2nd Year Remington-Marlin 45-70

Reed

Active Member
I'm looking at a Marlin 1895 45-70 that was supposedly built in 2009. That would make it a Remington, no? There seems to be lots of conflicting info out there regarding these rifles. Can anyone help me with either of these questions?

-I read somewhere there were some problems with quality in the early years of Remington's takeover. Were those fit/finish problems, or serious functional problems?
-Bore: I have no experience with microgroove barrels. Would Ballard-style rifling ever have 12 grooves? This one does. If Ballard, are the bores smaller than the microgroove bores were? Did they bring the bore down to be more like modern 45 Colts? Anyone have some "typical" dimensions? I have a nice ACC 45-340A mould that casts .453 that I thought I might be able to use if this is the case. Is that probably still too small if this rifle has Ballard rifling?

Thanks for any insight.
Reed
 

Ian

Notorious member
A 45/70 will always have a .457-8" groove, that's the standard established 150 years ago

12 grooves is microgroove. The bore will be a little larger than ballard because the lands are not as tall, but the groove size will be really close to standard for the caliber.

Remlins typically had fit and finish problems throughout. They bought and moved the Marlin tooling but none of the employees who knew how to run it. They squeaked out a good one now and then, you'll just have to check it out and use your own judgement. Look down the sights and check that the barrel is clocked correctly (sights straight up and in line with the receiver).
 

Matt

Member
I think that the internet rage against Marlins after Remington purchased the company is overblown. I’ve got Marlins from the 1950s to 4-5 years ago (a new 1895 .45/70) the old ones are very smooth compared to the new ‘95, but they were well used
when I obtained them. Fit and finish of my .45/70 is very good and it shoots very well with any cast 300 to 500 grain bullets, gas check and PB. That’s with light to maximum loads. It’s is probably the most accurate lever gun I own, certainly the easiest to get to shoot.

As Ian suggests, look it over for obvious problems either from the factory or the previous owner(s) and make sure the bore is bright. Of 1E8347A2-54DA-40AC-A428-B8E218FD2356.jpegthe 3 or 4 of the Marlin 444 and .45/70 rifles I’m familiar with they all shoot well.

Photo is of typical 5 shot 50 yard bench rest groups with my “Remlin” 1895 .45:70
 

RBHarter

West Central AR
No bugs in the 2010 1895 I shoot . It's Ballard and all Rem parts . There was a guy that must have just been the unluckiest guy ever to send back a bad barrel on a rifle . I simply can't imagine a guy on any line not looking down a barrel before screwing it to a receiver , but it just becomes mathematically improbable that one guy could send back a rifle 3 times and get 4 barrels poorly cut with imbalanced , bare places unless there is just some nuances of a ball on a rod , pulled though a pipe , that I'm not grasping .

I've seen a lot of complaints of over clocked barrels and crooked sights . I can't imagine that's good for the magazine alignment either .

I've seen a few complaints about a too tall front sight and not enough elevation on the factory sight , and it not being tall enough to accommodate a Williams FP family .
This one comes from the Leverevolution crowd mostly , shoot it within the Cartridge design and it is a lot more capable of hitting the POA .
 

CZ93X62

Official forum enigma
".457"-.458" grooves might be typical, but throats are religiously .459" and most of my barrel grooves are a few tenths smaller. 2 Rugers (#1 and #3), 4 1895s, and a Bubba Trapdoor all told. I am down to the newest 1895 and the TD now. The 95 is a RemLin, from about 2012 with Ballard-form rifling and shoots as well as I can hold with open irons--about 1.5" to 1.75" at 100 yards. It ain't fer shootin' small varmints, so that kind of output is more than adequate.
 

creosote

Active Member
Marlin rebarreled once on two rifles. The third rifle had a very over clocked barrel.
Five tries all told.
They did give all my money back, even dros.
I still have LOTS of pictures.
Each bad barrel was a little different in that you could see the progression of the tooling going bad. (In a mixed up order) I think the the second was the worst.
There was only one good full "land".
In each of the barrels.
Not to mention how bad the crowns were.
I really wasn't gonna say anything but......someone had to bring up math & improbable. ;)
Numerous folks have looked at all the pictures. Each one amazed they were able to ship them out the door.
It's all good now...Got one that's a keeper.
Now to forget it for good.
 

Missionary

Well-Known Member
Good morning
About the bore / groove diameters We own numerous rifles in 45-70 that were made between 1874 -1923. The bore / groove diameters of those Springfields (,460-.464+), Marlins 1881s (.459+-.462). Winchesters .459+-.461 and Rolling Blocks .459-,462.
Marlin seems to have got their act together with the Model 1895. Both ours are at .458-459. One is an early Ballard and the other a micro groove from about 1990.
We bought a Navy Arms Buffalo rifle 45-70 1990 that is .458. The reproduction (jap) 45-70 rifles are also well grooved at 457-458.
Your experience may vary. If we could pool all the 45-70 rifles we have here we would find far to many exceptions from the last 60 years.
But that is why we try to remember to take nothing for granted. Most any bore / groove can be overcome.
But crooked barrels and interrupted rifling is inexcusable.
 

RBHarter

West Central AR
Didn't remember whom the train wreck belonged to . Apologies for poking at the scar .

I didn't do a chamber cast on the example I shoot but .457+- .0003 in close enough to try what I have available measures for net groove has allowed good results with with bullets just over .458 both naked lubed and in a paper patch .

I've never expected much from lever or slide guns in terms of pin point accuracy so when this one delivers field accuracy groups of 2-2.5" at 100 I'm not unhappy . I'm sure I could improve with some trigger work and wood fitting but I'm happy for now .
 

RBHarter

West Central AR
RM numbered Marlin guns .
No suffix is 2009 some are parts bin assy and some are Rem parts .
A is All Rem and 2010 , I suspect still shaking out the bugs and bushing up tooling slop and settling into new footings .
B,C,D etc for succeeding years
The ad square/bar code was added circa 2012 .
I would presume that the new suffix starts with the first new action in the line after 1/1 ea yr .
 

Reed

Active Member
Thanks for your comments, everyone. Very helpful. Bought the rifle. Mine must be a parts bin gun, then. No suffix, but a 2009 according to a site that explains the serial number math. Has the JM stamp on the barrel. It's a beautiful rifle, and has had only about 60 rounds through it according to the seller. Bore is pristine. Has been a gun safe queen. Need to change that part of its history as soon as my broken shoulder heals. :(
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ian

CZ93X62

Official forum enigma
I enjoy mine. I DGA_ who made it or when, its sights clock correctly--its assembly is sound, and it functions flawlessly. It is reasonably accurate with some existing loads I have on hand (all castings), though I haven't given it a thorough wring-out--500 rounds or so, most of an 1873-level flavor with a few stompers just for grins. That sort of fun isn't as enjoyable as it was in my 20s and 30s.
 

Brad

Administrator
Staff member
A 400-420 gr cast over 24 gr of 2400 is generally a good place to start in a Marlin 45-70.
Mild recoil and accurate.