Archimedes Said: "If Your Lever Is Too Short. . ."

[Bigslug]

". . . maybe you should get two."

Ruglin 1894 1.jpeg (125.04 KiB) Viewed 1990 times

When Ruger announced they were bringing back the Marlin 1894, I knew it was going to be a likely thing. I've been wanting a .357 long gun for a while. Only thing is, there's also a fair sprinkling of .44's on the ground too. Only rational choice seemed to be to get both.

Ruglin 1894 2.jpeg (207.23 KiB) Viewed 1990 times

The model that was originally piquing my interest was the 1894 "Dark Series", with its tactical M-lock handguard and synthetic stock, but I got to thinking about that and said "Carbon steel gun that wants to rust. Handguard full of holes that wants to let water in, but make it hard to wipe down. Ummmm...no.' There's plenty of aftermarket furniture options, so I figured to start with the 1894 SBL stainless and build up me own "White Series" version.

Ruger is doing a NICE job on these. My Pop has a number of original JM's and an early Remlin - these have absolutely nothing to be ashamed of in terms of fit and finish. The triggers are crisp, if a little heavy (they're hundred yard brush guns - I'm cool with that), and the actions are tight and smooth in that "new Ruger" way of the parts needing few hundred cycles to get to know each other better.

The cross bolt safeties will for sure go away in favor of filler plugs. The red plastic followers will likely go away in favor of stainless. I need to get them apart to see what Ruger is doing for an ejector before deciding if the "Bear Proof" option is necessary. I need to study on the 1-piece firing pin conversions a little more, but very possibly...

Only thing I'm not crazy about are the front sights:

Ruglin 1894 3.jpeg (40.16 KiB) Viewed 1990 times

I can live with the fiber optic - or just color it over with a black Sharpie. But can I please just get a G-D SQUARE front post intended for a 6:00 hold at the bottom edge of my target instead of this bayonet-distance blob? Their 1894 Trapper version has a square post with a white ramp that could be easily blacked out, but my estimate in looking at the photos is that it's significantly shorter since the Trapper isn't mounting its rear sight atop a thick Picatinny rail, so swapping out to one of those probably isn't in the cards.

Oh well, I have another sighting option in mind...

Ruglin 1894 4.jpeg (126.07 KiB) Viewed 1990 times

My vendor happened to have a signal Sig Romeo 5 red dot on hand that I'd been contemplating because (A) cost, and (B) came with a low mount. I'll probably pick up a throw level base for it, but I'll run it in on the stocker and confirm I want another for the .44.

I got as far as confirming they both feed my cast handloads. Range day is gonna have to wait. I boogered up my left shoulder a couple weeks ago - ironically by doing exercises to hopefully improve neck and shoulder health - and needed a lift just to pick these up.

So stay tuned. Between these and the 66, I got some work to do...

[Zee]

Those are kinda cool looking. And, that’s a chunk of change laying there! Them suckers ain’t cheap!!

[sakodude]

Very nice! I definitely need a 357 lever but choke on the price when I look at them.

[Bigslug]

Those are kinda cool looking. And, that’s a chunk of change laying there! Them suckers ain’t cheap!!

Yeah. . .stung a bit. Even with pretty decent "friend" pricing, Cali's new 11% tax on stuff that goes bang pretty much wiped out the benefit of the "friend" pricing. This may be my last hurrah at buying new for a while as a result. I remember the pre-CAS days of the early '90's working at the LGS when we had the birch stocked 336/30AS for about $300. Truly, where have all the good times gone?

But WTH. . .It's a long standing itch that needed scratched. The price on original JM's has gotten pretty silly; I wasn't really impressed with what I was seeing when Remington had the brand; I really don't like straight-wrist stocks which a lot of the old 1894's came with; and I couldn't care less if it doesn't look "Western". The furrin-made 1892 Winchester clones can be had for about half the price, but I practically had to stand on the back of the cartridges to get even 4 .357's past the loading gate on the one I got to play with - made me wonder what else they're rushing. Seemed like the time had come.

[Chiro1989]

Two at a time, injecting logic into gun purchases, well done Bigslug

[Elk Creek]

Very nice! I definitely need a 357 lever but choke on the price when I look at them.

Yes yes you do!!!!

[JunkCollector]

Wow my friend go big
I'll stay on the porch.
My last lever was a 38 special

It has been a fun gun with steel.
Everyone loves it.

[Elk Creek]

1873 Saddle Ring Carbine in 44 Special…. That’s what you need!

[Admin]

I often wondered why the "Dark" series wasn't a black coated stainless steel. Seems that would fit the profile of a hard use gun like it is positioned to be.

But that is one hell of a nice pair of acquisitions! Congrats!

[GrapeApe]

Congrats on a nice score!
One question though, could the recoil pads be any thicker?

[Wambli Ska]

Wry nice score!!!!!!! Like the fraternal twins

[Bigslug]

Congrats on a nice score!
One question though, could the recoil pads be any thicker?

My guess would be that they're putting the same stock on the stainless 1895 and 336 as a production expedient. They seem to be using the same thinner brown rubber pad on the walnut 336 and 1894's - probably for similar reasons.

Which makes sense. I think one of the things that helped kill the original Marlin company was excessive dithering around with too many cartridge options (especially the "classic era" ones) , and probably too many variations of them. .25-20, .32-20, .35 Remington .38-55, .44-40, 444 Marlin, even .45 Colt. They all have their charms, but none of them DO anything better than the four currently and widely accepted cartridges Ruger has chosen to relaunch the brand with. It's hard to make a profit when you tool up to produce something you're only likely to sell a couple hundred of.

I kinda dug the octagonal barrel "Cowboy" options the old company was doing, but I wouldn't suggest Ruger take them up. I'm not in the cowboy action crowd, but my impression is that - like with Highpower - the participants of that game are aging out and not attracting a lot of new blood. The other problem is that any action or cartridge born in the 1890's is a little past that group's field of interest. The Uberti repros will likely continue to rule there.

I think they'll do well if they stay reasonably streamlined.

EDIT TO ADD: Yeah. . .I'd like to seem them bring back the 39A, but I doubt we'll see it. There's a lot of complaining about the cost of the centerfires (that I don't totally disagree with), and the 39A is largely the same kind of old-school, milled steel effort put into a .22. Which I doubt enough people appreciate to make a lucrative go of at the price they'd likely arrive at. Enjoy your cast receiver Henry's folks. Siiiiigh. . .

[GrapeApe]

Well, Ruger IS a leader and IIRC innovator in investment casting.
They were a pioneer in regards to IC receivers with the 77 action.
Last I heard, their IC had spun off into a rather LARGE division, even making golf club heads ect.

[Bigslug]

Yeah, the investment casting is definitely a wrinkle.

It's certainly cheaper than milling out '98 Mauser receivers, but even so, we've got 77/Hawkeyes price-pointing in the $1500 ballpark and cheaper-process Americans for half that. Same kind of situation with the revolvers: They make the Single-Six. . .and the Wrangler. They make the SP101. . .and the LCR. So whatever they're saving by investment casting their steel parts, it's not enough to intrude on the entry market end of slapping a bunch of plastic and aluminum together with roll pins to produce something that goes "bang" with few other qualitative concerns - subjective or otherwise.

I dunno. . .the lever gun is tricky. Its entire development and heyday was completely contained in an era that didn't have those cost-cutting measures, and they're linked with those old processes in a lot of heads. Numerous companies have been looking into ways to make them cheaper as functioning tools without concern for the aesthetic. It isn't especially working for me, but YMMV.

[GrapeApe]

Yep

[Chiro1989]

Enabling Fu....

https://battlehawkarmory.com/product/ma ... c662d909d4

[shotgunshooter3]

Enabling Fu....

https://battlehawkarmory.com/product/ma ... c662d909d4

Is that an old stock Remlin, or a newer Ruger made one? The SKU matches Ruger...

Asking for a friend...

[Elk Creek]

Ruger…. That’s a good price. Pit LGS has it for 1k

[JunkCollector]

Very nice! I definitely need a 357 lever but choke on the price when I look at them.

Yes yes you do!!!!

You both do......just saying.

[Chiro1989]

Going to need more pictures than that....

[Bigslug]

Did the necessary chipmunk juggling (barrel break in) and zeroing. Got the irons on for both guns - yes, the front sights need to go AWAY - then slapped the one Romeo 5 my shop had in stock onto the .357. After one correction:

Ruglin 1894 5.jpeg (168.77 KiB) Viewed 1575 times

Ten rounds of American Eagle 158gr JSP from 50 yards. Crappy rest, too-low bench, and a 2 MOA dot - still, all the hundred yard brush gun a man is likely to need. Plinkers, in my case.

The .357, not surprisingly, is a real pussycat. With full-snort stuff, the .44 lets you know you've got something. Gonna put the same red dot on that one as soon as my guy gets more in.

Nice guns - real happy with them. The safety deletes are on the way. Gotta check with my Dad to see just how many Marlins we have needing their plastic magazine followers replaced before ordering those. Other parts to ponder, but not tonight. ZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzz.....

[Wambli Ska]

For the purposes that gun would be called upon to achieve that will do just fine!

[Zee]

What distance is the group?

[Zee]

Disregard. 50 yards.

You can do better. Don’t compromise.

[Zee]

Never accept mediocrity.