The .444 is back.

[Chuck 100 yd]

I see in GunWorld magazine that the Marlin/Remington .444 is back. The one in the photos looks pretty nice. The writer reported a heavy trigger pull and stiff action that was made much better with use.
May be worth a look see.

[Buck Elliott]

(...yawn.....)

[BenT]

That is one caliber I haven't seen on the used rack for a long time. There will be people looking to buy one because used ones aren't that common.

[Griff]

(...yawn.....)

[Blaine]

(...yawn.....)

I really like my old Micro Groove .444.... If I only wanted one centerfire hunting rifle, and it had to be a lever, that would be it.

[6pt-sika]

I wasn't aware it had gone anywhere . Not that I'd have any intention of purchasing a new one !!

[6pt-sika]

I'm glad I culled my stable down before this was announced . That way I got maximum profit on my investments .

[6pt-sika]

Stiff action and a crummy trigger is nothing new . They were like that from the Marlin factory in Conn.

[Blaine]

Stiff action and a crummy trigger is nothing new . They were like that from the Marlin factory in Conn.

After 20 years they start to be pretty good.....Mine is over 40 and smooth as silk....

[AJMD429]

(...yawn.....)

I really like my old Micro Groove .444.... If I only wanted one centerfire hunting rifle, and it had to be a lever, that would be it.

Same Here. Not much needs done where I live that a 444 can't do very well. Until grizzlies start living in Indiana, I think I can do ok 'stepping down' from 45-70, and I do like the common caliber with my 44 Mags. Shoots plenty 'flat' for my neck of the woods, without risk of an over-the-horizon bad shot going a mile or two. Puts stuff down faster than my 30-30 or 35 Rem.

Stiff action and a crummy trigger is nothing new . They were like that from the Marlin factory in Conn.

After 20 years they start to be pretty good.....Mine is over 40 and smooth as silk....

Yep...

[TedH]

(...yawn.....)

I really like my old Micro Groove .444.... If I only wanted one centerfire hunting rifle, and it had to be a lever, that would be it.

+1

The only thing I don't like about my 444 is that I waited so long to buy one and missed out all those years!

[Dan 444]

(...yawn.....)

I really like my old Micro Groove .444.... If I only wanted one centerfire hunting rifle, and it had to be a lever, that would be it.

+1.
Dan

[6pt-sika]

Of all the Marlin's I've owned the four square bolt 1895's I had were like hot butter when you worked the lever . But all four of them are 100+ years old .

Those 336SC's I was wound up on for awhile were very smooth , but when I got them they were all 50 years old . All of the Pre 1976 444's I had or have were smooth . Same can be said for the 336T's in 44 MAG I had .

Of my remaining 444's the 1966 and 1967 are smooth as all get out even though both have been reblued atleast once . My 2001 444SS is getting there but I doubt if it's been fired more then 400 or so times by me and it was used when I bought it although it was like new and a wee bit stiff when I first got it .

[Ysabel Kid]

The .444 has always struck my fancy. If I could find one with a straight stock at the right price, I'd break my rule of not adding yet another caliber to feed to the stable!

[sore shoulder]

.444 is a neat cartridge, however I got rid of mine simply because it didn't do anything my 45-70 couldn't do, except kick harder, and the 45-70 can do a lot it can't.

[Blaine]

.444 is a neat cartridge, however I got rid of mine simply because it didn't do anything my 45-70 couldn't do, except kick harder, and the 45-70 can do a lot it can't.

I only have 1 45-70 left....A 525 @ 1400 fps (Grizz's Load) should suffice. @ 12lbs, I won't feel a thing....

[AJMD429]

The .444 has always struck my fancy. If I could find one with a straight stock at the right price, I'd break my rule of not adding yet another caliber to feed to the stable!

That's what I liked - it was the same caliber as my 44 Mag, and on occasion I use the same bullets; can't do that with a 45 Colt and 45-70 (and I know that most of the time there is no real good reason to do that).

[jeepnik]

Wow, this could easily go off into a .444 (well actually .429, but whose counting) versus 45-70 (well actually .452, ) but I will resist, I will resist, I will resist. Oops, I guess I'm not a strong willed as I thought.

[Grizz]

Wow, this could easily go off into a .444 (well actually .429, but whose counting) versus 45-70 (well actually .452, ) but I will resist, I will resist, I will resist. Oops, I guess I'm not a strong willed as I thought.

Uh Jeep, that would 0.459

[sore shoulder]

Wow, this could easily go off into a .444 (well actually .429, but whose counting) versus 45-70 (well actually .452, ) but I will resist, I will resist, I will resist. Oops, I guess I'm not a strong willed as I thought.

Uh Jeep, that would 0.459

.460 if you're doing it right.

[Canuck Bob]

The finest Canadian moose rifle was always destined to come back! With a 265 Hornady FN it is a truly amazing rifle cartridge combo. Other loads add some icing to a fine cake. 45-70 snore! The 444 was the reason big bore levers made a comeback.

[kaschi]

6pt-sika made a reference to the year 1976 with regards to Marlins. Did they make some kind of internal changes then?

[Win94]

My 72 vintage:

[6pt-sika]

6pt-sika made a reference to the year 1976 with regards to Marlins. Did they make some kind of internal changes then?

Up until 1976 the majority of the 444's had barrel bands .

From 1964-1972 they made the version that had a 24" barrel , straight grip monte carlo stock and barrel bands . From 1971 to 1975 they made a version that was similar with a 22" pistol grip stock that also had barrel bands .

They all had 1-38 twist micro groove barrels . And they just happened to be my preferred age range 1964-1975 for 444's !

I think when all was said and done I owned about 24 or 25 of the 444's that were made from 1964 to 1975 .

[Jahrs]

If I had to choose only one lever gun, it would be my 1970 444.

[1894c]

(...yawn.....)

ok...that made my day...you're a bad man Buck... :)

[harry]

Wow, this could easily go off into a .444 (well actually .429, but whose counting) versus 45-70 (well actually .452, ) but I will resist, I will resist, I will resist. Oops, I guess I'm not a strong willed as I thought.

That may explain some of the issues you have with your 45-70

[vancelw]

Wow, this could easily go off into a .444 (well actually .429, but whose counting) versus 45-70 (well actually .452, ) but I will resist, I will resist, I will resist. Oops, I guess I'm not a strong willed as I thought.

Uh Jeep, that would 0.459

.460 if you're doing it right.

"What did you shoot him with?"
"Oh a 38, 39.....whatever it took". - Teri Garr's character in Mr. Mom

[jeepnik]

Wow, this could easily go off into a .444 (well actually .429, but whose counting) versus 45-70 (well actually .452, ) but I will resist, I will resist, I will resist. Oops, I guess I'm not a strong willed as I thought.

Uh Jeep, that would 0.459

.460 if you're doing it right.

Yep, my bad. I was thinking of that other round from 1873

[GonnePhishin]

Never owned one but looked them up on the web. I see that some of 'em were made with Ballard style rifling and other with Micro-grove rifling. According to some of the people out in the 'ether (esp Marlin forum) it seems that really no difference in accuracy/shooting either of them if using factory ammo. However, if reloading using cast boolits the common opinion is that the micro-grove rifling is better, especially if using slightly larger diameters.
Would those who have 'em agree with this?

What about the Winchester versions of the 444? Same opinion?

[Chuck 100 yd]

Micro groove rifling will shoot cast bullets just fine but it is more difficult to find an accurate and non leading load combination than when the gun has the Ballard style rifling. I own and shoot both types and prefer the Ballard style rifling. The newer rifles with Ballard style rifling also have faster twist rifling to stabilize heavier bullets.

[Grizz]

On Marshall Stanton's site are 3 articles he published on the 444 work he has done. He has groups you can cover with a dime. Well worth the time to read them.

The thing that kept me from developing 444 was the slo-twist rate. There is a guy in the big bore section of Marshall's forum that has souped up the 444 to amazing levels, Marshall made a bullet for that rifle and the performance is stunning.

I would not shoot that gun, I don't like being stunned.

This is the only guy to ever take my 405 gr redhawk load seriously. He has it running about 1030 from his redhawks, and it penetrates 13 one-gallon jugs of water, one gallon more than my PileDriver load.

stunning performance I'd say, for a .43 . . .

[Aussie Chris]

My 444 does well for sambar down here.
Just wish I could find another in the timber carbine 94

[KWK]

Mine is over 40 and smooth as silk....

Mine (acquired used) isn't quite that old, but it is one of the smoothest lever guns I've tried. It's fairly versatile: Trail Boss turns it into a .44-40; H4198 lets you bruise your shoulder.

[tman]

Have the BigBore 94 model. A LOT of power in a 6.5 lb. gun. More than enough power for any North American game out to 200 yards. That pretty much covers 90% of hunting situations all in a 7 shot, lightening fast handling gun. Not bad for a 50 yr. old cartridge and 120 yr. old rifle design.

[rodeo kid]

I once thought I wanted a .444 about 20 years ago, but then I got a genuine Marlin 1895 in 45-70 and decided I did not need a .444. And I have never regretted it. God Bless.

[Chuck 100 yd]

When your lever gun collection passes the 25 or 30 mark, one of them needs to be a .444 ,just for the fun of it. Until then, the .45-70 will do.