45-70

[Justin_E]

Just taking a quick poll. I'm looking at buying a 45-70 soon and can't decide between Henry and Marlin. Any advice which is best?

[maroonandwhite]

If you are buying new I'd go with Henry. If you can get an older Marlin in good shape I prefer them. Fit and finish on the new Marlins just doesn't feel the same to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sidinman]

Ditto what M&W said.

[KaNaPaPi]

Henry has better iron sights (ghost ring). Marlin has loading in the receiver and not the tube. I prefer Henry's fit and finish over Marlin as well.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[Justin_E]

The Henry I'm looking at doesn't have a ghost ring.

[I am Groot!]

The older Marlins pop up every now and again. I think they are worth the wait. You can easily add a goats ring to one of these.

Just want to throw out the Ruger No 1 in 45-70. it is no longer in production, but is by far my favorite.

[Justin_E]

You sound like a guy I know on the Ruger.

[TNWNGR]

First above all others would be a 1970's production run of the Marlin 1895 45/70, second would be a Ruger #1 45/70 from the same time period that was proven to not have a wandering zero. Last, but not least as I plan on getting one myself later would be the Henry 45/70.

[xd shooter]

Don't rule out the new Marlins or (remlins) if you will. I collect Marlin leverguns, & always look for the presafety guns.

With that being said I do own a (remlin) 1895 GBL guide gun in 45-70. The fit & finish is great even though I'm not a fan of checkering. The sights are spot on straight out of the box. & is actually my favorite Marlin to shoot besides my 1894 in 357 mag.

Just don't rule something out without checking it out yourself if you have a chance.

[Cherokee Slim]

I saw both and got the Marlin.  The stock was a tad long for the 200 yard buffalo shoots and for deer hunting all heavy clothed up so I cut it off a little.  It fits much better now.  Very smooth action and it feeds my reloads easily.  You won't go wrong with either one.  I think The Marlin costs less but I may be wrong on that.

Cherokee Slim

[Justin_E]

I think I can get a Marlin for $599+ taxes and crap. The Henry is, if they still have it, $675+ all the gov't crap.

[runco]

How about the Winchester 1886 or the Taylors Ridge Runner.  Hickok45 just did a great review just this week on the Taylor.  I would like to find a good Winchester, but not at a collectors price.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnIaTPI7B24

[TripleGGG]

First above all others would be a 1970's production run of the Marlin 1895 45/70, second would be a Ruger #1 45/70 from the same time period that was proven to not have a wandering zero. Last, but not least as I plan on getting one myself later would be the Henry 45/70.

My 1970's Marlin is the best I have shot. IMHO. However I have not shot the new Remlins. I always tell people to shoot different guns and go with what feels and shoots best for you.

[KahrMan]

I prefer the Marlins.  I have a couple of 1895's in 45-70.  They are both great looking and shooting guns.  My other 45-70 is a Ruger No. 1.  That would be my second choice.

 

[URL=http://s196.photobucket.com/user/kahrman/media/DSCF0042.jpg.html][/URL]

[Wade195]

Wow..

LOOKS GREAT.

I have the Henry 45-70 steel I just purchased a few months ago.

I have not got to shoot is yet, but I hope to soon.

The Henry's may not be the same quality as your Marlins or mine, but I do like them.

I have an early Marlin 336RC in 35 rem and 30-30 that were my grandfathers and fathers. They are my favorites.

[Sidinman]

Like that Marlin KahrMan :drool:

[221 Fireball]

Anybody remember the Ruger #3s in 45/70? They always quit making the cool stuff.  :shrug:

[Wade195]

I think so

Were they a detained #1?

Or am I thinking of something else?

[I am Groot!]

Anybody remember the Ruger #3s in 45/70? They always quit making the cool stuff. :shrug:

I have always wanted one. I have never seen one in person, only online. They are less expensive than the no1, but I bet you will be feeling the recoil for a while. Edited January 23, 2016 by Odessa7979

[221 Fireball]

They WERE less expensive then the No. 1, but now that they've become quite uncommon, they are bringing quite a bit more if in pristine condition.

 

I had one in my hands at a gun show several years back in .22 Hornet, but you know how it is ... you can't buy them all.  :cry:

[I am Groot!]

I try my best too, but the wife and kids keep getting in the way. It's too bad I love my family.

[KahrMan]

Like that Marlin KahrMan :drool:

Thanks. The barrel has been cut down to 16 1/8", recrowned and had the action slicked up. It is a sweet carrying little woods gun.

[221 Fireball]

Thanks. The barrel has been cut down to 16 1/8", recrowned and had the action slicked up. It is a sweet carrying little woods gun.

 

I thought that barrel looked short. That's sweet. Did you have someone local cut the barrel down?

 

One (of many) guns of regret I sold was an early JM guide gun in 45/70. My one buddy at deer camp kept his and to this day, hammers 'em down. He doesn't need to track them!

[KahrMan]

I bought it like that.  An older gentleman bought two 1895's.  One in 45-70 and one in 444.  He had the custom work done to both and then took them on one hunting trip to Alaska.  Sold them both when he got back.  I really wish I could have bought them both but only had the cash for one at that time.

[Justin_E]

Ok, so I bit the bullet. I couldn't pass up the price. Just as soon as I can get a picture posted, I'll share it.