Henry Big Boy vs. Marlin 1895sbl

[Fishwishin]

[TMB 1]

Think I'd rather have a Marlin 1895GBL , but my first choice would be this or this if i didn't aready have a Browning 1886

[CG11]

Had a lever Marlin many years ago, wish I still had it. Would take that over a Henry simply because I know how good that Marlin was. Given Marlin's parent company problems, I would look at both Henry and Marlin's recent offerings very carefully. These days, Henry might be the better rifle.

[John Browning]

Marlin's quality is totally terrible. Just bought a GBL. It's the worst factory rifle I've ever seen.

[golfish]

Marlin's quality is totally terrible. Just bought a GBL. It's the worst factory rifle I've ever seen.

OP. Not only does the quality of their product suck, so does their customer service. Just ask John Browning.

[200Apples]

Had a lever Marlin many years ago, wish I still had it. Would take that over a Henry simply because I know how good that Marlin was.

Marlin quality began to tank as their neglected tooling continued to wear out. Then the rumors of, and then the sale of the company may have also ruined morale. The worst of it might have been 2009, 2010? until/thru recently when the newest owners of the marque (?) invested heavily in new machinery; it was one year ago I first heard this news, and that even then some good rifles were beginning to appear.

I had been hunting for an 1894 chambered in .41 Magnum. I found one, a 20" FG, virtually NIB but made in 2005. It is a solid, well-made gun and even with it's microgroove barrel shoots Barnes 180 gr. copper solid round nose hollerpoints well. I anticipate properly-sized bo0lits (after slugging the barrel) should be even better.

I am also fortunate to own a 1989-made 18" 1894CS357 which needs a bit more throat chamfer to feed reliably. It is a neat piece and a sought-after carbine, especially by the SASS crowd.

20161223_154411.jpg

My only Henry is a Zamak-receiver .22 Magnum H001M. While I hear many happy reports with their centerfire rigs, this one might as well be a nice airsoft rifle. Would not buy another, though. They're not Winchesters nor are they Marlins.

[k1dude]

Never mail order a Remlin 1895 SBL. ONLY choose a rifle from the rack of a local gun store where you can inspect it closely.

The fit, finish, trigger, and action vary greatly. If you come across one that's put together well, with a nice light trigger, and the action is tight and it cycles smooth, buy it.

[Jeepergeo]

Why not own both?

[John Browning]

I would not buy one unless it was a JM one. Marlin can't put out a rifle consistently that can pass a basic eye test. How much would you trust them to get the things right that you can't see or test, like chamber reaming, internal mechanical tolerances, etc?

I bought a GBL in July. Long story short, it was a mess in ways that go way beyond cosmetics. It took Marlin/Remington almost two months to fit a proper stock. They sent it back and it was still a major disaster. The second pass they made it functional. I bought the rifle in July and it was only safe to shoot about a month ago.

Here is the latest update and a link to the thread below.

Update:

I got the rifle back from Marlin in early November. They replaced the lever assembly entirely, replaced the front sight, and the rifle looked safe enough to shoot. The barrel still has pseudo-micro groove rifling with very discernible rough extra lands in between each normal Ballard cut rifling. It's ROUGH. Like the worst rifling I've ever seen rough, and I've owned rifles from the 1850s. Marlin said it was fine by their standards. I didn't want to post until I got to shoot it.

I got it out to the range about two weeks ago. The GBL shot everything about 8 inches to the right at 50 yards. Vertically, it was all over the place with 300gr loads shooting two inches low at 50 yards and 405gr loads shooting 7 inches high at the same distance. The rear sight managed to be drifted way over in the dovetail during the last repair and I didn't catch it. The vertical stringing is way more than I've ever seen, but I'll shoot some more loads to see what's up. The rifle will feed fine with no jams over what is now about 100 rounds.

I put some Skinner Express sights on it and shot it again last weekend. It is good for left and right, but still shows a whole lot more vertical stringing at 50 yards than I've ever seen. It's functional which is a whole lot more than I could say at first, but the barrel still looks like hell on the outside. The metal fit is excellent and it seems to run fine.

The 1957 Marlin 336 in .35 Remington that I picked up at Cabela's put the first five rounds of FTX into about two inches at 50 yards, dead on, right out of the gate. It is all-together a totally superior rifle.

You want a Marlin, take your chances. The GBL still might be going back for another barrel. I totally love the .45-70. If you reload, it's a HOOT. I'll be scooping up the first JM .45-70 at a decent price I can find.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=1351951&highlight=marlin

[John Browning]

Marlin quality began to tank as their neglected tooling continued to wear out. Then the rumors of, and then the sale of the company may have also ruined morale. The worst of it might have been 2009, 2010? until/thru recently when the newest owners of the marque (?) invested heavily in new machinery; it was one year ago I first heard this news, and that even then some good rifles were beginning to appear.

I had been hunting for an 1894 chambered in .41 Magnum. I found one, a 20" FG, virtually NIB but made in 2005. It is a solid, well-made gun and even with it's microgroove barrel shoots Barnes 180 gr. copper solid round nose hollerpoints well. I anticipate properly-sized bo0lits (after slugging the barrel) should be even better.

I am also fortunate to own a 1989-made 18" 1894CS357 which needs a bit more throat chamfer to feed reliably. It is a neat piece and a sought-after carbine, especially by the SASS crowd.

[ATTACH]661245[/ATTACH]

My only Henry is a Zamak-receiver .22 Magnum H001M. While I hear many happy reports with their centerfire rigs, this one might as well be a nice airsoft rifle. Would not buy another, though. They're not Winchesters nor are they Marlins.

Marlin rifles were totally fine up until Remington bought them. The tooling was old, but they still had craftsman do the stuff that mattered.

Remington bought Marlin, fired everybody, moved the machinery, and proceeded to crank out garbage. If you find a JM, be sure it isn't a Remington made one. Remington used JM proofed barrels for what seems to be an overlap period of about a year where they took existing barrels from old stock and used them on new production. They also must have had an exchange program where a drunk Soviet from the former Yugo factory assembled the rifle.

As a further FYI, Remington may be going bankrupt, so don't count on any warranty work. Given that their warranty work is mostly incompetent, that may not be a totally terrible thing.

I still love Marlin. My first .22 I bought myself was a Marlin 600 at Big 5. I own many of their rifles. I own M1 Carbines with their barrels. You have some beautiful lever guns in that photo. That Marlin is long dead.

[200Apples]

As a further FYI, Remington may be going bankrupt, so don't count on any warranty work.

FYI, I either 'smith my guns issues myself or simply acquire good guns.

The two Marlin '94s I own predate the time period you're having problems with. Good luck to you. You sound pissed.

[RiskyBusiness]

Guess I got lucky with my SBL. Anyone whose ever come over to admire it and inspect it has had their opinions changed there on the spot about Remlins. I'm not as picky about cosmetics and unseen workmanship as most of you ripping on Marlins. But when I'm hitting quarters at 50yds and half a dozen people say it looks purty at the range.. I gotta believe Remlins are good to go in my book. Again maybe I got lucky, especially since it was mail ordered

[DHarris]

I just played with an SBL at a shop last week. Had been wanting one but was concerned with the issues I'd read about.

The one I handled, appeared to be mechanically sound. Sights looked straight, lever felt fine and the machining of the metal looked as I'd expect for something at that price point.

The stock was a different story. The color of the fore grip and the stock didn't match. Not even close. The stock had a much bluer look to the fore's grey appearance. Checkering was the worst I've ever seen. Front was fine, rear had the basic shape of the checkered area but with literally zero checkering in in. It was just kind of rough. The laminate also didn't look to line up properly in any of it's contact points with the metal. The grip cap was also sloppily sanded and generally uneven all around.

I went in thinking this could be one of the coolest, most fun $1000 guns ever.
I didn't buy it. Would have taken likely multiple trips back to the factory to get it to where it'd be acceptable to me. I'm admittedly picky but there was no way I could have enjoyed that gun. It was just a mess.

Will keep an eye out for a JM but from what I saw, if buying current production, go Henry.

[TMB 1]

Guess I got lucky with my SBL. Anyone whose ever come over to admire it and inspect it has had their opinions changed there on the spot about Remlins. I'm not as picky about cosmetics and unseen workmanship as most of you ripping on Marlins. But when I'm hitting quarters at 50yds and half a dozen people say it looks purty at the range.. I gotta believe Remlins are good to go in my book. Again maybe I got lucky, especially since it was mail ordered

Every time I see a new Marlin in a gun store I have to look at them to see the cosmetic problems described on the internet. I haven't seen any in person yet, just in pics on the net.

[mtndragon]

I have a Remlin 1895 SBL that I bought about this time last year. I would give the fit an finish a B-. The wood meshes with the metal well (A), but all the metal edges (the loop in the lever, the loading gate, etc) are squared at hard 90 degree angles, and they are sharp (C-). The loading gate is currently a thumb eater. The gun is a tack driver, and the laminate wood matches well. Overall, because it is very accurate, I am happy, and this holiday season I will dissemble the gun and finish the parts. I am looking at this as a chance to bond with the rifle. I got it because I thought in that caliber, I really wanted a loading gate and it holds more rounds than the Henry. It's primary purpose is a hunting rifle, and with the Leupold 2.5 fixed Scout scope, it excels at this use.
I also have a Henry .44 Big Boy Steel, and all aspects of that gun are top notch-accurate, great fit and finish, smooth action, etc. In hind site, I probably would have been happier with the Henry All Weather in 45-70. I like unloading the tube better than unloading a loading gate, and thus far, I have yet to fire more than one round at any game from either rifle, and I hope to continue this trend. Therefore, whether the hunt is successful or unsuccessful, unloading is gonna happen. In terms of bear defense, if the gun is needed, there won't be an opportunity to top off with the loading gate: either the threat was stopped in a shot or two or I just got eaten.

There's no way I am selling my 1895 (after I "bond" with it and make it right), and ultimately, I am gonna end up with the Henry All Weather in 45-70 too, so the best answer to your dilemma is to get both, although, had I started with the Henry, I probably wouldn't have bought the Marlin.

Just another data point for you.