Marlin Firearms Forum banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
205 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I just picked up a new 1894C and have discovered that the magazine tube is not budging with any normal amount of force. There are no forend, band or magazine cap screws holding anything, and at this stage, the tube on my earlier Marlins would slip right forward from the receiver. But this one doesn't.

The end in the receiver looks like it was ground to a taper (the bluing is ground off) and wedged into place, but if so, it is wedged dang tightly. It is like the thing is silver soldered into place.

Anyone else have this problem on a recent gun? My last 1894 (last year) was a disappointment that the factory ended up making right, but this latest one is the pits for bolt fit and contouring of the receiver/trigger guard plate. And if I can't get that @#$%! tube out, I will be sorely tempted to wrap it around the jack pole in the basement.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
272 Posts
You now may understand why I buy no guns,well a FEW,that were made after 1945..It is a proven fact that the 2nd world war was the beginning of the end for hand fitted firearms of every maker.. It is just too costly for them to compete with slave labor,found in some countries..You can thank liberal legislators for the problem..Have you heard of the billions of dollars deficet in trading among countries and our country??Enough to bring tears to your eyes..But if our own citizens will not buy American because of the higher prices,,why then should other countries buy our products??
It is high time for us all to cease buying foreign goods and think about our neighbors and their jobs..They too need to mass together and boycot American companies who manufacture their goods in foreign lands..
I really would like to see these things happen but do not believe it will happen until after the NEXT WORLD WAR..WE ARE DUE for another..When Russia and China conduct war games to work out communication problems problems between the Armies,and China is buying our scrap metals,ala Japan prior to WW II,it makes any sane person squirm..But they are counting on us to be stupid as we have proven time and again..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
205 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I like the simplicity and overall handiness of the 1894C, and while a Rossi is as just as handy (and is stronger), I prefer the Marlin partly because it is from an American outfit. Some days a guy can feel like a schmuck "buying American," though. M seems to have some problems of late that need to be worked out ASAP. Cast parts? Fine, if they hold up and fit right. Rudimentary sights? Just as long as they are on straight.

This new 1894C is not hideous, but it has a couple of things that would have me putting it in the rework rack if I was inspecting. I've been accused of being fussy off and on, so take that for what it is worth. Because this is intended to be a utility carbine, it doesn't have to look like a period piece, and it doesn't have to be made like a fine watch... I'll give it the benefit of the doubt as far as safety, function and accuracy. I clean and deburr anything new, and it has needed a bit of both, but so have much more expensive guns. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

It is this flippin' magazine tube that frosts my butt right now, because my non-destructive attempts to remove it have failed. Apparently nobody else on the forum has had this problem, so my uniqueness remains at the same level as my frustration.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
473 Posts
deafrn, The question that comes to mind is Why would you want to remove it? Just curious. Byron :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
205 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Why? Well, I generally disassemble any new gun to thoroughly clean out the shavings, wipe off residual bluing salts, etc. When it comes to some assembly that is staked, soldered or dovetailed, I leave it alone... otherwise, it comes off, assuming I have a schematic and the right tools.

Once in a while, I get one that balks.

I could slide the front sight hood off, drift out the sight blade, remove the sight base and get most everything pulled off from the front. But that wouldn't satisfy MY curiosity, because in decades of tinkering with these guns, I've never run across one with an immovable magazine tube.

There are a few other unusual points to this particular gun; with any luck, the 1894 knowledge base will be enlarged by it.

UPDATE:

Yes, the magazine tube is soldered in place; if the carbine ever gets soaked, then the front sight blade has to be pushed out of the dovetail in order to remove the sight base/upper and lower bands/forearm.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
205 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
UPDATED UPDATE:

"Marinate one breast of crow for a week, then liberally rub with salt..."

After all else failed, I took the advice to call... and the mystery of the immobile magazine tube has been solved. What appeared to be small beads of solder when seen through a magnifier were in fact very small shavings of displaced steel that resulted from the tube being rather forcefully inserted into it's hole in the receiver.

It isn't Swiss watch workmanship, and it doesn't look all that hot (admittedly it is hidden under the wood), but at least it makes sense now.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top