Lever action marlins vs remington

[AlAl27]

I was wondering if anyone could tell me the problems they had with the remington made marlins im looking at a 1895 cowboy 45/70 but dont want to buy a problematic gun so hope i could get some feedback thanks

Read More

 

[PORSCHE928S4]

I have heard of the "REMLIN" so watching this one ! Great question BTW

 

[Koda]

I havent heard of any problems with function, but the thing to look for in a Remington Marlin is the laminated stock vs a hardwood stock. The hardwood stock is preferred but hard to find.

 

[Nosferatu]

I have an 1895 GBL and 336 Dark. Both have been flawless over the last few years. The 336 has been shot the most, primarily suppressed. Shot an elk 2 years ago with the 1895. It died just fine. Almost 2 dozen coyotes have fallen to the 336.

I know there was a lot of bubbleguming about them on the forums and from what I can gather, mostly cosmetic nitpicky stuff. The stock on my 1895 wasn't isn't perfect where it met the receiver, but I sanded it down and it's fine.

 

[bcp]

I would rather have a late Remington than a late Marlin. Marlins were getting buggy, and Remington finally figured out how to make good ones.

Haven't seen a Ruger version yet.

Bruce

 

[Spitpatch]

The manufacturing problems (severe) when Marlin was acquired by the same firm as Remington were numerous and documented: Chattered rifling in bores, parts missing from the action to name a couple. That's what happens when you fire a senior and experienced work force.

The best proof of the seriousness of the issues was that a major overhaul effort was undertaken by the Remington outfit and an even greater effort undertaken to broadcast the new effort to improve inspections and quality control.

Gunwriters that sang praises to the first Remlins as having "saved" the Marlin name (and then had to eat words when the failures were documented) now were once again directed by editors to sing praises. At least the guns functioned and had all parts.

Fit and finish will never match a true JM Marlin. Ruger's first effort didn't either.

 

[Val1884]

It was fit an finish..marlin was a dead company with worn out tooling an Remington found out the hard way..mid production Remington rifles the quality got back to standard. Late marlins an early Remington's had issues. At least from my experience with the gunsmithing end of seeing them.

 

[ma96782]

Re: Remlins

I seen a couple of Remlins (tough never owned one). Yeah.....I wasn't impressed and/or happy with the ones I've run across (new and used examples).

Anyway, that being said.........I currently own three Marlins. I prefer the genuine Marlins. They were smoother functioning, looked better (fit better), and they retained their value. They also seem to be more desireable amoungst other SASS shooters.

BUT, But, but......IMHO, the Winchester and clones of the 1873 and 1866 are in a category of their own. Mucho desireable.

And for ME.....I'd pass on the Winchester 1894 (and clones). BTW, the Henry is also, OUT. But....that's just me.

Aloha, Mark

 

[drstrangelove]

 

[osprey]

I ordered a new 1895 Remlin. It went back and I got a refund. Fit and finish were ok ish, but missing a complete land in the rifling was a deal breaker. I found a late model used 1895 jm marlin a short while later. Fit and finish is great, action is smooth, trigger is crisp and accuracy is very good. I have heard of some good remlins but qc was obviously hit and miss. The only way I would consider buying one is if I could examine it very closely first.

 

[Knobgoblin]

Remlins are the century builds of the lever action world. You might get lucky, you might not. For a full price rifle, I'd pass every time. Plenty of used JM stamped Marlins in the wild.

 

[drstrangelove]

My first Remlin had a very crunchy action and a rear sight that was clearly not centered. Lots of internal tool marks visible. Had enough internal burs that factory ammo would cause the lever to lock up, not unlike a difficult bolt lift on a too-hot reload. The worst years were certainly the handover when barrels said New Haven but missing was the JM stamp and present was an MR prefix on the serial number. AVOID.

 

[PORSCHE928S4]

I only have a old Marlin from my dad and seems like that's when they used to make stuff now no so impressed

 

[DirectDrive]

I was wondering if anyone could tell me the problems they had with the remington made marlins im looking at a 1895 cowboy 45/70 but dont want to buy a problematic gun so hope i could get some feedback thanks

I have one of the last 1895 Remlins and it's a perfect gun in every way.
Internet Lore says that some of the early Remlins had problems.
They were fixed apparently because I never heard of any being thrown away.
The JM Marlin fans keep fanning that flame, though.

 

[titsonritz]

I don't have this problem, my Marlins don't/won't have crossbolt safety.

 

[DirectDrive]

Sounds like somebody has JM Marlin fanboy problem.

 

[titsonritz]

Somebody has a crossbolt safety on a levergun problem. Goes for Winchesters, too.

 

[Tinman357]

I had a JM marked Marlin 1894c in 357.
I had a Remlin 1984CB in 357

I had plenty of time to compare side by side in the field, on the range, and disassembled on the bench.

The Remlin was hands down better in every way. The JM Marlin was a fine example of Marlins best. I kept the Remlin and sold the Marlin at a fair price.

Don't get me wrong. The Marlin was a great gun. Everything the fanboys say they are. It was my favorite, "never sell" rifle. The Remlin was just smoother and more accurate.

Just my opinion based on my experience of 1 each. But the Remlin just shoots straight.

 

[Spitpatch]

I have one of the last 1895 Remlins and it's a perfect gun in every way.
Internet Lore says that some of the early Remlins had problems.
They were fixed apparently because I never heard of any being thrown away.
The JM Marlin fans keep fanning that flame, though.

The very real problems with the early Remlins were unrelated to any "internet lore" until well after the fact had been established and documented repeatedly. Remington's frantic advertised response is the very proof that the problems were manifest. The firm had serious issues of a similar nature with their introduction of the R51 handgun, and during the same time period. Bankruptcy followed shortly.

As others have related here by personal experience, later production Remlins (as a direct result of Remington's acknowledgement of the problems) were relatively devoid of the glaring defects (but not the finish work deficits).

The inordinate rise of prices on original Marlins is certainly to a degree related to brand loyalty, but the lion's share of such price increases is driven by the quality of the guns; appearance AND function. The customer base for them is putting these guns to use. They want a gun devoid of recent shabby (true) history and one that shows signs of some human effort toward appearance.

Unfortunately, Remington's horrible stumble is one more high hurdle for Ruger to surmount in their effort to revive the Marlin reputation. I am cheering for them.

 

[Spitpatch]

I had a JM marked Marlin 1894c in 357.
I had a Remlin 1984CB in 357

I had plenty of time to compare side by side in the field, on the range, and disassembled on the bench.

The Remlin was hands down better in every way. The JM Marlin was a fine example of Marlins best. I kept the Remlin and sold the Marlin at a fair price.

Don't get me wrong. The Marlin was a great gun. Everything the fanboys say they are. It was my favorite, "never sell" rifle. The Remlin was just smoother and more accurate.

Just my opinion based on my experience of 1 each. But the Remlin just shoots straight.

I would hesitate to make an accuracy comparison between an 1894c (carbine) and an 1894CB (rifle/heavy octagon barrel) toward a decision to get rid of one of them.