Mojave Lever Crew - Roll Call!

[RAMCLAP]

I thought the same thing splithoof. We'll see.

MLC

Nah.

[golfish]

I thought the same thing splithoof. We'll see.

MLC

Kind of reminds me of south east Utah.....

Kind of like what we do Tom, it's best not to give the location...except The Mojave

[pennstater]

Kind of reminds me of south east Utah.....

Kind of like what we do Tom, it's best not to give the location...except The Mojave

This is true.

MLC

[1859sharps]

update to marline's web site, including the announcement that select models of the 1895 are now shipping.

https://www.marlinfirearms.com/

[bergmen]

update to marline's web site, including the announcement that select models of the 1895 are now shipping.

https://www.marlinfirearms.com/

If this is true, it appears that the 39A is history (not shown on this website).

Dan

[Killer Bee]

If this is true, it appears that the 39A is history (not shown on this website).

Dan

it's all history in my eyes - ya'll can have the repops from whatever company buys the rights but they'll never be the same

[1859sharps]

If this is true, it appears that the 39A is history (not shown on this website).

Dan

the "press release" is from 12-20-2021. I guess the only way to know for sure is to wait and see if rifles show up in the usual places for sale.

it's all history in my eyes - ya'll can have the repops from whatever company buys the rights but they'll never be the same

From what I am reading around the net, while the JM era of Marline was known for it's quality over all, it wasn't nearly as perfect as the legend growing around that period of Marlin history would have people believe.

The Remington era should not have been as bad as it was. There is actually zero reason Remington couldn't have built just as good if not better rifles than the JM era.

Likewise, Ruger is perfectly capable of building rifles as good if not better than the JM era of Marlin. I suspect they will given their history and reputation. The only concern I have is...will they move the product line to a cast receiver or keep it a forged receiver.

Marlin is basically starting over, almost from scratch, not 100% from scratch, but close in a lot of ways. It will take some time to get back up to speed. It isn't reasonable to expect a full catalog of all the rifles we are used to seeing from Marlin right out of the gate, and to provide the best quality possible they should take their time. Getting it right the "first time" is going to be critical for consumer acceptance of the "new" Marlin and you can't do that if you spread your self too thin trying to bring back the full catalog right out of the gate.

[200Apples]

The Marlin 39A was a hand-assembled rifle, with some parts hand-fitted. Unless or until Ruger might replicate some of these pieces, perhaps with MIM, then, we won't see any 39s.

From what I am reading around the net, while the JM era of Marline was known for it's quality over all, it wasn't nearly as perfect as the legend growing around that period of Marlin history would have people believe.

The Remington era should not have been as bad as it was. There is actually zero reason Remington couldn't have built just as good if not better rifles than the JM era.

Remington inherited with their acquisition of Marlin mostly worn-out machine tooling, and the craftsmen that could tweak the machines with the right touch of experience were shown the door.

There was no one who knew very much about how Marlin had been run on the factory floor. Of course it was bad, and there was little chance to make anything decent with worn machinery and unskilled hands.

Remington DID however invest in new machinery and had started to turn the corner when their bankruptcy was called. Ruger brought much of this equipment to their own premises; truckload after truckload of it, so they're not exactly starting from scratch.

[pennstater]

The Marlin 39A was a hand-assembled rifle, with some parts hand-fitted. Unless or until Ruger might replicate some of these pieces, perhaps with MIM, then, we won't see any 39s.






Remington inherited with their acquisition of Marlin mostly worn-out machine tooling, and the craftsmen that could tweak the machines with the right touch of experience were shown the door.

There was no one who knew very much about how Marlin had been run on the factory floor. Of course it was bad, and there was little chance to make anything decent with worn machinery and unskilled hands.

Remington DID however invest in new machinery and had started to turn the corner when their bankruptcy was called. Ruger brought much of this equipment to their own premises; truckload after truckload of it, so they're not exactly starting from scratch.

Again, spot on Chris. Lets give Ruger some time to adjust to what the buyers/market is looking for. This isn't going to be a overnight process.
What Marlin once was and what Ruger is attempting is going to take time.

MLC

[bergmen]

The Marlin 39A was a hand-assembled rifle, with some parts hand-fitted. Unless or until Ruger might replicate some of these pieces, perhaps with MIM, then, we won't see any 39s.

This would be the PERFECT opportunity for Ruger to downsize the 336 action to the same size as the 39A. Modern design with a round bolt and CNC machineable with minimum (if any) hand fitting.

They could treat this in the same manner as the transition from the model 36 (square bolt) to the 336 (round bolt) in 1948. Stay with hardened forged steel construction and make this a legendary .22 lever action rifle.

Dan

[200Apples]

Again, spot on Chris.

Thanks, Tom, but that's only my perspective gleaned from posts both here on CGN and from the Marlin Owners forum (which I do not visit much and for no particular reason)... I am not an authority.

I respect very much everything 1859sharps posts and it felt odd to reply in contrary. Again, it is only my perspective on the subject. Too, I do own Marlin made over a broad range of manufacture dates... 1951 (39A), 1968 (336 Texan SR Carbine), 1989 (1894CS357), 2005 (1894FG), 2007 (1895GS) and 2018 (1894SBL).

The 2018 was the one that should have never left the factory in the condition it was in. It was as if chimpanzees had assembled it in a pig sty. Randall Rausch and I both worked on it (together and seperately) at length to get it into it's present, acceptable condition.

[200Apples]

This would be the PERFECT opportunity for Ruger to downsize the 336 action to the same size as the 39A. Modern design with a round bolt and CNC machineable with minimum (if any) hand fitting.

They could treat this in the same manner as the transition from the model 36 (square bolt) to the 336 (round bolt) in 1948. Stay with hardened forged steel construction and make this a legendary .22 lever action rifle.

Dan

BRILLIANT! idea, Dan.

Absolutely brilliant.

[1859sharps]

Remington inherited with their acquisition of Marlin mostly worn-out machine tooling, and the craftsmen that could tweak the machines with the right touch of experience were shown the door.

There was no one who knew very much about how Marlin had been run on the factory floor. Of course it was bad, and there was little chance to make anything decent with worn machinery and unskilled hands.

Remington DID however invest in new machinery and had started to turn the corner when their bankruptcy was called. Ruger brought much of this equipment to their own premises; truckload after truckload of it, so they're not exactly starting from scratch.

not to beat the dead horse, but all the factors you list, all could have been overcome/addressed from the get go by Remington had they wanted to invest the time, effort, and money. which management thought they could get away with not doing, then had to do anyway once their reputation was damaged.

as for starting from scratch... Ruger sort of is, but not 100%. They have a big jump start by inheriting the designs, equipment etc. But as a company they still have to figure out how to "follow the recipe" and train employees, gain experience etc. For example, a review of one of the Ruger 1895 pointed out that the sample he had while well put together, the polishing needed improvement. they had polished out some of the "lines" that should have been more "sharp". they also need to build experience with assembly so they can pickup the pace of rifles completed to meet demand and expand the catalog. small stuff like that is what I am talking about.

[200Apples]

I agree, sharps!

And thank you, always, for your contributions to this subject.

[BOBGBA]

it's all history in my eyes - ya'll can have the repops from whatever company buys the rights but they'll never be the same

I don't believe that Ruger bought the Marlin name (& equipment, etc,) only to run it into the ground. They know they have to make good stuff to get a return on their investment.

What they produce might never be the same, but what is these days?

It may take some time to iron out the kinks, but my guess is they will get it figured out and produce good products.

It is what is is. I won't let nostalgia keep me from buying one.

I think we need to be happy that they will be produced and that they didn't just go by the wayside. We need all the manufactures we can get.