The only advantage a Marlin has, is that it's easier to remove the bolt for cleaning. Marlins are NOT any stronger than Winchesters, some people seem to believe this because the Marlin has a closed top reciever, and the Winchesters an open topped design. This is utter nonsense, and some of these people should know better, but since they already have Marlins, swallow this nonsense whole. Everybody believes the gun they have is the "best". I collected lever-actions for many years, and have had many of both Marlins and Winchesters. I regularly correspond with lever-action collecters and accumulators. Show me a Marlin made in the last 50 years that has any collector value. We already know that such Winchesters exist, both in commoratives, and even lowly standard production models. I've seen more defective Marlins in the last 20 years, than defective Winchesters. Some Marlin 45-70s have to go to the gunsmith new, for repairs before firing moderately heavy loads because the lever blows open when such loads are fired. Their barrel quality has gotten better lately, but for the longest time, their bore diameters varied wildly. The POS Microgroove barrels are/were the biggest offenders in this area. I've seen chamber cut crooked, heavy (really heavy) reamer chatter marks in the chamber, and a host of other maladies. Neither Marlin nor Winchester rifles are perfect, I've owned both, and will continue to buy both. Marlin has one big advantage, they cater to limited production guns for the cowboy shooters, this has been a very valuable niche market for them, and they are to be commended for recognizing this market and responding so well. Winchester hasn't really applied themselves in this area at all, and now they're paying the price. And there hasn't been much available in '94s lately, outside of the vanilla models. That's what happens when you let a bunch of Europeans run an American gun company. Just like S&W discovered.