1894 for deer ?

[Jarhead63]

I have killed many deer with my little 1894 P in .44 mag.  With that being said, I keep my ranges down to a hundred yards and under and because my old eyes are getting tired, I pulled the williams peep sight off and put a leupold 2.5 X 5 on top.  The terrain here on the edge of the Ozark Plateau fits the little rifle perfectly with its many draws and heavily wooded box canyons.  As far as Bear...maybe black bear  300 - 400 lb max.  Anything larger and I owe it to the animal to ensure that I have a weapon that will cleanly dispatch the animal.
 

[Forestclimber]

I bought a blued, used Marlin 1894 at a pawn shop for $400, then put a scope on it.  It shoots great. 300 grain Hornady XTP bullets and also the 240 grain jacketed bullets that come in the white Winchester box.  I couldn't believe how good it shot.  I've had an H&R and a Ruger 77/44, but I never could get them to shoot well.   The 1894 shot circles around them.  Some rifles shoot better than others.  Even the same models.  I think I got a good one. I'll use it for Indiana deer season.

[ironglow]

 
Every buck I nailed with my 44 MAG carbine went down fast.  Great cartridge for deer.
 
TR

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
  TR;
  That looks like an H&R "Shikari"..

I don't think the Shikari has a magazine tube, nor a loading gate on the side of the receiver....   

-WH-

ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
 
     OK..guess I didn't look close..no matter, back to the original question, we have collected 4 large northern deer with an H&R Shikari..a single shot rifle..bang..DRT.   The .44 mag is an excellent deer cartridge..and under 100 yards, superior to many others.

[cwlongshot]

I have killed many deer with my little 1894 P in .44 mag.  With that being said, I keep my ranges down to a hundred yards and under and because my old eyes are getting tired, I pulled the williams peep sight off and put a leupold 2.5 X 5 on top.  The terrain here on the edge of the Ozark Plateau fits the little rifle perfectly with its many draws and heavily wooded box canyons.  As far as Bear...maybe black bear  300 - 400 lb max.  Anything larger and I owe it to the animal to ensure that I have a weapon that will cleanly dispatch the animal.
 

GREAT combo, GREAT pic and I LOVE that scope too!!

Looks identicle to mine... only you have a smaller hole down the bore and wood pecker holes in the barrel. (Mine is a 45LTD 45 COLT and no ports.)




What knife do you have there?

CW

[Jarhead63]

Thanks.
The knife was a gift from my dad when I graduated from ITR.  Steve Brooks out of Butte, MT. made it.  Its a shortened version of some knives he made for STA platoon (Can't remember the Unit) back in the early and mid eighties.  Its made of D2 tool and has been a reliable old friend thats for sure.

[Cheesehead]

[quote author=Jarhead63 link=topic=243608.msg1099475364#msg1099475364 date=1329667929]
I have killed many deer with my little 1894 P in .44 mag.  With that being said, I keep my ranges down to a hundred yards and under and because my old eyes are getting tired, I pulled the williams peep sight off and put a leupold 2.5 X 5 on top.  The terrain here on the edge of the Ozark Plateau fits the little rifle perfectly with its many draws and heavily wooded box canyons.  As far as Bear...maybe black bear  300 - 400 lb max.  Anything larger and I owe it to the animal to ensure that I have a weapon that will cleanly dispatch the animal.
 



That rifle looks very carryable.

Cheese

[popplecop]

Interesting reading about the .357 on what it is capable of doing.  I carried one in my law enforcement career from 61 to 88 when I retired.  During my career as a game warden I had to shoot a varity of animals with my handgun including a bear.  Mostly carried a 125 +P load in later years and the 158 gr. before that.  Secret is bullet placement, mostly I was dispatching car hit animals so could get close and pick my shot.  Come to think of it same goes for my deer hunting now a days.  Have both Marlin 94s, 1 each in .357 and .44, both wear William Foolproof Receiver sights, also have a Ruger 96 in 44 wich is scoped.  With a hardcasted 180 gr. bullet over a charge of H110 would not be hesitant in shooting a blackbear, wouldn't be my first choice, but a capable rifle.  Still have a S&W pre Model 27 I bought used in 61 with 12 rounds missing from the original box of ammo and an El Paso holster.  One has to pick their shot or walk away from it if not a good one.

[chewey]

For deer at 100 yds or less especially where there might be thick cover it would be hard to beat an 1894 in 44 mag with a peep sight . Tough to beat it too at the shooting range for fun!

[T.R.]

I have more experiance with Hornady hollow tip ammo than anything else.  The mighty 44 MAG blasts a wide and ghastly wound channel through muscle and organs.  Lethalty is far greater than paper ballistic charts would suggest.
Shoot an animal through the chest and watch it go down within a few yards or so.  Animals much larger than deer have been toppled by 44 MAG revolvers through good shot placement and correct bullet for the particular animal.  The owner of COLD STEEL Knives produced a video of his hunts within Australia.  Watch him slay large water buffalo with ease using his mighty 44 MAG revolver!
 
This photo shows a dandy buck I took in northern California with my Marlin 44 MAG.  Admittidly, the lever is a little difficult to see in the photo but its my Marlin carbine alright.
 
Good hunting to you.
 
Jack
 

 

[Lonegun1894]

I have used the .357 on deer, but have not used the .44 yet.  My last deer was a 120lb cull buck taken with a 4" Ruger Security Six .357 revolver with a 158gr cast bullet over some Unique.  The shot was at 45yds, into the chest while th edeer was facing me, and the bullet was recoverd in the ham AFTER going through the deer lenghtwise and breaking the hip too.  If a 4" revolver can do that, I have no problem using a .357 rifle against any deer out there, and would use it against larger animals like bear too with no worries.  All it takes is a good bullet placed in the right place.  I have used and seen used .357 revolvers out further, and they worked every single time, but the shots were placed well and by shooters who would pass on any risky shots and only fire if they were confident in the placement.  I have full confidence in the .357, but considering what I have seen it do, I would bet that the .44 will do as well or probably much better.

[txpitdog]

And if you reload, you have the option of using 180gr XTP's in the 357 lever gun.  I would expect these to perform very well on game.

The 44mag in a rifle is quite wicked. You can easily break both front shoulders without ruining a bunch of meat, and it just plain knocks them flat.

325lb sow taken on public land using a Marlin 1894 44mag with Nosler 240gr JSP bullets at 70yds. Blew threw both sides and dropped the hog on the spot as it lays in the picture. 

[454Puma]

Greybeard
 Hogdgon still has data to push the 158 gr to 1550 fps in the 357 mag. Using Lil'Gun powder makes them alot more tame. They run at just below 25,800 CUP vs. 40,700 CUP with other powders

[cwlongshot]

Here is a Sitka deer I shot back in 2001 with a Marlin LIMITED 1894 in 45 COLT.

CW

[375supermag]

I was just reading this thread and was interested about the comments regarding the .357Mag for black bears.


I have a fair amount of experience with the .357Mag in revolvers , but have never owned or shot one in a rifle. I have managed to safely crank up some 158gr HP/XTP to fairly respectable velocities in several long-barreled Ruger blackHawks and a S&W686 Silhouette model. I would not hesitate to use that load on any whitetail I am likely to encounter here in Pennsylvania. I am also quite sure that it would suffice for "most" black bear here in Pennsylvania. I have carried one or the other of my .357Mag revolvers when bear hunting and hiking and never felt particularly under gunned.


Having said all that, there have been more than a couple rather large (over 700 and some over 800 lbs)black bears killed in Pennsylvania over the last 15-20 years.


I am not at all convinced that a .357Mag is the wisest choice for a black bear of that size, whether in a lever-action carbine or a revolver. It may well get the job done, but I wonder just how quickly and/or humanely.


As a matter of ethics, I have decided that I will carry a minimum of .41Mag when I hike or hunt with a revolver in black bear country. A .357Mag may be sufficient for 80-90% of black bears, but I am not convinced it is capable of humanely dispatching critters weighing in the 7-800 lb range.

[vbhunter]

Just about anything that will kill a whitetail will kill a black bear pretty much just as easy, so .357 will work.  In .357, I would make sure and use flat point bullets instead of hollow points.  .44 mag will just do it better, and won't make much difference between FB vs hollow points.  To me, recoil is not much worse especially in a rifle, and muzzle blast is less in a handgun.  Statistics may prove me wrong, but that has been my experience.  I had an 8" Dan Wesson .357 that seemed to have way more muzzle blast than my Super Blackhawk, and didn't seem to kick much less.  Muzzle blast has always bothered me much more than recoil, unless I'm shooting a 45-70 or 12 ga. with slugs.

[454Puma]

Saw I vid on you tube once (tried to find it) and a gent wacked a nice Elk on the way back to camp with a Marlin 94 357 mag . One shot dead elk!

[mannyrock]

Guys,
 
    I'm sorry to jump in, but I just don't understand why this question keeps coming up over and over:  Is the .357 Mag out of a carbine good enough for deer, or maybe even black bear.
 
    The answer is simple: YES.  Buffalo Bore makes .357 ammo for use in the Marlin carbines, using compressed powder charges, that boost them up to screeching high levels, giving you within 100 ft pounds of the .30-30.   They show you the info on their website, including the velocity and foot pounds, for the 158 grain bullet.  They even tell you that it virtually equivalent of the .30-30.
 
  In essence, these factory rounds turn your carbine into a  mini .35 Remington.
 
   So, yes, you can kill deer very easily out to about 125 yards.  And no, if you shoot a black bear with one of these rounds, it will not just "piss him off,"  it will kill him.  And if the first round doesn't kill him stone dead, you've got 9 more right behind it, which you can deliver in less than five seconds, that will put him down.
 
    Go out a buy a box of these things, and quite overthinking this problem.  The problem has been solved by Buffalo Bore.
 
  Best, Mannyrock
 
   

[greywolf444]

The question keeps coming up because most don't separate what they know about handguns with what the round does in a rifle. My 44 marlin rifle is very comparable to a 454 handgun and the 357 marlin runs real close to a 44 handgun energywise. Both of those handguns are undisputed as being more than enough. I've killed deer with both and both work just fine. Mind you I hunt timber so shots are never over 100 yds. I'd rather hunt close than blast away across a field anytime. I don't feel limited by the round as much as by the terrain. I killed everything for 25 years with roundball muzzleloaders (no inlines) and never felt undergunned. Both of these better my muzzloaders by a bit. I used my 444 once and put it away as it was way too much for deer. Maybe use it on an elk someday. Same with my 300 WSM. Hugely powerful but just isn't needed. Most critters aren't particularly hard to kill. Maybe hard to hit in the right place but not hard to kill.

 Do the guys using 223's have to listen to this tired old argument. they really are using a round that's not enough for anything bigger than a coyote yet they happily go out and kill whatever with them. I guess they didn't get the memo.

[RevJim]

 I used a Marlin 94 in .44 mag, back in '75 witht he Remington factory 240 JHP. I shot deer and hogs with that load. It cut a humongous hole, and on the bullets I did recover (lengthwise shots) they were just wadded up, not at all like the pictures, so it killed very well. This was down in what is known in East Texas as the "Big Thicket" (Txpitdog knows what I'm talking about! I hunted between Houston and Beaumont, Tx) I wanted those animals down fast as in those palmetto/briars/yupon thickets where thick! ha. I considered it one of the fastest handling woods rifle ever. And I've used a bunch in 49yrs of deer hunting! I later in life used an 1894CB (20") in .45 Colt with 100% satisfaction, and will try a Rossi 92 in .45 colt soo. I've owned, used, sold many more '94s from .357, .41 mag ( I should have kept all these!), .44 mag, .45......of them all, my favorite is the .45 Colt. If I was not a handloader, I'd use the .44 with the .357 second (with Corbon or Buffalo Bore, Federal 180, preferable in hard cast) Corbon used to load a 200gr Hard cast back when. maybe they still do. I also used a S&W Mod 28 in .357 back in the mid 70's, using the Remington 158 JSP, those things were wicked! Agree, the .357 is very useful, but the .41, .44 and .45 just cut bigger holes! Good luck to you Pard!

[eastbank]

here,s a large black bear over 500lbs, take look at the shoulders on this bear. one swipe with a paw and your going to be tits up,i would take enough gun if i were you and i don,t think i would want a .357 if i got in a tight with this one. eastbank.

[chewey]

You can kill an elephant with a .22. It has been done.

Why not go with the 44? Ammo cost? For hunting use there is not a significant difference.

My '94 with a peep site is surprisingly accurate up to 100 yds and is fun to shoot.