Marlin Firearms Forum banner

1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I think I read somewhere that Remingtons facebook page stated there would be new (better quality?) rifles rolling off the line this month and showing up in stores this June? Wow, that would be great if true. Has anyone else heard this? I have a pre-Remington 1894C in .357 and would like another new one. I will wait until January to see how things progress with this new batch of rifles and if things haven't changed I have about made up my mind to get a Uberti 1873 rifle instead. Sure would like another Marlin though... :-\
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,094 Posts
thetoad64 said:
I think I read somewhere that Remingtons facebook page stated there would be new (better quality?) rifles rolling off the line this month and showing up in stores this June? Wow, that would be great if true. Has anyone else heard this? I have a pre-Remington 1894C in .357 and would like another new one. I will wait until January to see how things progress with this new batch of rifles and if things haven't changed I have about made up my mind to get a Uberti 1873 rifle instead. Sure would like another Marlin though... :-\
I dont know what you plan to do with it, but IMHO theres better options than a 73 repro. Though they do look nice & are about as smooth as you can get in a lever action, theyre also the weakest ones out there. If your intent is other than shooting paper you'ld be better served with a Win 92 reproduction or a Henry than a 73. I realize they are made of modern materials & chambered for 357 but they are still just a toggle link with no real breach block. Theres a reason that John Browning didn't bother with it when he started designing guns for Winchester.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,018 Posts
Hey ya'll -- I've seen lots of references to the "weak" 1873 toggle link actions and thought I'd toss this out for your kicked back and easy reading pleasure. For those of you unfamiliar with the 1876 rifle, it is an 1873 rifle in rifle calibers.

The strength of the Model 1876 rifle and the .45-75 W.C.F. cartridge was tested by Winchester in the late 1870s. These tests will astound collectors and shooters who have stated the Model 1876's toggle link action is "weak". The factory conducted tests on the strength and reliability of the action to answer concerns by customers. In response to a letter sent to the company by Charles Hallock, Esquire, of Forest & Stream magazine, Oliver Winchester responded by telling about the tests the factory accomplished on the 1876 rifle. He indicated that engineers first started the tests by removing one of the toggle links and fired 20 rounds (this was with .45-75 W.C.F. cartridge with 350 grain bullet) with no effect. They restored the missing link then went through 6 more trials starting with a charge of 105 grains of black powder, behind a 700 grain bullet! The comment "worked well" is noted. They then increased the charge of powder to 165 grains behind 3 bullets (1,150 grains) and that "worked well." From there, they increased the powder charge to 203 grains and added more bullets until they reached 1,750 grains of lead (five 350 grain bullets). This also "worked well." Finally, they added one more bullet, bringing the total weight to 2,100 grains, and things began to happen. The comment was, "Breech pin slightly bent. Arm working stiff." The seventh and final test was again 203 grains of powder but this time six Martini bullets weighing 480 grains each (2,880 grains) were used. "The charge bent the breech pin, blew out the side plates, split the frame and otherwise disabled the arm," was the comment. Oliver Winchester noted that in this seventh trial, the shell had burst into fragments and the escape of gas at the breech did the damage.

Food for thought. Best regards. Wind
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
You have a point. I understand Rossi sold the rights to it's Win 92 reproductions to an Italian firm. " Puma M-92's are built by Chiappa in Italy to the Browning specifications." Can find them on Legacy Sports International. Web site say's $1,200 for one. Still, if one cannot find a quality 1894 what really is left? I will still wait until December/January to see what happens with the Remington/Marlin guns before I jump ship.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,925 Posts
thetoad64 said:
I think I read somewhere that Remingtons facebook page stated there would be new (better quality?) rifles rolling off the line this month and showing up in stores this June? Wow, that would be great if true. Has anyone else heard this?

I hope they get their stuff together soon.....I'd love to have the new 1894SBL, but not if they hit the shops with any of the current problems.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,094 Posts
Wind said:
Hey ya'll -- I've seen lots of references to the "weak" 1873 toggle link actions and thought I'd toss this out for your kicked back and easy reading pleasure. For those of you unfamiliar with the 1876 rifle, it is an 1873 rifle in rifle calibers.

The strength of the Model 1876 rifle and the .45-75 W.C.F. cartridge was tested by Winchester in the late 1870s. These tests will astound collectors and shooters who have stated the Model 1876's toggle link action is "weak". The factory conducted tests on the strength and reliability of the action to answer concerns by customers. In response to a letter sent to the company by Charles Hallock, Esquire, of Forest & Stream magazine, Oliver Winchester responded by telling about the tests the factory accomplished on the 1876 rifle. He indicated that engineers first started the tests by removing one of the toggle links and fired 20 rounds (this was with .45-75 W.C.F. cartridge with 350 grain bullet) with no effect. They restored the missing link then went through 6 more trials starting with a charge of 105 grains of black powder, behind a 700 grain bullet! The comment "worked well" is noted. They then increased the charge of powder to 165 grains behind 3 bullets (1,150 grains) and that "worked well." From there, they increased the powder charge to 203 grains and added more bullets until they reached 1,750 grains of lead (five 350 grain bullets). This also "worked well." Finally, they added one more bullet, bringing the total weight to 2,100 grains, and things began to happen. The comment was, "Breech pin slightly bent. Arm working stiff." The seventh and final test was again 203 grains of powder but this time six Martini bullets weighing 480 grains each (2,880 grains) were used. "The charge bent the breech pin, blew out the side plates, split the frame and otherwise disabled the arm," was the comment. Oliver Winchester noted that in this seventh trial, the shell had burst into fragments and the escape of gas at the breech did the damage.

Food for thought. Best regards. Wind
Thing to remember is black powder cant produce the pressures of todays modern smokeless powders in reasonable scenerios. I'm not even sure HOW they could fit 165 grains of black powder under 3 bullets, since the black powder cartriges were designed such that a case was full under the bullet it was designed for. I'm assuming they must have put the extra bullets in the bore ahead of the chamber in order to generate the pressure needed to defeat the action. They never even chambered the 1876 in 45/70 which was well under 357 pressures at that time and still is in factory loadings.
Its a well known fact that moderate pressure calibers will grip the chamber enough that there is basically zero bolt thrust. They did tests with the 30/30 actually removing the guns locking bolt entirely without tragic results. The cases expand & grip the chamber walls and the pressure isn't high enough to blow the case head off. That in itself says something about the low pressure of black powder loadings since the cases back then were of weak baloon head design and the still did not blow. I suspect that even in a modern action a 35,000 psi load would rupture a baloon head case.

At any rate I think a modern 1873 chambered for 357 would be perfectly safe. My concern would be for how long with full house loads & I'd think it would be rendered inoperable well before it became dangerous. Its also alot bigger & heavier than other guns of the same class. Like I said, it would depend alot on what I wanted it for. If I was looking for a hunting arm I could load hot its not what I would choose. If I wanted a cool cowboy gun for the range or plinking thats a different story. I have a Rossi 92 & a Marlin 1894C. The 1894C right now is getting turned into a 32/20 and then the 92 will be my only 357 lever action & imo is about perfect for what I want. :)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,094 Posts
thetoad64 said:
You have a point. I understand Rossi sold the rights to it's Win 92 reproductions to an Italian firm. " Puma M-92's are built by Chiappa in Italy to the Browning specifications." Can find them on Legacy Sports International. Web site say's $1,200 for one. Still, if one cannot find a quality 1894 what really is left? I will still wait until December/January to see what happens with the Remington/Marlin guns before I jump ship.
You can get a Rossi for much less than $1200.00. I got mine for around $400. Rossi was bought by Taurus, the Pumas were made by Rossi but Chiappa might have bought the name. If Chiappa is making their guns to Browning specs then theyre not like a Rossi. Rossi's are the same design but the parts dont interchange. Brownings guns are made in Japan by Miroku & are a very well made gun that generally go for around $1000. Things change fast & frequently in the gun industry but I'd be very surprised if Taurus stopped making the Rossi line, of which the "Puma" was a small part. They called it different things depending on who was marketing it. Mine is an "EMF Hartford", the only difference between it & the "Puma" is the "Puma" had the bolt top saftey first. Mine lacks it but from what I gather all the Rossi 92s have it now.

Heres a link to EMF Rossi's.
http://www.emf-company.com/store/pc/1892-Hardfords-c123.htm
A link to Rossi,
http://www.rossiusa.com/product-list.cfm?category=8
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,670 Posts
I've read that the Puma name was owned originally by Interarms who was Rossi's original importer. Rossi put the name on the guns for Interarms. The owner of Interarms died and his heirs didn't want to be in the gun business so they sold out. LSI took over from what was left of Interarms and supposedly now owns the Puma name as applied to 1892 clones. That being said, I have no idea who imports the Rossi '92 now and under what name. Navy Arms imported them for a few years with American walnut wood and excellant fit & finish, but they no longer list the 1892 on their website. I've got an early production Navy Arms 1892 24" rifle in 357 and love it. And as heretic as it is to say so, my 1894 in 44-40 would go before that 1892.

As for a '73 in 357, I was interested in one for a while but when I went to Dixie Gun Works and handled one there, it seemed much heavier than either my Marlins or my Navy Arms and when I asked about shooting regular factory ammo in it like Winchester Silvertips, I was told to stay with CAS level loads in it. Not sure if the lady at Dixie I was talking to while holding the gun was right about that, but it was enough to put me off of buying one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
368 Posts
I was in a gun shop in Corbin KY about three weeks ago and had them price me an 1894C in 357.
Gave me a price of $550.00 and said it would be about June before they were available.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
622 Posts
In my new issue of national rifleman there are at least 4 remingtion recall notices. 4.

None of them have anything to do with MArlin problems. I would be inclinded to thing that things will not be any better it just marketing BS.

Just like the old FORD commercial from 10-20 years ago after years of bad cars and poor support, the union guy prodly says "OK america you win quaility is job one with us now" It actually took them another 5 years or so to actually make competitive vehicles. :)


With Remington's track record I expect things to get worse, I expect 94s to have a round bolt, and I expect all octagonal barrels to go away as well before it gets better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,670 Posts
gyrhed said:
With Remington's track record I expect things to get worse, I expect 94s to have a round bolt, and I expect all octagonal barrels to go away as well before it gets better.
I've been figuring on the round bolt thing as soon as the bean counters figure out that it's less machining and therefore cheaper to build 'em that way. Wouldn't be surprised to see the octagon barrels go either.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,536 Posts
gyrhed said:
In my new issue of national rifleman there are at least 4 remingtion recall notices. 4.

None of them have anything to do with MArlin problems. I would be inclinded to thing that things will not be any better it just marketing BS.

Just like the old FORD commercial from 10-20 years ago after years of bad cars and poor support, the union guy prodly says "OK america you win quaility is job one with us now" It actually took them another 5 years or so to actually make competitive vehicles. :)


With Remington's track record I expect things to get worse, I expect 94s to have a round bolt, and I expect all octagonal barrels to go away as well before it gets better.
+1, You don't fire all the experienced workforce, run things straight into the tank and then turn on a dime and start making quality firearms again. I suspect the customer support will be very nice and cheerful, but that part is easy, just give them raises and they will be friendly and caring. Building a workforce that knows what they are doing takes time, money, and commitment. One would think they would have understood that!

Round bolts for the pistol calibers? Imagine what that will do to the prices on GB for used 1894's.. :eek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,702 Posts
I think I read somewhere that Remingtons facebook page stated there would be new (better quality?) rifles rolling off the line this month and showing up in stores this June?


Now that BS line should keep them in bussiness a little longer! Why wait? Do it now Remington!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,094 Posts
I wonder how much stronger a short action round bolt Marlin would be? I'd imagine it would be more rigid than a 336, maybe it could even handle the 454 & 480.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,268 Posts
Leverdude said:
I wonder how much stronger a short action round bolt Marlin would be? I'd imagine it would be more rigid than a 336, maybe it could even handle the 454 & 480.
Didn't see THAT one coming!

Great idea though! May have to investigate it.

Jon
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
163 Posts
If it were me, and I wanted a lever gun in .357 and expected to be able to shoot full power magnum rounds, I would NOT buy one of the 1873 replicas. Besides the price which is likely to be $1,000 or more, I doubt they would handle the heavy loads. Most of those rifles are used for cowboy action shooting and most folks use light .38 special loads so they can have less recoil and increase their speed shot to shot. I own two of the Uberti '73s in .44-40 caliber and shoot black powder only, for that purpose, they work pretty well but I would also mention that the quality of my Marlins is better than those of my '73s. Your mileage may vary. Good luck.

Azbagger
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,282 Posts
I traded a Winchester 94ae trapper in 357(that ran like shit) for a NIB Rossi 92 Stainless Steel with the same 16" bbl....... Best thing I ever did with guns. I am in love with my Rossi and will just get a matching stainless 357mag. I always wanted a Marlin 1894c...... I would love to have a matching set of 1894sbl in 44/357....... but now I am just going to get another Rossi.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,670 Posts
I grew up in a Marlin family and all but one uncle had at least one Marlin lever gun on their gun rack. He had a Winchester 94 and was considered a bit of a disgrace to the family anyway. But since Remington took over I haven't felt good about recommending a new Marlin to anyone. Lots of nice older ones out there that need a good home. But I bought my Navy Arms 1892 in 357 at a time when I needed a new levergun in 357 and no one could get a new 1894C and I wasn't finding any used ones locally. Other that a stiff action when new and launching the fired brass into low earth orbit, it's been a great rifle for me. I eventually found some 1894Cs, bought 'em and kept one, but if I'm taking a 357 out, it's that 1892 clone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
This is what Remington sent to me:

Michael – appreciate you reaching out to us. We take quality control very seriously, and have implemented several changes to our manufacturing process to ensure quality at every step as we've moved manufacturing to other facilities.


This summer we're actually planning to release some info on these changes, and we'd be happy to include you. We're planning to send info out via our e-newsleter. You can sign up for that at marlinfirearms.com.
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top