How the Marlin 1895 shoots

H4831

H4831

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
151   0   0
Location
BC
I mounted a Redfield 1 to 4 scope on the new Marlin, which I told about getting on an earlier thread. Put a target at 25 metres, first shot five inches low and 2 to the right. Elevated 20 minutess and eight left. Two shots cut each other, dead on centre. For once a scope did just what it was supposed to!
Then fired the five shown in the picture at 100 metres. Centre to centre it is less than 1½ inches, which makes me quite happy.
The light load is one that Johnn Peterson said gave him good results.


P1020733.jpg
 
H4831 said:
I mounted a Redfield 1 to 4 scope on the new Marlin, which I told about getting on an earlier thread. Put a target at 25 metres, first shot five inches low and 2 to the right. Elevated 20 minutess and eight left. Two shots cut each other, dead on centre. For once a scope did just what it was supposed to!
Then fired the five shown in the picture at 100 metres. Centre to centre it is less than 1½ inches, which makes me quite happy.
The light load is one that Johnn Peterson said gave him good results.


P1020733.jpg
Click to expand...

What load/bullet are you using?
 
Load

The load, 22.5 of 4227, is given on the target, but admittedly, the "point mark" is blurred, making it confusing. Bullet was 405 cast with bevelled base.
I had just two loaded with 28 of 4227 and those two went three inches higher and were two inches apart.
I also had just two of the heavy loads, 42 of IMR 4198, left over from my previous trials before I put the scope on, of just testing for recoil. The two heavy loads, which were likely going about 1800 fps, went 8 inches higher than the group shown and were 2¼" apart.
The two loadings of IMR 4227 were all backed with stop draft, ala, Johnn Peterson.
Since I was sighted dead on at 25 metres with the lightest load, the group of them was 6 inches low at 100, while the heaviest were actually two inches high at 100. The in between loads all went in between, where one would expect them.
A surprise was I had three of my poured bullets, about 405 grain, but sized with my Lee sizer which is .457. I wasn't expecting much from them, but loaded with 40 grains of H4895, they went where they should have and the three grouped 2¼ inches, which surprized me.
I will now load larger numbers of some various loadings and try them out, which should be more meaningful. Hopefully, the chronograph which I have on back order, will soon arrive. I did a lot of chronographing some years ago, but haven't had one lately.
 
H4831 said:
I mounted a Redfield 1 to 4 scope on the new Marlin, which I told about getting on an earlier thread. Put a target at 25 metres, first shot five inches low and 2 to the right. Elevated 20 minutess and eight left. Two shots cut each other, dead on centre. For once a scope did just what it was supposed to!
Then fired the five shown in the picture at 100 metres. Centre to centre it is less than 1½ inches, which makes me quite happy.
The light load is one that Johnn Peterson said gave him good results.


P1020733.jpg
Click to expand...

The Marlin 45-70 I had was able to put 3 shots into the loonie at 100 yards with 40 grains of H4198. The 420 grain GC checked cast bullets worked best for me. The 520's worked very wel too......
 
303 carbine, by no stretch of the immagination, am I saying I am getting out of the rifle all that it is capable of achieving.
Sixty years ago I probably could have. I know I certainly won more than my share of turkies at turky shoots at that time, as well as some hard won hardware.
But sixty years down the road and bifocals doesn't help the prescission one bit.
 
H4831 said:
303 carbine, by no stretch of the immagination, am I saying I am getting out of the rifle all that it is capable of achieving.
Sixty years ago I probably could have. I know I certainly won more than my share of turkies at turky shoots at that time, as well as some hard won hardware.
But sixty years down the road and bifocals doesn't help the prescission one bit.
Click to expand...

You're telling me the rifle can shoot better than you....I think that's true with most,including me.:wave:
 
H4831 said:
I mounted a Redfield 1 to 4 scope on the new Marlin, which I told about getting on an earlier thread. Put a target at 25 metres, first shot five inches low and 2 to the right. Elevated 20 minutess and eight left. Two shots cut each other, dead on centre. For once a scope did just what it was supposed to!
Then fired the five shown in the picture at 100 metres. Centre to centre it is less than 1½ inches, which makes me quite happy.
The light load is one that Johnn Peterson said gave him good results.


P1020733.jpg
Click to expand...
Great shooting Bruce. Very nice.:) Glad the load performed well for you. With the rest of the selection of cast bullets I have available to test, I'll give you a heads up if I find anything else that really shines. The same for any jacketed loads. Good shooting.;)
 
I have shot many 3 shot groups with all touching or nearly touching at 100 yards with my GG in 45-70. The gun is incredibly accurate but is hard to hold repetitively to keep it from verticaly stringing 2 to 3" groups. This rifle requres more practice shooting than any other I own.
 
Republic of Alberta said:
I have shot many 3 shot groups with all touching or nearly touching at 100 yards with my GG in 45-70. The gun is incredibly accurate but is hard to hold repetitively to keep it from verticaly stringing 2 to 3" groups. This rifle requres more practice shooting than any other I own.
Click to expand...
Would the longer bbl version be easier to shoot?


.
 
Kid you not - my XLR .45-70 had a subMOA 5 shot group going for it with LeveRevolution factory stuff until the 5th round. It was a good shot, I thought, same position and solid, no pull, but landed 1 1/2" higher than the next highest. Still, I was impressed (that was @ 100 yards).
 
My best group ever from my 1895 Marlin (purchased in 1974) was 4/10ths inch for five shots at 100 yds. The load was 53 gr 3031 and 400 grain Speers. Ouch.
It was by far the most accurate lever action I ever shot. Regards, Bill.
 
SuperCub said:
Would the longer bbl version be easier to shoot?


.
Click to expand...
I find the recoil of the 1895GS more 'noticeable', primarily because of the straight stock design I believe. I've shot other 45-70 Marlins with the curved pistol and found them to be considerably easier on the fingers. That's my only criticism but I do like the length of the GS.
 
SuperCub said:
Would the longer bbl version be easier to shoot?


.
Click to expand...


My friend has the XLR ( I think) with the 24" BBL and pistol grip. I have only fired it off hand but I think it has much less BBL rise due to lenght, weight and rear stock design. I would guess it would be less sensitive to vertical stringing. But the reality with any heavy recoiling rifle with slow bullets and a fair amount of drop at the stock is it is going to string up and down.

IF I sight mine in dead on at 100 off the bags, letting the gun recoil naturaly, with 350grainers at 450marlin velocity it will hit about 3" higher when shot off hand. It is just the nature of the beast.
 
Leeper said:
My best group ever from my 1895 Marlin (purchased in 1974) was 4/10ths inch for five shots at 100 yds. The load was 53 gr 3031 and 400 grain Speers. Ouch.
It was by far the most accurate lever action I ever shot. Regards, Bill.
Click to expand...

One if my favorite loads for the 45-70, I just use the Remington 405's. Amazing accuracy for a heavy loaded lever gun.
 
Johnn Peterson said:
I find the recoil of the 1895GS more 'noticeable', primarily because of the straight stock design I believe. I've shot other 45-70 Marlins with the curved pistol and found them to be considerably easier on the fingers. That's my only criticism but I do like the length of the GS.
Click to expand...

You and I share the same feelings about the pistol style grip John, as we have chatted about before. I put a stock from classic pistol style 22" 1895 onto a 18.5" G and found it far more comfortable to pound out heavy loads with the pistol style grip on the short GG.

The stock style made a big difference as far as comfort goes on the 18.5" GG. The straight stock now resides on my classic 22" 1895, it looks better that way in my eyes...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom