Old vs new Marlin 336C?

sphen

sphen

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
50   0   0
Location
Toronto North
Howdy, have a friend with a very good condition Marlin 336C in 30-30 I'm thinking of making an offer on. Just curious is there is anything to consider, it's pretty old but in pretty good condition. Is this a case where older is better or newer has improved? Or is it pretty much the same rifle? I'm still waiting for him to get back to me on the exact date.

Josh
 
I prefer the 1985-2005 models myself.

Any rifle can be hit and miss, be most wary of the 2009-2013 models. That said most of those are still "fine"
 
My 336C is almost as old as I am (61) and I'd take it any day over one of the new ones currently on the shelf. Depending on what you consider "old" it may or may not have a cross-bolt safety. Mine has the lever safety which I back up with the half-#### notch.
 
GMC403 said:
I prefer the 1985-2005 models myself.

Any rifle can be hit and miss, be most wary of the 2009-2013 models. That said most of those are still "fine"
Click to expand...

I was never a fan of the safety or the fatter forend That came on the later years. I like the wood to flow into the receiver if you know what I mean. That all said, it's just my personal opinion and it's worth what you paid for it.
 
freddyfour said:
I was never a fan of the safety or the fatter forend That came on the later years. I like the wood to flow into the receiver if you know what I mean. That all said, it's just my personal opinion and it's worth what you paid for it.
Click to expand...

Yup, I agree the slimmer forends are much nicer in the hand. The forends on all the new models and most of the older 1895's are horrible IMO.

I go a little against the grain. I actually like the CBS, checkering on the stocks, and that thick "Mar-Shield" finish :)
 
I have only one Marlin with the cross bolt safety and in spite of all that is said against them, I don't mind it a bit and I do use it for unloading the magazine.
However, I also much prefer the old girls, with one exception. Since long before the cross bolt, they were drilling and tapping the receiver for excellent top mounting of a scope. However, the still earlier ones had a krinkley like surface on top of the receiver, which was nice to look over with iron sights, but no provision for scope mounting. And I consider a low mounted, fixed power scope of not over 3x, is a great asset on the Marlins.
I have a 1895 model in 45-70 that was made in 1974, just two years after they started making the Model 95 and the wood to metal fit and finishing is the best of any of the Marlin levers in the stable.
 
sphen said:
Howdy, have a friend with a very good condition Marlin 336C in 30-30 I'm thinking of making an offer on. Just curious is there is anything to consider, it's pretty old but in pretty good condition. Is this a case where older is better or newer has improved? Or is it pretty much the same rifle? I'm still waiting for him to get back to me on the exact date.

Josh
Click to expand...

Older is better.

If the rifle does not have a cross-bolt safety then it's probably a better JM rifle in some ways than the later JM rifles made before the Remington takeover. Not because of the safety, but because the older JM rifles just had better attention to detail and fitting.

Having said that, I'm sure that many of the JM cross-bolt rifles are well-made as well, although in the last couple of years of JM guns I noticed things like loose sight dovetails and sharp-edged extractors in the 1894 models that needed stoning.

The Remington Marlins were terrible but are getting better, but I've still heard that some of them have real problems. I definitely would not consider one of these in preference to a JM rifle.

Your older rifle is the way to go, if it is in good sound condition. Inspect the bore and the chamber with a strong light, after unscrewing the lever screw and removing the lever, bolt, and picking out the loose ejector. Look for pits in the chamber and bore, bore damage or rust.

If you can, run some cartridges through it somewhere safe, to check functioning, chambering, and ease of closing the action.
Check the stock for cracks.
 
Lonesome Donkey said:
Older is better.

If the rifle does not have a cross-bolt safety then it's probably a better JM rifle in some ways than the later JM rifles made before the Remington takeover. Not because of the safety, but because the older JM rifles just had better attention to detail and fitting.

Having said that, I'm sure that many of the JM cross-bolt rifles are well-made as well, although in the last couple of years of JM guns I noticed things like loose sight dovetails and sharp-edged extractors in the 1894 models that needed stoning.

The Remington Marlins were terrible but are getting better, but I've still heard that some of them have real problems. I definitely would not consider one of these in preference to a JM rifle.

Your older rifle is the way to go, if it is in good sound condition. Inspect the bore and the chamber with a strong light, after unscrewing the lever screw and removing the lever, bolt, and picking out the loose ejector. Look for pits in the chamber and bore, bore damage or rust.

If you can, run some cartridges through it somewhere safe, to check functioning, chambering, and ease of closing the action.
Check the stock for cracks.
Click to expand...

Good points here,

But to clarify, Marlin had been putting cross bolt safeties on the 336 for 24 years prior to the Remington takeover.

Lots of good years of JM rifles there.
 
GMC403 said:
Good points here,

But to clarify, Marlin had been putting cross bolt safeties on the 336 for 24 years prior to the Remington takeover.

Lots of good years of JM rifles there.
Click to expand...

I knew that the crossbolt safety was started around 1992.

I should have included that in my comments.

However, I do believe that rifles made from the 50s to the 80s will be some better than those made with the safety from the 90s onward.

But, those made with the safety, up to, but before the last few years of JM production should also be very good.
 
Last edited:
Lonesome Donkey said:
I knew that the crossbolt safety was started around 1992.

I should have included that in my comments.

However, I do believe that rifles made from the 50s to the 80s will be some better than those made with the safety from the 90s onward.

But, those made with the safety, up to, but before the last few years of JM production should also be very good.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

The CBS showed up in 1984.
 
I have a 55, 75 and 82 and I consider the 1982 to be the new one lol. I think the new ones are nice but the wood and work is nicer on the older ones.
 
GMC403 said:
Agreed.

The CBS showed up in 1984.
Click to expand...

I did not know that, but I looked it up and you're right.

I recalled buying a new 336 variant in .375 Winchester in what I thought was the mid-eighties, which did not have the cross-bolt safety. (Really great rifle)

But, looking up references to the years of production, 1980 to 1983 seems to be when the .375 was made.

I bought it new, so it was probably around 1981 or 1982, before the changeover occurred.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom