I would be interested to hear if you have actually handled one of the 1894 Remilns made in the last 2 years. Everything I have seen says they fixed the problems. From what I read Remington bought Marlin in January of 2008. The 1894 and other Marlins continued to be made by the same guys in the same factory for the next 2 years. Problems began later in 2009 when those guys found out they would have to move to New York and make much less money, or lose there jobs. After Remington started making the rifles in New York in 2010 without the Marlin experts on old wore out machines, junk started coming out daily. When Remington figured out this wasn't working, they completely retooled. The new rifles all have Ballard rifling, not microgroove, and yes they are "Remlins". In fact Remington saved the 1894 from never being produced again. Now if they can work out there own bankruptcy... I have 3 Remington firearms and am very fond of all of them. Remington has been making firearms longer than anyone else, so I think they do know a little bit about firearms. My 1894 cowboy was made in 2008 and is JM stamped. Maybe it is not the quality of a Henry, I don't know. But after taking 14 or 15 deer and a coyote, I have no complaints, and would love another. Like I said, the Henry is a great rifle, I just hate the way you load them. I would never buy a .22 when I was a kid that was tube fed for the same reason. But that is just me.
I haven't handled the newer ones yet. I really want a Cowboy 45-50. Hopefully I will run across one. I know 6-7 years ago they were terrible. I looked at 5 before I bought my Henry. Actions were tight and gritty. 2 had canted front sights. The receiver to stock fit looked like it was done with a pocket knife.
I have heard that they have upped there game in the last few years.