Why didn't Marlin replace Winchester? In 1881 they had a levergat that could handle .45-70, .40-60, and other big-bores. Winchester (aside from the basically failed 1876) wouldn't have anything similar until 1886. Marlin had mid-caliber (.38-55, .32-40) lever guns in the early 1890s, before the Winchester 1894. The 1890s Marlins were also more sealed up than Wichesters, with a solid top receiver. Was Winchester running on name recognition?

>>57985412 (OP)

Well obviously it was a commercial flop for some reason or another, considering it's less know about than the Colt-Burgess.

Looks ugly.

Gay opinion.

It's not that unknown, they made more than 20,000 of them, I see them at auction frequently. I don't know the real reason but I'm guessing it was because Winchester was the much larger company so they had more marketing clout. Even if the Marlin was the better gun Winchesters are going to outsell them if Winchester can get them in more shops. It's a bit like the revolvers, Merwin &amp; Hulberts were arguably technically better than Colt and S&amp;W but fewer were made and they are nowhere near as well known today.

>Merwin-Hulbert repros never

Feels bad, man.

The only saving grace about M&amp;H's is that they are a lot less popular with collectors compared to Colts, so antiques aren't all that expensive. If someone wants to get into collecting old west handguns they are more accessible than most.

>>57985412 (OP)

>basically failed 1876

I dunno if I would call the '76 failed, it wasn't as popular, but it sold and stayed in production for quite a while. More powerful guns usually aren't the most popular, it's as simple as that. AR15s are far more popular than AR10/SR25s. .308 Nato is more popular than 300WM etc.

The '76 was an attempt to bulk up the '73 to handle .45-70 because of an Army trial for a repeating carbine. The '76 worked, just not elegantly. It was definitely the upper limit of the toggle lock, and there's a reason the '86 was Winchester's answer to Marlin.

How come nobody bothered just making a thumb cocked single action eight shot revolving cylinder rifle? Can't really understand how they had all the pieces to do this in 1870 but finicky lever actions in goofy calibers were preferable

Revolving rifles aren't really all that great. Cylinder gap, generally restricted to weaker calibers. Colt tried, but they were always a niche option.

The 1855 Colt Root (sidehammer) revolver was made in rifles and shotguns as well as handguns. Capacity varied depending on the caliber, they ranged from 6 shots in .36 or .44 to 5-shots in .56 cal rifle or 10ga shotgun.

>>57985412 (OP)

JMB (PBUH)

Because marlins were a lot more expensive than winchesters

>>57985412 (OP)

The civil war was over and there was more need for the reconstruction than there were for new guns, especially since the military surplus from the cold war production from both sides were still fairly fresh. By the time the economy was better off, the transition towards spitzer bullets and bolt actions was already beginning.
