Winchester's New 94 Offering

[Jay Edward (deceased)]

I put this rifle up as 'wallpaper' on my desktop so that I could contemplate it.  I frequently do this as it gives me a chance to 'cool off' if I'm thinking of getting my hands on one.

This is the new Winchester Model 94 Timber lever action in 450 Marlin.  You can see the 'ports' on the barrel under the front sight and the 'ghost ring' rear sight.  The literature on the website states that the recoil will get your attention so anyone considering this rifle had better be warned.  You could load it down to .45-70 velocities but then I already have one of those.  That's where contempalting it as 'wallpaper' helps out.

[cgphunter]

That is a sharp looking rifle Jay. Too much gun for me but I love the style. The first and only (not for long) deer I have killed was with a 30-30, so I think I will always have a place for that particular rifle.
 
Chris

[Jay Edward (deceased)]

You know, I wonder how gitano feels about this sort of firearm for hunting the big bears that roam more in his state than in mine?

I would think for close in firepower (4 rounds it seems to me), this lever action would do a pretty good job.  As I said above, the webpage states that recoil will he heavy so you'd almost have to wear a PAST recoil shield (or somesuch) at the range.  However, in the field with a really long fanged/long clawed animal at the end of your barrel, the prospect of inordinate recoil and pain seems a small price to pay.

There is something eye-catching to my way of thinking about this rifle.  The only changes I would make is an Ivory bead front sight and an old Lyman rear peep.  Actually, I wouldn't mind another inch or two of barrel length while keeping the magazine length the same.

[Jay Edward (deceased)]

I think I'm going to put up the speculative loadings from COTW so that those of you thinking about this firearm can get a 'feeling' about the chambering.

[gitano]

[/color]

You know, I wonder how gitano feels about this sort of firearm for hunting the big bears that roam more in his state

[/color]



Well since you asked.:D

This is kind of a tough one for me. Most of my life I have been devoted to absolutely maximizing the precision with which a rifle shoots, relying more on well-placed shots than 'fire-power'. My first coastal brown bear substantially altered that perspective, but I still can't shake it entirely. So in answer to a question something like "What do you think of this as a gun for big bears?" I'd have to make sure we're all considering "apples and apples" first.


As I am sure you are surprised to hear, I have some very strong opinions on what constitutes a "bear gun". These opinions are based on personal experience both hunting and professional. These opinions are also generally not consistent with popular mythology nor "official" published USF&W employee policy.



First, what constitutes an "appropriate" "bear gun"? For me, there are three simple requirements: 1) Big bullet diameter – for me .338 is the absolute minimum, 2) Lots of bullets – minimum of three for hunting and 6 for protection, and 3) Easily carried on the body without interfering with what ever other task you might have to do.



In my view, there are three general circumstances that call specifically for a "bear gun". (For the rest of this discussion, when I refer to "bear", I mean a coastal brown bear or a polar bear.) The first circumstance, is bear hunting, the second is "back up" for a bear hunter, and the third is protection from bears when in the woods doing something besides bear hunting. In my opinion, each of these situations call for a different kind of "bear gun". It seems prevalent in American culture that we relentlessly seek the mythical "universal" tool. One tool that will do all jobs equally well, or at least sufficiently well. Being a red-blooded, all-American boy, I had that particular view in my early years. Now not so much. Particularly when it comes to bears, I think 'specialization' to the task at hand is preferable to 'one size fits all'.



So... A "bear gun" for hunting would be whatever your little pea-pickin' heart desires. If you wanna hunt coastal brown bears with a .22 rimfire, knock yourself out. If you ask me to go with you, I'll be carrying a .338 Win Mag AT LEAST. This Model 94 in 450 Marlin would be "fine", but not my personal choice. This is where my attitude about "precision" returns. I do not hunt bears by wandering through alder thickets where the visibility is 10 yards or less. Nor does any sane person. It is not uncommon to have to follow a wounded bear into such a thicket, but that's a different issue. No, for hunting them, I strive to find them in the open and at a distance, and I want a rifle I feel comfortable with taking a 200 yard shot and expecting it to hit the bear "hard" in a lethal spot. It's a 'scoped bolt gun for me. When I have to follow the bear into the alders, I'll have the bolt gun 'at the ready', and a .44 Rem Mag on my hip. Of course a lever gun would be fine once you had to go into the alders. On average, I would just expect a bolt gun to keep me out of the alders more than a lever gun would.



If I am not hunting, but accompanying someone hunting, and acting as "backup"  then I would consider a lever gun, and the above Timber model would certainly fill the bill. I suppose, I might be more inclined to a .444 Marlin or a .45-70. From what I read, the .450 Marlin is a smaller cartridge than the .45-70. "Although the external upper body dimensions of the 450 match the 45-70 Gov, given the heavier brass of its 375 H&H roots the case capacity of the 450 is approx 3+ grs less than the 45-70: 73.8gr (of water, full case, 53.2gr, with a bullet seated .500", vs, 77.0 and 56.2gr, respectively). The 450 Marlin is the smallest .458" commercial rifle cartridge introduced in the last 100+ years, yet it fills an important niche." And, "In a real world comparison, the 450 is a lesser cartridge than a modern load (Marlin1895) 45/70, and by as much as 500 fp's. Although the two cartridges, if chambered in same barrel length firearms, will show the Marlin generating 1-2% less muzzle energy;" from http://www.gmdr.com/lever/450mtext.htm



The final category of "bear gun" applications is where I depart substantially from most arm-chair bear hunters, and even a few with actual personal experience. If I am in the woods for a reason other than hunting, but I feel the need to carry a firearm sufficient to protect me from attack from a bear, then, as I said above, I want a gun that has 1) lots of bullets, 2) a big bore, and 3) does not need to be removed from my body in order for me to accomplish my assigned or desired tasks. Once again, I have to define specifics so that we all are considering the same scenarios. First is the protection gun used by a person whose sole task is bear protection. In other words, they are the guard while someone else performs the assigned work. Personally, I have never even heard of a government or for-profit organization doubling their personnel costs by employing a bear protection guard. However, in that unlikely event, my preferred firearm would be the Street Sweeper – a fully automatic 12 ga capable of holding (if I remember correctly), 12 rounds, OR a fully automatic, clip-fed 30 caliber machine gun with at least 30 rounds of ammo in a clip. These choices clearly have some "challenges", but they illustrate a point.



However, the REALITY is that biologists and other professionals required to work in "bear country" are ALWAYS required to provide their own protection. In that case, my first choice of weapon is the 44 Rem Mag in a Desert Eagle, or AutoMag. Cost, availability and weight are negatives with this choice, but I don't want to consider anything but utility at the moment. A very close second would be a .44 Rem Mag in any revolver. I would choose the revolver first, if I had ANY doubt about the absolute certainty of operation of either of the semi-autos. Many are advised or ordered (by the USF&WS) to use 12 gauge pump guns for personal protection. A fine choice as long as you keep it on you and handy. Trouble is, you CAN NOT keep a long gun on your person and do much of anything requiring your hands or whole-body movements such as fishing or data collection. As a result, people put their shotguns down – and then they walk away from them. It is a poor choice of protection firearm that requires or leads you to remove it from your person. There are now several new big bore revolvers available such as those chambered for the .45-70 and other .45 caliber "rifle" cartridges. Personally, I would not choose those with only 5 rounds in the cylinder. From what I understand, there are a couple that have 6-round cylinders. I have used a .44 Rem Mag on brown bears more than once, and I have seen first hand what it can do. I am satisfied that a "more powerful" cartridge is not necessary. Bigger around is always welcome though.



So... if you're inclined to lever guns, and you wanna get "up close and personal" when you hunt brown bears, this Winchester Timber may be the one for you. As for me, I'll stick with a bolt gun and a revolver on my hip. The Timber is shore purty, but generally, I don't care for muzzle brakes, and especially those that cannot be removed. If I understand correctly, Marlin has quit making their Guide Guns with ported barrels because there were so many complaints. I wouldn't have this (or any) arm with a ported bbl. If I couldn't shoot it without having to have it ported, I wouldn't have it.



Paul

[wildbillhickok]

...one of the big reasons the "ported" guns weren't doing well, was the sound....it REALLY
booms!!  LOUD!  i mean LOUD!!! .... think, you'd HAVE to wear some serious ear protection...and do you want to not be able to hear too well, while walking around in bear country (or any other kind of hunt)??  Something you're hunting could walk right behind you almost, and you'd never hear it...or a grizz could sneak right up on you, and you wouldn't know it until it hit you... i'd bought one too, and at first the big flashy burst from the ports was cool....at the range (and it does help recoil), but the more i thought about it, the less i wanted to have the port due to the loudness and having to wear serious ear protection...so i sold my ported Marlin guide gun.

[Vacant]

That is quite the looker Jay, though I prefer the older style stocks and the standard sights.
 
My mossberg 12 guage is ported. Compared to my dads unported 12, it has less muzzle rise, hence the reason for the ports.
 
Gitano sure threw down in his post. Though I have to agree. My Ruger Redhawk .44 is what I carry in bear country
 
Randy

[Jay Edward (deceased)]

If I am not hunting, but accompanying someone hunting, and acting as "backup" then I would consider a lever gun, and the above Timber model would certainly fill the bill. I suppose, I might be more inclined to a .444 Marlin or a .45-70. From what I read, the .450 Marlin is a smaller cartridge than the .45-70. "Although the external upper body dimensions of the 450 match the 45-70 Gov, given the heavier brass of its 375 H&H roots the case capacity of the 450 is approx 3+ grs less than the 45-70: 73.8gr (of water, full case, 53.2gr, with a bullet seated .500", vs, 77.0 and 56.2gr, respectively). The 450 Marlin is the smallest .458" commercial rifle cartridge introduced in the last 100+ years, yet it fills an important niche." And, "In a real world comparison, the 450 is a lesser cartridge than a modern load (Marlin1895) 45/70, and by as much as 500 fp's. Although the two cartridges, if chambered in same barrel length firearms, will show the Marlin generating 1-2% less muzzle energy;" from http://www.gmdr.com/lever/450mtext.htm  [/QUOTE[/size][/url]]

Hmmm....I thought the point was that the lever rifle that is chambered for this cartridge could withstand higher pressures (and velocities) and therefore made available a factory cartridge that mimiced to some extent the .45-70 in proportion (i.e. standard lever action length) but would not fit into older lever actions.

Certainly the bolt action .45-70s (especially designed to enclose the case head) could be made to almost duplicate .458 Win Mag ballistics but it would be a handloading proposition that effectively eliminates litigation with ammunition manufacturers.

My personal conclusion is that I would purchase the rifle in a heart beat if the following design changes were implemented:

1) Lengthen the barrel to 22".
2) Eliminate the 'ports'.
3) Offer the rifle in .45-70 Government.
4) Reinstitute the 'factory' style buckhorn sights.
5) Factory drill and tap for Lyman receiver type sight.
6) Leave the 'half magazine' magazine.

[gitano]

My personal conclusion is that I would purchase the rifle in a heart beat if the following design changes were implemented:
 
1) Lengthen the barrel to 22".
2) Eliminate the 'ports'.
3) Offer the rifle in .45-70 Government.
4) Reinstitute the 'factory' style buckhorn sights.
5) Factory drill and tap for Lyman receiver type sight.
6) Leave the 'half magazine' magazine.

Laughing out loud!:D
 
Paul [/size]

[Whitetail_hunter]

Looks like a nice rifle. I've got the 450 Marlin 1895M guide gun and so far I like the round. The noise hasn't been much of a factor, when I'm at the range I have my ear protection on and when I'm hunting I don't seem to notice the noise. The recoil is a little ruff but its managable. My only complaint is lack of optins when it comes to ammo. I am not a reloader so I'm stuck with the hornadys. They are a good round I just like to have other optins. IF you are a reloader your set though.
 
I shot a whitetail with it last weekend and  it did a wonderfull job. I know its a little big for that but it really did a nice job.