- Messages
- 7,138
- Likes
- 30,269
I own neither 1. nor 2.
#fail
I always try to stay out of the brand debates on firearms. All of them have their merits, strengths and weaknesses. With that said ... I've owned S&W revolvers before, and the Model 686 SSR in .357 was a joy to shoot. Accurate AF, too. I always said if a bad guy had a knife to my daughter's throat and I had to pick one weapon to use to stop that threat, that was the one. Wound up selling it to a very good friend who was completely weaponless when the BLM stuff was percolating a few summers ago. He remains grateful to me on that deal, and someday I'll grab another one to like it have an pass on to the descendants. Or a Ruger in .357. Those dang GP-100s are built like tanks, definitely a forever gun.I'd like a .357 and I want a HENRY or a MARLIN level action rifle.
IF you're considering a Marlin, Ruger purchased the name and equipment a few years ago when the Remington group went tits up. They've only released two rifles so far, both stainless steel and in 45-70 Government. Initial reviews on those two models are phenomenally positive - Ruger got it right - but that's a whole lotta rifle for where you live, amigo. If you're looking at used Marlins, try to find a "JM" stamped one. They're from the era BEFORE Remington bought Marlin, and are considered their best era.
I've got a couple of Henry's, but in the X series vs. their traditional brass and walnut stock guns. I figured they'd be out there getting banged up a little, not sitting in a gun case for show, so I went that route. The .357 is shown below (and currently residing in your new home state at my daughter's house). The .44 is identical, though it currently lacks the scope and picatinny rail scope mount kit. Thinking about just sticking with iron sights on that one ...