Marlin 1895 Cowboy KABOOM!

[J Miller]

I ran across a thread about a Marlin 1895 Kaboom over on The Ruger Forum.
http://www.rugerforum.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=92201

The actual thread about the Marlin was in Marlin Owners.com forum:
http://www.marlinowners.com/forums/inde ... 268.0.html

I've never loaded for the 45-70 so all I can say is the guns owner did something really wrong.

Joe

[Blaine]

Kind of cheesy blaming smokeless powder

[Hobie]

Note that they all come apart the same way...

[stretch]

Yikes!!

That's a serious pressure spike.
It amazes me the way those things come apart.
Double-check your loads......

-Stretch

[Mike D.]

That's exactly why I shoot 1886s. I don't understand his problem with smokeless, let alone 50/4895. That IS NOT a particularly stout load.

[Malamute]

I believe part of the reson that the 95 Marlins seem to be featured in this sort of event is that the action wasnt deigned for 45-70. It's an action designed around the 30-30/38-55 cartridge. There was enough room to squeeze the 45-70 into it, but it leaves the bottom of the chamber thin with the magazine cut. I've seen one 95 barrel at a gunsmiths that was cracked along the bottom of the chamber, anf he said he'd replaced one other.

[J Miller]

Based on what I read, the person who loaded the ammo tried for a very light load using a rifle powder that was too slow. I have read several articles about detonations being created in the lab with just such a combo. A large rifle case, slow burning or a too slow burning powder for the cartridge, and a light charge.
I'm thinking this is what this guy did.

I'm also thinking from what I read that he is not a competent reloader.

I doubt seriously it was the fault of the rifle. He probably would have KABOOM'd an 1886 too.

Joe

[Chas.]

I believe part of the reson that the 95 Marlins seem to be featured in this sort of event is that the action wasnt deigned for 45-70. It's an action designed around the 30-30/38-55 cartridge. There was enough room to squeeze the 45-70 into it, but it leaves the bottom of the chamber thin with the magazine cut. I've seen one 95 barrel at a gunsmiths that was cracked along the bottom of the chamber, anf he said he'd replaced one other.

I'm not sure I would agree with your hypothesis. Your argument is anectodal. I would like to see that the percentage of Marlins, compared to other brands, that kaboom. I think we see more Marlins because so many more of them out there, but I remain unconvinced that the percentage is greater.

There are many more Toyotas in accidents than Ferraris. Does that mean Toyatos are more accident prone?

Not to be anal but we need DATA!

[FWiedner]

Note that they all come apart the same way...

Maybe it's a safety feature...

[Blaine]

Note that they all come apart the same way...

Maybe it's a safety feature...

More like a breech of good conduct.....

[Mike D.]

"KA-BOOMING" a modern 1886 would take some serious overcharging. It is highly doubtful that even a too light charge of slow burning powder could cause the kind of problem that Marlin 336s have.

[Blaine]

"KA-BOOMING" a modern 1886 would take some serious overcharging. It is highly doubtful that even a too light charge of slow burning powder could cause the kind of problem that Marlin 336s have.

A spike has the potential of being many, many times the pressure of a normal shot. Every Kaboom is different and there is no way to test for them.

[Malamute]

I believe part of the reson that the 95 Marlins seem to be featured in this sort of event is that the action wasnt deigned for 45-70. It's an action designed around the 30-30/38-55 cartridge. There was enough room to squeeze the 45-70 into it, but it leaves the bottom of the chamber thin with the magazine cut. I've seen one 95 barrel at a gunsmiths that was cracked along the bottom of the chamber, anf he said he'd replaced one other.

I'm not sure I would agree with your hypothesis. Your argument is anectodal. I would like to see that the percentage of Marlins, compared to other brands, that kaboom. I think we see more Marlins because so many more of them out there, but I remain unconvinced that the percentage is greater.

There are many more Toyotas in accidents than Ferraris. Does that mean Toyatos are more accident prone?

Not to be anal but we need DATA!

Do you have anything more than the opinon that it's simpy the numbers of Marlins, rather than the thickness of the barrel at the chamber? The thickness of the barrel at the chamber is a fact. I don't recall the actual dimension. I just called the gunsmith, but wasn't able contact him. Anecdotal it may be, but a gunsmith that has seen at least two (this was 15 years ago) cracked at the same spot is a fairly strong anecdote. He mentioned the thinness of the barrel at that spot, and I've heard others comment on it as well. It may not sound like much, but neither is the differnce between a Colt 45 cal cylinder and a Ruger 45 cal cylinder. The difference in what you can do with them at similar levels is quite different tho. It would be anecdotal to say that there have been more Colts come apart with heavy loads than Rugers, but few would find fault with the analogy when comparing the thickness of the chamber walls.


The car analogy isnt really applicable. What may be more applicable would be an analogy on the order of, if more Toyotas had fires under the hood than Ferraris or whatever, on a percentage of cars on the road of course.


I just measured two Browning 86 barrels, a rifle, and a carbine. Both, at 2.1" forward of the rear of the barrel measured .932-.933"" diameter. Deducting the maximum chamber diameter (.507", measured at the rear of the chamber), this gives a wall thickness of .2135 at that point. There is no groove cut in the bottom of the barrel for the magazine tube to clear. Does anyone have a Marlin 95 barrel that they can measure the chamber wall thickness for comparison? Maybe I'm all wet. If we have a barrel that can be measured, we'll have a direct comparison, which seems to be a point of question in the discussion regarding the various models.

Not trying to make waves, but the idea that the Marlin barrels being thinner being a possible explanation for the problem of the KB seems to be called into question. Just wanting to keep a reasonable discussion afloat on the matter. If someone has a Marlin barrel, preferably off a gun that they can measure the chamber wall thickness at the magazine cut, we would have a bit more added to the discussion at least.

[Mich Hunter]

My dad had a 1895 Cowboy blow on him a couple years ago using FACTORY remington ammo. To be honest, the threads are very thin. I was surprised to see that. He was lucky and was not hurt, but Hobie is right. When they blow, they all look the same. In the end, Marlin offered a replacement rifle. He declined and took a check instead.

[Malamute]

Interesting comment Mich Hunter.

A gunsmith I know had mentioned that even with very good quality barrels, he could sometimes feel the difference in harder and softer parts of a barrel when chambering them. It wouldnt take much of a minor flaw on a thin spot to have a problem. Not that every example of X barrel would have a problem, just saying, barrels arent perfect, and a thin spot would be the place most likely for a flaw to exibit a stress crack or failure. A thicker barrel may have a flaw, but it would be less likely to be an issue.

[AJMD429]

Somewhere one of our fellow levergunners who makes custom .50 cal Marlin guns commented on the very thing that he felt limited the Marlin - that barrel-to-magazine-tube distance, which even if the sides of the receivers are thickened, does leave a 'weak' area.

I still trust my Marlin .45-70, but I would NOT hot-load that gun. As always, if you want something 'hotter', get something 'bigger'. A .416 Rigby barrel for an Encore will out-muscle ANY .45-70 load I've ever heard of, and then some, and cost less than replacing one new Marlin Guide Gun.

That's not saying all kabooms are 'hot' loaded; we all know many other reasons cause them, including sometimes just bad luck all around.

Safety Glasses. Listen to the gun & stop shooting if a shot 'sounds' different. Don't hot load. Don't 'under' load other than with KNOWN safe loads. Don't make mistakes loading 'normal' loads. Etc......

[bgmkithaca]

I have a Marlin 45-70 factory barrel in hand that is identical to the one in this discussion.The thinnest portion is under the threads as was already pointed out, the chamber thickness at that point is only .100 inch thick-yes 1/10 of an inch and at the extractor slot it tapers to 0 at the rear of the chamber. The measurement at the barrel shoulder is .115 inch.
The cutout for the magazine is also .115 inch.We are indeed looking at thin places under the threads and forward to the
barrel shoulder where it butts up to the reciever.Almost every marlin that I have heard about letting go has went in this area.I have seen two that had confirmed barrel obstructions-all the others look like this one.The pictures indicate that
it let go in the thin area and will some magnification I noticed that the reciever cracked along the extractor slot as well as along the area between the barrel and magazine tube-this area is also quite thin.Without more information I would be looking at a lot of chamber pressure

[brucew44guns]

I have always shot the 405 grain Remingtons, 1300 feet per second I think it is. I hope I need not start worrying that I'm a dangerous man afield with that, or at a range, got 3 different ones that havn't blown up so far. You see this stuff and it makes you wonder.

[Marvin S]

Wow, makes me glad I got a Browning 1886.

[Kansas Ed]

I won't offer an opinion on the quality of the new Marlins, but do have this incident to share which some may find interesting.

Back in the mid '90's a good friend wonderful gunsmith and fellow levergunner in Star Valley ...Jay Romine called me one evening and asked me if I had any experience with the 45-70 and RE-7. I had been experimenting with extreme loads in a Browning Hi-Wall using Barnes X bullets and RE-7 (about 2500 fps). He says that he'll be over in about 30 minutes.

Awhile later he shows up at my door with his two 45-70 rifles, a pound of powder, and a box of ammo. He's loading 300 gr FN bullets and the aforementioned powder. He pulls a piece of brass out of his pocket...and says this was the first shot out of his newer 1895 Marlin. The brass had .100" scallops stretched out at the mouth...stretched beyond belief. So he says that after feeling the recoil and seeing the brass he took the next shot out of his Ruger #1 or was it #3...He pulls the second brass out of his pocket and only half of it was there...not seperated at the case head, but gone about halfway up it's length. We pulled bullets on a few loads, checked the powder charge, verified visually the powder. He had just opened the can of powder so we knew it wasn't mixed. Everything checked on spot.

He sent the remaining rounds back to Hercules who dissected them, and pressure tested a couple. IIRC they were in the neighborhood of 120K psi. They claimed that he had mixed the powder with Red Dot...but he insisted that he opened the powder new for these loads. Hercules ended up buying back the whole case of powder where he had bought it.

The reason I'm relating this is that the Marlin handled the pressure of those rounds for one shot without damage...so If we are comparing apples here...I would think that the Marlins are capable of handling some pretty extreme pressures without letting go on one shot. Those photo's show some pretty extreme pressures IMO. But perhaps Jay's brass was just better than the other fellas also.

Ed

[bgmkithaca]

I just measured the cylinder on my super blackhawk 44mag. and came up with .100 inch at the thinnest spot in it -the same dimension as the marlin.the super black hawk can handle quite a bit of pressure within common sense limits.
It would appear that the Marlin would be capable of the same expectations within the limits of common sense.No one runs a factory super blackhawk to pressures of 45,000 psi & up. The same should not be done in a marlin either-there just isn't enough steel in the chamber,same as the cylinder.Reloading sources vary but I have not seen pressure tested data over
about 35,000 psi for an 1895 Marlin and I suspect that the factory would prefer a fair amount less. They don't want a blow-up anymore than we do.

[.45colt]

This whole thing sounds like a load of bull**** to Me. this guy says.... "First (and last) time I shoot smokeless in it!"??????...... and "You can't get 50 grains of powder under that 250gr???? bullet. . there is alot more to this I think. The Lord only knows the real truth.

[J Miller]

This whole thing sounds like a load of bull**** to Me. this guy says.... "First (and last) time I shoot smokeless in it!"??????...... and "You can't get 50 grains of powder under that 250gr???? bullet. . there is alot more to this I think. The Lord only knows the real truth.

The real truth is the guy did something really wrong when he loaded that ammo. And like so many do now adays he's trying to put the blame elsewhere.

Joe

[AJMD429]

"Well I took some time today to do a little checking.
Unloaded all the rounds left, less than 30 gr 4895 in each
behind a 250 gr flat point round nose, light crimp,
as per the book for a "light" load (I knew the range would be 100 yds)
took the action apart bolt, hammer, trigger and springs all working,
Frame split virtically through the barrel threads.

Splints on fingers is making key board a mess but I will keep looking
and keep you posted.
Two points worth noting, can't get 50 gr in the case with those bullets,
Can't get 25 gr in the case with 2 bullets...
No bulge anywhere in the barrel.
I will be scoping the brass (still in the barrel) next

My Lee Modern Reloading book lists H-4895 (for "all modern guns in good condition") with a 300 grain jacketed bullet and says Starting Load is 55.7 gr, and Never Exceed Load is 58.0c, the "c" meaning "compressed". Thus, unless IMR-4895 is what he was using, and IMR is truly FAR fluffier than H-4895 (which I doubt, since my Lee Dipper Capacity Chart lists them as IDENTICAL in grains thrown for all of their powder scoop sizes), and unless a 250 grain bullet takes up more case capacity than a 300 grain one - you CAN in fact get AT LEAST 55.7 grains in the case. Having said that, with a 250 grain bullet, it remains to be seen whether a 'double' charge of his light load would fit, AND whether that would really be all that 'hot' a load, even if it did. For a 350 grain bullet, the Lee manual lists 53.0 Start and 59.0c Never Exceed for a Ruger No. 1, but knocking 100 grains off that bullet might (or not!) mean a 60 grain charge would be over the Marlin's limits. All speculation, and I sure wouldn't go there on purpose, but I'm just wondering if a double charge wouldn't in fact FIT, and if it did, I wouldn't count on the light bullet making it 'safe'.

According to Hodgdon, a double of his 30 gr. charge of H-4895 WOULD fit under a 300 grain bullet in the .45-70:

• From the Basic Reloader's Manual 2002
  Hodgdon Powder Company, Inc.
  Winchester cases
  CCI 200 primers
  Bullet Wt. 300 gr. Sierra Hollow Point
  Charge 62.0 (compressed) of H-4895 21,000 CUP
  1874 fps by chronograph.

Given the above data, I seriously doubt a "double charge" would be the issue - if anything, the overly-light charge DOES sound worrisome like some folks say about the 'detonation' or some orther type of abnormal burning.

Maybe the secret is the "light crimp" - - what if the force of feeding caused the bullet to be driven way down in the case, so it had the effective volume of a .45 Colt case loaded with a compressed 30 grain charge of 4895, and the bullet slid another inch whereupon suddenly contacting RIFLING...?

Most important Don't forget to wear Good eye protection..."

Yes, Yes, Yes...!

[Old Savage]

Did it kick the bullet down the barrel and then ignite?

[Griff]

I only read the OP over @ Marlinowners, but right off a few statements ccaught my eye.

Gun was overloaded

Well, maybe not, but the cartridge sure was.

First (and last) time I shoot smokeless in it!
I am going to check the other loads to confirm what I know.

It was the first shot, no squib, I hand dipped each one but clearly
doubled one and bet I missed the next one.

I'm sorry, but this really sounds as though he doesn't know what he's doin'. Don't "dip" anything unless you KNOW the charge is correct.

Well I took some time today to do a little checking.
Unloaded all the rounds left, less than 30 gr 4895 in each
behind a 250 gr flat point round nose, light crimp,
as per the book for a "light" load (I knew the range would be 100 yds)Two points worth noting, can't get 50 gr in the case with those bullets,
Can't get 25 gr in the case with 2 bullets...
No bulge anywhere in the barrel.

He can tell this how? 4895... hmmm. IMR or H? 250 grain fp in a .45-70? What case was he using when he couldn't get 25 grains of 4895 with two 250 grain pills in it?
Let's see... Hodgdon site sez 28.5 of IMR 4895 with a 300 grain bullet is the LIGHT load for a levergun... 62.5 for max. Just what bullet was he using? Was it actually a .458 bullet or was he using a .454 and shoved it all the way in?

Something fishy here.

[El Chivo]

if he did double charge, and the double only comes to 21,000 cup, since when would 21,000 cup blow a Marlin? I don't load for 45/70, but my hunting loads with H4895 fill the case with no room to spare and they don't blow the rifle.

Also, I read somewhere that the light load/slow powder detonation claim has never been reproduced and is probably bogus. I do know that Hodgdon publishes a light load for 30-30 with H4895 and I've used it with no detonation.

Maybe the gun was broken beforehand and finally gave out. The incident where Remington factory ammo blew one is revealing - that stuff is intentionally light so it can be used in older 45/70's.

[J Miller]

Marlin chambers the 1895 in the 450 Marlin cartridge. Basically a 45-70 on steroids. I really doubt they'd do that if there was an inherent weakness to the action or barrel.
I stand by what I've said twice now. The doofus did something very wrong with is reloaded ammo and blew the rifle up. His fault, period.

Joe

[Streetstar]

Marlin chambers the 1895 in the 450 Marlin cartridge. Basically a 45-70 on steroids. I really doubt they'd do that if there was an inherent weakness to the action or barrel.
I stand by what I've said twice now. The dufas did something very wrong with is reloaded ammo and blew the rifle up. His fault, period.

Joe

My first thought -- was (i rarely shoot my Guide gun, and factory FTX loads have been fine so far, but i might want to try something different some day)

Then the second thought was the same as Joe's ----- they already make a factory "hot rod" in the .450 --- if the barrel thickness thing is such a large issue, shouldn't these all be popping like popcorn too?

[457121]

My dad had a 1895 Cowboy blow on him a couple years ago using FACTORY remington ammo. To be honest, the threads are very thin. I was surprised to see that. He was lucky and was not hurt, but Hobie is right. When they blow, they all look the same. In the end, Marlin offered a replacement rifle. He declined and took a check instead.

that's crazy! i don't doubt your word but it's almost impossible to believe that those Rem. factory loads could do that. one thing that is a generally accepted rule in the firearms business is that factory ammo dosen't blow guns up, reloads do. but hey anything man made is never going to be perfect.

[Chas.]

Marlin chambers the 1895 in the 450 Marlin cartridge. Basically a 45-70 on steroids. I really doubt they'd do that if there was an inherent weakness to the action or barrel.
I stand by what I've said twice now. The dufas did something very wrong with is reloaded ammo and blew the rifle up. His fault, period.

Joe

That is true with a caveat. The .45-70 has tapered threads and the .450's are square. And I agree that we don't know all the story. The guy who it happened to may not know either.

[J Miller]

Marlin chambers the 1895 in the 450 Marlin cartridge. Basically a 45-70 on steroids. I really doubt they'd do that if there was an inherent weakness to the action or barrel.
I stand by what I've said twice now. The dufas did something very wrong with is reloaded ammo and blew the rifle up. His fault, period.

Joe

That is true with a caveat. The .45-70 has tapered threads and the .450's are square. And I agree that we don't know all the story. The guy who it happened to may not know either.

Chas.,

Other than tapered vs square is there any other differences to the barrels or receivers? And does the thread difference have any effect on the strengths of the parts? Inquiring minds want to know.

Joe

[AJMD429]

That is true with a caveat. The .45-70 has tapered threads and the .450's are square. And I agree that we don't know all the story. The guy who it happened to may not know either.

I think that's one of the differences in the "XLR" series also - they have the [correction] "V" (more supportive) threads - I think in all the chamberings.

[Chuck 100 yd]

The Marlin .450, .308MX and .338MX are made with V threads. The old style square (Acme) threads are not as strong as V threads because they can not be made to fit as close as the V thread thus the V thread combined with the receiver ring give a stronger breech. This comes straight from Marlin a couple years ago.
I have been looking for a .450 to re barrel to .40-65 because the v threads are much easier for me to turn on the lathe and the barrel will have to be made up by me from a blank.
Another someday project.

[AJMD429]

The Marlin .450, .308MX and .338MX are made with V threads. The old style square (Acme) threads are not as strong as V threads because they can not be made to fit as close as the V thread thus the V thread combined with the receiver ring give a stronger breech. This comes straight from Marlin a couple years ago.

I knew it was SOMETHING like that...

[Gary7]

From those pictures it would seem the basic design of the Marlin action is plenty strong. The bolt didn't let go at the locking lug. If it had, the guy would have been killed.

(Sorry to resurrect an old thread.)

[Hobie]

The Marlin .450, .308MX and .338MX are made with V threads. The old style square (Acme) threads are not as strong as V threads because they can not be made to fit as close as the V thread thus the V thread combined with the receiver ring give a stronger breech. This comes straight from Marlin a couple years ago.
I have been looking for a .450 to re barrel to .40-65 because the v threads are much easier for me to turn on the lathe and the barrel will have to be made up by me from a blank.
Another someday project.

We had to cut Acme threads in machinist class many years ago. IIRC (it was in 1972-73) we only had to grind the tool to the correct shape and it was otherwise not any more difficult. What am I forgetting?

[Idiot]

Wow, what a lot of noise. Just by a Marlin in the superior 444 Marlin chambering and go hunting. The barrel won't be too thin, factory ammo is already loaded "up" enough, and the game won't be able to tell the difference between it and the ancient 45/70 Government. Solved.

[Old Savage]

MikeD - unless you are shooting a new 1886, we had a fellow here have an old one come apart, a very experienced shooter.

[Mike D.]

OS, all of my 1886s, except one, have nickel steel barrels and smokeless receivers made expressly for the use of said powder. The nice, clean bores are a testament to the use of other than black powder and proper cleaning of possibly corrosive priming compounds after shooting. I shoot all of my guns, so excellent bores are paramount. Also, I load each and every round separately and by hand weighing the powder charge. Weigh powder, charge case, load bullet, crimp, repeating that procedure until the planned number of cartridges are completed.

[Old Savage]

Glad you are protecting yourself with meticulous procedures, I try to be more careful because of what I see here. I think the 86 that let go was nickel steel. I am not sure that it is in our current data base here.

[RDB]

Note to self. Marlin comes a part at documented weakness in design. Marlin shooters uses light loads.

Marlin owners condemn loader, shooter, kaboom theory of detonations, Ferraris and '86s.

Observation to self...Marlin owners should stick to Marlins..cheaper to replace than Farraris

Just glad no one was seriously injured.

[Mike D.]

Glad you are protecting yourself with meticulous procedures, I try to be more careful because of what I see here. I think the 86 that let go was nickel steel. I am not sure that it is in our current data base here.

No, the gun was a 1902 built 1886 .45-90 that had an old ordnance steel, or crucible soft steel, barrel. Had it been a NS barrel it would likely still be shooting.

[Chuck 100 yd]

The loader messed up BAD!!
There are gobs of Marlin .45-70`s out there shooting some pretty stormin loads. The only blowups I have heard of was with so-called reduced loads. Somebody is not paying attention to what they are doing.