Have you ever seen such poor rifling?

[Sbarton]

Marlin 94, 44 mag. Made in 1983, jm stamp, micro groove.
Looks like it was cut with a back hoe!
What'd y'all think? Any ideas?
It shoots as bad as it looks too!
Cast lead bullets go all over the place, jacketed kinda group, more like a shotgun pattern though.

Read More

 

[Member 34319]

My Taurus looks worse!

That is a lot of chatter, but the lands looks pretty decent. Surprised it groups so badly. Sure it isn't just copper fouling?

 

[s1xty7]

Wow! That's terrible! It hurts me to know a fellow firearms enthusiast is burdened with such a machine. I'd like to do my part to help. If you send me the rifle, I'll make sure it never bothers you again.

On a more serious note, that's unfortunate. I wonder if a smith could do something like sleeve the barrel or re-barrel it from one that turns up with a damaged receiver or use a blank barrel and fit it to the rifle. Once Ruger finishes spinning up Marlin production, I wonder if they'd be willing to help you out.

Best of luck!

 

[Ura-Ki]

Get your self some of the Tubbs 2000 fire lapping bullets, start with the rough grit and shoot your way through to the fine, should tighten it right up for ya!

 

[Sbarton]

There's a bit of copper in there, but there was also a bunch of lead, the bore slugged at .431, so it leads up pretty badly, gotta find some bigger bullets.

Trust me, you don't want it!
I may see if i can get a new barrel from ruger, but that's a big question mark right now. I don't think it can be sleeved, it's pretty thin at the muzzle, but i may check around with some gunsmiths, see what they say.

 

[Sbarton]

Get your self some of the Tubbs 2000 fire lapping bullets, start with the rough grit and shoot your way through to the fine, should tighten it right up for ya!

I thought about that, never had to do it before.
Maybe I'll give that a shot.
One thing I do know, it probably couldn't hurt the accuracy. This thing throws bullets everywhere, I wouldn't want to stand next to someone shooting it!

 

[po18guy]

JB Bore Bright is also a time-honored classic in cleaning up rough bores.

BROWNELLS J-B® BORE BRIGHT | Brownells

A micro-fine bore cleaning and finishing compound that works as both a cleaner and a final polish to help keep barrels free of fouling and shooting their absolute best. Regular use gives your barrel a mirror-like finish that helps prevent the buil...

www.brownells.com

 

[Certaindeaf]

Regular cast slugs should be .430 and very often are bigger if unsized.
Powder coating will make them fatter still.. shoot for .432 at least and it'll probably group fine.
A little JB bore polishing compound wouldn't hurt either. Mind the crown and make sure it's not damaged currently.

 

[CLT65]

Yes, I've seen rifling like that, on a similar vintage Marlin .44 mag. What's worse is the roll stamp on the side of the barrel. You can see dents through to the inside of the bore from the stamps.

I had the same problem with accuracy (or lack thereof). I ended up sizing my cast bullets about .4315", a compromise that also works well in my revolvers, as any bigger didn't seem to make much difference in my rifle. I also found that the magazine tube was binding badly on the barrel and receiver. I relieved that binding and it did make a difference.

It still shoots mediocre with plain base cast bullets. It does much better with gas-check cast, as well as jacketed bullets. It's still no target rifle, but it's at least acceptable now.

 

[Sbarton]

Yes, I've seen rifling like that, on a similar vintage Marlin .44 mag. What's worse is the roll stamp on the side of the barrel. You can see dents through to the inside of the bore from the stamps.

I had the same problem with accuracy (or lack thereof). I ended up sizing my cast bullets about .4315", a compromise that also works well in my revolvers, as any bigger didn't seem to make much difference in my rifle. I also found that the magazine tube was binding badly on the barrel and receiver. I relieved that binding and it did make a difference.

It still shoots mediocre with plain base cast bullets. It does much better with gas-check cast, as well as jacketed bullets. It's still no target rifle, but it's at least acceptable now.

Mine, like yours, also has tight spots. I'm looking at lapping the thing. Tubs doesn't sell a .44 cal, but I do have plenty dead soft lead, I'll probably lap it by hand.
I'm sorry to hear yours still doesn't shoot well, I think there's a couple things with these .44 marlins that lead to poor accuracy, besides the chatter marks.
Frankly, if I'd have known what a dog this rig would be, I'd have bought a henry instead. The rifling pitch on their new .44 barrels is 1-20, instead of marlin's 1-38.

Thanks everyone for the recommendations, all good information.

 

[gmerkt]

I've seen some crappy barrels in handguns made in the past 15 or 20 years. You've got to look at Colt factory barrels very carefully before buying. Also Smith & Wesson revolvers, if you can find one these days. After reading about frequent turnover of $12 an hour employees in gun factories, it shouldn't be surprising. But you pay good money for a quality arm such as a Colt or Smith, you expect better.

The Marlin barrel shown in the OP, not often seen in the 1980's in my limited observation. If anyone at the factory was aware of it, maybe they thought nobody would notice in a Microgroove barrel.

 

[CLT65]

Mine, like yours, also has tight spots. I'm looking at lapping the thing. Tubs doesn't sell a .44 cal, but I do have plenty dead soft lead, I'll probably lap it by hand.
I'm sorry to hear yours still doesn't shoot well, I think there's a couple things with these .44 marlins that lead to poor accuracy, besides the chatter marks.
Frankly, if I'd have known what a dog this rig would be, I'd have bought a henry instead. The rifling pitch on their new .44 barrels is 1-20, instead of marlin's 1-38.

Thanks everyone for the recommendations, all good information.

I probably could have worded my post better. Mine actually shoots pretty decent now with gas check or jacketed bullets, just not as good with plain base. I powder coat too, no leading at all. It's just not a target rifle.

Average accuracy with my favorite load for it, a powder coated 429244, over a full load of H110, was IIRC around 2.5" or 3" at 100 yards. I would get some nice 2" groups, then a flyer that would open it up to 3.5" occasionally. I figure that's decent for what it is. The biggest accuracy improvement came from relieving the mag tube binding.

I've often heard of guys with their tack driving 1moa lever rifles and am seriously impressed by those that can do it, but mine sure won't.

 

[po18guy]

Yes, I've seen rifling like that, on a similar vintage Marlin .44 mag. What's worse is the roll stamp on the side of the barrel. You can see dents through to the inside of the bore from the stamps.

I have a 444 from about 1978 that was one of the first after Marlin switched from dovetailed front sights to screwed-on sights. They drilled the holes too deep, causing two slight bulges into the bore. Sent it back and they screwed on a new barrel N/C. But that was then, two owners ago.

 

[OldBroad44]

Marlin 94, 44 mag. Made in 1983, jm stamp, micro groove.
Looks like it was cut with a back hoe!
What'd y'all think? Any ideas?
It shoots as bad as it looks too!
Cast lead bullets go all over the place, jacketed kinda group, more like a shotgun pattern though.


View attachment 1042670View attachment 1042668 View attachment 1042669View attachment 1042672View attachment 1042671

No. Never seen anything like that. I didn't even know rifling could be that bad.

 

[Stomper]

Wow! That's terrible! It hurts me to know a fellow firearms enthusiast is burdened with such a machine. I'd like to do my part to help. If you send me the rifle, I'll make sure it never bothers you again.

On a more serious note, that's unfortunate. I wonder if a smith could do something like sleeve the barrel or re-barrel it from one that turns up with a damaged receiver or use a blank barrel and fit it to the rifle. Once Ruger finishes spinning up Marlin production, I wonder if they'd be willing to help you out.

Best of luck!

Yeah, Ruger might help….. they wouldn't want their newly acquired Marlin line to compete with their Mini-14/30 rifles for shooting around corners and such…..

 

[Foreverlost]

Marlin 94, 44 mag. Made in 1983, jm stamp, micro groove.
Looks like it was cut with a back hoe!
What'd y'all think? Any ideas?
It shoots as bad as it looks too!
Cast lead bullets go all over the place, jacketed kinda group, more like a shotgun pattern though.


View attachment 1042670View attachment 1042668 View attachment 1042669View attachment 1042672View attachment 1042671

This was typical for Marlin levers of that time period! A Marlin employee posted an excellent writeup on another forum years ago detailing the steps needed to product a functional barrel. Marlin skipped some of those steps to reduce cost.

What you see here is the results of only drilling the barrel, the next step of removing the ruff cuts did not happen. Most likely even the next step of stress relief was not done! After that one and only first drilling the barrel was button rifled.

If the owner of that Marlin had pushed a very tight patch through the barrel, the owner also would of noticed loose & tight spots in the bore as the tight patch moved through the barrel. Without stress relief of the barrel, metal tends to move back from where it was before the button rifling step.

With that said; If the barrel ain't right - nuth'in is right. In this case it is hard to make a silk purse from a sow's ear. Best outcome is to hand lap the bore very slowly. Attempt to even out the loose & tight spots. Pay very close to the bore diameter by using a micrometer and check the lead lap's diameter.

The loose & tights spots will be located where the sights are attached, roll markings, dove tail cuts, and surprisingly where the barrel is screwed into the receiver. Don't ask me how I know.

Foreverlost,

 

[RVTECH]

Yeah, Ruger might help

Heck yea - give 'em a try as ask them - but don't get POd if they refuse. Typically a manufacturer's warranty ends with THAT particular Mfg. but ya never know - never hurts to ask.

I have seen a barrel this bad but its not a fair comparison as it was a CVA .45 ML rifle barrel on my first kit built ML I had. Although it looked like yours (and maybe a touch worse) it shot very well.

Frankly, if I'd have known what a dog this rig would be, I'd have bought a henry instead.

That might have been a better option but Henrys have had their share of problems as well - including some pretty bad bores as well but at least you would be assured of it being taken care of.

FWIW If you do ever decide on a Henry give it a very thorough inspection prior to buying - as should be done with any gun purchase.

I gave my Henry about 45 Minutes prior to buying only because of the issues I had read about.

 

[Sbarton]

Yeah, Ruger might help….. they wouldn't want their newly acquired Marlin line to compete with their Mini-14/30 rifles for shooting around corners and such…..

Maybe I should give them a call. If they keep the threads the same, should be an easy barrel swap.

 

[CLT65]

Some years ago I contacted Marlin about mine due to the ugly roll stamp dents into the bore. I don't remember exactly what they said, but it was a no-go, not a chance. I posted about it to on a different forum somewhere as I recall. There was even a guy who had a spare take-off barrel laying around that he sold me cheap, but the roll marks in it were just as bad so I never put it on.

For me it was a case of diminishing returns. I tinkered with it and got it shooting well enough for my purposes. I could have gone all out and put a lot of time, effort, and money into it at really made it right, but for my practical purposes it wouldn't have mattered. For precision shooting I have other rifles. For an open-sight lever gun with limited range like the 44 mag, 2-3moa was plenty good enough for me, especially since I'd typically shoot it without a scope and offhand. That, and the fact that it almost never leaves the safe. I have rifles back in there that haven't been shot in many years, and realistically I may never shoot again. As I get older I'm really starting to wonder why I still have them.

 

[Sbarton]

This was typical for Marlin levers of that time period! A Marlin employee posted an excellent writeup on another forum years ago detailing the steps needed to product a functional barrel. Marlin skipped some of those steps to reduce cost.

What you see here is the results of only drilling the barrel, the next step of removing the ruff cuts did not happen. Most likely even the next step of stress relief was not done! After that one and only first drilling the barrel was button rifled.

If the owner of that Marlin had pushed a very tight patch through the barrel, the owner also would of noticed loose & tight spots in the bore as the tight patch moved through the barrel. Without stress relief of the barrel, metal tends to move back from where it was before the button rifling step.

With that said; If the barrel ain't right - nuth'in is right. In this case it is hard to make a silk purse from a sow's ear. Best outcome is to hand lap the bore very slowly. Attempt to even out the loose & tight spots. Pay very close to the bore diameter by using a micrometer and check the lead lap's diameter.

The loose & tights spots will be located where the sights are attached, roll markings, dove tail cuts, and surprisingly where the barrel is screwed into the receiver. Don't ask me how I know.

Foreverlost,

Interesting. You hear all the time, "just buy a jm stamped marlin".
But what you say makes sense, the story by the old employee jives with what I'm seeing here.
I will try hand lapping it before I do anything else. I've never don't that before, but I understand the principle, and I believe I'm aware of the pitfalls associated with the procedure.
I don't want to mothball this rifle, but I also don't want to sell it to another unsuspecting shooter, unless it someone I just don't like!