Time for that lever gun.

[Chainsaw.]

Well. Its been about 20 years. 20 years since I had that Rossi Puma in 44 mag. Back before they came with the silly (and ugly) safety on top of the bolt. And 20 years I’ve been missing having such a rifle.

So, nows the time, gonna spend some real money on a new 1892, in 44 mag. A 92 because they are such a fine, slim, handy little rifle. And 44 mag because I am a hound for that round. And yes, I know, a 45 colt is more traditional, and even more powerful potentially. But them what excuse would I have to later buy an 1873 in 45?

I’ve been hunting around and these seem to be the choices I have for a 92 in 44.
Marlin. (Thats out due to the micro groove rifling as I shoot mostly lead bullets, and that confounded cross bolt safety on the newer ones)

Winchester/Miroku. (Lots of rave reviews on these. Do have a modern safety but its removable and coverable with tang skinner sights)

Taylors and company/Chiappa. (This is the most traditional looking rifle (which I like,alot) but I’ve heard about some minor Issues on some rifles).

Turnbull. Ha! Did you SEE the price on that thing!?

Henry. Very nice nod to the lever gun but to far from original styling.

And of course there is always the used market, but thats so hard to even consider.

[ligonierbill]

I have had very good luck with the one Miroku I own, although it is a '94 replica. Not completely traditional, of course, but then you are looking at a non-traditional caliber. The Italians do a pretty good job as well. Regards the '73, you do know that no lever gun was ever offered in 45 Colt until the current replicas. Traditional would be 44-40. In any case, you would not want to run "Ruger" loads in even a modern replica of a '73. The action is super smooth, but not nearly as strong as a '92 or a '94.

[PatientWolf]

I like the Rossi and the Henry (Big Boy Steel, although if you wait they should start offering a side loader that isn’t brass). Both are typically smoother examples of levers in my experience.

Marlin was offering one with curly maple stock that was beautiful in my opinion, but the marlins are nowhere as smooth as the ‘92s and Henry’s I’ve handled.

The Winchester can also be a little pricy and when they discontinue offering that model it’s nearly impossible to find parts (my experience with a Browning ‘92 with the same parent company).

I have no even limited experience with the Taylors or Trumbull.

[Obambulate]

I found an Interarms Rossi 92 carbine in .357 in perfect condition for $500. They are out there.

[Scorch]

I know, a 45 colt is more traditional

No, it's not. Original Winchester 1892s were chambered in 44-40, 38-40, 32-20, and 25-20. All of these are bottleneck cartridges, and that is because John Browning designed the rifle to feed tapered cartridges. Straight-wall cartridges in 92s are a relatively new thing.

[eastbank]

I have two winchester,s(1892-53) and a marlin(94 cb) in 44-40 and load 21.5-2400(not for older wicheater,s-73,s or older revolvers) with a 200 gr JFP for a honest 1600 fps and accurett to boot(.75-1 inch groups at 50 yards), plus its a original caliber.

[YankeeIronSights]

After owning a Henry, Japanese Miroku made Winchester 1873, a Rossi 92 and various Marlins 1894, 336 and Glenfield, I have developed a preference for Marlin rifles, due to how easy they are to disassemble for basic cleaning. You remove just one screw and the lever and bolt comes off, allowing you to clean the barrel from the action/breach side with a long brush. All other brands make you clean the barrel from the muzzle, unless you settle for using a snake, or you take the time to dismantle the whole action, which can be very tedious and time consuming.

The microgroove feature makes the gun very accurate but does not work with lead cast bullets. The action tends to be better and smoother on older Marlin JM marked models.

Nowadays, I only own JM marked Marlins in 30-30, .44 and .357. I love them all. They are beautiful rifles that give testimony to outstanding American craftsmanship and ingenuity.

Regardless of the brand and model, every gun collection should include at least one lever action rifle.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gb_in_ga]

Marlin. (Thats out due to the micro groove rifling as I shoot mostly lead bullets, and that confounded cross bolt safety on the newer ones)

Regarding micro-groove and shooting lead bullets: That's a common misconception. You actually *can* shoot lead in a micro-groove bore. The trick is to size the bullet a couple of thousandths larger than you usually would, and if you are loading it on the warm side you need to use gas checks.

I regularly use lead in my micro-groove .30-30 336, I just size the bullets .311 instead of .309 as you normally would.

[bamaranger]

I'd be tempted to hold off and watch for an older Marlin w/o the tang safety. I hear bad things about micro-groove and lead, but the early .357 I have shoots lead acceptably as long as I keep the velocity down to 1000 fps with a 158.

And +1, .45 Colt was not a traditional chambering. In addition to the cartridge taper, seems I have also read that the rim on the .45 was small enough, and the extractor hook on the '92 small enough, and metallurgy being what it was in the day, that the combination was thought not to be a good idea. No source for that, recollection only.

Duly noted that the OP is interested in .44Mag, but a .357 will be way cheaper to shoot.

[44 AMP]

In addition to the cartridge taper, seems I have also read that the rim on the .45 was small enough, and the extractor hook on the '92 small enough, and metallurgy being what it was in the day, that the combination was thought not to be a good idea. No source for that, recollection only.

We have similar recollections, though I doubt the case taper had anything much to do with it. The .45 Colt doesn't taper, that may have been part of it, but I think its the case rims and the rifle that was the issue. Take a look at some 1880s vintage .45 Colt brass. You'll find the rim smaller/thinner than on the brass today. Additionally, in those days the cases were "balloon head", and the rims were hollow to a degree not found today. Between the two it was felt that the .45 Colt would give trouble in the lever gun, and therefore was not chambered.

[Chainsaw.]

Originally Posted by gb_in_ga

Regarding micro-groove and shooting lead bullets: That's a common misconception. You actually *can* shoot lead in a micro-groove bore. The trick is to size the bullet a couple of thousandths larger than you usually would, and if you are loading it on the warm side you need to use gas checks.

I regularly use lead in my micro-groove .30-30 336, I just size the bullets .311 instead of .309 as you normally would.

On lead pistol bullets in the Marlin micro groves, do you have an idea of how much larger? I typically size my 44s to .430, which usually shakes out to another half thou larger.

[Chainsaw.]

Originally Posted by eastbank

I have two winchester,s(1892-53) and a marlin(94 cb) in 44-40 and load 21.5-2400(not for older wicheater,s-73,s or older revolvers) with a 200 gr JFP for a honest 1600 fps and accurett to boot(.75-1 inch groups at 50 yards), plus its a original caliber.

Now thats a respectable 44-40 load!

[Rifletom]

Agree the .45 Colt is relatively new in lever rifles. But, gadz, are they fun to load for and shoot! Have one in a Henry BB steel. Speaking of which; it was mentioned earlier, that only Marlin's can have the lever dropped out and bolt removed. Same exact thing with the Henry Big Boy's I have. Very easy to do.
Good luck in your search Chainsaw.

[Scorch]

seems I have also read that the rim on the .45 was small enough, and the extractor hook on the '92 small enough, and metallurgy being what it was in the day, that the combination was thought not to be a good idea

Really? Really and truly?

Because 44-40, 38-40 and 45 Colt all have the same rim size. And the extractor on the 1873 and 1892 are pretty big.

No, it's the taper that makes the cartridge feed and extract easier. Browning designed the 1892 for the 44-40 because it was used in the 1873. The 1873 has very ittle leverage to pull out a straight-walled cartridge.

[FrankenMauser]

What is so hard about considering the used market?

Tools are tools. Used tools are cheaper tools.
Some people take care of their tools. Some people don't.
It is usually very easy to tell the difference.

On lead pistol bullets in the Marlin micro groves, do you have an idea of how much larger? I typically size my 44s to .430, which usually shakes out to another half thou larger.

It depends on the barrel.
Generally, Marlin barrels slug at .430-.431.
Most people, including myself, get by just fine with .432" bullets.

[Crunchy Frog]

A friend of mine has a Browning B92 in .44 Magnum. A nice 1892 reproduction without the rebounding hammer and tang safety found on other Miroku ‘92s. They made a smaller quantity in .357.

[Chainsaw.]

Can anyone explain this rebounding hammer thing?

[Hawg]

I found an Interarms Rossi 92 carbine in .357 in perfect condition for $500. They are out there.

I sold my Interarms Rossi in 44-40 in the same condition a few weeks ago for $450.00. There was never a lever gun chambered in .45 Colt until Uberti did it in 1984.

[Scorch]

Can anyone explain this rebounding hammer thing?

It's a safety device. I think it's stupid and ugly, but it's out there.

[Chainsaw.]

Theres a store on the way to my vacation property that has a Taylors and Company. Think Ill stop and put my mitts on one here soon.

[gw44]

I have a model 71win and a Marlin 375win, I do not use them to often but I have to have to have them, lever guns are something that make you feel good !!!

[Chainsaw.]

Well, stopped into my favorite local shop and they had a Winchester 92 in 44mag, 20” barrel. Its mine now. So, lets see how it shoots.
Might have to add a leather lever wrap. Maybe a tang peep sight. And, perhaps reoil the wood. Weeee!!