Proper Winchester - Marlin comparisons

[catoctinfalls]

The Winchester 1894 is most frequently compared to the Marlin 336. For example, here are three comparisons, from Field and Stream and the venerable Chuck Hawks and Paul Harrell, each of which grade the Marlin 336 slightly better.

However, this to me is in line with my assessment that Winchester produced a slightly superior lever action up through roughly the pre-war era, because the true comparison of the Winchester 1894 is the Marlin 1893, not the Marlin 36/336 which was introduced more than 40 years later. In my mind, when I do a fair apples to apples comparison of these two crème de la crème firearm manufacturers, I think of the following:

• Winchester 1876: Marlin 1881 (First big bore chambering). Marlin action is significantly stronger and pulls ahead briefly; Winchester hires Browning to catch up

• Winchester 1886: Marlin 1895 (Improved big bore chambering). Winchester 1886 is stronger and slicker and better made, at a significant premium. Both are two of the best lever actions ever made, we're nitpicking here.

• Winchester 1892: Marlin 1894. (Pre-eminent pistol chambering design). Winchester 1892 has the same dual locking lugs of the 1886 and is stronger and slicker than the square bolt of the Marlin 1894. Again, both are two of the best lever actions ever made, we're nitpicking here.

• Winchester 1894: Marlin 1893. (First rifle cartridge chambering). Winchester 1894 has a more durable and stronger action. The 1894 went on to become best-selling lever action of all time.

• Marlin 336: NO Winchester response. Winchester had pulled so far ahead of Marlin in the rifle caliber lever action market with its Model 1894 that it continued to trot out its half-century old design to compete with the new Marlin 36 (1936) and 336.(1948). While the 336 is based off the 1893 LL Hepburn design, there were significant changes and improvements made and various online reviews grade it ever so slightly better than the Winchester 1894.

And yet, when considering the entirety of their company histories, I may be more complementary of Marlin (and Savage) overall than Winchester, and here is why: Marlin / Savage stood toe to toe with Winchester, the Hollywood famous, Colt-pairing industry leader, and didn't back down, and continued to compete on quality, with Marlin eventually surpassing Winchester with its Model 336.

• Contrast Marlin with Remington, who competed with Winchester in the bolt action market. Remington undercut Winchester's pre-64 Model 70 (one of the last models designed and manufactured quality first without qualms about cost) with its cheaper Model 700 to compete on price and volume. Remington's downward spiral continued its irreversible path of cutting corners to maximize margins: Remington later almost destroyed Marlin when it acquired the company and started churning out Remlins.

• Contrast Marlin with Winchester, who responded to Remington's strategy of cutting corners, by becoming a Remington clone and cutting its own corners. Unsurprisingly, this led to the embarrassment of post-64 Winchesters and the bankruptcy and shuttering of the company.

So where does this leave us in my overall assessment? Nothing quite compares to the history, nostalgia, and quality of pre-war Winchesters, but Marlin (and Savage) came admirably close in the pre-war era, to the point where we are nitpicking. However, Winchester lost its way cutting corners and trying to become Remington, and shut down in 2006. Only its namesake trademark survives and is licensed to various other manufacturers including Miroku, and it inspires more replica manufacturers than perhaps any other company. This a testament to Winchester's nonpareil history, but history is the only area where Winchester is superior: meanwhile, Marlin has continued to chug along, remaining true to its original vision despite ownership changes and producing top notch lever actions for the average American.

Overall, my two favorite firearms companies of all time, 1 and 1A!

Which one is 1 and which one is 1A, you ask? I'll reply with the following Robert Frost quote: "[New Hampshire] is one of the two best states in the union. Vermont is the other."

[gamekeeper]

A very interesting first post...... Welcome to the campfire...

[Bridger]

Interesting thread! Would the Winchester Model 64 not be their answer to the 336?

[cj57]

Winchester was the King! Hands Down! Marlin started out with the Ballard SS, The High Wall 1885, beat all the others! The 1885 continued into the 1920s, the rest were gone!
The Marlin 1881 had the 45-70, but was not strong, 1he 76out sold the 81, 59000 to 20000. The Winchester 73 sold 750000, the 92, 900000+ The 1886 was lighter and stronger then the Marlin 1895, selling 159000 to Marlins 5000-10000.
When Marlin was sold in 1915 serial numbers reached 450000, total for all models. Winchester was in the millions!
Shotguns: Winchester came out with the 1893, it was a blackpowder gun, updated in the 1897 and it sold near a million. Marlin shotguns had many problems, the same with the rimfire pumps, not nearly as strong as the Winchesters 1890 and 1906, again the 1890 and 06 reached 900000 each, the Marlins were way less. I'm not beating on Marlin, as i own many! You just can't argue numbers! Winchester Was the King in the Golden Era of Firearms!

[Scott Tschirhart]

Where I grew up in South Texas, the Winchester 94 was the saddle rifle. But I saw Marlins that were mostly deer hunting guns and folks would mount a scope on them. This is likely a regional thing and the fact that you could buy a Winchester 94 for around $100 new when I was a kid where the Marlin was typically more.

I like them both and have enjoyed them both for many years.

I still prefer an older Winchester 94 for my own use, but I would never look down my nose at a Marlin Texan carbine!

[gcs]

All I can say is I went to buy a lever action 30-30 in 1971, as a kid with no knowledge of the history and differences of the models.
I was handed a Winchester and the action felt clunky and rough,, Next I handled the Marlin and it was smooth and solid. I bought the Marlin.

Granted, these weren't pre war models, but the difference was night and day, I'm surprised anyone that handles both would choose the W.
but, like everything else YMMV.....

[catoctinfalls]

Thanks for the welcome! A few thoughts and responses:

- No comparison on popularity. Winchesters sold more than Marlin and was front runner; Marlin played the role of underdog very admirably. I was focused on quality not quantity.

- Marlin continues to look to the future. Some are good, like Marlin 444. Others personally not a fan of, like synthetic stocks. But at least this company is alive and innovating, AND continues to manufacture its classics (336, 1894).

- Winchester meanwhile is all about its past (or trying to cut costs), and for the most part has been since Pearl Harbor.

- To the most recent poster’s point, I agree. My Marlin 336 action is superior to my Winchester 1894 action. Smoother and slicker. But to my point, this isn’t a direct comparison. The 336 had the benefit of 50+ years of advancement, Winchester 1894 > Marlin 1893.

My favorite model all time is Winchester 1892/1886, followed by Marlin 336, and Marlin 1894.

[AJMD429]

.
Personally I tend to prefer the Marlins because they are a little smoother, although I think either Marlin or Winchester after having shot a thousand rounds or so can become very slick and smooth. The Winchester 92 action seems a little bit rattly and the 94 even more so, but unless you carry it with the lever down and shake It, who cares?

Scope mounting is certainly easier on a Marlin, although good aperture sights like the Williams FP or the really fast handling marbles bullseye sight are a good tank site, are nearly as practical as a scope for guns you're typically not going to expect sub-MOA groups from.

The main difference that saves me towards Marlins is the number of parts and complexity of the actions. Of course if a Winchester can shoot several thousand rounds without a malfunction, it really doesn't matter if "there are lots of little teeny parts to break or get lost", but I do like the Marlin actions (1894 and 336/1895) to the extent that they kind of resemble the 1911 pistols; not a whole lot of parts, and most of them are rather large and robust, and look like they could be made in a few minutes with a random chunk of metal and a hand file..

[Ysabel Kid]

A very interesting first post...... Welcome to the campfire...

+1

[Old Savage]

Like both the 94 and 336 in the various calibers, see no reason to choose one over the other.

[1894cfan]

I picked up a 1977 Win 94 that had been through a plane crash and fire! The guy that salvaged the plane, my Dad, found it and asked the dead pilots wife if she wanted it back. She said you can keep it! So he sent it off to a gun smith to be re-blued and new wood put on it. Looks good as new and is slicker than snail snot! Shoots good too. Got a Williams Fool Proof on it with elevation adjustment knob on it.
At one time I had a 336C in 35 Rem, but could not get used to the LONG lever throw as apposed to the W94, so let it go. Still kinda kicking myself for that!

[pricedo]

In gun manufacturing like many other things "It's not how you start but how (IF) you finish that counts".
I own both Winchesters and Marlins but have always liked the simplicity of the Marlin action.
The Winchester 86, 92, 94, 95 not so much.
An argument could be made that the complexity of the Winchester actions caused production costs to soar with the result that despite a few bumps in the road Marlin is the only one of the two old competitors still in business.
Of course things are rarely as simple as they seem.
Truth be told several bad management/marketing decisions contributed mightily to Winchesters demise.

[Scott Tschirhart]

Truth be told several bad management/marketing decisions contributed mightily to Winchesters demise.

Seems like that is the general history of gun manufacturers. Volcanic, Henry, -----Oliver Winchester bought the company cheap.

Of American gumakers is seems that only Ruger is still Ruger.....every other gun company (including Wincheser and Marlin) has gone bankrupt and/or changed hands several times.

[marlinman93]

I personally don't think the 1894 Win. is more durable than the 1893/'93 Marlin. Mainly because the Winchester has so many small parts to do the same thing the 1893 Marlin did with half as many parts. There are several parts in the 1894 Win. that are more fragile then the 1893 Marlins. And there's certainly no history of the 1893 Marlins having parts failures, and they were chambered in the same cartridges at the same time.

[Old Savage]

In the Big Valley it was Marlin.

[JimT]

This thread is highly entertaining

BUT

everyone knows it was Winchester rifles that won the West!

Movies have been made about it.

It is penned in books.

I have yet to run across a book on the old West where the writer pens "... he raised his trusty .44 caliber Morris & Brown Conical Repeating Rifle ..." or "... they fell in front of him as he levered his .45-70 Whitney-Burgess-Morse .."

[pricedo]

Truth be told several bad management/marketing decisions contributed mightily to Winchesters demise.

Seems like that is the general history of gun manufacturers. Volcanic, Henry, -----Oliver Winchester bought the company cheap.

Of American gumakers is seems that only Ruger is still Ruger.....every other gun company has gone bankrupt and changed hands several times.

Frank Kenna Sr bought Marlin for a song and the Kenna family ran it successfully for a few years before selling to Remington in 2007.

[2ndovc]

All I can say about this post is that: in my own little corner of this world, there are 22 Winchesters and four Marlins hanging around here.
I've had quite a few Marlins over the years but most come and go. The Winchester are here to stay.


jb

[pricedo]

In the Big Valley it was Marlin.

The wife was looking over my shoulder and said "that's Ellie May Clampet".
I said "No it isn't."
I think her show name was Audra Barkley (played by Linda Evans).

[OldWin]

While I own both, I own WAY more Winchesters. I think many times, it comes down to what you started with, in regards to preference. For me, Winchesters are just better natural pointers and have a better feel. I prefer straight grips, even with Winchesters. When I was young, most Marlins I encountered were pistol grip with oversized wood.
As everyone has stated, there are fewer small parts in many of the Marlin designs. However, it's not always just the size of the parts that need to be considered, but the interface of the parts in question. The lever camming surface is one such with the Marlins. The parts themselves are big, yes, but they are dependent on a relatively small point.
The bottom line is ANY of these 19th century designs are products of their time. In the case of the 86, 92, 94, and 95, JMB did a typical JMB job, I'd say. Winchester did its usual great job of manufacturing and marketing.
The sales figures say a lot, but not everything. On the other hand, Winchesters history of cartridge development is hard to deny, as is its work for the government in times of war. This, during WW1, is probably the biggest factor contributing to Winchesters economic downturn and loss of stability. Marlin's smaller size as a company was an advantage in this regard. More so than a reflection on its products.

One man's opinion.

[RIHMFIRE]

In the Big Valley it was Marlin.

I think Rawhide featured marlins too

[pricedo]

Well, we know what side of the argument Rooster Cogburn, Lucas McCain and Josh Randall stood on.

[buckeyeshooter]

love them both!

[Bill in Oregon]

I am very fond of both makes as well, but prefer the Marlin. First time I had to field strip a Model 94 came as a rude shock compared to the Marlin, where you just remove the lever screw and slide the bolt out for cleaning from the breech.

[.45colt]

I have had several of each , as I got older I preferred the Marlins for ease of takedown and scope mounting . My Holy Grail Gun would be a Bullard . Time is short. get what ever You can , and shoot them.

[pricedo]

I've stripped down and repaired many a Winchester 94 ... could almost do it in my sleep.
When you throw 70 year old eyes into the mix I'd sooner not mess with a bunch of small parts that like to fall, bounce and hide behind other things on the table or floor.
I own and shoot Winchester 1886, 92, 94 and Marlin 1894, 336, 1895 and like them all.

[LeverGunner]

Quite an interesting discussion.

One of the things thats was not mentioned, and might not matter to some, but does play a contributing factor for which gun someone might choose is aesthetics.

If you look at the old Marlin 1894 vs the Winchester 1892, the Marlin has a nub sticking down in front of the trigger. Not to mention Marlins generally have thicker wood on all models.

Saying which gun is stronger is something to debate on paper, but in real world use it makes no difference. Winchester 1894 handles 30-30 the same as a marlin 1893 and 336.

Which gun is lighter can be a big factor however, and a Winchester 92 is lighter than a 94, and a Winchester 94 is lighter than a 336.

Marlins look great on paper, but in the gun rack or hand Winchesters look and feel better.

That said, I like Marlin and have a long love of the model 1894. But having had several of both brands, I am still a Winchester man.

[hfcable]

This thread is highly entertaining

BUT

everyone knows it was Winchester rifles that won the West!

Movies have been made about it.

It is penned in books.

I have yet to run across a book on the old West where the writer pens "... he raised his trusty .44 caliber Morris & Brown Conical Repeating Rifle ..." or "... they fell in front of him as he levered his .45-70 Whitney-Burgess-Morse .."

well......i think everyone should have a burgess 45/70 ....it was the first commercially produced 45/70 levergun..... " the firstest with the mostest"

here is mine:

[Bill in Oregon]

It's lovely Harold!

[jeepnik]

Okay, someone has to say it.

There's a levergun in that picture. All I see is a lovely lady with a low cut top. Hmm, guess I ain't dead yet.

[Woodsloafer2]

Have Winchester 94's, 95's and 71's. Two marlin 336's in 35 Rem. To shoot I use the Marlins mostly. They will shoot with bolt guns accuracy wise. The Winchesters are less accurate in my samples. They will shoot 2- 3 inch groups at 100. The Marlin 35's 1 - 1/2 inch groups. Also for me I can easily adjust Marlin triggers. Never tried to on a Winchester. Both shoot well but I find for me the Marlins are better offhand shooting guns.

[LeverGunner]

Have Winchester 94's, 95's and 71's. Two marlin 336's in 35 Rem. To shoot I use the Marlins mostly. They will shoot with bolt guns accuracy wise. The Winchesters are less accurate in my samples. They will shoot 2- 3 inch groups at 100. The Marlin 35's 1 - 1/2 inch groups. Also for me I can easily adjust Marlin triggers. Never tried to on a Winchester. Both shoot well but I find for me the Marlins are better offhand shooting guns.

I think you mean off bench, and not off hand, you won't be able to tell any difference in accuracy when shooting offhand between a 1" gun and a 2" gun. Unless you're one of the rare few that can hold better than 2" off hand. I cannot.

I often plink with my Winchester 94. It's just as accurate for off hand shooting as any of the 22's rifles that myself and others commonly used, at my typical 75 yards or less plinking distances.

[marlinman93]

If you think Marlins have heavier wood than Winchesters, then you're not comparing old 1893, 1894, and 1895 Marlins to Winchesters of the same era! There is no extra bulbous wood on stocks or forearms of the old pre 1930's Marlins. It was only later versions where stocks and forearms got thicker.
And I'll take any old 1893/1894 Marlin completely down, and put it back together 3 or 4 times for the time it takes someone to take their 1892/1894 Winchester apart and back together!

I had a collection of 1894 Winchesters prior to buying my first 1893 Marlin. Once I broke the Marlin down to it's basic parts I knew I was done. I sold all my 1894 Winchesters and took the money and bought more Marlins.

[yooper2]

I have an even mix between the 2 manufacturers. Can't say I have a strong preference for one brand over the other but really enjoy them all. My most used are a plain old 32 Special 94 carbine, a 92 38-40, a first run new 1895 in 45-70 (straight stock, regular rifling), and a Marlin 375. I think the Marlin 39 is finest 22 levergun ever made by a country mile and a Winchester Big Bore 375 lives in my truck.
If all Marlins were stocked like they were before WW1 I might lean slightly in that direction. Marlin has proven they still know how to make a proper forearm with the 1895CB so why they don't apply that knowledge is beyond me.

Eric

[AJMD429]

.
You really need to have BOTH....

[earlmck]

And I'll take any old 1893/1894 Marlin completely down, and put it back together 3 or 4 times for the time it takes someone to take their 1892/1894 Winchester apart and back together!

I'm with you there Val: ole John Browning was a gun design genius but he never used just one part when three would get the same job done.

I'm awful fond of my '92s but not that fond of the take-apart put back together work required for them.

[Walt]

I have both and in sickness and in health I will never part with any of them.

[LeverGunner]

Yeah, I guess I was comparing the newer Marlin's wood.

No doubt that Marlins disassemble easier than Winchesters. The irony is, back in the old days when the guns were used with horses, and not kept in safes, if that was an issue, the Marlin would have just took over right out of the gate... it didn't, so I can only surmise, that it's not much of an issue.

Does anyone know why Winchesters elaborate disassembly wasn't considered a detriment back in the days when these guns were truly depend upon? Why didn't Marlin take over right out of the gate?

[jeepnik]

And just to be contrary, while I have Marlin, Winchester and Savage Lever guns I think the Marlins outshine the Winchesters. And really, those would be apples to Savage's oranges.

[1894cfan]

Pardon me for not reading the whole thread, but, I've had a Marlin 336c in 35 rem. AND a Win 94 in 30/30. And while the 336 was much more capable of better accuracy, the Win 94 was lighter for carrying and had a shorter lever throw that was much better in allowing a faster second shot on whatever you need to put a second hole in! Bottom line is I got rid of the 336 and hung onto the Win 94! BTW, the Win94 I have is a post 64 version made in 1977 that came out of a plane crash that my Dad salvaged and had rebuilt after the widow told him he could keep it.

[Griff]

I won my first rifle off a $5 raffle ticket. A Winchester mdl 64A. I carried it in hand for a number of coyote hunts in SoCal. It was comfortable in the hand, and accurate for my purposes. After it was stolen, I traded into a Marlin 336... it was nowhere near as comfortable to carry. After being invited onto a private ranch for a deer/coyote hunt (opportunity often takes precedence, and coyotes paid a bounty)... the host told me get rid of the Marlin if you want to ride one of my horses... Lent me a Winchester carbine and I've never looked back. I do have two Marlins, a mdl 375 & 1894 in 45 Colt. The 375 is scoped and is like magic on coyotes... but it doesn't feel as good carried by hand, and a saddle scabbard for a scoped rifle on horseback use is even less so. The 1894 is a custom build, for a specific purpose, and doesn't require being carried for more than a few feet. That's my view, and everyone is free to have their own...

[marlinman93]

Yeah, I guess I was comparing the newer Marlin's wood.

No doubt that Marlins disassemble easier than Winchesters. The irony is, back in the old days when the guns were used with horses, and not kept in safes, if that was an issue, the Marlin would have just took over right out of the gate... it didn't, so I can only surmise, that it's not much of an issue.

Does anyone know why Winchesters elaborate disassembly wasn't considered a detriment back in the days when these guns were truly depend upon? Why didn't Marlin take over right out of the gate?

There are many reasons the Winchester sold better than the Marlin did, but few of the reasons were quality. Both were equally well built firearms, but the Browning designs have always been overly complicated. It often took Winchester a year or even several years to take a Browning design rifle action, and make modifications to it so they could be produced in a factory.
Winchester rifles sold for less than a similar Marlin model.
Winchester had a long history before Marlin made their first repeater in 1881.
John Marlin refused to add more employees and expand his factory, even when the company was 2 years behind in orders.
John Marlin was at one point so behind on orders that instead of adding space and employees he simply dropped the entire Ballard single shot rifle production in 1890! Much to the disappointment of many shooters who loved the Marlin Ballard. It caused a huge amount of letters to various sporting magazines from people complaining about Marlin dropping the Ballard rifles.
Not everyone knows it, but John Marlin didn't own the rights to produce Ballard rifles. Those rights were purchased from Charles Ballard by Merwin & Bray Sporting Goods, and they asked John Marlin to build the Ballard rifles after 5 other companies had gone bankrupt trying to do so. John Marlin was a Colt employee previously and had gone out on his own building copies of little Colt single shot pistols in 1870, so when M&B contacted him to build the Ballard he had no experience in this area, but agreed to do the job. He was paid a set amount for each gun made, plus 5% of the ownership of Ballard Rifles. He not only was successful building them, but made some significant upgrades to the design that resulted in huge increases in sales, and demand for Ballard rifles. That along with offering 10-12 models made Marlin Ballard rifles the most successful version of the Ballard, and increased sales enough for Marlin to delve into lever action repeaters later. His success there also evolved into so many models that it forced him to halt production of the Ballard and concentrate on filling orders for his own repeating rifles.
The Marlin Ballard rifles were the main push for Winchester to come out with their own single shot rifle, the Model 1885. The Winchester Western sales rep telegraphed the factory telling them that most Western hunters preferred a single shot rifle like the Ballard. And if they wanted to sell rifles out West they needed to develop a single shot. That lead to the same rep seeing a Browning single shot, and Winchester buying their first Browning design in 1879. But it took 5 years to get that rifle to production as the engineers made numerous changes to make it possible. It was also the Model 1881 Marlin available in .45-70 and .40-60 that made Winchester go back to Browning to design a lever action to handle these cartridges. Thus the 1886 was designed to compete with the Marlin 1881. The two companies were constantly competing for the same market back in the day.
So it wasn't just that Winchesters were more popular; there's a lot more to the story. And some say Sharps made the West safe for Winchester to be the "Gun that won the West".

[Sarge]

Send me into a room with two tables, one piled high with Winchesters and the other with Marlins; tell me to pick three. The Marlin pile will be undisturbed for you guys who love them.

I've never had to fix or tear down a 94 Winchester. They carry, handle a point naturally for me. I trust them.

[LeverGunner]

Yeah, I guess I was comparing the newer Marlin's wood.

No doubt that Marlins disassemble easier than Winchesters. The irony is, back in the old days when the guns were used with horses, and not kept in safes, if that was an issue, the Marlin would have just took over right out of the gate... it didn't, so I can only surmise, that it's not much of an issue.

Does anyone know why Winchesters elaborate disassembly wasn't considered a detriment back in the days when these guns were truly depend upon? Why didn't Marlin take over right out of the gate?

There are many reasons the Winchester sold better than the Marlin did, but few of the reasons were quality. Both were equally well built firearms, but the Browning designs have always been overly complicated. It often took Winchester a year or even several years to take a Browning design rifle action, and make modifications to it so they could be produced in a factory.
Winchester rifles sold for less than a similar Marlin model.
Winchester had a long history before Marlin made their first repeater in 1881.
John Marlin refused to add more employees and expand his factory, even when the company was 2 years behind in orders.
John Marlin was at one point so behind on orders that instead of adding space and employees he simply dropped the entire Ballard single shot rifle production in 1890! Much to the disappointment of many shooters who loved the Marlin Ballard. It caused a huge amount of letters to various sporting magazines from people complaining about Marlin dropping the Ballard rifles.
Not everyone knows it, but John Marlin didn't own the rights to produce Ballard rifles. Those rights were purchased from Charles Ballard by Merwin & Bray Sporting Goods, and they asked John Marlin to build the Ballard rifles after 5 other companies had gone bankrupt trying to do so. John Marlin was a Colt employee previously and had gone out on his own building copies of little Colt single shot pistols in 1870, so when M&B contacted him to build the Ballard he had no experience in this area, but agreed to do the job. He was paid a set amount for each gun made, plus 5% of the ownership of Ballard Rifles. He not only was successful building them, but made some significant upgrades to the design that resulted in huge increases in sales, and demand for Ballard rifles. That along with offering 10-12 models made Marlin Ballard rifles the most successful version of the Ballard, and increased sales enough for Marlin to delve into lever action repeaters later. His success there also evolved into so many models that it forced him to halt production of the Ballard and concentrate on filling orders for his own repeating rifles.
The Marlin Ballard rifles were the main push for Winchester to come out with their own single shot rifle, the Model 1881. The Winchester Western sales rep telegraphed the factory telling them that most Western hunters preferred a single shot rifle like the Ballard. And if they wanted to sell rifles out West they needed to develop a single shot. That lead to the same rep seeing a Browning single shot, and Winchester buying their first Browning design in 1879. But it took 5 years to get that rifle to production as the engineers made numerous changes to make it possible. It was also the Model 1881 Marlin available in .45-70 and .40-60 that made Winchester go back to Browning to design a lever action to handle these cartridges. Thus the 1886 was designed to compete with the Marlin 1881. The two companies were constantly competing for the same market back in the day.
So it wasn't just that Winchesters were more popular; there's a lot more to the story. And some say Sharps made the West safe for Winchester to be the "Gun that won the West".

Thank you very much for sharing that. I didn't know any of that.

So it's likely that Marlin would have a more significant role in history if he'd been willing to up his production.

[Drawdown]

Send me into a room with two tables, one piled high with Winchesters and the other with Marlins; tell me to pick three. The Marlin pile will be undisturbed for you guys who love them.

I've never had to fix or tear down a 94 Winchester. They carry, handle a point naturally for me. I trust them.

I'm with Sarge for sure! In 70's growing up here, it was best my memory, 5to1 Marlins. And into 80’s too I'm sure. I was by teaching, a Marlin devout! Loved the 39a, and got my first deer rifle in 1981, a 336 30-30 which I still have. I shot few 94's, handled em from friends, but didn't want one. Until I finally got one. Now, I love everything about my 94, I just can't pick up my Marlin when it's time to go hunting!
Quality? They'll both last 2 lifetimes if taken care of. The slack in an action that drops out is nothing. When you close it, it's strong and ready and capable! I have no desire to scope a Levergun, and I much prefer the top ejection! So easy to discharge a round and slip in a different load if a different game or shot distance happens! I always single load when target shooting or testing loads! Easier to get too for 99% of cleaning, but not hard to disassemble when a deep cleaning is needed!
But most of all, the carry, feel, function and accuracy is way ahead in my rifles! Both my Mod 94 Carbine and a notch ahead, my Mod 64 are rifles I just love everything about!

[4t5]

Great first post.

[Woodsloafer2]

From Levergunner

"I think you mean off bench, and not off hand, you won't be able to tell any difference in accuracy when shooting offhand between a 1" gun and a 2" gun. Unless you're one of the rare few that can hold better than 2" off hand. I cannot.

I often plink with my Winchester 94. It's just as accurate for off hand shooting as any of the 22's rifles that myself and others commonly used, at my typical 75 yards or less plinking distances."

Group size quoted is off a bench. For shooting offhand, which is most of what I do, the Marlins shoot better for me. They just hold better and better triggers in my particular guns.

[LeverGunner]

The only fault I can see with a Winchester vs a Marlin, is the more complicated disassembly. Now, I'm pretty handy, and I don't have a problem with disassembly of such things. But I can see that most people do. That said, I don't find the need to disassemble a Winchester 92 or 94 very often. Course, I also don't mind a gun that is somewhat dirty, long as it ain't prone to rusting.