Got the buttstock finished and back on the rifle. I still need to make a filler for the rear sight slot, and do a little touch up bluing in a few places, but it's ready to sight in as is. Still not bad for $160, and the barrel bore cleaned up nice, and the barrel crown is undamaged. It was shot little and neglected much.
New sights.
Yes, that's a stainless steel screw in the barrel/magazine band. I have a pack of screws on order to fit it with the proper blued screw. This is an old style rifle and the screw for the new ones DOES NOT interchange. The old style screw is #5-40 tpi, and that screw happens to be about as common as passenger pigeons. So I ordered a pack of 36 that are on the long side, and will cut one down to length when they get here.
“I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer” ― Douglas Adams
Not me, I hand load them. The flex tip really aren't anymore expensive than any other quality bullet.
Agreed. Even in Factory ammo, it's not that much more than any other quality round IMHO. More to the point, it turns a 150 yd gun into a valid 200 yd gun. The ballistics of the .30-30, .45-70, and .44 mag, especially stand out IMHO.
Luis
Wielding the Hammer of Thor first requires you to lift and carry the Hammer of Thor. - Bigslug
I have been hanging out at the Marlin Owners Board over the past few months and it is a great group and really well informed.
Since I am wading into the Marlin collecting waters, and recently purchased a Rem-lin 45-70 in stainless vs a JM marked gun built in 2008, I see substantial differences. I took the lever out of the Rem-lin and one side is only partially finished that is inside the gun. I assume this is a "doesn't matter" area. The wood is not nearly as nice, and the metal finished edges are not as eased as the other guns. It shoots well, the Rem-Lin has a 6.5 lb trigger, the Marlin a 5 lb trigger.
I would prefer a JM marked gun based on this experience.
D
Agreed. Price dependent of course.
Luis
Wielding the Hammer of Thor first requires you to lift and carry the Hammer of Thor. - Bigslug
My .35 Rem. is JM marked, as is my .30-30. :tooth:
I don't know if my .38-55 octagon barreled Cowboy model is JM marked or not. But it has Ballard rifling, so I don't mind one way or the other.
“I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer” ― Douglas Adams
Thanks! I checked the SN code and it was made in 1969. Not bad for a 45 year old rifle. Kind of ironic, too, in that it was made the year after GCA '68 went into effect.
“I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer” ― Douglas Adams
I have been hanging out at the Marlin Owners Board over the past few months and it is a great group and really well informed.
Since I am wading into the Marlin collecting waters, and recently purchased a Rem-lin 45-70 in stainless vs a JM marked gun built in 2008, I see substantial differences. I took the lever out of the Rem-lin and one side is only partially finished that is inside the gun. I assume this is a "doesn't matter" area. The wood is not nearly as nice, and the metal finished edges are not as eased as the other guns. It shoots well, the Rem-Lin has a 6.5 lb trigger, the Marlin a 5 lb trigger.
I would prefer a JM marked gun based on this experience.
D
There was a time where the Remlins were not very good rifles. I've seen them, like seven years ago, that were awful...saw one with the front sight non-centered.
But lately, so I hear, they're a lot better. The JM is just a stamp. My shooting buddy has a Westernfield 30-30 that was made in about 1978 or so, and it's marked "P". He preferred it, since it has a forend cap and not a barrel band. I had one of these, an excellent rifle.
Not to lessen the JM marked guns, but to point out it's not the final word in Marlin rifles. Some of them, for whatever reason, lack the magic JM. Maybe it was over looked. Finally, it all depends on workmanship rather than a roll stamp. As I said, I have two and have never looked at the barrel stamp. I assume they're marked, but don't care and if not, (made in 1976) that's OK, too.
Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
Thanks! I like old rifles. The wood on this one is pretty plain, but I've been on the hunt for a Marlin in .35 Rem. for a while. I'll correct the gap around the top tang when I get the time. That gap is what causes stock splits.
“I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer” ― Douglas Adams
OOPS! Isn't that why they make a B F H ?
:tooth:
Jerry
Why was your dog giving you a raspberry in that picture ? What did you do to him ? lol !
"There is some evil in all of us, Doctor, even you, the Valeyard is an amalgamation of the darker sides of your nature, somewhere between your twelfth and final incarnation, and I may say, you do not improve with age. Founding member of the G&A forum since 1996
Good looking rifle! You got a bargain on that one.
You're seeing the after pictures. The before rifle was pretty sad. Along with neglect to wood and metal, it had a really cheesy scope on it with those see-through mounts. I bought it with full knowledge that I might have to replace the barrel. I put a bore light to it while I was inspecting it, and the bore was full of crud; I may have given it its first ever cleaning. I lucked out on that part, as the barrel was really good inside. The sides of the upper tang had some nasty pitting and rust. I took care of that with some full strength CLR(thanks, CPJ) applied with a Q-Tip and followed up with Oxpho Blue creme to get a good even bluing.
“I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer” ― Douglas Adams
Cool! When you use CLR, do you have to republish the metal? In other words, if you are just removing the old blue from polished steel, does it dull the finish?
The ONLY place I use CLR on one is where there is some serious pitting and rust scabs on top. I did use a stainless steel brush for initial cleanup after washing off the CLR, and some 400 grit paper to lightly polish the areas before rebluing. The rust was on the sides of the tang and covered by the wood, so I didn't spend a lot of time trying to get it back to a high polish. If you DO use CLR to remove rust on a firearm, when washing off the CLR, use HOT soapy water to get it all washed out and use a coarse rag (like heavy denim) and a toothbrush. An initial brushing with a stainless steel brush, or chore boy pad to get off any crusty residue. CLR leaves high carbon steel with a white finish that needs removal; it's a thin finish and isn't hard to remove.
I've tinkered with the CLR on old high carbon tools like diagonal cutters, nippers, and even just scrap pieces to find out how to remove the residue and prepare the metal for bluing. I have some tools that I blued as test subjects, and once they were washed and polished, they took bluing well.
“I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer” ― Douglas Adams
Replies
New sights.
Yes, that's a stainless steel screw in the barrel/magazine band. I have a pack of screws on order to fit it with the proper blued screw. This is an old style rifle and the screw for the new ones DOES NOT interchange. The old style screw is #5-40 tpi, and that screw happens to be about as common as passenger pigeons. So I ordered a pack of 36 that are on the long side, and will cut one down to length when they get here.
― Douglas Adams
Agreed. Even in Factory ammo, it's not that much more than any other quality round IMHO. More to the point, it turns a 150 yd gun into a valid 200 yd gun. The ballistics of the .30-30, .45-70, and .44 mag, especially stand out IMHO.
Luis
Agreed. Price dependent of course.
Luis
My .35 Rem. is JM marked, as is my .30-30. :tooth:
I don't know if my .38-55 octagon barreled Cowboy model is JM marked or not. But it has Ballard rifling, so I don't mind one way or the other.
― Douglas Adams
Thanks! I checked the SN code and it was made in 1969. Not bad for a 45 year old rifle. Kind of ironic, too, in that it was made the year after GCA '68 went into effect.
― Douglas Adams
There was a time where the Remlins were not very good rifles. I've seen them, like seven years ago, that were awful...saw one with the front sight non-centered.
But lately, so I hear, they're a lot better. The JM is just a stamp. My shooting buddy has a Westernfield 30-30 that was made in about 1978 or so, and it's marked "P". He preferred it, since it has a forend cap and not a barrel band. I had one of these, an excellent rifle.
Not to lessen the JM marked guns, but to point out it's not the final word in Marlin rifles. Some of them, for whatever reason, lack the magic JM. Maybe it was over looked. Finally, it all depends on workmanship rather than a roll stamp. As I said, I have two and have never looked at the barrel stamp. I assume they're marked, but don't care and if not, (made in 1976) that's OK, too.
Dad 5-31-13
Thanks! I like old rifles. The wood on this one is pretty plain, but I've been on the hunt for a Marlin in .35 Rem. for a while. I'll correct the gap around the top tang when I get the time. That gap is what causes stock splits.
― Douglas Adams
Dad 5-31-13
Why was your dog giving you a raspberry in that picture ? What did you do to him ? lol !
You're seeing the after pictures. The before rifle was pretty sad. Along with neglect to wood and metal, it had a really cheesy scope on it with those see-through mounts. I bought it with full knowledge that I might have to replace the barrel. I put a bore light to it while I was inspecting it, and the bore was full of crud; I may have given it its first ever cleaning. I lucked out on that part, as the barrel was really good inside. The sides of the upper tang had some nasty pitting and rust. I took care of that with some full strength CLR(thanks, CPJ) applied with a Q-Tip and followed up with Oxpho Blue creme to get a good even bluing.
― Douglas Adams
Dad 5-31-13
The ONLY place I use CLR on one is where there is some serious pitting and rust scabs on top. I did use a stainless steel brush for initial cleanup after washing off the CLR, and some 400 grit paper to lightly polish the areas before rebluing. The rust was on the sides of the tang and covered by the wood, so I didn't spend a lot of time trying to get it back to a high polish. If you DO use CLR to remove rust on a firearm, when washing off the CLR, use HOT soapy water to get it all washed out and use a coarse rag (like heavy denim) and a toothbrush. An initial brushing with a stainless steel brush, or chore boy pad to get off any crusty residue. CLR leaves high carbon steel with a white finish that needs removal; it's a thin finish and isn't hard to remove.
I've tinkered with the CLR on old high carbon tools like diagonal cutters, nippers, and even just scrap pieces to find out how to remove the residue and prepare the metal for bluing. I have some tools that I blued as test subjects, and once they were washed and polished, they took bluing well.
― Douglas Adams