Marlin 1895 Barrel is off center

Shoot it in .45-70 first, then decide how much more horsepower you really need. If the factory BP level stuff isn't enough then Buffalo Bore and Cor-Bon have a load or two that will get your attention.:eek:
But seriously, if it doesn't shoot or function correctly then I think you need to give the folks at the factory a chance to make it right. I think the 1895 is an awesome gun, stick with it and hopefully you'll agree someday.
 
I don't know about others, but I am getting tired of people bashing companys who products they have never purchased.
Click to expand...

Wait until you see a new one with a hammer that strikes off-center... Its quite amazing how bad the quality control is with the new marlins...
 
If the sights still aren't aligned I'll send it in. Remington has been having such a hard time making these Marlin rifles though, that they've halted production until next year. For 25$, it was well worth a try.

As for horsepower, I've never had a problem with recoil. I can dump a full tube of 430 grain hc gas check 45-70's (only rounds I use), they don't kick all that hard in my book. The gun will be used to hunt grizzles, as well as moose.

In reality the .457 Magnums only go about 200 fps faster than the comparable hottest loads of 45-70 (if the charts I've seen hold true).

However, you can still shoot 45-70 (like a .38s in a .357 magnum), you have the option of using the .457's, as well as .410 shotshell (though I don't know why someone would). In addition to the action being able to cycle those 540 grain loads.

Just adds some versatility. I may or may not go through with it though.
 
I put about 50 rounds of 430 grain bear load down range today.

At 100 yards it was about an nine inch pattern when standing shooting just a few inches low. Windage is pretty dead on so far.

I think I need a smaller aperture, and maybe a narrower front sight; because at that distance the front post eclipses the whole of the target.

Back at 75 yards the group was in the black, but still a little low. One outlying group was way low, but the wholes were touching.

I meant to shoot another set at 50 yards (I think it would have been dead on elevation wise there), but I didn't budget my rounds well enough. So I'll have to restock and go back.

I think the aperture sight is a success so far. I don't think I could have kept the rounds on paper that far off with the stock sight (I'm not great with open sights).

Either way I had a lot of fun.
 
9" standing at 100 yds with aperture sights is pretty darn good shooting, in my book. Most folks couldn't do that with a scope, standing.


It would be interesting to see what groups you would shoot off sandbags.

Good luck with it, keep us posted!
 
Most groups were groups of only about four or five, I couldn't put the gun down, re-aim then hit the old group, there were some outliers, and I'm for some reason I've always been much better shooting standing up, than sitting down. I think there's still room fore improvement.

I wanted to try using a shooting rest, but the ones at the range were all in use.

The short length of pull on the guide gun stock doesn't fit me very well. At one point I got careless and just the bottom corner of the stock was seated, left a pretty unpleasant looking bruise.

What's the best way to add length to a stock?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top