Marlin musing..........

[DarryH]

I have owned a couple Marlin lever guns over the years.
Marlin and Glenfield 30-30's, 444 Marlin, Golden 39A.
I sold the big bores as I lived in Iowa, and there was no firearms deer season. You could use black powder guns, shotguns, and bows.

The 39's have bugged me since I held my first one.
Please, don't take offense here, I am voicing a personal opinion.
I never liked the way they handled.
The buttstocks were too bulky, and so were the forearms.
I felt that I would like the guns much better if I took a rasp to them and took away a lot of the wood.
I am curious if anyone else felt the same way, and are brave enough to admit it. I'd post this on the Marlin Forum, but I'd probably be stretchin my neck with a rope in a few hours!!!!

Thanks
Good Shootin!!
DarryH
Nebraska

[mescalero1]

You are correct, nothing messes up a firearm more than hanging a 4x4 on it.

[gamekeeper]

Yeah, a lot of Marlin owners have slimmed down the woodwork.

I much prefer the feel and look of my 9422 to the Marlin I once had.

[Tycer]

Hence my love for the Mountie.

[Hobie]

I'm with Tycer. I like the Mountie. The standard rifle format is way too big for me. I've passed by some good examples at excellent prices because I couldn't bring myself to like the "big" gun. Some of those have some BIG wood on the forearm, too! Just doesn't feel right to me.

[Rimfire McNutjob]

They should have stuck with the 1897 sized wood instead of fattening it up for the 39A.

[COSteve]

I've had two 39As in my time and sold both (at a nice profit) to friends that really like them. Both sales were because I just didn't like the clunky feel and the gritty, stiff action. One was new and one was well used but the action was still not comfortable to my tastes.

In fact, the 39A put me off of lever 22s for years until I picked up a friend's little Henry 22 about 6 months ago. I couldn't believe the difference. It was slim and agile and the action was as smooth as a baby's bottom!! I went out and bought one and love it. Accurate, light weight, and it points naturally for me. There, I 'outted' myself.

I happily join DarryH in admitting that the Marlin lever is not my choice for a shooting gun and I'll never own another one. Yes, I know that the Marlin is an heirloom quality firearm and the Henry is, well ..... serviceable, but I want a lever 22 that I like to shoot rather than a pretty one just sitting in the rack. The 39A ain't it, much as I've tried to make it one.

[GoatGuy]

Oh, I feel so much better. I thought I was the only one here with such a dark secret.

[Leverdude]

Hence my love for the Mountie.

+1 & I still reworked mine. I wouldn't hesitate to rework any stock unless it was a fancy collectable gun. Generally my guns are for me to shoot so if I can make them better I do. Theforend is darker than the second pic looks.

[Pete44ru]

I've only owned 1940's & early 50's Model 39a's - and have always thought the receivers dis-proportionately thin - but the rifles hellaciously accurate !

My 1946 model easily keeps a magazine-full under a dime @ 25yds with the issue open sights.

I would opine that Marlin went to heftier wood to make them feel bigger than they are, and to help accuracy with offering better holds.

.

[J Miller]

I dislike the 39A wood profusely. That is why I own a Winchester 9422.
Were I to attempt slimming down the wood it would surely be ruined. So it's best I don't buy one.

Joe

[Blaine]

Love my Mountie. I have a 39A and don't really shoot it anymore, but it is scary accurate.

[BwanaDave]

I don't like pregnant rifles either. Something un-manly about it. I put a treebone stocl on my 1895.

Dave

[Nobody]

[Modoc ED]

I don't think anyone can argue that the 39A isn't a great mechanical, reliable, functioning rifle; however, as others have said, the wood is a little fat. I don't mind the fat wood so much on my .444 Marlins but don't care for it on the smaller caliber Marlins.

Having both Marlins and Winchesters, I will say that neither is more reliable that the other.

[Terry Murbach]

THE OLD MARLIN 39A RIFLES WERE DONE THAT WAY INTENTIONALLY TO MAKE IT A MAN'S SIZE RIFLE WITH A MAN SIZED HEFT. I ALWAYS THOUGHT THEY'D HAVE MADE A HELL OF A CANOE PADDLE TOO !!! I HAVE WANTED TO BUY ONE OF THESE FOR THE PAST 49 YEARS BUT ALWAYS OPTED FOR THE MOUNTIE INSTEAD. THE LAST 39A RIFLE I TRIED TO BUY AT A GUN SHOW IN THE U.P. A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO WAS STOPPED BECAUSE THE MAN WOULD NOT TAKE MY OUT-OF-STATE CHECK. ON THE OTHER HAND ANOTHER FELLOW A FEW ROWS BACK HAD A MARLIN 39CL THAT GAVE ME HEART PALPATATIONS AND I BOUGHT IT INSTEAD. IT IS IN REALITY A MOUNTIE WITH A SLENDER, SLEEK, SENSUOUS, OCTAGON BARREL, SPECIAL SIGHTS, AND THE "CENTURY LIMITED" PLAQUE ON THE REAR RIGHTSIDE STOCK AND ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE ACTION. THIS IS IN ALL PROBABILITY THE FINEST MARLIN MOUNTIE SIZED 22 CARBINE THEY EVER MADE. IT SHOOTS LIKE A MILLION BUCKS DEAD ON THE SIGHTS.
THE MARLIN MOUNTIE IN 39A AND 39M PERMUTATIONS [ I THINK I AM FORGETTING ONE DESIGNATION...] WERE MADE TO BE A LIGHTER QUICKER HANDLING 22 CARBINE VERSIONS OF THE ORIGINAL 39A RIFLE.
FOR SOME REASON I STILL HAVE A YEN FOR A 39A RIFLE, PROBABLY BECAUSE I HAVE NEVER OWNED ONE BEFORE....BUT THEN MAYBE IT HAS BEEN PRE-ORDAINED THAT I SHOULD NEVER HAVE ONE LIKE THAT...
WITH A REALLY ACCURATE 39 MOUNTIE AND THE 39CL IN THE SAFES I HAVE NO NEED FOR A 39A RIFLE....BUT THEN WHAT IN THE FLYING 'ELL DID NEED EVER HAVE TO DO WITH OBTAINING A GOOD SHOOTIN' IRON ???

[jdad]

I love the 39A because of the weight, but the 1892/1897 does have the ideal stock & forearm design.

Model 1892

[AJMD429]

I happily join DarryH in admitting that the Marlin lever is not my choice... Yes, I know that the Marlin is an heirloom quality firearm and the Henry is, well ..... serviceable, but I want a lever 22 that I like to shoot rather than a pretty one just sitting in the rack. The 39A ain't it, much as I've tried to make it one.

That's the same reason I like my little Ruger 96/22 - it WORKS and is handy and has a short lever throw. However, it ALSO suffers from 'stock obesity' and at least on the Marlin it would be fairly easy to cure; it might weaken the Ruger's stock too much to trim it around the receiver.

[C. Cash]

I've always been a fan of the slim Winchester stocks. I've always detested the Marlin Center Fires with the fat forearms. But...the 39A is a bird of a differerent feather with me. It balances really nice on that fat rounded stock, right where it should in front of the reciever. A joy to carry with one hand. It's heavy but hangs nice offhand. If it wasn't as accurate as it is, then it would be difficult to forgive the weight of the rifle and all bets would be off.

What drives me crazy about the 39A is the weak extractor. If I shoot the rifle but forget to eject the empty, and come back to shoot some more and drop the hammer on an a spent piece of brass, the swelled brass sticks and the extractor is no longer adequate to remove it. I either have to have a range rod to knock it out or the range trip is over, often after only a few rounds. Just can't bring myself to stick my pocket knife in there....

[COSteve]

Everyone raves about the Marlin's accuracy, however, even though I sold off my 39As, I still have a Model 60 with the same 'micro-grove' rifling that is very accurate. However, I don't see it being any more accurate than my plain old Henry. More accurate than my 1973 Ruger 10/22s, certainly, but not my Henry.

In addition, I may have gotten lucky on my Henry as it's trigger is pretty smooth like the action with a decent break. Not target quality but good for a stock trigger. That's in contrast to both my 39A's triggers which I'd rate as average to poor, especially for their price range.

Again, I'm not saying that the Henry is as high quality firearm as each of my 39As. The stock is pretty but the Marlin's were rich with their checkering. Its just that my Henry seems to be 'good enough' where it needs to be to shoot as accurately and it has a better weight and balance than either Marlin did.

I guess the proof will be in 10-20K rounds. If the Henry is still shooting fine I'll conclude that it's good where it needs to be and adequate where that's sufficient. If not, I'll likely just buy another one because its so much easier to lug around and smoother to shoot.

YMMV!!

[DarryH]

That model 1892 with the tang sight does the trick for me. Where can I buy one????
Oops, I forgot, that takes cash!
I do have some trading stock, but more specialized stuff, and not lever powered.

That is a Marlin lever I would be proud to own and shoot!!
Thanks for the picture.
Good Shootin!!
DarryH

[Chuck 100 yd]

I must be one of the few who don`t mind the full size stock at all. When I pick up an early rifle with thin wood it feels strange at first.
All need to be seen as they are, not what they should have been.
A 50 ford is not a 57 T Bird!!

[kimwcook]

Different strokes for.......I love the looks of the '97's, rather spendy, but really slim. I don't care for the fat stocks on the others. I bought a Winnie 9422.

[DBW]

I love the 39A because of the weight, but the 1892/1897 does have the ideal stock & forearm design.

Model 1892

That is a thing of beauty.

[mescalero1]

That is beyond beauty, it is the spectacular catagory.

[pokey]

hah! a little wood, a little spoke shave, a little rasp.
and voila.

DSC_0082.JPG

DSC_0081.JPG

DSC_0079.JPG

i don't care for that wide wood either, so i sold the
newer 39a, and FIXED this one. like my 9422s too.