.357 Magnum Lever Gun (Henry vs Marlin)

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have a Henry .357with an octagonal barrel, and I love it. Beautiful, smooth action, and extremely accurate, but it is a bit on the heavy side. Weighing in at 8 1/2 lbs (unloaded) it would be a beast to carry long distances through the brush. The advertised Marlin weight is just over 6 lbs which would make a big difference in carry ease. When you add the convenience of the side gate, in my opinion at least, the Marlin wins. Now, that being said, you’re not likely to burn through more than the 10 round capacity of the Henry on a hunting trip.

In my opinion (and with that plus a buck-fifty you can buy a Coke) the Henry is an excellent rifle, but for hunting, I would have to vote Marlin.

This.

I've shot a friend's Big Boy 357 with a 20" octagonal barrel. The build quality is fine, the finish is really good, but the rifle is just a pig. I don't exactly take a scale with me shooting, but I would say 8 or 8 1/2 pounds feels accurate. It was definitely heavier than the hunting rifle I pack around, and that thing is about 7 1/2 pounds scoped
 
The listed weight has the 20" Marlin is a little over a pound lighter than the 16.5" Henry and I'll throw in the 20" Rossi just for comparison at more than 2 pounds lighter than the Henry. The Henry must be very robust and it looks it. It appears rather fat and clunky compared to the other two. Of the two mentioned I would choose the Marlin. Considering all three I would opt for the Rossi. I would rather have the 20" barrel above the shorter Henry. Just my opinion and everyone knows about opinions.
 
Last edited:
I have both marlin 1894c and a couple of Henry .22s.
I like them both. My marlin safety is always in the fire position. I'm a hammer guy.
The Henry has a dood deal of drop in the stock. It is a bit unnatural for some.
I couldn't tell you which one is better, they're both good.
Soooo...
I would tell you to get two Henry's....one in .22, one in .357.
 
https://beartoothmercantile.com/basic-safety-delete-for-marlin-rifle/
I put these on my marlins that come with crossbolt safety. Look good and work as designed.
The advantage of the henry is unloading, no need to crank all the cartridges through the action. Slower to load, faster and safer to unload. I'm of the " safetys make you less safe" camp, once you trust a mechanical safety a certain part of your brain stops considering the firearm a concern, which is bad. I wont abide a mechanical safety on any gun. Only gun i have with one is an ar, only reason i have an ar is because i'm a good patriotic american and i should have an effective way to defend the country i love if the need should ever arise.
I still say henry but the marlin would be fine too.
 
Henry 41 mag carbine.... fully loaded with ammo, scope mounted, and sling.... it weighs 8 pounds 2 ounces on a certified scale.

The scope doesn't weigh a lot, it is a lightweight model....a Leupold VX 3i...a bigger scope could put it up to 9 pounds.

It balances perfect when its loaded...a little butt heavy when its unloaded.

20191012-164249.jpg
 
I have one of the Big Boy .357 carbines. It's a nice rifle and I'm about to start testing it more thoroughly with a Leupold 1-4x, starting with the 158gr Gold Dot. Been shooting Marlins and Winchester (USA and Japanese) for years. To be honest, you'd be hard pressed to choose a bad one. Mostly they are all just a little different. Although I have to say, in the over 200 guns I've bought in my lifetime, I've never bought one where ease of cleaning was even a consideration. I have 17 leverguns and can't remember the last time I cleaned one anyway. I also don't understand the uproar over how the Henry loads. I always liked tubular magazine .22's and the .357 is no different.
 
For what it's worth, the pre-remlin 1894C, slicked up a bit and properly broken in, has been the last non-collectible levergun I've bought. And that was new, over ten years ago. It filled pretty much the whole void I had between rimfire and full power .45-70 and whenever I get the urge to get yet another, just taking it out reminds me that why bother, it'll do the job.

Crossbolt safety is there allright, but I rarely use it. I don't know what's the current status between Marlin vs. Henry but it's hard to go wrong with either. My choice was a result of an impulse purchase I came across at a liquidation sale at a ridiculous discount. Didn't have to think twice and I'm glad I didn't.
 
Onl
https://beartoothmercantile.com/basic-safety-delete-for-marlin-rifle/
I put these on my marlins that come with crossbolt safety. Look good and work as designed.
The advantage of the henry is unloading, no need to crank all the cartridges through the action. Slower to load, faster and safer to unload. I'm of the " safetys make you less safe" camp, once you trust a mechanical safety a certain part of your brain stops considering the firearm a concern, which is bad. I wont abide a mechanical safety on any gun. Only gun i have with one is an ar, only reason i have an ar is because i'm a good patriotic american and i should have an effective way to defend the country i love if the need should ever arise.
I still say henry but the marlin would be fine too.
y gun that should have a safety is most handguns, mainly semi autos, especially a 1911 and a Glock.
 
Not everyone puts their brain in neutral after engaging a safety. Safe gun handling should be foremost for every shooter but unfortunately it isn't for some and a safety helps the poor souls around them as long as it is used.
 
Not everyone puts their brain in neutral after engaging a safety. Safe gun handling should be foremost for every shooter but unfortunately it isn't for some and a safety helps the poor souls around them as long as it is used.

Unfortunately, "safe gun handling" is like common sense... not so common.
 
This is one of those questions with no wrong answer. Both Marlin and Henry have great reputations. I have a Marlin 1894 Cowboy Limited and just added Skinner sights to it. It is a great little rifle. I just ignore the safety. Let your decision be informed by your preference to tube loading or side loading.
 
I think my marlin is prettier, much glossyer bluing, more character to the wood, nicer lines, nicer pointing, and more natural feeling. But its also a JM, and I cant speak for the newer models.
The newer models are substantially worse in fit and finish than the old JM Marlins. I had a JM 1894 in .357 that I picked up used for $400 in a gun shop in 2007. Beautiful rifle!

Decided to sell it a few years ago and got $1000 for it.

Then I decided to pick up a new 1894 in .45 Colt a couple of years ago. I figured they would have gotten their act together by then. Nope. The new rifle was noticeably inferior in every way to the JM. In addition to the lackluster finish, it came with a broken magazine tube follower, loose screws, and it wouldn't feed reliably. Got most of the bugs worked out, but joined the Marlin forum and discovered that they are still having issues. I would never buy a Remlin.

But, you have people who will swear on their mother's grave that the new Remlins are every bit as good and reliable as the old JMs. Sorry, not from what I've seen.

My JM 1894:

MyuwZKGaQDCap4GLPkMkyQ.jpg

628gKwwkSTCpVHV4peOwjw.jpg

My new Remlin:

-h7fddrGSVqVmZADFG9UYQ.jpg

Kp6fKZGUR4q8VPdqUsCjdA.jpg
 
Sorry about your experience; I bought a Marlin 1894 "Cowboy" in .357 Magnum a few months ago: no loose screws, nice wood, works real well.
I've heard that they're better than they used to be but not up to 100%. I was able to inspect my rifle before I forked over a dime .... I think that's a good thing to do in situations like this.
 
Wow! I was just considering picking up a .357/.38 spl lever gun. I have done a lot of fondling of lever gun in the last few months. I wanted a mares leg in .357, then I determined I would really prefer a 16"-20" barrel. Initially I looked at the Henry offerings. They did appear to be heavier, but the action was smooth and the price palatable. I kept seeing them right around $600. I then got to handle a Rossi with a 16" Winchester clone and it was great. The bluing was decent. The stock wood was acceptable, but the price was exceptional a nice $400.
I then started looking at the Taylor & Company 16" takedown with the hard chrome finish. This was a steep $1200 plus but the stock and sights were awesome and it felt like a real quality build. With that being said, I ended up with a 1942(?) Winchester 1894 in .30-.30 in excellent shape with a butter action, dynomite bluing and the most beautiful deep red walnut stock. What can I say. I still want the .357 because I am invested in it, but I could not turn down this pre-64 Model 94 carbine. If I would choose one the Rossi seemed to be the best quality for the money, but the take down T&C had the most modern features and the stock materials were great. The Chiappa offerings are really high end, with a high level of detail. The model 94 I got is absolutely awesome. Maybe I can use it as trading fodder for a .357 mag in the future. If not I am confident I can get another 100 yrs out of old Winnie.

It may be worthwhile to note I tried a couple Marlins and all the shop owners said they marlins are crap now. (unverified.) The prices were comparable. The appearance of those rifles were good, and the actions pretty smooth.
 
My late model Marlin 1895 is just fine. In some ways, it is nicer than my older guns. Marlin has never been top drawer in fit & finish. So I'm not sure what people are looking at when they praise the JM guns so loudly.
 
I have a Marlin in .357 and a Rossi (Win 92 Replica) and I prefer some version of the 92. Given the two choices you offer I would prefer the Remlin. The Henry is heavy.
 
I have a Marlin in .357 and a Rossi (Win 92 Replica) and I prefer some version of the 92. Given the two choices you offer I would prefer the Remlin. The Henry is heavy.

Heavy is good, recoil wise.
 
The Henry steel rifles aren't as heavy as they're often made out to be... maybe a little heavier, but it's not like they weigh 10 pounds or something.

The brass Henry's and octagon barrels.... yeah, now those are heavy.
 
My late model Marlin 1895 is just fine. In some ways, it is nicer than my older guns. Marlin has never been top drawer in fit & finish. So I'm not sure what people are looking at when they praise the JM guns so loudly.

I posted photos of a JM 1894 and a current production 1894 that clearly show a much higher polish, sharper wood engraving, higher quality wood, deeper bluing, and glossier stock finish on the JM. The JM also had a much smoother action and no issues in cycling.

Not sure how folks can't see the difference. :(
 
Every JM Marlin I've looked at had rough machine marks, a haphazard polish job and an action rough as a cob. The woodwork is usually pretty good.


The Henry steel rifles aren't as heavy as they're often made out to be... maybe a little heavier, but it's not like they weigh 10 pounds or something.

The brass Henry's and octagon barrels.... yeah, now those are heavy.
The round barrel guns are pretty light, if not balanced a little rearward. The octagons are boat anchors.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top