Sorry to interrupt the arguing but I know some of you guys also like to shoot guns, so wanted to bring this to your attention.


Marlin 1895 Trapper

1349 msrp

grabagun has them on their site for 2 grand

Cheaper than filling up the lawnmower these days.

But then you hafta fill up the rifle.....

Great sub gun...

.458s as subs are bad to the bone.

Wish it was a faster twist though... Not keen on 1:20 for slow freight.

used to think Marlins were handsome firearms.............these latest versions are just fugly , imo

That in an 1894 straight stock 44 magnum would be hard to resist at a sane price. I have a hunch that it would make a great rifle after the requisite trip back to Ruger.

Sdgunslinger: I agree this Rifle does NOT have much "sex appeal" - but it is stainless and laminated stock wise with interesting sights and in an interesting caliber.
It will have appeal to some shooters. Maybe Black Bear Hunters and dark timber Elk Hunters etc?
And, like most all things "gun" these days it is EXPENSIVE.
I hope the "Ruger/Marlinian" people can make a go of it.
We'll see.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

At these prices and appearances it looks as though I'm done buying new leverguns. The Skinner sights are very nice. They're smart to use a quality sight set up someone else makes rather than cobble together some half-useless garbage. The giant loop lever and barrel sticking out past the sight that far leave me cold.

Edit to add: I wonder of the forends are still 3x thicker than needed on these Ruger models.

I just don't care for laminated wood stocks, always look like plywood to me, cheap!

God knows we need more 45/70's, not.

Something like this in 475 Linebaugh or 480 Ruger might be fun.

They address that on the website: "Refined stock fit and thinner forend improve aesthetics and ergonomics."

"Thin" is subjective but I agree they used to be way too thick so any improvement here is a step in the right direction.

Perhaps when they come out with one in a more economical to shoot version I will be interested in one.

Be nice to see them re-introduce the .256WinMag

Ugly damn thing. If Ruger ever figures out how to make a lever gun of blued steel and walnut and that not everyone needs a gun for grizzlies, I might try one.

Ruger has been producing more modern utilitarian stuff these days. It's not just the Marlins, look at their M77 Hawkeyes. Not a tradional looking rifle in the lineup that I can see except the compact. That's clearly where they see the market as being.

I can see the appeal of this rifle to some though. I personally wouldn't want a 45/70 with that short of a barrel. Don't think I'd want it less than 18" but someone traversing thickets in Alaska where big bears roam might consider this rifle just the ticket. Wondering if Ruger will eventually reprise the 444 Marlin perhaps in limited production runs for Lipseys or Grice.

I Agree. The semi-beavertail stocks may be a signature look fior Marlin but I much prefer the handling of the slim forestocks Marlin put out in the 60's on the 336 and early production 444 Marlins.

Just HOW MANY of us do they think needs a “bear gun”???

How many Alaskan grizzly/moose hunters are there compared to deer hunters in the lower 48 ? Seems to me the bigger market by far would be the deer hunters and I think most deer hunters would be more interested in .30-30's and .44's than .45-70's.

There is strong evidence that the 1895 will have the 444 Marlin, .45/70 and 450 Marlin as standard chamberings (eventually).

The manual on the website is brand new for these Ruger made Marlins and at the top of page 19 it states:

"Ammunition Notes and Warnings:
NOTE: If your rifle is chambered for 444 Marlin, .45-70 Gov’t. or 450 Marlin,
please carefully review the following warning and dimensions."


https://www.marlinfirearms.com/assets/pdfs/RM-Marlin-1895.pdf

If deer hunters in the lower 48 were buying lever guns in such cartridges - Marlin would still be Marlin right now.

I know several deer hunters here who bought .30-30's in the last 5 years. Not a solitary soul who bought a .45-70. Even Wal-Mart sold lever action.30-30's and .30-30 ammo. They didn't sell .45-70's. Beyond that Marlin also made .45-70's when it was still JM Marlin.

I wonder why they aren't going with a synthetic stock. If it makes sense for other rifles, why not lever guns?

Not sure why Ruger chose to start with the 1895's, but they do show the 336 and model 1894 on their site, although not currently available. The 336 indicates it will be chambered for 30-30 and 35 Rem. The 1894 doesn't say, but surely 44 will be on the list.

I know they say they're going to make 336's and 1894's eventually. I just find it odd they chose to start with the 1895's. Hopefully they don't fuuck up the 336's and 1894's with big loop levers, threaded muzzles and laminated stocks. If they do they can keep the ugly damn things as far as I'm concerned.

The .45-70 is now legal for deer in several midwestern states so I'm wondering how much of that new demand is driving Ruger's choices? The QC on some of their product lines ain't nothing to write home about (SP101, I'm looking at you) but their marketing force has been scoring a lot of home runs.

If they can build a 1894 that’s as accurate as these 1895s, I’ll buy it regardless of the lever style. Sub MOA from a big bore lever action is extremely impressive.

There's a lot of us deer/black bear hunters that like to use a 45-70. It's a great deer cartridge

How ugly do you want it to be?

If a good quality synthetic stock could shave 6 or 8 Ounces vs the laminated stock I'd be interested. As popular as suppressors have become I'd think there would be a strong market for a Trapper version properly twisted for heavy bullets in .357 .44 Mag or even though some would really think would be blasphemy .45 Colt.

I can guarantee that I have/own the finest Marlin collection around The Campfire, bar none. It's not even close.

Not a single Remlin in the bunch ... all fine examples of New Haven JM stamped craftsmanship at its finest.

I'll eventually own one of these Ruger varients ... grudgingly. It'll be when they come up with something I don't already have because Ruger will make them great again. But they need to get down in the dirt with the 1894s and 336s if they're going to be taken seriously and not looked upon as a niche boutique maker of leverguns. Instead of more 45-70s they need to push out a few 444s, etc. Then step down and get serious with the 1894s to include one to go with their 327 Mag, et al.

Then they can step back into the necked-down stuff and do it like Henry did it with the Long Ranger series. Marlin actually had the right idea and built a helluva rifle for a helluva cartridge in their 308 MX and 338 MX offerings ... but Hornaday failed to support it which validated Henry's claim that you should never ever collaborate with Hornaday for a wildcat because they don't go both ways. Hornaday always wants rifle mfgs to support their new cartridges/calibers but they'll never do the same when the roles are reversed.

Henry already upped the anty on price but Marlin/Ruger has to be careful going there.

As ugly as all the bolt and semi-auto rifles where synthetic stocks are not only available, but also more prevalent than wood.

I've only ever known one deer hunter around here who used a .45-70 in contrast to dozens who used .30-30's, .35's and .44 mags.. Our group got together for a day of deer drives two seasons back. Of the six of us, three showed up with lever action .30-30's and one with a .308 MX. Not saying a .45-70 won't kill deer but not many choose it at least around here. As for myself, I hucked enough ponderous slugs at deer years back when I hunted the shotgun zone to last me a lifetime.

I hate a laminate stock.

Teal,

"If deer hunters in the lower 48 were buying lever guns in such cartridges - Marlin would still be Marlin right now".



If Marlin had not been bought up by the Freedom Group, both Marlin and H&R would still be in business making the guns they were famous for. Instead they went right down the toilet with Remington.

Agree, they look cheesy.

To be bought - you had to be for sale. Why did Marlin and H&R sell? I'm wondering why a company would sell if they were making wood/blue lever actions with good margin and that was unlikely to change?

For the love of God, Ruger please bring back the semi-auto .44 Ruger Carbine.

One article or interview mentioned that Ruger started with the 1895 because it was the model most in demand.

Bruce

The word was, that Marlin sold out because the FAMILY wasn’t interested in running a business, anymore. They were interested in “cashing out”, so all the heirs could go build mansions/etc, without the hard work.

Teal,

Many things are sold when the owner is offered a price they can't turn down. As I was not involved with the sale/purchase, I can't say why it was done. Freedom Group was buying everything they could get their hands on at that time.

However, at the time of the sale I was working at H&R as a test shooter for the engineering dept. H&R had been bought by Marlin several years before I started there. The barrels for the rifles were being made by Marlin and shipped up to the H&R plant as rifled blanks. H&R was very profitable and was working on new products and improving their line of existing products. I was there when the employees at the plant were called in to the cafeteria and told they had been bought and would be moved to Ilion, NY.

Had that not have happened, H&R would still be in business. I see no reason Marlin wouldn't be as well. They were making the models and calibers everyone is so hot for today.

A 59 page manual. Amazing.

I remember reading that somewhere too.

I am not too crazy about the stemmed peep sight. It will catch every vine and bramble in the woods.

Having used those sights on guns in brushy southeast Alaska, I can tell you it’s not an issue.

Marlin and then Remington sold every one of these they could make ,most at scalper prices.They will sell these like hot cakes also.

Because the owner died and the kids weren't interested in running it

Yup its the most in demand model

There's no accounting for poor taste.

I'm still young enough to appreciate it. If I didn't already have the Guide Gun I'd have to have it

A general lack of common sense - amazing.
That said, the manuals are a way of lawsuit-proofing businesses. To an extent (as you well know, Ed)
It is disgusting to me that juries can be led, so easily, down "the primrose path" - and disabused of using their own common sense, in rendering a verdict.
Judges set the parameters, instead of common folks making a common sense decision.

The guide gun isn't a bad looking rifle. Still there are no grizzlies hereabouts so I have no use for one.

They are misdirected for sure. If they made that in 308 mx or 30-30 they would be on backorder for ten years

I HAD one of those Marlin Dark 444's that I guess were intended to be "tacticool". Thing was ugly as sin with the black stock and forend looking as though they were simply matte black rattle canned. Only reason I bought it was when they were first announced I told a good friend who owns a LGS I wanted the first one he got and didnt want to go back on my word. He gave it to me at like $50 above his cost. Ended up never even taking it out of the box after I brought it home and last summer listed it on broker at a no reserve penny start sale. Ended up at I believe $1800 or some stupid number and I basically tripled my money!

I'm hoping Marlin keeps the 30 cals on hold and does the 444 next

Just to be clear, the sights you use have an exposed stem?

If you really cared about 444’s instead of being a poser, you would already own enough 444’s

That's happened/happening in every industry in
the US now. Places started by grandpa and taken
over by the son and grandson was being groomed
to take over are bought out by "investment groups "
and they install management that has no experience
in that particular field, but has that degree on the wall
I'm always reminded of the old television commercial
where the guy says " Gee boss, I always wanted to
fix a transmission. . . "
Lots of old time restaurants in this area are boarded
up or bulldozed because the kids didn't want to put
in the work that made dear departed dad so
successful.

I like it, but I've got 50 years of great ideas, that weren't, behind me.

Yeah, the skinner peep on two different rifles.

My opinion was based on the photo the OP put up of the 1895 and the stem/stud is too high for my taste. Regards.

That's because Remlin failed in that regard more than any other (in terms of supply). Plus a few states opened-up straight walled cartridges for deer hunting ... although one or two still ruled against 45-70 (5mm too long) but those are changing soon to accept 45-70.

More reloaders/handloaders too and they've all been told that 45-70 is easy to reload.

What it means is that the market will soon be flush with 45-70s which means ... more for me.

A 454 casul woul be a good plinker.

They making a stainless 35 Rem yet, yes or no?

No.

MarlinFirearms.com / Lever-Action

I have/had similar Skinner sights on four rifles so far and they really aren't as obtrusive as they appear in that photo. The square profile of the average Williams or Redfield receiver sight normally mounted on lever guns is just as likely to snag on brush if not more so, and I've never read any complaints of that.

Plus, they are strong and sturdy little buggers, you'd have to bash them with a big hammer to really dent or bend them.

Skinner makes an excellent product, very well machined and finished and I think Ruger did well in choosing them for this rifle. They are not readily adjustable target sights but great set and forget hunting sights.

However, with the inserted aperture like in the picture they do remind me a lot of the one eyed trash compacter monster in the original Star Wars movie...