Model 94 Mare's Leg

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Thu Jan 27, 2011 8:27 pm

For those that feel the need!

Model 94 Mare's Leg

(Also avail as a take-down!)

damienph · Post by **damienph** » Thu Jan 27, 2011 10:45 pm

I sincerely apologize to the group, but I think the Mare's Leg in any rendition is just COOL!!!

damienph · Post by **damienph** » Thu Jan 27, 2011 10:50 pm

Griff, I think that is even better than the '92 version. At least it could be chambered in 38-55 and shoot something similar to the cartridges that Josh Randall had in the loops on his pistoil belt.

Post by **Ysabel Kid** » Thu Jan 27, 2011 10:55 pm

damienph wrote:I sincerely apologize to the group, but I think the Mare's Leg in any rendition is just COOL!!!

+1

Streetstar · Post by **Streetstar** » Fri Jan 28, 2011 12:46 am

My ears are already ringing if that is chambered in a rifle caliber

RIHMFIRE · Post by **RIHMFIRE** » Fri Jan 28, 2011 7:44 am

did you see the take down version.....i like it!

Cimarron Red · Post by **Cimarron Red** » Fri Jan 28, 2011 8:40 pm

Because the mare's leg is technically a pistol, I think it should be chambered in a pistol cartridge. So I'd prefer the model 1892 if ever I decided to buy one.

RIHMFIRE · Post by **RIHMFIRE** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 12:53 pm

I saw 3 at a gun show today
a 92 in 44-40 ...1195 smackers
and two pump versions....that were engraved....one was 2100 the other 5000 bills

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 1:22 pm

I humbly apologize to the group, but I think the Mare's Leg in any rendition is a total waste of raw materials!!!

It's neither a hand gun nor a rifle, it's just a gimmick for a Hollywood TV show that should have stayed there.

JMNSHO

Joe

don Tomás · Post by **don Tomás** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 2:33 pm

damienph · Post by **damienph** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 11:12 am

J Miller wrote: ...the Mare's Leg in any rendition is a total waste of raw materials!!! ... it's just a gimmick for a Hollywood TV show that should have stayed there. Joe

And from a pretty good Hollywood TV show at that!

DPris · Post by **DPris** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:31 pm

There were three TV guns from my childhood that, "waste of raw material" though they may have been, are still standouts over 50 years later.
Mare's Leg.
Rifleman's 92.
U.N.C.L.E. Special.

And that's reason enough right there.

Denis

RIHMFIRE · Post by **RIHMFIRE** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:41 pm

DPris wrote:There were three TV guns from my childhood that, "waste of raw material" though they may have been, are still standouts over 50 years later.
Mare's Leg.
Rifleman's 92.
U.N.C.L.E. Special.

And that's reason enough right there.
Denis

I agree with the Mare's Leg is not practical
But the Rifleman's 92 could do anything a normal 92 could do...it just had a big loop....
for guy who had huge hands....same thing with JW 92....plus it looks cool...
and for the life of me...i cant remember the U.N.C.L.E. Special.

Hagler · Post by **Hagler** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 5:16 pm

But the Rifleman's 92 could do anything a normal 92 could do...it just had a big loop....

Au contraire, RIHMFIRE. McCain's 92 also had a "trigger trip" screw:

...and, because of The Rifleman, so does my Henry:

Shawn

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 5:44 pm

I remember one night many summers ago when I was shooting 110 gr bullets over a max charge of IMR 3031 powder from my 16" Trapper. The fire balls were huge and the blast terrific.
I can only imagine how it would be from that thing ......

Joe

damienph · Post by **damienph** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 6:06 pm

J Miller wrote: The fire balls were huge and the blast terrific.
I can only imagine how it would be from that thing ...

Joe

I know what I mean Joe, I've been imagining the same thing... I mean, really...How much fun can a man have, right?

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 6:45 pm

damienph wrote:
J Miller wrote: The fire balls were huge and the blast terrific.
I can only imagine how it would be from that thing ...

Joe

I know what I mean Joe, I've been imagining the same thing... I mean, really...How much fun can a man have, right?

OK, I have to admit the fun factor would be off the scale. Maybe there is a use for them things.

Joe

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:19 pm

It seems to me that any muzzle blast or "fireball" wouldn't be significantly greater than out of a 10" Contender.

soe · Post by **soe** » Wed Feb 16, 2011 8:50 am

I got a Rossi 357 16" last year for a good price b/c it was missing the butt plate. Rossi said they didn't have the replacements at the time and they didn't know when they would. I saw the Ranch Hand and started thinkin'.....
I ended up chopping it (still legal rifle length) and had a friend make a short leather cover for it. I've shot it a lot now with a Skinner barrel peep sight and I've found it's plenty steady just pushed up against my cheek. The recoil is easy. People make a fuss about them not being practical but it's great to carry in the bush out here (Cumberland Plateau, TN) where the terrain is rough and thick. I love it.

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Wed Feb 16, 2011 9:28 am

1st;

and Welcome to the forum!

2nd, and PC (public cowardice) thrown to the winds... I saw that pic and thought: "...another bloomin' Aussie..." I could visualize Paul Hogan reachin' over his shoulder sayin' "ya call THAT a handgun?" I'da lost money if someone'd said "wanna bet..." I got cousins runnin' all over the Cumberland Plateau... and yep, that'd be a conversation piece!

Good lookin' job. Adapt, improvise & overcome!

TMair · Post by **TMair** » Wed Feb 16, 2011 10:24 am

Hagler wrote:
But the Rifleman's 92 could do anything a normal 92 could do...it just had a big loop....
Au contraire, RIHMFIRE. McCain's 92 also had a "trigger trip" screw:

...and, because of The Rifleman, so does my Henry:

Shawn

Is that a photo of the "First Chuck Conner's rifleman's" rifle?
I recall watching an episode where they showed off the little flip up lever that had been put in the trigger guard rather then a screw.
Terry

soe · Post by **soe** » Wed Feb 16, 2011 10:32 am

Thanks for the welcome!
I've been hawkin' these forums a while now. Loads of good stuff here.

BTW, been a lot of places but never to Oz. Worked with a bunch of them for a while though and I think they'd get along fine in East TN

Hagler · Post by **Hagler** » Wed Feb 16, 2011 11:55 am

Terry,

I am not certain which episode that picture is from. However, McCain's rifle never had any sort of "flip" lever. Like soooo many people that remember Lucas having a little flip-do-dad on his gun, you may be thinking of one of a couple of non-"Rifleman" capguns. In the very first episode of "The Rifleman", The Sharpshooter, Lucas McCain's Winchester '92 had what appeared to be a non-removeable stud in its lever (a stillshot from the turkeyshoot competition in that episode):

Later episodes featured the affore-mentioned screw through the trigger guard.

Shawn

DPris · Post by **DPris** » Wed Feb 16, 2011 2:10 pm

I had the capgun, it had the little ON/OFF flip lever to engage the trigger or pivot out of the way.
Never seen any indication of one on any of the TV guns.
Denis

SJPrice · Post by **SJPrice** » Wed Feb 16, 2011 2:18 pm

yep, it was in the later episodes that they changed the stud out to a "selective fire" screw. By backing out the screw he could go from full auto to semi auto.

Birdman · Post by **Birdman** » Fri Feb 18, 2011 9:12 pm

Rifle, pistol, practical, who cares, it's still America and if it trips yur trigger get one, or two.

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Sat Feb 19, 2011 1:30 pm

DPris wrote:I had the capgun, it had the little ON/OFF flip lever to engage the trigger or pivot out of the way.
Never seen any indication of one on any of the TV guns.
Denis

Didn't EVERYONE? Wish I still had mine!!

DPris · Post by **DPris** » Sat Feb 19, 2011 2:51 pm

Y'know, Griff, out of ALL the guns I've owned, that's the one I'd most like back today.

Absolutely no lie.
Denis

RVM45 · Post by **RVM45** » Thu Feb 24, 2011 5:58 pm

My Friend Muleskinner is a modern day Cowboy; Outfitter; Tracker; and until recently, a Deputy Sheriff. He had this to say--forgive me if I freely paraphrase:

" If one replaced the Trigger and Lever, he would have a very compact weapon that could easily be rolled up in a bedroll. (Niether seems necessary to me.rvm)
The unvented 12" barrel should give more power than a similarly chambered Handgun. And the average (Non Pistolero) will be able to shoot it better in sighted fire (Holding it roughly where a conventional stock would put it) (And oh yeah, he also specified Ghost Ring Aperature Sights--on which point, I heartily concur) Than he will probably ever be able to shoot a revolver.)"

Muleskinner added, that in his opinion, that was why sawn-off Rifles and Shotguns were largely prohibited--because they are devastatingly effective.

Oh he also pointed out the potential to conceal it under a Jacket.

Another Commentator pointed out, that if all else failed, it should make a handy club.

soe--I'd also wondered about the utility of a legal length barrel and OAL--Especially since my ideal would be in .30-30 or .45-70, and have a 13" or 14" barrel. Not too big a step up to 16".

.....RVM45

kenken0269 · Post by **kenken0269** » Thu Feb 24, 2011 6:26 pm

When the Ranch Hand is available I will have one in 45lc. I have my 'gun guy' on the look out for one.

Way cool.

kenken

DPris · Post by **DPris** » Thu Feb 24, 2011 11:54 pm

RV,
I'd disagree with your friend. At least on being able to shoot a Mare's Leg more accurately than a conventional handgun.

"Holding it roughly where a conventional stock would put it" can be taken two ways.
The first would be resting the stock nub against the shoulder for something resembling "normal" sighted levergun fire. Can be done, extremely awkward & inefficient. The Rossi has an extra inch of nub that makes it slightly less awkward, but I can't fire either brand with any comfort at all that way.

The second would be holding it with the receiver near the face (or against it), forward and independent of any stock to shoulder contact, and using the sights. With any cartridge of .44 Mag or .30-30 recoil levels, you do not want to be holding the gun back anywhere near your face with nothing to stop its rearward motion under recoil but your arms. It WILL cause pain, if not on said face then it'll almost certainly strike the shoulder.

Ghost ring apertures work best the closer to the eye you can get 'em, and again- you don't want that gun anywhere near your face in a heavy recoiling caliber, supported only by your bent arms.

My Chiappa with a 200-grain lead bullet at slightly over 900 FPS in .44-40 (a mild load) almost took out a lip when I was first exploring possibilities with the thing.
I can make it work at distance, but it's slow & cumbersome. I can do better, quicker, with a conventional handgun.

In my opinion, the prohibition against sawed-offs wasn't because they were necessarily more effective, but largely because they were just so easily concealed (in the clothing of the 1930s).
Stockless leverguns are just not that efficient, were not the primary "target" of the 1934 NFA, and just got lumped in with other weapons that were considered more important to prohibit (and/or more commonly used in criminal endeavors).
The Thompsons and shotguns were more efficient (at short ranges) in either stockless or short-barreled form, but weren't as dependent on precise aiming.
I'd question how often Clyde Barrow carefully aimed his BAR whippet, with cut-down stock, as opposed to hip firing (or possibly under-arm firing).

I had an idea of possibly using an ML for serious purposes, and that's why I did explore various ways & positions to shoot it.
I found that it's possible to build some fair hip-shooting skills, at short distances. Accuracy in so doing is far inferior to what I can do with a conventional handgun & sighted fire.
I can hit a steel target two feet tall by three feet wide at 75 yards with my .44-40, freestanding. I can do the same with several revolvers and pistols I own, and faster without having to lose the firing grip & sight picture, and cycle the lever.
It does better at distances by using a two-handed hold on the gun's wrist than by trying to hold it with the fore & aft rifle hold we'd normally use.
It's heavy. It's slow to fire successive shots. It should be kept away from the face, with any recoil at all.

It CAN be forced to do certain things, but it's harder on most of them than with a good revolver using a 6-inch barrel to achieve decent velocities in a given caliber.
I wonder if your friend has ever actually worked with an ML.

The .30-30 has a very limited mag capacity, a .45-70 ditto, plus recoil that can cause serious injury in a stockless levergun if not VERY carefully held.

I do concur that the Mare's Leg would make a jim dandy club.

Denis

RVM45 · Post by **RVM45** » Fri Feb 25, 2011 10:06 am

I've quoted Muleskinner on several forums. This is the first "Come-Back" that I've had--Pro or Con.

I was hurrying yesterday, trying to get done before Supper, and making an inelegant Hash of my Arguments.

Here are Muleskinner's exact words:

"Put on a rubber butt pad, shorten the hammer spur, replace large loop with standard cocking lever, add a ghost ring sight. Would fit in a pack, or roll up in your bed roll. In .44 mag with hand loads would out shoot any pistol you can name. And it looks cool.

The reason they outlawed short rifles, is because they were powerful, accurate, and could be hidden under a coat, or slicker."

Muleskinner,

Here is the address of the original post:

http://www.hoodswoods.net/IVB/index.php ... 2547&st=15

**************************************

As far as to "Why" Sawn-Off Weapons were first outlawed--I have no idea. I had always assumed that it was to keep people who were much less regulated about long Guns, than they were about Pistols; from creating Ersatz Pistols from Rifles and Shotguns.

**************************************

Both Clyde Barrow, and Bonnie Parker were Jockey-Sized people. The "Whippet" Browning Auto Five that he used--The Barrel was the length of one Shotgun Cartridge longer than the magazine tube; and the stock was cut just barely long enough to clear the spring housing in the stock .....

And Barrow was quite comfortable firing it from the Shoulder. I can't give you the dimensions of the cut down BARs--but they do say that he cut the stocks, at the very least.

I've often thought that I might like to have a Browning Whippet--only with a legal length Barrel. I'm pretty sure if you run the Barrel out to 18.25", That you'll also have minimum overall length (In this particular case)

I have often looked at my father's Browning--Which will be cut into a Whippet over my dead body--and tried to picture just where the stock would end; how it would handle; etc.

I used to see relatively cheap Browning Autos--which doesn't mean that I ever will again. I'd like to have a good; clean 20--just to sit beside my fathers. My next Browning--I might go with a 20--is intended for Whippetdom.

Which is a digression, and not really connected with Lever Guns.

Forgive me.....

You know what I'd really like to have? A .45-70; built on a 20 Gauge shotgun frame; working on Browning's Long Recoil Action; and looking in every way like a Browning Shotgun.....

.....RVM45

DPris · Post by **DPris** » Fri Feb 25, 2011 10:05 pm

RV,
The problem with trying to shoot as a shoulder weapon is that the Chiappa stock nub is way too short for any comfort, the Rossi is an inch longer & still quite uncomfortable to shoot from the shoulder, and adding more length to the nub to make it into a shoulder-fired weapon by installing a recoil pad takes it too close to Class III territory for comfort.
The .30-30 shown (and nicely done) is way too short to run from a shoulder.

I know Barrow was relatively un-tall, but his full-auto whippet would still be awkward to shoot from the shoulder, and the one I've seen attributed to him in photos still had a longer stock nub than these Mare's Legs do.
Denis

RVM45 · Post by **RVM45** » Sat Feb 26, 2011 8:56 am

I agree with you.

The main use I'd see for a .45-70 Bushwhacker like the one Wild West Arms used to offer as a Class III Weapon, would be if you were serving no-knock warrants, and you were the first man through the door. Across a room should be in reasonable range for a hip-shot/point shoot, and the extra power of the .45-70 might be comforting when shooting at some well-drugged Client.....

It might also be some use for point response to a close-range ambush by a large bear.

Outside of those two relatively obscure uses.....

By the way--Although I'm old enough, I have no memory of the Steve McQueen Character.

Still, anything that makes someone happy (Firearms Wise) is a good thing (except for Plastic Guns).

.....RVM45

DPris · Post by **DPris** » Sat Feb 26, 2011 1:42 pm

I had money sitting with WWG for two years on a .44 Mag Bushwhacker, they could never deliver, and I finally asked for a refund, which I promptly got.
On that one, it would have been a total toy, for me.

Would not have been anywhere near as efficient as a Ruger Redhawk in .44 Mag.

As a retired cop, I can also say pretty much the last thing I would have wanted in hand while going through a door would be a limited capacity slowfiring lever-action pistol with major recoil levels and which required two hands to hold onto AND operate in general.

Same applies, for me, as a bear gun.
I have Redhawks for that role.
Others may have a differing opinion, and to each his or her own.

How could you NOT remember the McQueen gun? Coolest thing on TV back then.

Denis

Model 94 Mare's Leg

Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg

Re: Model 94 Mare's Leg