H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619

Prisons go back at least to ancient Egypt. Joseph was held in prison for more than a few years when he was there. That was around 1850 BC, give or take a decade or two.

Actually, Lassiter is making me one in .44 Special. (Which is what I wanted.) I asked him about the Magnum cartridge, mostly for speculative reasons, and he felt the Lightning action could not handle the pressures. I only truly became interested when I saw Pedersoli was making one.

If, and this is a big if, I obtain one of those Pedersoli .44 Magnums, the following changes will be made to it by me. 1. Barrel threads will be cut off. 2. Sights will be replaced with conventional blade front and rear buckhorn. 3. Magazine tube will be extended to length of the barrel. 4. Tang safety will be "filled in" like the tang safety on the Japanese Winchesters. 5 Receiver will be refinished to be blued, or maybe case hardened. 6. Can't really do anything about the buttstock, but if I can, I'll replace the buttpad with some sort of a buttplate. 7. Front grip will be replaced with a conventional one. That's a lot of customization to do to a new gun, but well, I'd really like to have a Lightning in .44 Magnum. But that's also why I call this a big IF. I'll have to save up a lot of spare change to do all of this. Maybe by the time I do, Pedersoli will be marketing a more conventionally configured one. Time will tell. Oh yeah, once I make all the changes, I'll take a photo of the gun and send it to Pedersoli, suggesting that they make one in that configuration. Well, maybe not.

I don't believe such a website exists. There are also many gaps in the records at Cody as well. For example, they have no record for my 39A. Their records for those are limited to much later production ones. Why there are so many gaps in the Marlin record, I do not know.

Except for number 1 and that last gun made of a particular model, all guns have 2 consecutive numbers to their own. FINDING at random a consecutive pair would be remarkably rare. Ordering a consecutive pair is a clever gimmick by the gun makers to squeeze a few extra bucks out of the purchase price that is really not justified. About the only way I think consecutive numbers truly matter is if you bought a pair of highly customized ones and asked to have consecutive numbers for "reasons." For example, if I bought a pair of custom Colts that were identical in every way in their customizations, except that one was blued and the other nickeled, (Or lets go crazy, one is gold and the other is silver) having consecutive number would be "neat."

Okay, you want piccies? Here's some piccies! This is what it looks like on the right hand side, as I got it. And here's the left hand side. And a close up of the scope... I find it curious that whoever put the scope on, side mounted it like you would do to a top eject Winchester. Now, I know that one of the "selling points" of the Marlin and its side eject is that it is easier to mount a scope on them.. That's fine. But, silly me, I don't think lever guns should have scopes on them. So... The scope is gone. I think it looks better. I have already checked and have replacement sights on order from Numrich. Buckhorn rear, and a more traditional blade front. I've never been a fan of these ramp sights on lever guns. And from the left. It just looks better this way. Close up of the reciever... In my opinion, they gummed it up good to put the scope on, but let that go. I guess I'll have to find some flush mounted screws to stick in those holes. But still, overall, I think I'be got a fine rifle. That chunk missing from the stock gives it some character, and overall, in spite of some flaws, I think the finish is still pretty good. I think I've done well.

Oh, that would be nice. Especially if they can do .45-70. The .45-85-285 used the same case, but the rifling was designed for lighter faster bullets. And, a 405 grain bullet makes the cartridge just a smidge too long to fit though the loading gate. Switching to 300 grainers will let it fit, and the bullet is light enough to go fast enough to be very accurate.

The Scope is actually side mounted for some reason. I plan to take before and after photos.

Found a very nice Marlin 39-A at my LGS today, $600, with a very nice scope. (The scope I will remove, but keep.) Overall, it's in really nice shape, most of the finish is still there. According to the dealer, it was made in 1946. I'll get a letter to confirm soon enough. I figure I got it for a pretty good price, considering that I usually see these going from 800 to over 2000 depending on condition. It's raining today, so I can't post a pic. It also has sling swivels, no sling, but I do not know if they are original or after market.

Generically, bottleneck cartridges feed better in just about any rifle in common use our game than a straight case will. That being said, my number 1 Lightning is a .45 Colt. Where the .44-40 really shows it's superiority, if you will, is in how the case seals the chamber and prevents blowback. All of the "crud" goes into the barrel, not the action.

Hey, everybody. This is a question directed at those of us who shoot a Lightning. I was pondering my small collection of them and I've got what are probably the "usual suspects" for calibers. .22 Long, .32-20, .44-40 (x2) .45 Colt and .45-285. I will soon also have a custom modified one in .44 Special. Pedersoli is now marketing a heavily modified version in .44 Magnum. I don't have a .38-40, but they do exist. But, just this evening, a thought occurred to me about other calibers that I think it'd be fun to have one in, and the cartridge that came to mind was .25-20. For some reason, I've kinda wanted a rifle in this caliber for a while for some reason, but I really didn't think getting another 92 or 73 was "worth it" to me. (Sure, if I found one for a good price, I'd go for it, but how likely is that?) Anyway, Colt never made the Lightning for the .25-20, and none of the replica makers do, but, at least theoretically, all it would take is a barrel swap on one chambered in .32-20, and I'd be in business. I'd guess, you'd wanna go with a 20" round barrel to keep the weight down. Now, while it is true that I don't own any guns in this caliber, a friend of mine has an old 92 in it, and it is a very pleasant cartridge to shoot, and in his 92, it was REALLY accurate. So anyway, to my fellow Lightning shooters, I have 2 questions. 1. If you could somehow obtain one, would you want one in .25-20. 2. What other calibers might you be interested in adding to the collection. (I assume that most Lightning shooters can't stop with just one...)

Related question... What exactly IS 218 Bee? Is it .25-20 necked down to .22 caliber, or something else entirely?

Great minds think alike. As I was opening the thread to see if there were any new comments, I found myself thinking I should have called it sub models. Lo and behold. Griff has done just that. I think I will change the name of the thread...

Heh, this is getting more and more complicated! So... We now know the following... Based on 94: The 55 and 64. Based on the 92: The 53 and the 65. Based on the 86, the 71. You know, I have always wondered why they gave these things new model designations. I mean, except for the 71, you could get all of the parent guns in same physical configuration and calibers. (Except for the .218 Bee, I think.)

It will have to come off!

This is what I did. 5.0 grains of Trail Boss behind a 350 grain bullet wound up working very well in my 1865 original. No recoil to speak of. I also seem to remember seeing this load listed in a Spencer forum somewhere, but don't remember exactly where.

Really simple.... The Winchester 55 was a variation of the Winchester 94 The Winchester 65 was a variation of the Winchester 92 The Winchester 71 was a variation of the Winchester 86. All of these variations had half magazines. The 55 was in the same calibers as the 94, the 65 was in 25-20, 32-20 and 218 Bee. the 71 was chambered for .348 Winchester. (I think.) And that's about all I know about these rifles. Were they really just half magazines of their "parent" rifles, or were there other variations? Every 65 and 71 I've seen has a pistol grip stock and curved lever, but this seems to have only been an option on the 55. Anyone who can offer more information will receive gratitude.

https://www.ruhterauction.com/listings/auctions/1551-stan-streff-firearm-collection-online-auction

I have never dunk cleaned a gun. But, as I alluded to before, with an AWA Lighting in .45 Colt, Gunscrubber is your best friend. Put the straw against the bolt face centered on the firing pin and squire away. Much crud will be flushed out, but it it will eventually squirt clean. If you are having other troubles, use that straw to flush out the whole action. Then wipe it all down with Hoppes #9, and apply gun oil to all moving parts. Keeps it running great. Your hammer hesitating to fall suggests to me a build up of crud, but I could be wrong, but something is clearly not right. If flushing it out and lubing it up does not make the problem go away, a more detailed disassembly and lubrication may be needed. I've never felt the need to do that, but this is what your description is making me think about. For the record, I have found the AWA's to be excellent guns. Others will tell you to avoid them. It either comes down to luck of the draw, or perhaps, when they were made, with the later ones doing better than the early ones. There will be a lot of blowback with the 45, leading to a very dirty action. .44-40's thanks to the nature of the design of the brass, tend to stay MUCH cleaner, with practically no blowback and the only place any crud goes is into the bore. My AWA .45 started my "love affair" with the Lightning, and I'll never regret going down the road. I get a lot of good natured ribbing, but anyone who has ever seen me shoot will tall me that, overall as mediocre at best that I am, I run the Lightning well. Good luck, and if you have any specific questions, feel free to ask. I am no expert, but I will happily offer what experience with shooting the guns that I can.

Or, send them to Lassiter and have him work his magic.

Dang! For that price, I'd buy one. Maybe 2! Sadly, not legal for sale in Massachusetts.

Well, my preferred barrel length is 30", so it would not really affect me. I do have an 18.5", 19" and a couple of 20" guns that I take out from time to time for variation, but I tend to miss more with them than I do the long barrels. That being said, I'd love to have a gun like Mississippi's in El Dorado, just for the fun of it, without needed to jump through NFA '34 hoops. THAT being said, I thought the so called SHORT act was going to unregulated short barrel rifles, but left shotguns alone. Was I incorrect?

Using Cimarron terms, the Model P is a full size SAA copy. The Model P Jr. is a smaller version of the SAA. Their Lightning is smaller frame SAA but with the birds head grips like on the original Colt Lightnings. They sorta wanted to imply that their Lightning was a SA only version of the original Colt, but it's really not.

Yeah, if I do start collecting Marlins, assuming I can find the calibers I want, (and the prices are not too out of my wallet's range) I'll go with older, pre-safety Marlins. Just like I go with vintage Winchesters when I can.

Hmm... Good question. I never really watched it. Are you suggesting that the mag spring might be weak?