New Marlin 1894 C's in stock

[sghart3578]

I got an email alert from Kentucky Gun Co. this afternoon.

http://www.kygunco.com/Product/View?ItemNo=65859&utm_source=KyGunCo%20Marketing&utm_medium=Website&utm_campaign=Notify%20Me

Best of luck!


Steve in N CA

[Goldstar225]

I was eagerly awaiting this release. I've called Marlin for the last two years inquiring about a release. Then about two weeks ago I had a JM 1894CS pop up at a price I couldn't pass up and bought it.

I truly hope these new 1894 .357s are perfect. There are a lot of folks (like me) that want one but were unwilling to pay the price that the market was demanding.

[Solothurn]

Thanks. Just placed my order.

[Idaho45guy]

No need for Remlin junk...

Sad to see people forget what quality firearms look and feel like. I bought a JM Marlin 1894 in .357 for $400 in 2008. Nice little gun with good bluing, polished surfaces, beautiful wood, smooth action, and flawless functioning.

Too nice to use as a knock-around ranch gun so I sold it in 2013 for $1000.

Bought a new Marlin 1894 in .45 Colt this January. What a complete ***! Wouldn't function, awful checkering, magazine follower was crushed and cracked from the factory, front sight fell off during target shooting, screw for the for end cap broke apart when loosening it for takedown, action felt like it was full of sand when you worked it, "polish" on the receiver was on par with a $250 Ruger. Just overall a sad example of a once great firearm.

I had no qualms sanding down the stock and painting it with a textured finish. Now that I have it working reliably, it's my camp gun. I have no qualms about banging it around and abusing it.

Saw someone post pics of their new Remlin 1894 a couple of months ago and declare just how much improved it was and how Marlin is coming back. It looked as bad as mine...

[sghart3578]

I guess that we will see.

I am willing to give them a chance at redemption. The JM's are never coming back and I have made my peace with it.

My new rifle should be here by the end of next week. I will put it through the wringer and post my opinions and range results.

If it is junk then I will say so.

But I will be comparing it to the new Rossi and new Henry in my safe, not my JM Marlins.

[jmort]

Hope it functions as you desire. I would send it out to get tuned. Regardless, enjoy.

[Idaho45guy]

I guess that we will see.

I am willing to give them a chance at redemption. The JM's are never coming back and I have made my peace with it.

My new rifle should be here by the end of next week. I will put it through the wringer and post my opinions and range results.

If it is junk then I will say so.

But I will be comparing it to the new Rossi and new Henry in my safe, not my JM Marlins.

I think the Henry's are a passable lever gun but the Rossi's I've handled have been a bit cheap feeling.

My first rifle ever was a Browning BLR22 Grade II. The next year I got a Winchester Model 70 XTR Featherweight in .257 Roberts. I have higher expectations of quality than most I suppose.

[hpdrifter]

I have bought two new Remlins. Both were cosmetically fine.

Barrels.........a different story.
A 35 Remington had bugered rifling. Took 3.5 months of haggling to get it re barreled.
Sold it when I got it back. I became unenamored(no longer enamored) with it.

I swore off Remington/Marlin but I always wanted a 45/70 1895 Cowboy.

Ordered one as I couldn't find one in the area.

Rifling was very uneven. Almost non-existent on one side. Sent it back for a look see and to their credit, they re barreled it rather quickly. Still have that one.

Good luck. As I stated before, they looked fine to me. Check it out good.

[Jeff Michel]

I must be exceptionally lucky, I've acquired a 336, and two 1894's in 44 Mag and .45 Colt(CB) of recent manufacture and they are every bit as good as anything I own that was made in North Haven.

[44Blam]

I have a Marlin 1895 that shoots great. I have a borescope (not specifically for guns - its for looking around in engines and behind drywall but the 45-70 is big enough bore that it works) that I ran up the bore when I went to buy it and the rifling was fine along the length of the barrel.
I love that gun. The fit/finish is not as nice as my Henry, but it's reasonable.

[brewer12345]

Considering the gaggle of JMs floating around and the other alternatives (perfectly happy with my Rossi lever), I don't understand why anyone would buy a new Remlin.

[lightload]

Having read here about Remington's difficulties making Marlin clones over a period of years, I can only conclude that they don't know how and further, that they knowingly ship out defective rifles. Now that they are in terrible financial straits, I wonder if the bean counters will allow workers to build these fine rifles as they should be built.

[rototerrier]

Considering the gaggle of JMs floating around and the other alternatives (perfectly happy with my Rossi lever), I don't understand why anyone would buy a new Remlin.
Easy answer, the folks with JM's have been asking $1000 or more.

I've been in the market for years and just never could justify, personally, dropping that amount of cash on a JM 357. In the back of my mind, I've kinda felt like everyone sitting on a JM knew this day was going to come and they've been trying to dump those guns for a grand before new ones became available. I'm curious how things will finally shake out. If the new ones are garbage, will the old ones go up even more? If the new ones are really good, will the old ones go down or will everything just remain the same. Guess we'll finally get to see.

[osteodoc08]

My last few Remlins have been just fine. Marlin produced turds during the JM period too.

[sghart3578]

My last few Remlins have been just fine. Marlin produced turds during the JM period too.


Ain't that the truth.

I will be very critical of my new rifle. I plan on several posts with photos, range evaluations, etc.

Of course, I won't be evaluating long term wear and tear but JM Marlins break also.

I just had to repair the button on my carrier that engages with the lever to lift the carrier into place. Luckily the little button fell onto the blanket of the shooting bench and I was able to replace the spring and C clip.

Who knows how many thousands of rounds that thing has seen. But the rifle was well used when I got it.


Steve in N CA

[brewer12345]

Easy answer, the folks with JM's have been asking $1000 or more.

I've been in the market for years and just never could justify, personally, dropping that amount of cash on a JM 357. In the back of my mind, I've kinda felt like everyone sitting on a JM knew this day was going to come and they've been trying to dump those guns for a grand before new ones became available. I'm curious how things will finally shake out. If the new ones are garbage, will the old ones go up even more? If the new ones are really good, will the old ones go down or will everything just remain the same. Guess we'll finally get to see.

When I saw what jm 357s were going for 5 years ago I gave up and bought a used Rossi. No complaints. Would have bought a Henry otherwise. I suspect jm anything will eventually fetch collector prices.

[Idaho45guy]

My last few Remlins have been just fine. Marlin produced turds during the JM period too.

There is a difference between "just fine" and an actual quality firearm made with skill and pride. Having owned both, the difference is amazing.

My JM rifle...

221629

221630

My Remlin...

221631

221628

[dragon813gt]

There is a difference between "just fine" and an actual quality firearm made with skill and pride. Having owned both, the difference is amazing.

The real differences are that the JM’s have better wood and better wood to metal fit. Other than that the differences are minor. If anything the Remington’s are made to more exacting tolerances.

There is no excuse for the letting turds out the door. But on the flip side you can blame Marlin to some extent for not documenting changes that were made on the line as production was ongoing. The stories you hear about how they were made, from the actual guys that made them, is comical at times.

I own a bunch of each. I’ve come across a lot or JM turds over the years. People like to pretend that everything they produced was perfect. This certainly wasn’t the case. Like I said, no excuse for letting turds out the door. Unfortunately this is how most large manufactures do it these days. Ruger is another shining example of letting your customers be the the final quality control. If you only buy one or two firearms every decade you probably won’t notice. If you buy in the quantities I do it shines a glaring light on the issues from all the large manufacturers.

The current Marlins have gone through the teething problems and the issues seem to have been worked out. This is a good thing for anyone that prefers their design. I’m one of them.

[sghart3578]

The real differences are that the JM’s have better wood and better wood to metal fit. Other than that the differences are minor. If anything the Remington’s are made to more exacting tolerances.

There is no excuse for the letting turds out the door. But on the flip side you can blame Marlin to some extent for not documenting changes that were made on the line as production was ongoing. The stories you hear about how they were made, from the actual guys that made them, is comical at times.

I own a bunch of each. I’ve come across a lot or JM turds over the years. People like to pretend that everything they produced was perfect. This certainly wasn’t the case. Like I said, no excuse for letting turds out the door. Unfortunately this is how most large manufactures do it these days. Ruger is another shining example of letting your customers be the the final quality control. If you only buy one or two firearms every decade you probably won’t notice. If you buy in the quantities I do it shines a glaring light on the issues from all the large manufacturers.

The current Marlins have gone through the teething problems and the issues seem to have been worked out. This is a good thing for anyone that prefers their design. I’m one of them.


I agree 100%. I buy and sell a lot of guns every year. I have returned brand new S&W's, Rugers, CZ's, you name it. Ruger has to be the worst in my opinion.

I think it is hilarious how, now that you can't get them, JM Marlins were the epitome of firearms greatness on par with Purdey and Holland and Holland.

I already told this story on the Marlin forum but here goes. My oldest brother is a 74 year old Winchester die hard. He has never forgiven them for 1: dropping the Mauser style feed and 2: moving production overseas.

When I tell him that a rifle equivalent to his pre-64 70 in quality is available from an American company for $2000 he says "They will never be as good as those old Winchesters."

When you hear that from a person talking about guns, or cars or athletes or anything just quit talking. Their minds are made up and you won't change it.

I understand that mind set. It took me a long time to consider a new Smith and Wesson after they sold us out to the Clinton administration. But the new S&W revolvers with the lawyer lock and MIM parts are very good guns.

And I find it equally amusing that people who are angry at Remington have no problem buying a Ruger. Ruger's quality is all over the map and Bill Ruger sold us out to the gun control folks.

Folks that complain about modern Marlins have no problems buying Rossi 92's and spending hours cleaning, polishing and refitting them. I know, I have two. And new Rossi 357's, when you can find them, are as much or more than the $600 I paid for this new rifle.

But if I had to guess at the nut core of the anti Remlin anger it is this. And I confess that it is the one burning issue with me also. That is the fact that the bean counters thought that they could ruin a great American gun company like Marlin and the rubes in fly over country wouldn't be smart enough to see it.

Well, enough ranting. People are free to spend or not spend.

Personally, I accept reality. And the reality is that JM Marlins are gone forever. I want to like the new Marlins not only for myself but my kids and grandkids. I buy and sell so many guns because I am building a gun trust for my descendants. And lever action rifles should be a part of any practical collection.

With that practicality in mind I have looked at the new Marlins and they look serviceable. When my new gun gets here it will be evaluated fairly.

Best of luck,


Steve in N CA

[Idaho45guy]

The real differences are that the JM’s have better wood and better wood to metal fit. Other than that the differences are minor. If anything the Remington’s are made to more exacting tolerances.

Sorry, but I absolutely disagree. If what you claim is true, then how do you explain the obvious much higher polish of metal surfaces on my JM Marlin vs. the Remlin?

It is much more than wood to metal fit and quality of wood. The screws themselves are of a cheaper metal and are prone to shattering. The sights are notoriously canted on many Remlins; mine fell out of the dovetail due to bad tolerances.

Go here and tell them you think the new Marlins are better made than the older ones...

http://www.marlinowners.com/forum/marlin-rant-forum/

[dragon813gt]

That site is full of people that can’t accept that Marlin was sold. There is a wealth of information there. But that doesn’t mean everything they say is correct. I stopped going there for a lot of reasons.

You’re correct that the polish is higher on the old guns. But Marlins are service rifles. They’ve never been beauty queens. They’re built to put meat on the table. And they, even the new ones, do this very well.

I will repeat it again. There is no excuse for sending defective products out the door. I’m not defending that. But the good ones they’re producing are every bit as good as the old ones. There will never be another JM stamped barrel so people just need to accept that. Be glad that Marlin is still around at all. Otherwise we’d be stuck w/ Henrys and Rossis. Neither of which I will ever buy due to a myriad of reasons.

[FergusonTO35]

My 1982 1894C is my favorite gun in the entire arsenal, gave a whopping $250.00 for it in 1998 like new. I wouldn't sell it for $1000 or even $2000 for that matter. Am I itching to buy a new Remlin version? No, but if I encountered one that had respectable workmanship and the price was right it might just come home with me. If I like a gun then I like it, regardless of the name on the barrel.

I am glad that the Marlins are still being made. In fact, I'm really not worried about how polished or fancy they are. None of my JM Marlins could be described as such, nor do I expect them to be. My gripe is that Remlin still expects us to spend hard earned money on rifles with irritating defects that just scream "we have no pride in what we send out the door". Front sights clocked at 11:30 or 12:30, fat forends, rifling problems; no excuse for any of that nonsense, period. Plenty of New Haven Winchesters rolled off the line with similar problems so Remlin is not alone here. I'm not going to spend the rest of my life hating Remlin for shuttering the North Haven plant, but until they get their act together (which they have had what, like eight years to do now?) Remlin deserves every bit of derision they receive.

[hatt]

Sorry, but I absolutely disagree. If what you claim is true, then how do you explain the obvious much higher polish of metal surfaces on my JM Marlin vs. the Remlin?

It is much more than wood to metal fit and quality of wood. The screws themselves are of a cheaper metal and are prone to shattering. The sights are notoriously canted on many Remlins; mine fell out of the dovetail due to bad tolerances.

Go here and tell them you think the new Marlins are better made than the older ones...

http://www.marlinowners.com/forum/marlin-rant-forum/ My pre safety Marlins have much nicer bluing than my Remlin 1895(the Remlin finish looks fine however). Other than that the Remlin is just as well, or better, put together. Time will tell on the metal quality. I'm hoping Remlin got there act together and keeps producing nice guns.

[osteodoc08]

For all the naysayers.

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?343395-Remlins-Marlingtons-are-not-the-only-ones

Here’s a good example of what Remlin CAN produce

[FergusonTO35]

I really want Remlin to get their act together and make nice guns. They can do it, I have no doubt. The question is, are they going to do it? Maybe, maybe not.

[Idaho45guy]

For all my derision of the Remlins, mine does exactly what I bought it for perfectly.

I wanted a light, handy carbine with higher capacity that was reliable and accurate out to 100yds and packed enough punch to end whatever threat I encountered while out hiking and camping in the Idaho back country.

Mine has been customized to fill the role of a camping/Jeeping gun that can be abused without me worrying about messing it up. That's why I sold my JM; it was just too pretty to be used as a woods gun.

I took my Remlin, which I bought new for $525, sanded the stocks and added a textured coating, replaced the plastic magazine follower with a stainless one, added a rail for a light, added a reflex sight, a sling, and a buttstock pack that holds another seven rounds of .45 Colt. I also had to do some minor filing and polishing to get it to cycle smoothly.

It will do an inch and a half at 55 yards and packs nicely in the woods.

221672

[osteodoc08]

Idaho45guy, I think that’s pretty cool.

[sghart3578]

Idaho45guy---

That's pretty much the direction that I wanted to go when I bought a Rossi 92 in 357 mag. But I ended up giving it to my son a few months ago.

If this new 1894C works out, and I think that it will, then I am going to sand off the checkering and either stain it a very dark walnut followed by Truoil or give it a similar coating as yours.

Excellent job.


Steve in N CA

[FergusonTO35]

Kentucky Gun Company wants $620.00 for one. I hope the new 1894C is successful, but honestly at that price I'd rather have a Henry.