LOL... all my rifles are Marlin with the one exception a Colt Le6920. Bought a bunch and sold a bunch on here can't really say if I've made any $$$ on them but the smiles of the new owner are a whole lot better........I know ..wierd
-
ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info
Marlin Lever action question
- Thread starter JWC
- Start date
I don't get the whole JM stamp thing...it's just a Marlin proof mark on the barrel. I've had customer's look at a 60's gun and scoff at it because it wasn't JM stamped. I've also heard (but not verified) that there were a few guns that left Ilion with a JM stamped barrel. To me, Ilion is the stamp that should have people sprinting in the opposite direction. I certainly hope they are better now, but first impressions last and I doubt values will ever catch up to the older stuff.
My pride and joy 1960 Marlin Golden 39A Mountie
Gimli2, you are correct. The JM is just a proof mark from Marlin to show that the barrel was installed on the receiver by Marlin, and met quality standards. On older rifles, it is an actual proof mark, and did indicate successful test firing. But, later on, it turned into nothing more than a "maker's mark" and QC stamp. The JM does indicate that the rifle fired or at least met the QC standards of the Marlin plant, before the sale of the company to Remington. I believe that is why the JM stamp is important to some.
I do have to admit that I have not seen a Marlin from the 60's without the JM proof mark. Back in the 60's, I thought that it was an actual proof mark indicating that the rifle was fired. I have seen, (only in a picture, not actually in my hands), a couple of JM/REP proof marks on some of the Ilion rifles, but those are very few and far between. Remington uses the REP proof stamp and the REP stamp does indicate it was proofed by Remington and not Marlin.
As I, and others mentioned earlier in this post, some of the early Remington lever actions were not very good, but there is a number of buyers who state the post 2014 lever action rifles are much better than the earlier Remingtons. I do not own a Remington lever action, so I honestly can't attest to fit, finish and accuracy of those rifles. It is true, the older JM stamped Marlin rifles will bring as much, and in many cases, more than the new Remington rifles.
Before you Marlin purest eliteist start screaming, I have every original part that came with it ,including the see through scope mounts and 3x9 scope,stock in great shape I am considering refinishing it
I added the RPP big loop and rail and also installed a Happy Trigger by professional gun smith
She is a tact driver up to 200 yards
I added the RPP big loop and rail and also installed a Happy Trigger by professional gun smith
She is a tact driver up to 200 yards
Attachments
Ok. A few things to add.
444 is a great round. I love mine. I have one of the early Marlins in 444 that I bought from my brother. It is a true freezer filler and has provided meat for several families for years. With the exception of finding inexpensive ammo, the 444 has no draw backs.
I own a dozen or so Marlins. Mostly JM stamped, but I do have a couple Remlins. I will agree with what one of the previous posters said. My newest Marlin shows no QC issues. The Marlin from 2012 is absolutely horrible. It's been back to Remington to be worked on and while better, still isn't on par with the earlier JM marked Marlins. There is a silver lining to the Remlins. I have absolutely no guilt when I have them shortened and threaded. I could never bring myself to do that to a JM classic, but freely hack away on a Remlin.
Thanks to a few members here, I decided to take a 45 70 Remlin cut it down and suppress it. A hoot to shoot with 405gr SP ammo.
444 is a great round. I love mine. I have one of the early Marlins in 444 that I bought from my brother. It is a true freezer filler and has provided meat for several families for years. With the exception of finding inexpensive ammo, the 444 has no draw backs.
I own a dozen or so Marlins. Mostly JM stamped, but I do have a couple Remlins. I will agree with what one of the previous posters said. My newest Marlin shows no QC issues. The Marlin from 2012 is absolutely horrible. It's been back to Remington to be worked on and while better, still isn't on par with the earlier JM marked Marlins. There is a silver lining to the Remlins. I have absolutely no guilt when I have them shortened and threaded. I could never bring myself to do that to a JM classic, but freely hack away on a Remlin.
Thanks to a few members here, I decided to take a 45 70 Remlin cut it down and suppress it. A hoot to shoot with 405gr SP ammo.
Gimli, I do need to add this. Our country does not require proof testing and proof marks like some other countries.
Gimli, does the barrel have any markings? Given the age of your Marlin,1963, it should have the address New Haven Conn, which is the original Marlin plant, stamped on the barrel. Marlin moved to the North Haven Plant in 1970 or there abouts.
When you typed in that you had a M39a with no barrel marking, and no JM stamp, at first I thought, well, it must be a replacement barrel. But a replacement barrel would at least have the address of the plant. If it were a replacement barrel, it would not have had the JM proof mark, because the plant did not fit the barrel to the receiver. Which could explain the lack of a JM stamp.
But, I started looking through some of my old Marlin notes, and I found that I had kept an old post from a couple of years back. I guess I thought it was odd, and just did a copy and paste. This is the post:
***************************************
Old 39a with no barrel markings?
I ran across an old 39a breakdown at a local gun show that had no barrel marking whatsoever. Didn't write down the 6 digit ser # to check for age. Looked pretty typical in every other way. Good shape, but obviously pretty old and a decent price. I steered clear since there weren't any barrel markings, presuming it may be a re-barrelled .22. Good idea . . . or not?
- hutch
*******************************************
Gimli, only one reply was made, and the reply was, "never seen one or heard of one". I can easily admit that I have no clue as to how that happened, or why it happened. But, while I would have never scoffed at your rifle, I certainly would be a bit leery of it only because it does not fit the standards that I have learned.
I would never say that your Marlin has been re-barreled because, without any markings, it does not fit the standards of the replacement barrel made my Marlin.
In short, I don't have a clue how or why your M39a barrel has no markings.
Dang, wasn't that helpful! lol
Sneakypete, brother, it is your rifle and you do what you want to it. If it makes you happy, I will be all for it. Let the some others scoff at your rifle, not me.
Hey, as other members can attest, I owned a Mossberg 464 SPX. And I loved that rifle!! So far be it from me to look cross eyed at making the rifle into what you want.
Hey, as other members can attest, I owned a Mossberg 464 SPX. And I loved that rifle!! So far be it from me to look cross eyed at making the rifle into what you want.
Ok. There is a silver lining to the Remlins. I have absolutely no guilt when I have them shortened and threaded. I could never bring myself to do that to a JM classic, but freely hack away on a Remlin.
Thanks to a few members here, I decided to take a 45 70 Remlin cut it down and suppress it. A hoot to shoot with 405gr SP ammo.
View attachment 1146577
Well said. I had not thought about that particular advantage! I bet that 45/70 is a real....pardon the pun....blast!!!!
