Experiences with Marlin 1895?

[Emmett Brown]

I'm seriously considering a Marlin 1895 45-70, but have read some horror stories about quality and reliability. Can anyone here give me some input?

Thank you!

[jmr40]

Older guns have a better track record. But I sorta think QC concerns are a bit overstated on the internet. When Marlin closed the old factory and Remington 1st took over production there were a LOT of issues.

Production was moved into the Remington factory, most of the old Marlin workers retired or sought other jobs rather than relocate. That left untrained workers making guns they had never made on new machinery. And it took a while to "figure it out". The guns made in the last couple of years seem to be done right.

I'm not a 45-70 fan though. I've owned several dating back to the mid 1970's until I sold the last one 6-7 years ago. It is over rated and over hyped as a hunting cartridge and has no real history. The army used it for less than 20 years and it did not perform well. It was never popular as a hunting cartridge in the 1800's. NEVER commonly as a buffalo hunting cartridge because they were all dead before it was invented.

[TJB101]

Can’t speak to the 45/70 but I bought a 357 last winter and after about 7 or 8 times to the range the load gate is nice and smooth, action sweet and accuracy is good with iron sights. Pretty happy with it. As Hickok pointed out in one of his videos fit is not as tight as original models. For instance, on the fore stock, one side is ever so slightly wider than the other, and I probably wouldn’t have noticed it unless it wasn’t also something Hickok noticed. Watch his video, he has some good things to look out for.

[flashhole]

I bought my Marlin Guide Gun in 1998. Great gun, great cartridge. Mine is the introductory year with the factory ported barrel. Very accurate but factory ammo is somewhat anemic because it is loaded for Trap Door metallurgy.

45-70 has a dedicated following. It's been around for well over 100 years and will outlive me for sure.

I bought mine when I lived in heavy forest country and the short barrel is real handy in the dense woods. I now live in TX, not many trees. I would go for a Browning High Wall or similar gun in this country. A Ruger #1 would be an excellent choice. Both are single shots.

[Jim Watson]

A friend had a 1970s first run New 1895, with "conventional rifling for lead and jacketed bullets."
It was smooth, reliable, and accurate.
I don't know about the current crop.

I hear what jmr is saying but the advantage is that the .45-70 is one of the few 19th century rounds you can readily buy guns and ammo for. Try that for a .44-90 buffalo rifle.

Anecdote alert:
The above friend was shooting his '95 with Keith loads one day when The Guy at the range spoke up.
TG "That's a nice looking .30-30 you have there."
MF "It's not a .30-30, mister."
TG "Sure it's a .30-30, I know a .30-30 when I see one. Let me try it out."
MF "OK, here.
'95 "Blammo!"
TG (Recovers from step back, swings lever, looks down at ejected case) "That's the biggest dam' .30-30 I ever seen."

[mag1911]

That's funny!

[eastbank]

as the 45-70 was a military round starting in 1873 (trapdoor), im sure the caliber was used in the killing of the buffalo. maybe not as much as the big sharps calibers, but was more available and cheaper to use.

[ilmonster]

I have a 22" 1895 I purchased a few years ago (within the last 3 or 4 years), and it has been great. I looked mine over due to the things I also read, and it had good wood to metal fit, straight sights (although I've put a Vortex 2-8 scope on it), cycled smooth, etc. They've gotten much better since the original purchase of Marlin by Remington years ago. Take a look at some of the new ones on gun store shelves.

I use mine mostly as a range gun, and as such reload more of a mouse fart load than elephant killers. 300 gr. RNFP's at around 1,100 fps w/TrailBoss. Can shoot these all day. I have put around 350 rounds through it with no issues. Only mod's were a grind-to-fit Limbsaver recoil pad to replace the rubber butt pad, and it makes shooting even factory loads much more comfy. The factory loads I've shot have been Rem. 405 gr. rounds (at 1300 fps) which with the Limbsaver are comfortable to shoot. These are certainly at the lower end of the power scale compared to some 300gr. rounds at well over 2,000 fps! My 1895 certainly is a keeper!

p.s. it's a hoot to shoot fist sized chunks of lead downrange with the trajectory of a mortar shell! Makes a man sized "clang" on steel at 200 yds. as compared to my Rem. 700 in .223 which makes a "ting". The 45-70 is just downright fun!

[44 AMP]

It is over rated and over hyped as a hunting cartridge and has no real history.

I'll give you it may be over rated and over hyped, that is an opinion, and you're welcome to your opinion. What I don't understand is how you can say a cartridge that began in 1873 and has been in use continuously since, "has no real history". 140+ years seems like "real" history to me.

The army used it for less than 20 years and it did not perform well.

1873 to 1892, so yes 19 years, is less than 20. You might also note that the round the Army replaced the .45-70 with (.30-40 Krag) was used for 11 years (1892-1903), and the round that replaced the .30-40 Krag, the .30-03 was only in service use for 3 (three) years. The round that replaced it, the .30-06 stood duty for the next 50 years. The round that replaced the .30-06 was the 7.62 NATO and that service life as a rifle round was from 1957 to 1964 so only 7 years, and its replacement the 5.56mm was adopted in 64 and is still the current service rifle round, 55 years later and still going.

How long a round lasts as a service rifle cartridge depends on a lot of factors, and is essentially meaningless as a metric to judge the civilian usefulness of the cartridge itself.

A couple of rather big changes happened during the .45-70s military service life. The biggest was the invention of smokeless powder, and the high velocity "small bore" (approx. .30 cal) cartridges to use it. The other big change was the Army's belated recognition that it needed a repeater not the single shot rifle in use, and there was no .45-70 repeater that met their new requirements.

It was never popular as a hunting cartridge in the 1800's. NEVER commonly as a buffalo hunting cartridge because they were all dead before it was invented.

It may not have been the most popular hunting round in the late 1800s, but it survived, as a commercially produced round (to this day) where nearly all its contemporary rifle rounds did not.

You are correct it was not one of the rounds that played a part in the mass extinction of the buffalo herds. It simply arrived too late for that. But the buffalo weren't ALL dead, they still exist today, as well.

I had a Marlin 1895 that I got in the late 80s. One of the first ones with that useless crossbolt safety. NOT the guide gun, the full size "rifle" which was approximately an inch longer than a .30-30.

Mine was a good gun, worked flawlessly, and shot well. 400gr slugs in the 1300fps range (approx. black powder speeds) weren't any problem for me. 400gr slugs at 1800fps (the upper end of what the rifle will handle) will kick the snot out of you!! If you use a scope, DON'T "crawl" the stock and get too close shooting those loads. Weatherby eyebrow isn't limited to just Weatherbys!

I can't say what the new /current production rifles are, heard bad things after Remington took over, and hear that those things are fixed, now. Can't say from personal experience.

What I can say is that if I were in the market, I'd go to the used gun racks and look for an older one, happily pay less than new price for a used one, and still get a good rifle.

Most of the time, rifles like the Marlin get carried afield a lot more than they get fired, and while the finish often gets worn, the insides rarely do, and those are the important parts when it comes to the gun working and shooting well.

[flashhole]

Great post. I like factual information. No conjecture, just proven facts.

[flashhole]

Shortly after I bought my Guide Gun I bought a box of Remington 405 grain lead bullet ammo.

I had two empty 55 gallon drums in line with a tree that was about 18" in diameter. In front of the drums was a 6" x 6" timber with a target stapled to it. I fired a shot from about 75 yards away. Penetrated the timber, both 55 gallon drums, the tree and the bullet buried itself about 12" in the dirt berm behind it. I dug up the bullet and it had quite a bit of deformation but was still very much in tact. I was instantly sold on the 45-70.

[sarge912]

Had a Guide gun that was a gas to shoot. If you ever needed to blow up a watermelon, this is the rifle for it.

It was a lot of fun to load up shells with black powder as well.
Legal for deer in Ohio but wasn't when we sold it. Oh well. Should have know.

[ilmonster]

To the OP, what are you looking to use a Marlin 45-70 for? Hunting, targets, just always thought you needed shoulder mounted artillery...

If you reload, it's also a pretty cheap cartridge to load for, especially if you're using lead bullets. Just always make sure you don't get a double charge (if you're not using Trail Boss) as that could make for an interesting day! It's a pretty darn big case and can easily swallow a double charge of 4198, 3031, pistol powders, etc.

[FrankenMauser]

Current quality is substantially better than the years after Remington took over.
It is now at least on par with the waning years of Marlin (yes, Marlin put out garbage on their watch, as well). ...It's just that different corners are cut by the different companies, due in large part to the different approaches to manufacturing (lots of ancient tooling, combined with manual fitting; vs CNC everything and beat it together with hammers).

I treat current Marlin lever guns the same way I treat something in the used rifle racks: Give it a good inspection. If it meets or exceeds my requirements for fit, finish, function, etc., I'll buy it.
With the current Marlin levers, however, you don't have to walk away and wait for the next one to show up. You can move right to the next one, by asking the dealer/salesman to grab another, and see if it's any better.

It has been quite some time since I've seen reports of parts failure or premature wear that make the Marlins unsafe. What they're chasing now are the complaints about fit and finish - which, in my opinion, have more to do with aesthetics (and the different "colors" that wood and bluing are now) than actual fit/finish problems.
The only remaining outlier that irritates the crap out of me is the sharp-edged lever. Remington isn't finishing the edges of the levers as well as Marlin always did (even in their crappy years), and there are a lot of complaints about it - including my own.


.45-70?... I have an opinion. If you like the cartridge, then you won't like my opinion.
Bottom line for me: .444 Marlin is superior.

[44 AMP]

.45-70?... I have an opinion. If you like the cartridge, then you won't like my opinion.
Bottom line for me: .444 Marlin is superior.

I like the .45-70, and I don't mind your opinion, because you used those two important words, "for me".

For me, the .45-70 is better. Not better than the .444 in velocity or trajectory, but better in utility. It's available in a number of different guns that the .444 isn't, and it uses bullets common to my other .45 caliber rifles, in weights up to 500gr.

Are there any .444 bullets heavier than 300gr?? The .444 does use the same size bullets as my .44 Magnums, but since I don't use the really heavy bullets in my pistols, using 240s or lighter in the .444 is kind of suboptimal for full performance of the rifle.

I had .45-70s in a Siamese Mauser, Marlin 1895, Ruger No.3 and T/C Contender. Can you get a .444 in anything but a Marlin? (outside of a custom chambering?)

If the .444 floats your boat, then for you, its the superior choice. For me, its nice, but not as good for what I do as the .45-70.

As long as no one tries to convince me to drop the .45-70 and go to the .444 instead, we're good.

[Jim Watson]

.444 is kind of a Marlin equivalent of .405 Winchester; high velocity as lever actions go, but with low sectional density bullet. A smokeless High Velocity ..45-70 is pretty close and will handle heavier bullets when wanted.

[FrankenMauser]

As long as no one tries to convince me to drop the .45-70 and go to the .444 instead, we're good.

I agree. That's why I left things where I did.

My religion is my religion. I try not to preach, nor force it down other people's throats.
I may not believe in yours, but I'm not going to condemn you for believing - or disbelieving.
Just don't try to force yours down my throat, either.
(Minor insight into the above statement: I grew up in Utah...)


444 bullets heavier than 300 gr? Yes, many. Beartooth Bullets is a notable source. But only a few can be found in loaded ammo from 'boutique' manufacturers. The rest are hand-load-only propositions. ...And many are cast from custom molds, usually designed (and sometimes machined) by the guy pouring the lead and pulling the trigger. I have a huge variety of .44 caliber molds. Some are "handgun only". Some work in handguns and rifles. Some are "rifle only" - such as my 437 gr "One Ounce Suppository" and 420 gr WFN (with a .390" meplat, it's almost a 'full' wadcutter).

There are a group of us over on the MarlinOwners forums that have been experimenting and sharing experience with bullets that push Marlin 444 and Winchester Big Bore chamber and action dimensions to the limit. For the most part, we've settled on 425 gr WFN as a realistic maximum bullet weight and style (with bullet design trying to keep it as compact as possible). But, of course, single-shot and double rifles don't care. In Marlins modified for a longer COAL, custom Mausers, single-shots, and double rifles, we've gone as far as 620 gr (and stupid velocities that will not be repeated).

Most 444 owners won't touch 240 gr or lighter bullets, once they use them on game or try the Hornady 265 gr FP. Plinkers and casual paper punchers love the Remington 240 gr stuff, because it's "cheap"; but most 444 owners that actually hunt big game use the 265 FP as the absolute minimum (with exceptions of the Barnes 225 gr XPB and 250 gr Nosler Partition being considered adequate but marginal). 300 gr XTPs are quite popular and effective. 280 gr Swift A-Frames are a reliable choice. If chamber geometry and personal sizing choices will allow it to pass through the loading gate and fit in the chamber, the Lee 310 gr FP works well. And, of course, there are more bullets that are plenty good.

Most hunters end up finding 265-300 gr to be the 'sweet spot' for the cartridge; but a little jump to the Beartooth 320-335 gr WFNs is easy to make, too.


Ironically, the most notable company that you CAN'T get a .444 Marlin from right now is Marlin. They've announced the Model 444's reintroduction every year since 2014; but it has not materialized. (For 2018, it was a "New Model 1895 in .444 Marlin". ...That didn't go over well.)

Before H&R was thrown under the bus by Remington, Handi-Rifles were a very popular choice for .444 Marlin buyers. They are no longer available new, but can easily be found on the used market.
CVA, TC, and [someone I'm forgetting...] make single-shots.
Browning offered the 1885 in the chambering. Might still, but I didn't check.
Winchester Big Bores were chambered for the cartridge, and runs are still produced by Miroku occasionally.
Henry has been hinting at finally releasing a .444 Marlin by next summer.
Pedersoli usually offers their 1874 Sharps in .444 Marlin; and they do offer the 86/71 for the cartridge.
Magnum Research offers the BFR.
And, surprisingly to most people, quite a few of the "low end"/"budget" double rifle manufacturers offer .444 Marlin as a standard chambering. Apparently, it's fairly popular in Europe.
I'm sure I missed something, but that covers most of it.


As with everything in life, and especially the gun world, there are handicaps to be aware of, though.
Notably:
Marlin's 'Micro-Groove' 1:38" twist rate (standard until 1998) has a very hard time stabilizing bullets over 300 gr; and you need all the velocity that you can get, just to be able to trust the 300s. (No 16" barrels and reduced loads with 1:38s.)
On the flip side, the early Winchester Black Shadows had a 1:12" twist rate. Light bullets are 'over-stabilized' and not happy; but heavy bullets have been observed 'skidding' across the lands in the bore, before finally 'biting' and being spun up. Bad twist rate. ...Should be avoided.
Marlin's and Winchester's later 1:20" twist stabilizes everything - even 450+ gr bullets at subsonic velocities - but very heavy cast bullets (w/ or w/o gas check) or heavy cast bullets with low bearing surface may 'skid' across the first few inches of rifling, just as some bullets do in the 1:12" twist. It is not a huge issue, but has a measurable negative impact on accuracy. (My theory is that while the bullet is 'skidding', it may also be recovering from an off-axis jump in the throat, finally 'biting' the lands in the barrel while still off-axis. But I don't know how to prove it.)


Still not trying to waterboard anyone with my beliefs. Just answered questions.

The way I try to look at the cartridges, in regards to Marlins, and with a fairly open mind is:
.444 Marlin is for handloaders, and people that actually want a better chance at good accuracy from a Marlin lever gun. (And people that think the .45-70 rim cut in the ejection port of an 1895 is an abomination.)
.45-70 is for the guy that wants the classic 'cannon', but can't be bothered to reload, and/or doesn't really care if all he gets is "lever gun accuracy".

[ilmonster]

Wow, you don't see these often enough - a civilized conversation!! Carry on gentlemen...

[ilmonster]

Also to the OP's question, I also have a JM made 1894C in .357, and my recently made 1895 is certainly as well made as my 1894C. Trigger was quite a bit heavier in the 1895, but that's not really a QC issue, just a heavy trigger (broke cleanly though).

[AK103K]

I bought my 95C right after Remington took over, and I didnt know there was supposed to be a problem.

Mine worked great the whole time I had it. Function was fine, and accuracy was good.

Soon after hearing there were problems, I did notice that some of the other 95's I saw on shelves, did have canted front sights (like the AK's did) and a few other issues, like poorly fitted wood.


For those who say the problems were overblown, there were a LOT of reported problems across the different gun boards at the time, and some pretty bad customer service reports too.


I myself ran into troubles with a 336Y a couple of years later, when they were "supposed" to have gotten their act together. I found out then, that they hadn't.

I knew to look for possible problems and did look closely at three different rifles before I bought the one I did. Two of the three did have slightly misaligned front sights and pretty crappy wood to metal fit. The one I took looked OK. It wasnt.

When I got it home and went to the range, it wouldnt cycle from the first mag full. Someone forgot to tune the extractor, and it would not feed live rounds or empty cases. Nobody must have function checked it at the factory, other than maybe working the action on an empty gun. The extractor had no tension on it and it would not hold a case tight enough to clear the ejection port.

I got that squared away, and it seemed like it was working, but soon after, it again would not feed, and the follower/lift was off somehow and needed to be "fitted".

I considered sending it back, but from a number of the reports I was seeing online, people who had were getting guns back with worse problems than when they were sent. So I did it myself. No big deal, but annoying all the same for a "new" gun.

It also had the same typical Marlin hitchy action, so while I was at it, I smoothed that out too. I also smoothed out the action on the 95 not long after I got it. Marlins arent Winchesters.

Function wise, it worked well after that, but not too long after, the stock loosened up. It appears that the stock was over inletted, and they reefed down on the screw to get it to tighten up. I ended up having to shim it to get it so it was tight again.


If I were you, I would look closely and critically at anything Marlin that you want to buy. Still no guarantees, but it really pays to pay attention.


As far as 45/70 goes, I found that if you reload, its a lot more versatile, and can be a lot more pleasant to shoot too, especially if youre shooting a lot of it. And as fun as it is, you likely will be.

I grew up shooting a Ruger #3 in the round, and my dad didnt reload at the time, and only bought heavily factory loads for it. It was a miserable thing to shoot. Think 10-22 in 45/70. I got it when he died, and was going to get rid of it, and figured Id try some reduced loads. Man, what a difference. It went from being a brute, to a pussycat, and was actually a lot of fun to shoot.

It was then that I got the 95, and it was even better.

If you want a fun "plinker", that actually wouldnt be a slacker for deer, 300 grain LFPRN over 14 grains of Trail Boss. Accurate, and you can shoot them all day in just a tee shirt.

[FrankenMauser]

For those who say the problems were overblown, there were a LOT of reported problems across the different gun boards at the time, and some pretty bad customer service reports too.

Yep.
I've had myself neck deep in the Marlin world since before the buyout. The issues that Remington created by trying to recreate Marlin's products on CNC machines, with unskilled laborers, without gauging and inspection steps, and cutting as many corners as possible lead to a very, very bad product.
Some were okay. Some were pretty good. Most were terrible.
For several years, they were shipping 336s and 1895s where dangerously excessive head space was the norm (we're talking 0.040" excessive - sometimes worse) and some critical internal parts were completely unhardened (often wearing to the point of failure within less than 100 rounds).
And, of course, there's always ongoing brittle screw debacle*.

Marlin's management has been able to fight for better quality*, better quality control*, and more oversight of their own operation*, rather than having to request everything from the board of directors; so things are much better now than just a few years ago.
But the initial Remington production was very bad - possibly even worse than the internet says - and Marlin's management team does still have to fight Remington in order to make changes to their own operations if the change will impact the profit margin (even if only a couple cents).
For example, I've been told that a correction for the "sharp lever" issue has been a constant request by Marlin management for coming up on four YEARS, now. As of May, I had still not heard of it being approved.


*Before DPris passed away, we were working with a Marlin project manager to get numbers on the actual frequency of screw breakage - not just reports on the internet, reposted by the same guy to 27 different forums; and by other random people to 150 more. They had just revamped the tempering process for better control and higher quality, and were curious to see how the reporting rate would change "in the wild" rather than just through the repair center(s). I had an entire lot of rear barrel band screws and half a bushel of tip cap screws shipped directly to me, to mete out to victims of earlier brittle screws that had helped us compile reports on how, when, and under what conditions the screws broke. (Impacts with rests/benches, usually after recoil, turned out to be the primary suspect ... but that still doesn't mean that such failure is acceptable in any way.)

[44 AMP]

Thank you FrankenMauser for the information on the .444, I had no idea it had been put in so many different guns.

As for this,

.45-70 is for the guy that wants the classic 'cannon', but can't be bothered to reload, ...

I know there are people like that. I am the other guy, I don't think I've shot a whole box of factory .45-70 in 30 years. It's all handloads, mostly cast 400gr or something similar, but I do have some jacketed loads for really serious stuff. Like teaching people what real recoil feels like.
(you do it with a Ruger No.3 and a 350gr Hornady RN at 2200fps! )

I'm pretty sure the 1895 I had was an 80s gun. It worked well, and at the time all I needed was minute of deer accuracy and it did that handily. I will admit there is something waaay cool about seeing those huge long empties coming out of the action, the .444 is that way, too.

Overall, I liked the 1895 I had, it wasn't excessively heavy, the fit and finish were good, accuracy was more than adequate for me, and if you kept the loads below the "stupid" level, recoil wasn't horrible.

I eventually sold it as excess to needs after about a decade, and looking back now, I shouldn't have.
I was saddened by what happened to the rifle after Remington took over. Glad to hear they have come at least part of the way back to where they should be. For a lever .45-70 that didn't weigh six metric tons and didn't cost an arm and a leg /Winchester collector prices, the Marlin was a good gun. I hope they will be again.

[BusGunner007]

OP has 2 posts and an earfull after that!

I'm 'one of those people' that won't be reloading because I can't.
So, thanks for the beat down.

I just spent a lot of thought, money and enthusiasm on my 1895 to come back here and read snotty comments on the gun, cartridge and ammo?

C'mon, guys.
I respect the lot of you with so much more experience, but keep the new enthusiasts in mind whilst pontificating, will ya?

[Blue Duck]

I have owned several 45/70's and one Marlin 444, many years ago. The 444 had the micro groove rifling and shot the 240gr factory loads pretty good, but would not stabilize the heavier 265gr handloads. I must say the 240gr factory loads were explosive at close range.

One of my most memorable kills with the 444, was at a running buck at about 30 yards, with my receiver sighted 444 way back in the early 80's. It was tough shooting, but deer were a lot more scarce back then and I didn't pass up any shots I thought I could make, because back then, I knew if I blew a chance at a deer, it usually meant that I blew my year. Any way the deer was running to beat heck and I finally connected on the 4th shot, hitting it in the top of the back, at which point it did a somersault with the horns stuck in the ground, and I was shooting so fast, I put the 5th round through that white belly while the deer was still in the middle of the air, and the slug came out in the top of the back where the first hit had been.

I described this in detail because as far as I am concerned situations like this is where the 444 Marlin really shined. It had the power and the speed of fire for this kind of shooting. And the deer tasted just as good. This particular deer turned out to be possibly one of the biggest bodied deer I ever bagged, but I did loose a substantial portion of backstrap as the 240gr factory loads actually blew up when they hit. I recovered the first round where the bullet hit the spine, just behind the shoulder, and then slid down a rib, with the lead core separating from the jacket, and I recovered both core and jacket.

I eventually traded it off, because it would not stabilize heavier bullets.

I have owned several 45/70's and think I like them better, unless I could get a .444 with regular Ballard type rifling that would stabilize a little heavier bullet. But personally, for the hunting I do, I am quite happy with the 300 gr factory loads in the 45/70 and I have killed several deer and quite a few hogs with that load, at 20 to 100yds and always found it to work great, almost always resulting with drop dead right there results with any solid hit.

I currently, own a new Remington made 45/70 guide gun type Marlin with a Micro- Aim point on it. And workmanship is pretty good, but the loading gate is sharp as a knife, one has to be careful when pushing rounds into it, to not get a finger caught between the front end of the loading gate and the frame, as it likes to trap your thumb, and take a piece of hide off in the process. The action was a little rough when I got it but is smoothing out with use. So far I have only killed a few hogs with it, and it preformed decisively as expected.

The one thing I do like about the new Marlin is it does not have the Micro-groove rifling and is actually more accurate then any Marlin I every owned. I hesitate to say this because you won't believe me and I wouldn't either until I experienced it. But that Marlin 45/70 with just the Aimpoint shooing at a black bullseye at 100 yds will group into an inch with 3 careful shots, using 300gr factory ammo. I would have been just as happy if it had done 2.5" groups and expected those size groups.

[44 AMP]

And workmanship is pretty good, but the loading gate is sharp as a knife, one has to be careful when pushing rounds into it, to not get a finger caught between the front end of the loading gate and the frame, as it likes to trap your thumb, and take a piece of hide off in the process.

Here's a simple trick I learned a long time ago, which works with ALL loading gate tube magazine rifles.

DO NOT use your hand (thumb or fingers) to push the cartridge all the way through the loading gate. Use the bullet of another cartridge. Start the first round through the gate about halfway, then finish pushing it all the way in with the next cartridge.

When the magazine is full, the last round (the one you are pushing with) will be about half way sticking out of the gate, simply pull it out and put it back in your ammo carrier. Gun loaded, no pinched or cut fingers!!