How is the quality of the new Marlin 1894-s

[Cheshire Dave]

I'm looking at the new Marlin 357 carbine but I'm hesitant because of the quality issues since Remington took over. I'm hearing that the newest ones are pretty good quality. What kind of luck have you people been having with the new Marlin 1894-s?

Sent from my SM-J320V using Tapatalk

[ReloaderFred]

The new ones in the Marlin/Remington display at the SHOT Show in January were really good. I talked to the project manager at the show and he said that was one of the things he's been working on, bringing up the quality.

Hope this helps.

Fred

[Cheshire Dave]

That's the kind of info I was hoping for. Thanks a lot. It would be nice to get the thoughts of someone that just bought one. It's either that or the little Ruger bolt action. But I prefer Walnut and steel over stainless and plastic.

Sent from my SM-J320V using Tapatalk

[AnthonyB]

Dave, I can't help you on the Marlin but can highly recommend the Ruger. I have the 357 and it is a great little rifle. I recently installed a spring and bolt shim kit from MCarbo that definitely helped the trigger and may had helped accuracy - I haven't really tested it from the bench. The rifle is more accurate than I can hold.
I am also a big fan of the Rossi 92 clones if one of those has any interest for you. My latest versions wear red dot sights on NOE barrel mounts.
Tony

[Cheshire Dave]

I've heard good things about the Rossi. I only hang up with putting a scope on it my eyes aren't getting any younger. The Red Dot sight you put on maybe the answer though. I like the ease of disassembly that the Marlin has. I've done a few trigger jobs on the Marlins and I'm getting familiar with them.

Sent from my SM-J320V using Tapatalk

[Drm50]

I don't know if there is a difference in QC on different Marlin models. There is still problems in 30/30s & 45/70s
as of this past fall. I have mounted scopes and sighted in a Ruger 77/357 and several 77/44s. Not having another 357 to compare to 77/357 all I can say is it shot under 1" at 60yds. The 77/44s outshot my 94JM and I would have to say it's best 44carbine. I don't like the looks of them but they are shooters.

[Thin Man]

I really appreciate hearing a positive review about the current Marlin 1894 series. I was at the NRA convention (Nashville) a couple of years ago, just after Remington released their first production of the 1894s. I picked up the one example they had on display and looked it over. It was awful. The wood-to-metal fit was well off on anyone's scale and their metal finishing was horrible. The barrel looked as it had been recovered from a home fire, coarse buffed and plated with the old style "black chrome" finish of years ago. It was very black, very shiny and had multiple "over-buffed) waves in it. I set the rifle back in the rack and drifted on without giving feedback to the people at the booth but knew they were in trouble. Now that they are getting their quality control back in line I will be more enthusiastic about adding one of their current production models to the herd.

[ChuckJaxFL]

I just picked one up and posted here in the forum. I had some (unfounded) concerns which are detailed in the post. I’m really happy with mine about 150 rounds in. I put a cheap Leupold on it and can repeat honest 2 MOA groups at 50 with XTP’s, both 158 & 180. I’ll go to 100 and fine tune the loads a little more on my next trip.

I’m on my phone right now, and can’t figure out how to link to another post. Maybe someone will help.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Cheshire Dave]

No problem I just looked up your post using your name. I'm glad people are having good luck with the new Marlins. I think I'll be getting a blued one but hopefully the performance will be the same. Now I just got to find the best price.

Sent from my SM-J320V using Tapatalk

[Norske]

I bought an 1894 44M just under a year ago. Within it's limitations, like a really slow twist barrel, it's getting quite smooth, it's accurate, and it's lighter than the one with more steel remaining in the barrel you're asking about. Now that store has a 45LC 1894, and that one is really lightweight due to the thinner barrel wall. Thank God, I don't own a 45LC handgun or that one would come home with me, too.

[bmortell]

same I got a 1894 44 year or so ago and no real problems with it, trigger is kind of heavy but pretty clean, fit and finish is good unless your super picky. all I did was add a leather lever wrap and skinner sights and I like it a lot.

[waco]

I hope you find a Marlin you are happy with Dave. Julie loves the work you did on hers.

[Texas by God]

I saw a 94 and a 95 yesterday at the gun show. The 95 was an octagonal carbine with a weirdly proud forearm but nice otherwise. I didn't handle the 94 but the fit looked better. The stock finish on both was thin.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[Cheshire Dave]

Thanks Waco I'm glad she is enjoying the gun. I've seen a few of the older ones but I'm not sure I'm okay with microgroove rifling. I I know some people have really good luck with cast bullets in microgroove I'm just not sure I want the extra challenge. I assume if I get a new one the first thing I'm going to do is tear it apart and tune the trigger up a little and smooth everything out. I had to do that with my older 1895 4570. It's a great shooter now.

Sent from my SM-J320V using Tapatalk

[Jeff Michel]

I have the new 1894S (44M) and I'm quite pleased with it.

[jmort]

In theory, with CNC they should be fine. They cannot afford to get the fit and finish that would be expected at the price point they sell at. For now the JMs should continue to go up in value. They are getting better. As much as I like my JMs, a new CNC Marlin would be fine with me, if they just get it right. Better, but not there yet.

[Cheshire Dave]

I was at Cabela's today and found a JM stamped Marlin with micro Groove Barrel and a Lyman 66 peep sight. I was able to get out the door with it for 720 which was pretty decent considering they're hard to find now even on GunBroker. This is like new I can't tell if it's been fired. The recoil pad doesn't fit real well and there's a slight flaw on the top of the front stock but I think I'm going to be very happy with it. I already have a 360 diameter sizing die lined up. I've heard the microgroove barrel is like fat bullets so that's what I'm going to do.

Sent from my SM-J320V using Tapatalk

[sghart3578]

I have two new 2018 Marlins, a 1894C and a 1895 in 45-70.

Both are very good.

[curioushooter]

They cannot afford to get the fit and finish that would be expected at the price point they sell at.

So, why can Henry? New 1894Cs on Buds are running $650. That's the same money as a Big Boy steel. I intensely dislike the tube-loading nonsense on Henrys and the fact they are about a pound overweight. If anything the Henrys should be MORE expressive to produce with that brass tube nonsense and I'd assume lower production volumes.

And what of Mossberg 464s, which are USA made? Granted it is not 357, but they are basically the same thing. I have one and it bests the quality of any Rossi or Marlin I've seen or owned. It about equals the Henry. Mine cost me $406.

[bedbugbilly]

curious shooter - I also wonder the same thing as you. Right now, I'm changing things up as I've gotten older - selling some guns I don't shoot and wanting two lever guns - 38/357 and 45 LC. I'm going to take a look at a Uberti '73 rifle this week as that is what I really want for 45 LC. Still on the ledge as to what I will do on a 38/357. Anyway . . . I've looked at a lot of videos on 38/357 lever guns - Rossie, Henry, Marlin, Uberti, Winchesster, etc. I'm guessing the 38/357 I get is going to get more harder use.

I own a Henry lever 22 - old Brooklyn address - and it's a great gun. I've looked at Big Boys in stores and they are impressive in the workmanship - but while a tubular magazine isn't a deal killer for me, I still prefer a loading gate/old west look/function. From what I'm seeing on the Marlin 94s - they seem to have their act together now . . . or more together than they did. I've read a number of reviews on the "newer" / "post problem" 94s and the majority of them are very positive. I've read two reviews that said that when they took the gun out of the box, they could not cycle the action -this was due to the shipping grease (evidently very ample amount) that was in the action from the factory - the lever was extremely hard to get down but once they got it down, they could remove the lever, bolt, ejector and once cleaned and lubricated, the action was smooth. Most of us would clean them in the manner anyway - which is a design plus in my mind over other brands. The finish is not the best on the stocks but ample - and hey, at least it has a walnut stock and not tupperware! Even if I go with something like a Uberti 73 carbine in 38/357, I still may pick up a Marlin for a kock around, put in the car, etc. gun. Laying a Henry next to a Marlin 94 and I agree for similar price, the higher quality is the Henry - if only they would go to a loading gate. I[m guessing the Marlin lower quality (fit, finish, etc.) is as a result of the bean counters. I'm not a fan of the pressed checkering nor a flat rubber buttplate - but if I get one, I could see making a new stock with a presant butt plate as a winter project.

What does impress me about the Marlin 94 is the easy take down to clean. Pull the lever screw, pull the lever, slide the bolt out and remove the ejector and clean, lube and reassemble. We all haver our own degrees of acceptability, likes and dislikes but what I hear and am seeing on video reviews, etc. - Marlin (Remington) has made a concentrated effort to improve the quality control issues and has done a decent job of it. Don't like the color or finish on the stock - should be an easy stripping and refinish job that will dress up the looks some. I'm looking at the 38/357 carbine and to me, it looks like a good lightweight carbine that should be a good shooter, especially with the Ballard rifling they have.

If you order one . . . I think I would ask when the gun was made as you never know hold old the stock is or how long it's been on the shelf. I, like everyone, want a "good deal" but am willing to pay a little more to actually see and handle what I'm buying rather than getting a random pick off the shelf somewhere . . bu ttha'st me. If I decide not to go the extra $$$ on a Uberti or if I look at a Marlin 94 and discover things I don't like, then I personally would consider a Henry . . . but besides the tubular magazine, the other thing that I don't like is the weight of them - it seems like they could trim down some and still have the same quality and materials without the extra weight to have to carry around, especially if using it for hunting, woods walking, etc.

[FergusonTO35]

So, why can Henry? New 1894Cs on Buds are running $650. That's the same money as a Big Boy steel. I intensely dislike the tube-loading nonsense on Henrys and the fact they are about a pound overweight. If anything the Henrys should be MORE expressive to produce with that brass tube nonsense and I'd assume lower production volumes.

And what of Mossberg 464s, which are USA made? Granted it is not 357, but they are basically the same thing. I have one and it bests the quality of any Rossi or Marlin I've seen or owned. It about equals the Henry. Mine cost me $406.

I have had two Mossy 464's. They are good $400.00 rifles, certainly no worse than a Remlin. Fit and finish is nothing fancy but still better than most Winchester 94 Rangers. They are something of a modernised 94, and have the same rebounding hammer and tang safety if that matters to you. The current one I have was purchased used. When I got it, the bolt wanted to partially unlock under recoil. Sent it back and they fixed it. Like the 94's, mine has had problems with light strikes. I ordered a new hammer spring and guide rod, and the new spring seems stronger than the old one was. Hopefully that will be the end of its troubles, as mine does shoot pretty well.

[jstanfield103]

I have an 1894 CSBL in 357 Mag. Fit and finish is good to me, it functions well and will smooth out even more the more is used and cycled. Love the rifle and Love Marlins.

[curioushooter]

Take a look at reviews lodged in 2019 of 1894Cs on Buds. They are very poor.

It's not just Marlin either. So many firearms are hitting the market that are poorly made, standards are getting loose (had a S&W customer service guy tell me a gap of .006-.01 was ideal). It's aggravating. Basically firearms can't be returned, and the turds and up on Armslist. If you are like me I won't sell junk to somebody. I don't like playing craps with online gun stores, but it's about all you can do.

[FergusonTO35]

If the OP has a local dealer who will stand behind his products, I think it would be a worthy gamble. *Most* of the problems I have observed with Remlins would not be hard for a service center to fix under warranty or any decent smith.

[curioushooter]

OP has a local dealer who will stand behind his products

I am completely unaware of any local firearms dealer that would do gunsmithing work on firearm sold through is shop while it is under warranty, and absolutely sure he wouldn't do any work for free.

Part of the problem is that gunsmiths charge so dear for their services that it is often more cost effective for the owner of a defective firearm (or just a gruesome one) to just sell it to some ignoramus and take a gamble on a new one. We live in a disposable society with no ethical standards whatsoever when it comes to personal sales. Caveat Emptor.

I have send many firearms back to manufacturer over the years. It is seriously about half the ones I have bought. And often serious problems. The ones I don't send back are the ones of proven design by reputable manufacturers. Never had a problem with Browning, H&K, Kahr, or any of my CMP purchases.

In the last 3 years:

Sent a CZ Bobwhite back because the action incredibly stiff and extractor dragged so heavily that it would barely open. CZ made good and fixed the problem.

Send a Mossberg 464 back due to over generous headspace. Action would pop open when the cartridge slammed back against the bolt. Mossberg made good and got back rifle and it now works great.

Send Chiappa double badger back TWICE. The problem was that the 410 barrel would not fire about 2/3ds of the time, I think because the firing pin was not long enough, but it may have been because the chamber was bored too deep and some ammo didn't have a thick enough rim. First time they basically did nothing except douse it in oil. Second time the thing was basically completely rebuilt, came back with different barrels and completely reworked hammers. After 6 months it finally works for now. Still have a 6 months on the warranty so I better put it through some more testing.

Send an Ithaca 37 back because it again had a headspace problem and would not eject shells which would lodge in the chamber. Ithaca re-fitted the barrel and made it right. Works great now.

Send a T/C Buckmark back because it was intermittently full-auto (the hammer didn't lock back on the trigger all the time). This one I never got back. After a YEAR of delays they confessed that the parts supplier that made the defective part was no longer in business and they couldn't find a spare. They offered to destroy the firearm and replace it with something out of their catalog. This is how I came to own a G2...

That very G2 had its rimfire pin fall out. Send it back. Get it back with a different hammer and a trigger that sucks and goes BOOOOINNNGG after it falls. A sucky trigger isn't a warranty repair. Really regretting that one. Should have just fitted a hardened pin in there myself.

Presently I have a Ruger EC9s that locks back with a full mag (some EVERYDAY CARRY pistol, huh?). I have now replaced the slide stop spring three times and the recoil assembly twice. It still locks back about every third round, and basically always if I deliberately limp wrist. Wondering if it is even worth sending it back for Ruger to tell me it is fine with whatever ammo they pick and carefully shoot out of it.

Basically any moderately priced (not high end) firearm these days has a 50% probability or so of being junk and needing to be re-worked. Or at least that is my conclusion. S&W-T/C, Ruger, Marlin, Remington, Mossberg, CZ, and many others I am sure.

[FergusonTO35]

To clarify, what I mean is a dealer who will make sure the new gun you bought is fixed right, whether by the manufacturer or someone else. My local guy will do that, even if the factory won't. He told me he no longer carries Rossi lever actions as he can't promise the customer that they will get it fixed in a reasonable amount of time.

I have also sent quite a few guns back for repair. I honestly think the gunmakers are counting on a pre-election surge in sales every two years and so maximize production at all times. This also leads to new designs being released with bugs that should have been worked out beforehand.

[curioushooter]

My friend has about five of those Rossi 92 clones...he's still looking for one that works apparently.

One of them will work with 38s and not 357s.

One only works in 45 colt IF you seat a certain bullet just right. Waste of time for something that will always be a Rossi.

[trapper9260]

My friend has about five of those Rossi 92 clones...he's still looking for one that works apparently.

One of them will work with 38s and not 357s.

One only works in 45 colt IF you seat a certain bullet just right. Waste of time for something that will always be a Rossi.

I have a Rossi 92 and can feed both 38spl/357 mag with out any problem.Unless you try to feed WC then that is one in the chamber and one in the tube. All others feed ok.

[Ozark mike]

I bought a 1895 remlin new a year ago sad to say it would not chamber a shell so I set to work on it. 3 days later I had the slickest rifle I have Probably ever owned. But at the same time I bought a Henry 44 mag and that gun ran good out of the box. Henry upgraded the 94 action like a spring loaded bolt block slick action too real fine gun indeed. I do not recommend a remlin for the shooter who wants a trouble free gun out of the box because there spotty at best. For the tinkerers out there they can be good guns

[Prairie Cowboy]

I was in at a independent small town gun shop and looked over a few new lever action carbines. They had a .45 Colt Marlin Cowboy on sale for the price of a regular 1894, so I though that I would at least look at it, feeling sure that I would spot enough problems to exclude it.
Action? Not bad, worked reasonably smoothly and the carrier rose correctly and felt positive against my finger.
Steel Fit & Finish? Very good actually. Smooth steel and well blued everywhere. No apparent internal roughness.
Wood Fit & Finish? Also good. Not perfect fitting but quite acceptable. Sort of a matte finish, not as glossy or as nice looking as JM, but acceptable. With a different finish it might have looked the same as a JM. Hard to tell.
Assembly? Every screw was perfect. No damaged screw heads. Sights were straight. No canting. Sights were dovetailed correctly.
It was so good that I bought it.
At home I scrubbed the bore which was pretty dirty. It looks fine. It slugged out at .4515" with a soft lead ball.
The trigger was pretty heavy at first. Maybe 10 pounds. But it smoothed out with dry firing (against a piece of eraser) to maybe 6 pounds, which is fine.
Slow ejection of an empty case was very positive. About 3 feet. Dummy rounds fed well through the action with hang-ups at the extractor, which I expected. A tiny bit of stoning at the underside of the hook, just as with my former JM 1894s resolved that. It now feeds and extracts just fine.
A good cleaning revealed nothing amiss with smooth internal machining and the bolt looks very well made.
I have yet to shoot it but so far I am happy with it.
While it might seem terribly old-fashioned, you should personally inspect every gun that you buy before you buy it.
It's the only way to have any assurance that you are probably getting a good rifle.
The shipper certainly isn't going to cherry pick one for you.

[rockrat]

Picked up a new Marlin 357 last month. Quality is good. The only flaw I found was when I had to adjust the rear sight way left. Seems like the front sight insert was way to the left, no wonder I had to move the rear sight so far.

Loaded some 38 spcl wadcutters with the wadcutter seated about 1/4" out of the case mouth instead of flush and the thing even fed them without any problems