Your Rifles and Shotguns", says the repair would be to epoxy a thin, hardened piece of steel over the worn groove, He recommended a short piece of worn out (toothless) hack saw blade.
Personal experience has taught me the instructions are correct when it says; Don't use 38 Special full wadcutter ammo or 38 S&W cartridges (Long and Short Colt either!). It ends up jamming the action with the second cartridge and you have to disassemble the tube magazine to clear the jam. Did I say repeated personal experience.
I hope you enjoy your new Marlin for years to come.
Ruger seemingly has gotten the new production Marlins going out the door in an impressive manner. From everything I've heard & read, their QC fit & finish are pretty darn good. I have not yet shot or held one, but the consensus so far is good.
While there are a few differences in their production methods, at least they have stepped up to the Plate and made them high quality rifles. There will only be one JM Marlin and they are now long gone, but at least Ruger has done an excellent job in resurrecting the name and models. They are also giving the rifles back the reputation and quality they deserve after Remington completely destroyed that.
I am hoping that they also come out with the 39A. IMHO, the 39A was the finest 22 rifle ever constructed. Yea, the Winchester 9422 was an excellent, buttery smooth and gorgeous rifle / carbine in its own right, however the 39A was full sized and more comfortable for most of us and just plain always worked. The Henry's are just not my cup of tea. Yes, their quality is good and they work just fine, I just can't deal with their construction, looks and materials they use. I suppose one could make the argument that they are selling them at a much better price point and yes, that is true.
Good luck with your new Ruger - it looks great! Let us know how it shoots.
Just curious, does anyone know if Marlin ever made a 16” “trapper” 1894. That’s what I’m waiting for, in .44mag. Maybe Ruger will step up.
I think Marlin did make 1894 Trappers. Their “Trapper” line today doesn’t show an 1894. However, the “Dark Series” line does. I do not like the plastic stock etc; however, a 16” barrel with a threaded muzzle does open up some non-traditional possibilities.
P.S. takedown lever actions are COOL and that case looks vaguely familiar. I had one made for my Browning BLR in .308 and Winchester 1892 Trapper in .45 Colt:
Just curious, does anyone know if Marlin ever made a 16” “trapper” 1894. That’s what I’m waiting for, in .44mag. Maybe Ruger will step up.
Yes they did. Have the 357 and 44 mag CP versions. The 44 mag is in the bedroom loaded with 180 jhp's at about 1550 fps (1250 fps from 4 in). Very accurate and soft shooting.
Once took my mother to the range when she was in her late 70's, who had no rifle shooting experience. She was effectively on target from standing at 25 yds in a few shots.
I have a Rossi 92 and a Winchester 94 in .357 but have been unsuccessful in acquiring a Marlin in .357. I'm gonna have to go on the search for one of the Ruger/Marlins, looks impressive.
I'm also a fan of Lee Hadaway's work. He did a great job on the takedown conversion on my 16 inch 336Y in .30-30.
target tech, Yes Marlin made an unported 16" barrel, trapper type .44 carbine , about 25 years ago, IIRC. Mine is marked "The Marlin Limited" on the barrel and was part of a TALO distributor's run. I bought it new, still have it. Bottom one in the photo..
My friend brought a RM 1894 in 357 over 2 weeks ago. They’re impressive. I’d order one if I didn’t already have one from the 1980s without checkering and the cross bolt safety.
Williams makes a couple of really cool peep sights for the Marlins. The SIDE of the reciever of the 1894 Marlins are no longer drilled and tapped. But the top is, of course. The new Williams sight used the holes in the top of the new Marlins, so no drilling and tapping is necessary. I’m impressed with Williams quality, as well. They’re priced reasonably, too. Optics Planet.
Oh, and if the stock is too short, get a Limbsaver slip on pad. With full power 240s, those light 44s have some punch on the receiving end. So the limb saver is a welcome edition on my Miroku/Win 1892 for the recoil management as well as the additional length.
That’s a beautiful carbine. I’ve got the JM 1894C .357 w/ 18.5” bbl and the JM Cowboy w/ 24” Octagon bbl. they’re not going anywhere.
I’ve got an old Cowboy .44 with the long octagon barrel. Removed the silly cross bolt years ago (after it cost me a Nice buck😏 and went to a stainless follower. Great rifle.
I am waiting for them to bring back the CSBL. I ordered one just as Marlin went under, and the dealer still has my deposit (by agreement). I intend to go with modern accessories in the nature of a RDS, sling, and light, to make it as functional FOR ME as possible.
I am waiting for them to bring back the CSBL. I ordered one just as Marlin went under, and the dealer still has my deposit (by agreement). I intend to go with modern accessories in the nature of a RDS, sling, and light, to make it as functional FOR ME as possible.
You can put a red dot on virtually any Marlin 1894. EGW makes very nice mounting plates that put the red dot much lower than sitting on a rail.
If you want a light, a handguard from Ranger Point Precision or Midwest Industries gets you there quickly.
Or you could look for one of the new Dark Series 1894s.
Congrats!
They’re nice rifles, checked em out last month at SHOT. How’s the street price compared with the equivalent JM Marlin?
Currently, my only 1894 is a 1996 Cowboy Limited in 45 Colt.
Every Ruger era Marlin 1894 .38/.357 that I have seen in Charlotte has been $1,250 (MSRP) -$1,400 (premium for scarcity)... except this one. Bought this one new for $1,049.00 + NC tax at Firepower in Matthews, NC.
Sold my last JM stamped 1894c for $1,200 on GB, back in 2017 or 2018.
"We'll not let this one go." The girl or the gun ?
I have the 1894C in 357, 1894 in 44 Magnum, 1970s vintage, no crossbolt.
Now if I could just find one in 41 Magnum....
I found 38 Special WCs, especially flush seated one, have to be fed singly.
I still have a number of JM Marlins with the cross-bolt safety. If having the ugly button lets Marlin and now Ruger keep making them with lower insurance costs, thus lower cost to me, I'm all for it.
Issues:1) Bumping the safety On. It did happen to me once, out of thousands of rounds of cowboy action shooting.
2) Somebody else pushing your safety on. Happened 3 or 4 times. Sometimes it was a joke, sometimes it was a jerk trying to gain a few seconds advantage at a match!!
Solutions: There is a flush mount plug that were about $50 (don't know current pricing) and a plug that is a saddle ring for around the same price. (about a 20-to-30-minute job) The third solution is from the factory. If you remove the butt stock (2 screws), the left rear of the action has a small Allen set screw, that will lock the Safety Button in place. (Be sure you have it in the position you desire!) For me with toolbox handy, less than a 10-minute job and no parts.
Actual Safety: All the JM Marlins still have the Half Cock Notch hammer safety. The safety that actually worked since the 1880's! So, you gun is still as safe a Great Grandpa's! Nobody has said otherwise so I assume the Remlin's, and the Ruger's have the Half Cock safety also.
My 1895 Guide Gun isn't used for Cowboy competition, It is my Household weapon for things that claw, bite and chew. I have AO 12- or 14-inch rail with a 33mm Red Dot scope. with iron back-up sight from Wild West Guns (AO made one too, but I like WW sight better. I reminded me of Lyman's M-1 Carbine sight used in the military rebuilds.)
My "Critter Getter" load is a hard cast 400 grain w/GC over lots of IMR 3031 @ 2150fps and about 4000 ft. lbs. of energy. NOT KIND TO SHOULDERS or predators! Since my GG is the early model with factory porting, it is very quick on second, third, fourth & fifth shots! I have seen almost identical set ups in 45-70, 30-30, 357 and 44 mag. So, lots of people came to the same conclusions for a "Rabid Dog, Bear & Boar gun". I have a Nylon butt sleave with 8 follow up rounds on it. I have seen very nice Leather Sleaves too. (the nylon is easier maintenance after caught in the rain) I believe in the military "Hastey Sling" and leave it set up that way. (not allowed in any competition I now of)
My best friend used to have a Tiger-Lion mix about a mile up the road, his 22" 1895 JM Marlin was set up and always ready for family protection!
You can put a red dot on virtually any Marlin 1894. EGW makes very nice mounting plates that put the red dot much lower than sitting on a rail.
If you want a light, a handguard from Ranger Point Precision or Midwest Industries gets you there quickly.
Or you could look for one of the new Dark Series 1894s.
*
I already have the accessories. I did consider the Dark and might go that way but this is planned to be a travel gun in my hoped for RV and stainless has more appeal.
Bought a Williams 5D 336 that uses the back scope mount holes for mine, but if it was drilled and tapped on the side of the receiver like the old days, I'd prefer a Lyman 66.
During "just another gun conversation" some years ago, the topic turned to lever guns, and without much thought I said, "Nah, I'm not much of a lever gun guy. Well, I have a .22. And a .30-30. Oh, and a .357 and a .44 Mag..." Somehow, they just ended up here, I guess.
Anyway, here are my pistol caliber guns. On the bottom is a Marlin 1894 in .44 Mag. It's a pre-safety JM, with a Williams receiver sight. Up top is an Interarms Rossi 92 SRC .357 Mag, also pre-safety.
Max, I have a Williams that fits the 94 Winchester on the way. It should be here Fri 3/1/24. I’ll let you know what I think of that one.
I have the Williams that mount on top of the Marlins. That sight has no play. It looks good. Good quality as far as I can tell.
I have an 1892 Miroku Winchester Short Rifle in 44 Mag. I’ve ordered a taper tap, a bottoming tap, a high speed drill bit, and a carbide. As soon as everything comes in, I’m going to drill and tap the receiver of that rifle. Then it’s getting the Williams “side of the receiver” sight.
I tried the Skinner. The adjustment is too coarse on the Skinner. The sight radius is too short. That Marbels Bullseye rear sight looks dumb. I’ve had Lyman 66LAs on a 39M, Miroku 1886, and a Marlin 1894 in 357. I love my Lyman 66LAs. You can’t get them right now. I’ve had one on back order for 6 months. So I’m going to try another Williams.
I’ve never drilled and tapped a rifle myself. Stay tuned….
I have a Hartford-Rossi .357. I would like to put a peep sight on the receiver. What do you recommend?
Ranger Point Precision makes a peep sight with "wings" that is lower than the Skinner peep. However, I like to look of the Skinner better. RPP also offers several different styles of peep, so that might interest you. Both use the mounting holes in the top of the receiver. With the Skinner, you probably have to get a taller front sight. With the RPP, you probably are OK with the production front (no guarantees). I have both but not the Williams.
I have two Winchester 16" "Trappers" in .357 Mag and .44 Mag that will not be going anywhere soon.....oh and my Marlins in .32 H&R Mag and .41 Magnum will be sitting tight as well.....LOL!!
It's nice wood and excellent wood-to-metal fit as you would expect from Ruger. The semi-buckhorn sight wasn't quite centered, and the first few rounds hit 4 inches right at 25 yards. No matter - my Williams arrived the next day, and it shoots dead on now. I had no trouble keeping shots on a 9" paper plate at 150 meters in a 15 mph quartering wind.
^Hitting a 9 inch plate at 150 is good shooting. Your rifle and sight are certainly up to the task.
Those Williams peep sights are nice. The one you have isn’t really made for the 1894 Marlin. It’s made for the 336 frame guns. But hey, whatever works.
Yes, but it fits. There's not much clearance between the hammer spur and the srew-in sight ring. The really good news is the factory front sight works perfectly.
Marlin 1894 .38/.357 - This one stays here
and went to a stainless follower. Great rifle.
Linear Mode
