ChaseReynolds
New member
I would like to purchase a lever gun in .45 Colt, I have looked at Henry and Winchester and would like to know what everyone had and what they would suggest and why. Thanks.
.45 Colt lever action rifle
- Thread starter ChaseReynolds
- Start date
springfield 720
New member
both are very nice.. and very accurate.. It would depend if you like shiny brass ( like me ) or case colored receivers...Marlin also makes a good rifle in .45 lc..
the Black Spot
New member
I have shot the rossi and marlin both nice fit and finish better on marlin
.
I own a Marlin 1894 & a few Rossi Model 92's.
I would suggest a Rossi M92 if you want to use a peep sight; a Marlin 1894 if you need a scope (It's easier to mount a scope on).
The Marlin is easier to take down for cleaning than any Model 92, but the M92 takedown isn't beyond most folk's, who have a half-way decent mechanical aptitude.
I wouldn't suggest a Winchester Model 94 in a short (pistol) cartridge, due to the work-arounds viv-a-vis the lifter, etc, that Winchester used to make them feed, which sometimes go South.
The various Italian-sourced Model 92's have more "bling" than a Rossi, but are also twice the price.
.
I own a Marlin 1894 & a few Rossi Model 92's.
I would suggest a Rossi M92 if you want to use a peep sight; a Marlin 1894 if you need a scope (It's easier to mount a scope on).
The Marlin is easier to take down for cleaning than any Model 92, but the M92 takedown isn't beyond most folk's, who have a half-way decent mechanical aptitude.
I wouldn't suggest a Winchester Model 94 in a short (pistol) cartridge, due to the work-arounds viv-a-vis the lifter, etc, that Winchester used to make them feed, which sometimes go South.
The various Italian-sourced Model 92's have more "bling" than a Rossi, but are also twice the price.
.
towboat-er
New member
Last edited:
ChaseReynolds
New member
I need something not as long as normal, mostly for comfort due to my T-Rex arms. I don't understand why you guys are referring to .45 colt like they have the round for pistol and rifle. I want the rifle so I will have ammo compatibility with my wheel gun
ChaseReynolds said:
Regardless of matter how it's loaded, or what type firearm it's loaded in, the .45 Colt is classified as a pistol cartridge.
What was referred to was the chambering of a "pistol" cartridge in a longer action (like the Win 94) that was designed around a longer "rifle-length" cartridge.
.
ChaseReynolds
New member
Okay I see, so the action wasn't changed any when they added calibers to a weapon platform.
Just changes to handle a particular cartridge like lifters, extractors, etc. The 94 was designed around 30-30 length cartridges and the lifter is really long to handle a stubby little .45 Colt.
The .45 Colt was introduced for the Colt SAA in 1873. It wasn't chambered in a rifle until the 1980's.
The .45 Colt was introduced for the Colt SAA in 1873. It wasn't chambered in a rifle until the 1980's.
Last edited:
Andy Griffith
New member
What they are trying to say is, that the 94 Winchester action is a bit on the clunky side once they re-engineered it for the shorter, revolver length cartridges. It works, but it isn't ideal.
I don't think it's easily possible to pick up a 94 Winchester of recent manufacture for a reasonable price, or what I would call one.
I'd defintely take a look at some of Uberti's offerings. If you want short, a round barreled 1873 carbine might fit the bill. Also, I have a couple of Rossi 1892's in .357 that l adore. The 1892's will be the lightest of the bunch, especially with 16" or 20" round barrels. The Henry is ok, but from the one I handled, it was very, very heavy for it's size, and I didn't care for the tube style loading (like a .22 rimfire).
It's all in what you like though. Be certain the handle them all a lot before deciding- it may suprise you that you may change your mind on the short vs. long barrel preference, depnding upon what you want to do with it.
I don't think it's easily possible to pick up a 94 Winchester of recent manufacture for a reasonable price, or what I would call one.
I'd defintely take a look at some of Uberti's offerings. If you want short, a round barreled 1873 carbine might fit the bill. Also, I have a couple of Rossi 1892's in .357 that l adore. The 1892's will be the lightest of the bunch, especially with 16" or 20" round barrels. The Henry is ok, but from the one I handled, it was very, very heavy for it's size, and I didn't care for the tube style loading (like a .22 rimfire).
It's all in what you like though. Be certain the handle them all a lot before deciding- it may suprise you that you may change your mind on the short vs. long barrel preference, depnding upon what you want to do with it.
springfield 720
New member
Marlin 94 is very light and short.. receiver is designed to take the pistol rounds and is fed through the receiver side gate and ejects out the side. They too, are on the spendy side, but very nice.. I have a .357 with a 20" barrel and shoot the heck out of it..
I've got a Rossi M92 that I like alot 'tho I don't shoot it much. It is a beautiful gun but the action could use a little work. Or I could just shoot it more. It is however an accurate rifle and will knock heck out of a deer. I occasionally hunt with it when still hunting in thick mesquite flats and use my hot RBH loads.
45 colt
I have a Henry replica type 45 not the new Henry Rifle. It is agreat shooter I also had a 73 in 45 Colt both great rifles. If you are going to shoot BP in them not so much to much residue builds up after 25 rounds or so. Not designed for Bp that is why they never made the rifle in 45 in the old days. The marlin and 92 are stronger actions so if you are going to load heavy those would be the actions to get. My two cents. Gus
I have a Henry replica type 45 not the new Henry Rifle. It is agreat shooter I also had a 73 in 45 Colt both great rifles. If you are going to shoot BP in them not so much to much residue builds up after 25 rounds or so. Not designed for Bp that is why they never made the rifle in 45 in the old days. The marlin and 92 are stronger actions so if you are going to load heavy those would be the actions to get. My two cents. Gus
Jbar4Ranch
New member
Yep, no rim. Here's an original .45 Colt from my collection.
Hawg is pretty close to correct. The reason the .45 Colt was not used in rifles is because of the tiny rim, not because of the balloon head case, which was a matter of internal case construction. The rim was not large enough to ensure extraction in a rifle. The fact is that things have not improved much because the .45 Colt still has a small rim and still has extraction/ejection problems in rifles. The .44-40 is a much better choice in rifles and is fully equivalent in power.
The tiny rim of the .45 Colt came about because Colt wanted to keep as much of the old .44 percussion tooling as they could when they went to the SAA. The Army wanted .45 caliber, and the only way to put a .45 into a cylinder sized for .44 was to reduce the rim as much as possible. Of course, in the SAA, the rim had to be only large enough for case support. Extraction didn't depend on the rim since the SAA has a rod ejector.
Jim
The tiny rim of the .45 Colt came about because Colt wanted to keep as much of the old .44 percussion tooling as they could when they went to the SAA. The Army wanted .45 caliber, and the only way to put a .45 into a cylinder sized for .44 was to reduce the rim as much as possible. Of course, in the SAA, the rim had to be only large enough for case support. Extraction didn't depend on the rim since the SAA has a rod ejector.
Jim