Chambering a long gun and handgun for the same metallic centerfire cartridge is not a new inspiration. In fact, the concept took root roughly 150 years ago.
The initial stage was set by Winchester with the introduction of its Model 1873 rifle in a centerfire cartridge it brought out that same year, the .44-40.1 By 1877, Colt, nervous about Winchester’s threat to manufacture their own .44-40 revolver, adapted its Single Action Army revolver for that cartridge.2
It was thus that many folks on the late 19th-century American frontier–especially lawmen like the Texas Rangers—-had the option of carrying a rifle and revolver using the same round.3
Likely to help boost the sales of their Model 1873 rifle, Winchester offered .44-40 reloading tools so people in the isolated areas of the Far West could “roll their own” and not have to rely on scarce, expensive factory ammo. In any event, the shared cartridge concept proved to be a popular design that makes good sense today for many gun owners who don’t need or want the power of a hunting or military-style rifle.
A personal journey
My common-cartridge rifle/revolver journey developed over quite a spell; it began in the late nineties when I bought a new stainless steel .44 Magnum, 5½-inch barrel Ruger Bisley Vaquero. It’s a nice piece, though it had “teething problems” early on and was returned to Ruger to fix what was later revealed to be a defective pawl. The revolver’s been 100% reliable ever since.
The gun originally came with decent Rosewood grips, but I wanted something more in keeping with fancy Wild West revolvers. So, a beautiful pair of Sambar stags from Eagle Grips replaced the standard ones. This happened in the very early 2000s just before India halted their exports of Sambar stag. Unsurprisingly, Sambar stag grip prices quickly zoomed into the stratosphere, where they remain today.
Other easy tweaks for my Bisley followed: A local gunsmith reshaped and serrated the front sight; I added a Belt Mountain base pin to remove any cylinder slop; and I installed lighter Wolff Gunsprings’ main and trigger springs. In an article by pistol-smith Grant Cunningham, I learned about using standard ATF to lube my firearms’ internals, a tip that has paid off for me. In my experience, ATF does not gum up or evaporate like most petroleum gun oils.
My Bisley’s action is tight and smooth, and the gun is very accurate with .44 Special loads. To comfortably cart that piece in the great outdoors, I strap on a Mexican loop style, deerskin-lined leather holster, “The Cheyenne”, and cartridge money belt crafted by Rick Bachman of Old West Reproductions. For his traditional Western holsters and belts, Rick copies the originals in his own collection and carefully duplicates them.
south of the border counterpart
For more than forty years, I’ve lived in the Pacific Northwest and enjoyed camping and hiking in remote areas in the Cascade mountains. Usually, the Ruger Bisley is the handgun I carry in the wilderness, loaded with .44 Special fodder. When out in the Northern Rockies in grizzly bear territory, my Bisley is stoked with Corbon 320-grain lead slugs.
It was never my intention to make my Ruger Bisley an exact copy of a Wild West handgun, but long after I bought that revolver, I learned that Mexican Revolution general Pancho Villa carried a Colt Bisley that is similar in appearance. A wily and mercurial insurgent, Villa was also a feared gunslinger and knew what made a good revolver. He chose the .44-40 Colt Bisley. Whether he owned a long gun in that caliber is open to conjecture, but there’s no proof that he did. Nevertheless, there’s plenty of photographic evidence that he used rifle-caliber, lever-action and bolt-action long guns.
the quest for a compatible long gun
All the same, for years I wanted to own a lever-action long gun chambered in .44 Magnum to accompany my Bisley. Pickings were slim then as the lever guns made by Marlin lacked their prior quality and vintage Marlin prices were escalating. To make matters worse, Remington Arms, already in decline, acquired the brand and built their sloppy Marlin versions that were widely disparaged by customers and gun writers.4 Indeed, the future looked grim for my plans to buy a quality Marlin lever-action.
Then the unexpected happened several years ago–Ruger purchased the Marlin patent rights and decrepit tooling from then-bankrupt Remington. In relatively short order, Ruger tooled up with new machinery and technology and built dramatically improved Marlin lever-action rifles. The company continues to design new models.
But it wasn’t until recently that I learned Ruger had come out with the model lever-action Marlin I dreamed about–the stainless, short-barrel Model 1894 SBL in .44 Magnum. The rifle seemed to be the perfect choice for me, a mixture of traditional designs, modern improvements, and weather resistance, and since I hadn’t bought a brand-new firearm in eleven years I decided to splurge and purchase the 1894 SBL.
The SBL appears to be almost identical to Ruger’s 1894 Trapper model except it has a picatinny rail, allowing one to mount a scope or other optic, though for me the iron sights are all that are needed for a woods gun. With its 16.1-inch barrel the rifle is noticeably shorter than a Remington 870 riot shotgun. Sporting a bright tritium front sight and large rear peep sight, the rifle is easy to aim in poor light conditions and quickly line up targets.5 And the large-loop lever–well, you either like it or don’t. It’s my preference because there’s more to grab, which could make a difference in an emergency. The stainless steel and laminated wood stock and fore-end are necessary features for a weather resistant rifle. According to the manufacturer, the SBL can hold nine .44 Special rounds or eight .44 Magnums. That’s all the ammo capacity I’d ever need for camp and home protection.
A big extra is my new Ruger Marlin’s fit and finish are outstanding and the action is very smooth. It’s a welcome throwback to the Marlin firearms of yesteryear, and I now have a shared cartridge rifle/revolver pair to boot. Not bad for two firearms designs that are more than 150 years old.
Of course, my same-caliber long gun and handgun choice isn’t the only practical one, or perhaps even the best one. There are many other firearm combos featuring a broad mix of semi-auto, lever-actions, bolt-action, single-action and double-action smoke wagons.
The Moment of Truth
Fine fit and finish are sound reasons for acquiring a new firearm, but more important in my view are trouble-free operation and accuracy of the gun.
About a month ago, I grabbed my new Marlin and accompanied a friend to the gun range where he’s a member. At the bench, I shot at a target 50 yards away with generic .44 Magnum and Special factory ammo. My shots were grouping around 4 inches from the bullseye at the 7 o’clock position. Unfortunately, I forgot to bring a camera and cellphone with me so I couldn’t snap any photos.
Recently, I returned to the gun range and fired only .44 Special rounds from the Marlin at a target 50 yards away. During that exercise, I had to adjust the rear peep sight for elevation and windage, but finally shot a 3-string group in a vertical line, just to the left of the bullseye. Its spread was about 2 ½ inches. A younger person with good eyesight could probably shoot much better than that.
A welcome surprise was how smooth the action was while chambering rounds and ejecting the empties. Additionally, the trigger pull had almost no creep and it broke cleanly with light finger pressure.
For my needs, .44 Special rounds, with their low recoil, are all the power I’d need for my remote sojourns in the Pacific Northwest. If more ballistic horsepower were required then I’d switch to Magnum loads.
The Marlin 1894 SBL exudes quality and it nicely complements my Ruger .44 Bisley. Both will digest standard factory .44 Magnum or .44 Special ammunition without a hitch.
*****
Endnotes
1.) The cartridge is still around and also called the .44 Winchester Center Fire, and is a popular round with cowboy action shooters.
2.) The Winchester 1873 and Colt Peacemaker 44-40 long gun/revolver combo wasn’t the only shared cartridge option around that time period: The 44 Henry Rimfire cartridge apparently was also chambered in some Winchester Model 1866s, Smith and Wesson #3 revolvers, Colt “open top” revolvers, early Colt Single Action Army revolvers, etc. Smith and Wesson also began chambering their revolvers for .44-40 with their #3.
3.) Over the ensuing years, other firearms manufacturers produced new models of shared cartridge guns like the Winchester Model 1892 and Marlin 1889, along with some Colt Single Action Army revolvers, that were chambered with .32-20, 38-40, and 44-40 ammunition.
4.) Maybe some of the complaints were sour grapes, but too many of them were backed up with photographs of absurdly bad wood-to-metal fittings, boogered up screw head slots, wood stocks split at the wrists, and so on.
5.) My vintage peep-sighted rifles have small diameter rear sights that make is harder for me to quickly line up targets. The Marlin SBL’s larger peep sight is a big improvement.
Sources:
Baker, Chris, “Did Ruger Fix the Marlin 1894?”, Lucky Gunner Lounge, https://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/, April 3, 2025.
Campbell, Dave, “The .44-40 Winchester: History and Performance”, American Rifleman, https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/the-44-40-winchester-history-and-performance/, June 6, 2021.
Hacker, Rick, “The Winchester 1873: Winning The West For 150 Years”, American Rifleman, An Official Journal Of The NRA | The Winchester 1873: Winning The West For 150 Years, October 23, 2023.
McCombs, Paul, M.D., “Colt’s Frontier Six Shooter”, American Society of Arms Collectors, https://americansocietyofarmscollectors.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/McCombs-Colt-Forntier-six-shooter-v125.pdf, undated.
Pike, Travis, “Pancho Villa: The Guns of a Legend”, The Maglife Blog, https://gunmagwarehouse.com/blog/pancho-villa-the-guns-of-a-legend/, July 12, 2024.
Taffin, John, “Pistol Caliber Carbines Aren’t New”, Guns Magazine, https://gunsmagazine.com/ammo/pistol-caliber-carbines-arent-new/, 2024.
*****
Featured Image: Members of Company D, Texas Rangers, circa 1888. Some of these gents appear to be armed with .44-40 Winchester Model 1873 rifles and Colt Single Action Army revolvers. Public domain image.
Another great article Sir. Common sense to have long and short guns paired in the same caliber, especially if your daily mode of transportation is horseback.
I have had that itch since I entered into a serious relationship with the .32 caliber family, mostly the .32 H&R Magnum. Unfortunately Marlin lever guns in .32 mag got in short supply (astronomical prices) before I could purchase one.
Maybe one will turn up some day ,before dirt ,with an affordable price.
Thanks, Tony. The various .32 caliber pistol loads sound interesting to me, but what keeps me from buying a revolver (or long gun) in that chambering is whether the ammo companies will continue to manufacture the ammo for very long, or offer it at a reasonable price. If not, one could end up with an “orphan” firearm.
Spencer – I had the same concern in the past, but there are actually more new .32 options hitting the market than I’ve seen in a long time – both in terms of revolvers and new factory load options. I recently decided to pick up a SP101 in .327 Fed Mag, and I get what the hype is about. Of course I wish availability on the shelves would improve and that ammo prices will continue to drop, but online I can find just about anything I want.
Hammer, if there’s enough customer demand for the .32 fodder, the ammo companies might manufacture more of it and reduce their prices. It all comes down to demand and economy of scale in my view.
We (High Desert Cartridge) plan on offering 32 Magnum for years to come. As of now, it’s our top seller. We make 3 Magnum loads, one 32 Long load, and coming out with 327 Fed loads soon…all prices under what you’ll find on the net.
This is very good news for those who own .32 revolvers, and I recommend they check out High Desert Cartridge’s website.
Henry offers their “Classic Steel” rifle and carbine – no side-loading gate – in .327 Mag. After I acquired a set of S&W 432 UC revolvers I looked into a matching lever gun. I asked Henry whether they would ever offer the compatible .327 Mag. chambering in the Big Boy X configuration and was told not to hold my breath waiting for it. (I do “roll my own” .32 H&R loads so I’m not dependent on when they go in and out of commercial production.)
Something I found amusing was that on the website, Marlin’s 1895 .45-70 used to be rated for larger game including bear, deer, hog, moose, and t-rex.
Not that there’s much interest in the .44-40 today but many of us have read accounts of Texas Rangers and others dumping their single-action Colts in that chambering after having a primer cup extrude over the firing pin, locking up the gun. Gun writers typically attributed that to the slight taper and bottleneck of the WCF cartridge. I noticed, however, no such reports back when S&W briefly boosted that round with the limited-production Model 544. I finally figured out that the issue was that the older, blackpowder rounds had relatively soft copper primer cups and modern rounds are loaded with primers using harder brass cups.
A few years ago, a friend who shoots in local cowboy matches asked me to observe and evaluate the smoke from three different blackpowder-substitute loads that he was testing in a .44-40 replica Winchester 1873 that he was preparing to use in the blackpowder division of an upcoming match. When he was done and started cleaning the gun, he pointed out to me the lack of powder residue inside the receiver and mechanism, which he attributed to the slight bottleneck of the case.
I don’t own stock in either company and was happy to see Ruger’s belated reintroduction of the Marlin 1894 series. Still, gunners seeking a lever gun to partner with a revolver should evaluate Henry’s Big Boy. Several of those models offer the choice of loading through the front of the magazine tube or the loading gate in the receiver – a nice option for topping off the magazine after firing a few rounds. The Henry tubular magazine system, however, does allow emptying the magazine without needing to cycle all the rounds through the action.
Stephen: While I’ve never handled a Henry Big Boy, it and the new Smith and Wesson lever guns look pretty good, too. As you noted, the Big Boy’s tubular magazine system is a definite advantage for unloading unused rounds.
I’ve never fired a .45-70 firearm, Jeb, but it might just do for a T-rex.
The T-Rex reference is because Chris Pratt’s character in one of the Jurassic Park movies carried that model in .45-70. It was a witty move on S&W’s part.
The idea of a handgun and carbine taking the same ammo is still an excellent concept. My old pre-bolt safety Marlin .357 was not fond of semi wadcutter bullets – it would feed them about 90% of the time without a hiccup, but when it was not happy, it really wasn’t happy. Feeding it a steady diet of round nose flat point ‘cowboy’ bullets solved the problem.
The new Ruger/Marlin rifles, quality wise, are so totally different from the Remlins that it is difficult to quantify. IMHO, they’re the best generation of that class, and are definitely worth a serious look. Henry, also, makes a series of very slick revolver caliber carbines that resemble the Marlin 336 action more than the 1894. The M1854 S&W seems to be something of a copy of the Henry action, only not quite as smooth.
I think Tony Perrin has merit in his observation about the .32 caliber class. Given the revival of the .32 H&R along with the .327 Magnum, a lever gun in that caliber would be quite the combo.
All in all, any of those should be more than up to anything you can throw at them. The difficulty is deciding which one (or two) to get . . . and they’re even sweeter with a can on the end.
I’ve been wondering if my new Marlin .44 will chamber wadcutter ammo reliably, S. Bond. Now that you’ve broached the subject I’ll have to get some and evaluate.
Agree about the vast improvement in the Ruger Marlins over the Remlins. Too many horror stories out there about the latter guns. Best to stay clear of them, in my opinion, as they’re likely to be “problem children”.
Spencer, I haven’t found a lever gun yet that reliably feeds full wadcutters. The nature of the cartridge feed design, plus the angle at which most rounds are being chambered sort of precludes the full wadcutter. Elmer Keith’s semi wadcutter design (for .38 / .357) is the 358429. It works great out of revolvers, but the metplat is very large and has in my experience, been touch & go on feed reliability – especially if you’re playing the Cowboy IPSC games where speed counts. There are casting molds that have a more truncated metplat, and those might work a bit better.
You might search for some of the larger bullet casters on line and get like 100 rounds of each of their SWC pattern. If your Marlin will chug through 100 of a particular shape then that’s the one I’d go with.
More helpful info based on your experiences with lever guns, S. Bond.
I haven’t tried it repeatedly bur my Henry Big Boy X seems to feed full wadcutter .38 Spl. loads.
I have a Rossi 92 carbine in .357 Magnum that I absolutely adore; one of those firearms I could never part with. Very light, handy rifle.
The only thing that could make it better would be if it was chambered in .327 Federal Magnum. I bet .32 H&R and .327 out of a rifle would be flatter shooting than their .38 and .357 equivalents. Less recoil too, although it’s not like .357 kicks much out of my Rossi.
Reviews of the Rossi 92 that I’ve read have been positive, Axel, though I’ve never shot one. My only direct experience with Model 92s has been with the old Winchester versions in .25-20 and .32-20. They functioned well and were quite accurate out to about 100 yards, which is all you should expect out those cartridges. Many years ago, an old gunsmith told me that the .32-20 was a favorite deer poacher’s cartridge during the Great Depression because it wasn’t very loud, and if well placed it would drop a deer.
Spencer,
The M92 Rossi is a functional clone of the Model 92 Winchester. In the late 1990s when I was experimenting with this range drug called ‘cowboy action shooting’, a lot of guys were using the Rossi and Marlin carbines ( I used a M1894 Marlin ). I ended up working on a lot of these rifles because at the time, the finish work of the action left something to be desired – much like on the Uberti revolvers of that era. But, they all slicked up really nice and were fast handling guns.
Guys I know who are into cowboy action shooting like the Rossi M92s, s. bond, though they admit they’ve had to do some action work like you did.
Really great write-up Sir! I really appreciate the availabilty of a carbine that can be paired with my favorite carry revolvers. I favor the .357mg and Smith and Wesson K-Frames. Over the years, I tried a couple of different rifles but had a bad experience with a used and abused Rossi and a “Remlin” rifle that I eventually let go of to someone who was willing to take on the challenge of correcting it. Last Fall, I picked up a new Marlin by Ruger. I have no complaints and it has become a regular companion on outdoor trips and has even accompanied me on a deer hunt.
I generally feed mine with Federal American Eagle 158gr semi jacketed soft points when in the field but it feeds everything I have loaded it with. Thank you again for your contribution!
That’s a good combo (a .357 K-frame Smith and the new Marlin lever gun in the same caliber), Mark. I was sorely tempted to buy the .357 Marlin Trapper, but opted for the .44 Magnum for the extra knockdown power. However, the .357 Magnum version is probably the flatter shooting rifle at 100 or so yards. Maybe I’ll buy it anyway. Can’t own too many firearms!
My Rossi 92 is a .44 Magnum. It has handled and stabilized all bullet weights from 200 to 310 grs. to include cast, plated and jacketed. I don’t recall ever having a stoppage of any kind. I had sold my Marlin 1895GS because the sights were mounted off the centerline of the bore and the sloppy chamber was hard on brass. The cheaper Rossi does everything I need a lever action rifle to do and is better made than the Marlin. The companion revolver is a DA S&W 629-2 Mountain Lion. Recoil is vicious with full power .44 Magnum loads but tolerable with the full power Elmer Keith .44 Special load or of course slightly reduced .44 Magnum loads. While I do have a .32 H&R Magnum Single Six, I have no interest in a rifle using the same cartridge.
Was your Marlin 1895GS a late Marlin-manufactured piece or a “Remlin”, Dave? Regardless, it sounds like it was a real lemon.
After I inherited my Dad’s Model 10 38Spl service revolver I had the urge to pair up a carbine with it. To say I was shocked at the prices of most lever guns would be an understatement of the year.
So, naturally, I settled on a Rossi R92 357. And I’m glad I did. I had done my research and knew exactly what I was going to do before I had even gotten the carbine. With what I considered to be minor tinkering (just enough to satisfy the inner tinkerer in me….) I had an extremely smooth action with a 3.5lbs trigger pull. And it will feed full 38spl wadcutters if the bullet is seated way out there, long enough that the wadcutters won’t chamber in the Model 10. With a few grains of Trail Boss they are an absolute hoot to shoot, not much more noise or recoil than a similar .22, and pretty darn accurate out to about 50yds.
It used to be when I went woods stomping here in Idaho I carried my Mossberg 590 and a 1911 45acp. And I still do when I might be headed into grizzly country (which seems to be expanding every year….), however I appreciate the weight savings of the Rossi and model 10 so I can carry more photography gear with me….
Great write up Clay, I enjoyed reading it, thank you!
Not deeply seating wadcutter bullets sounds like the way to prevent feeding problems with lever guns, T. O. Mike. And like you, I wouldn’t enter griz country without bringing along some heavy artillery.
Clay, sounds like you have a great set up with your Ruger & Marlin in calibre .44. You have the option of softer shooting.44 Special or the harder hitting magnums, depending upon your situation.
My sons surprised me with a Henry Big Boy lever action rifle several years ago. My revolvers are all chambered in .38 SPL and one is a .357 Magnum. They naturally selected the Henry in the same calibre as my revolvers.
It seems to make sense to have one common source of ammunition in light of the shortages that we’ve experienced over the past few decades. I recently stocked up on .38 Special FMJ which should keep my revolvers and rifle amply supplied for range duty for the foreseeable future.
Enjoy shooting your pair of .44s!
Revolvers and long guns chambered in .38 Special/.357 Magnum are great combos, Opa.
Agree with your statement that the .44 Special is softer shooting, especially in a long gun. Because of that, .44 Special cartridges will be the default loads in all my firearms chambered thusly.
Spencer, Something to keep in mind with shooting the ‘Special’ cartridges in the Magnum chambers is to keep that chamber clean. The same carbon ring buildup that occurs in revolvers when you shoot the shorter round through the longer chamber also applies to rifles.
Excellent point, s. bond. When I clean my firearms I always let Hoppes #9 do its thing for 30 to 40 minutes before swabbing it dry. That seems to take care of carbon buildup without the need for heavy scrubbing, but if some grunge remains I repeat the process.
My 1895GS was made before the Remlin notoriety. It was a very good shooter but I think both sights were installed crooked at the factory. A gunsmith remounted the front sight but the rear still never lined up properly after that. A friend has something of a .45-70 obsession and he bought his third Marlin during that Remlin era. He never inspected that rifle when he went to pick it up. If he had he should’ve noticed the extra dovetail that was cut into the barrel and turned upside down. Cartridges would not feed from the magazine or fit into the chamber. The horror stories were true.
Regarding .45-70, the BFR .45-70 revolver would be an interesting companion. The cartridge is easily downloaded and my 1895GS handled everything from a single round ball to .454″ revolver bullets. I wouldn’t mind a .500 S&W combo either but but both the revolvers and rifles are just too expensive.
Your observations, Dave, were all to common with the Remlin Marlins. I don’t know why Remington, which had been struggling for years with a variety of self-inflicted problems, thought it was wise to buy out Marlin and manufacture their often sloppy versions of those firearms.
No doubt some Remlin Marlins were decent, but maybe the other kind was what finally put Remington under. Ruger, however, took a different approach to making Marlins; they built a new factory that contained virtually all new machinery, and insisted on higher quality control standards. The results are obvious to me.
Typo alert: should have been “were all too common”.
The Ruger-Marlins are an excellent product!
When Freedom Group acquired Marlin, the New Haven company’s standards had already been slipping a bit, but the forced move to Remington’s facilities in Ilion, NY and Madison, KY was a QC nightmare. The New Haven tooling and machinery had been sliding out of tolerance for some time, but the experienced workers there knew what adjustments needed to be made to make the guns work. In some cases, those adjustments were literally scribbled on the wall, next to the machine, and in other cases, they lived in the heads of the machinists and equipment operators.
When Remington packed up the machinery and moved it, they lost most of those employees, and all of the corporate knowledge about the tolerances. They built parts on the old machinery that didn’t meet original specs, and didn’t interface well with each other. The guns were generally poor, in comparison to the legacy products, and while Remington worked hard to correct the situation, they ran into bankruptcy before the guns matured into a passable product.
When Ruger bought the remnants of Marlin, it took a reported eighteen semi trucks to haul all the machinery, fixtures and tooling to the plant in North Carolina. Most of the surplus parts were junk, and were scrapped.
Recognizing that most of the tooling and machinery could no longer build to the blueprints, Ruger basically started from scratch. They “reblueprinted” the guns, establishing a new baseline for all the dimensions and tolerances. They refurbished what equipment they could, and built new machines and tooling for the rest. The methods for making some parts changed, as part of this redesign, to incorporate more modern manufacturing practices.
This is why it took so long to get guns into market. They had to start from scratch on each design, so they started with the 1895 first, then moved on to the 1894 and 336 as time and resources permitted. Eventually, we will probably see the rimfires come back, when they have the bandwidth to tackle them.
I’ve been impressed with the Ruger Marlins so far. I think Ruger kept what was good about the old guns (including some heritage cues) and improved on them, making a better product than even New Haven was making, at the end of their run. They’re struggling to keep up with demand, so I guess the market agrees. I hope they’ll continue to expand the catalog!
As the late Paul Harvey used to say, “and now you know the rest of the story.” Thanks, Mike!
Mike, you’re definitely correct in your observations on the ‘Ruglin’ rifles. Yesterday at the local gun range there were a couple of folks with new Marlins, one in .44 Magnum, the other was .30/30. They were gracious enough to let me handle both, and to say they are fitted like a pre-WW I Parabellum (Luger) or Mannlicher-Schoenauer is an understatement. The actions on both were silk smooth, feeding was almost inperceptable, triggers weren’t bad for brand new rifles, and overall function was flawless.
It is VERY apparent that all the time, money and effort Ruger put in to keeping Marlin alive was money – and time – well spent.
That’s certainly been my experience with the new “Ruglins” (the first time I’ve encountered the word!), s. bond. Usually when I purchase a new gun I end up doing a little minor finish and action work to bring it up to my standards, but with the new Marlin Model 1894 SBL there was no need.
Back when I turned old enough to buy firearms I paired a Ruger SBH and a Marlin 1894 both in 44 mag. I thought I was set. Great guns both. I sold the Marlin at some point (stupid) but still have the SBH. That pair provided me with LOTS of fun.
I did buy a Remlin 1895 in 45-70. Their Big Loop model. I looked it over carefully as I knew all about Remlin’s lack of QC. Somehow this one was about as perfect as a non custom gun could get. Still is. I have several 45-70 leverguns but even compared to my new Ruger/Marlin Trapper this gun takes the cake. Maybe I should have bought a lotto ticket that day too.
I’m still pairing handguns and rifles. It is apparently one of those traits (quirks?) some of have and we cannot help ourselves…
Excellent article, as always. Please keep the great stuff coming!
Thank you, Donald. You’re proof that not all Remlin Marlins are bad news and yours is still satisfying. But you raise a good point, e.g., careful inspection of any gun, new or used, before buying is critical to avoiding something you’ll soon regret.
Like many of us, my gun buying interests have evolved over time, and what I thought was hot stuff ten years ago is no longer true.
Spencer,
Only anecdotal evidence but… it is my understanding the 1895s were actually well built rifles from Remlin. Most of the complaints I have heard, read and seen (folks in CAS have trouble with them and I see that all the time…) were the pistol caliber 1894s.
Not sure why the rifle caliber cartridge 1895s were better made, maybe still had better/newer tooling and experienced operators running that line? No idea. I know several folks who have the Remlin 1895s and all state they are exceptional rifles. The 1894s however… crap shoot and a half apparently.
Anyway, a Remlin CAN be fixed to make it run smoooooth as butter but ya gotta know a cowboy gun gunsmith in the SASS world to gitter done.
Donald,
The M1895 Marlin action is a slightly enlongated 336 action. The bolt is cylindrical rather than squared as on the 1894 guns. Fitting the square bolt requires a bit more attention to detail, and if the attention isn’t there, or your tooling is a bit off, the results aren’t pretty.
Other than holding a few Remlin Marlins in my hands–and those were Model 336s with OK but not great fit and finish–I’ve had no other experiences with them, Donald. A lot of gun blogs barf on the early Remlin Marlins but claim the quality got better in a few years, maybe due to customer complaints and bad reviews.
Thank you for the good article, Mr. Spencer. I think the revolver/carbine concept makes almost as much sense today as it did in the late 1800’s. The Carbines make superior home or camp defense guns as they are easier to hit with (than handguns) and recoil is minimalized. The velocity bump you get with the revolver rounds (.357, .41, and .44 Mag, .45 Colt) make them serious medicine in the carbines. When my daughter is in the house, a Rossi 92 loaded with Remington .38 +P Golden Sabers resides behind her door. Those 125 +P’s clock 1350 fps from the 16.5″ barrel but are super pleasant to shoot. An old Winchester 94AE Trapper in .45 Colt will take care of anything that needs to be shot in my state, and is no trouble to pack around. Viva la Leverguns!
You’ve got my vote, Kevin. I’m still impressed with how mild the Marlin’s recoil is when using .44 Special rounds, plus how compact it is. It’s noticeably shorter than a Remington 870 riot gun and easier to move around in tight quarters.
As I’ve come to understand the significant difference between effective hits and high capacity firepower I’ve grown to appreciate the pistol cartridge lever gun, but my hankering is for a 357 carbine, rather than a 44 trapper, mostly because I prefer the balance of the slightly longer long gun and have more 38/357s than I do 44s. If ever I tread Grizzly Country again “Mjolnir,” a Marlin 1895G (pre-Remlin) 45/70 in the safe…
A lever rifle in .38/.357 is an excellent choice, Michael, especially when you already have a .45-70 in the stable to deal with really nasty stuff.
This comment section has me hankering for a Ruger/Marlin Trapper in 45 Colt now…
I need a .38-40 revolver to go with my rifle. Would be great if more companies loaded .38-40 ammunition too.
Other than paying big bucks for an old Colt Peacemaker chambered in .38-40, Steve, you might get lucky coming across a used Ruger Old Vaquero that fires that cartridge.
It doesn’t sound like .38-40 ammo is in much demand outside cowboy action shooting, which probably makes it unprofitable for ammo companies to manufacture much of the stuff. You can always try reloading.
I know Pietta and Uberti make some Colt clones in .38-40. Try Cimarron Arms and Taylor’s Firearms. Ruger, I believe, made a New Vaquero or perhaps a Blackhawk conversion chambered in 10mm and .38-40. Might be tough to locate though.
Other .38-40 revolvers, though very hard to find, are vintage Colt New Service and the S&W N-frame Outdoorsman chambered in that caliber. Custom gunsmiths like Bowen Classic Arms probably could convert a large frame revolver to .38-40. Won’t be cheap, though.
A modern option is pair a 9mm revolver with a PCC.
Such a combo would work well, Pete, especially since many companies make 9 mm revolvers, though most carbines in that caliber are semi-autos. Still, nothing wrong with a revolver (or pistol) paired with a semi-auto 9 mm carbine.