Two New Marlin's

[6pt-sika]

Went to an auction in Bedford Va. today and acquired a couple "new to me" Marlin's .

They are not what I cal traditional levers as they are both Model 62's . One is in the 256 WIN MAG caliber anf the other is in 30 Carbine caliber . I hadn't gone to this auction with the intention of buying these two , but I ended up with them anyway [smilie=1:

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f316/6pt-sika/DSCN0258.jpg

The 256 is the one on top and the 30 Carbine is under !

[Scrounger]

Your lucky day. I'd be satisfied with either ONE of those.

[6pt-sika]

Thanks Scrounger :-D

Look int he production gun forum and the single shot forum , my pop got a few pieces as well [smilie=1:

[9.3X62AL]

I am a very happy owner of a Model 62 in 30 Carbine--I've had it for 7 years or so. It is a cast boolit MACHINE, Microgroove bore notwithstanding. Lee Soup Cans sized @ .311" and seated into cases expanded with the 32-20 expander die assembly (.309" spud) shoot VERY well. Jacketed bullet loads shoot better in this rifle than in any M-1 Carbine I've ever owned. I would call this rifle's ballistic potential at minimum a dead heat with any 32-20 WCF rifle, jacketed or cast. While I have no experience with the 256 Win Mag, I imagine it would be a parallel to the 25-20 WCF in ballistic potential, and probably a bit more.

[Scrounger]

I am a very happy owner of a Model 62 in 30 Carbine--I've had it for 7 years or so. It is a cast boolit MACHINE, Microgroove bore notwithstanding. Lee Soup Cans sized @ .311" and seated into cases expanded with the 32-20 expander die assembly (.309" spud) shoot VERY well. Jacketed bullet loads shoot better in this rifle than in any M-1 Carbine I've ever owned. I would call this rifle's ballistic potential at minimum a dead heat with any 32-20 WCF rifle, jacketed or cast. While I have no experience with the 256 Win Mag, I imagine it would be a parallel to the 25-20 WCF in ballistic potential, and probably a bit more.

I wonder why they didn't bring that out in .357? Obviously since the .256 worked, so would the .357.

[6pt-sika]

I have recently gotten dies for both the 256 and 30 Carbine .

The carbine is a piece of cake to load for :-D

However I am not having the best luck with the 256 :???:

I have been trying to form brass with the sizing die and keep from buying the case forming dies .

I have tried one shot forming and three or four shot sizing where you work it in slowly and neither seems to want to chamber . I have measured with calipers and everything seems okay .

Any suggestions are appreciated , short of giving the rifle away :roll:

[lastmanout]

I had a problem with the 32/20, 38/40 and 44/40 reloads- you might have same problem. Maybe the brass is 'springing' back after it's trip through the sizing die and the shoulder is not where it is supposed to be-it is longer. That kept the actions from closing on my reloads. I ended up with a quick, crude fix- I took .010" of the bottom of my sizing die, polished a radius inside and that fixed it. Next time I will take the .010" off the shellholder ( a surface grinder would be great for the job). That way, you have only risked ruining a shellholder. good luck:Fire:

[Ranch Dog]

You did real good 6-Pt! I would like to have that 30 Carbine!

[6pt-sika]

You did real good 6-Pt! I would like to have that 30 Carbine!

I didn't stay long enough to get what I went for that day :roll:

They had a very very nice Marlin Model 93 rifle in 30-30 . Gun was an honset 90% and the bore was spotless . Although some do gooder had added an etra hole in the top of the action . It still woulda been worth about $600 to me .

But I weighed the cost , we had already picked up 6 rifles in the first 45 minutes and my pop was done with all he wanted . Besides I would have had to wait about 2 hours before they got to the Model 93 :(

[JSH]

I have some 256 brass I made around here some place if you are interested. I blieve I made it out of starline but will have to dig it out.
Jeff

[Calamity Jake]

[QUOTE=6pt-sika;246838]I have recently gotten dies for both the 256 and 30 Carbine .

However I am not having the best luck with the 256 :???:

I have been trying to form brass with the sizing die and keep from buying the case forming dies .

I have tried one shot forming and three or four shot sizing where you work it in slowly and neither seems to want to chamber . I have measured with calipers and everything seems okay .

Any suggestions are appreciated , short of giving the rifle away

Use new brass only and then you may need to anneal the case mouths. Also plan on outside neck turning or inside neck reaming to thin the neck and trim to length.

The FL die may not be setting the shoulder back far enough, the slot in the shell holder is always
.005-.010 taller than the case head is thick, using a piece of shim stock under the case may lift the case high enough to set the shoulder back enough to get them to chamber.
Alum foil folded a few times will act a shim in a pinch or use beagle tape.

The 256 Win. Mag is a diamite cartrage. I have a 10" TC bull barrell chambered in and love it.

[9.3X62AL]

I wonder why they didn't bring that out in .357? Obviously since the .256 worked, so would the .357.

I didn't see this 4 weeks ago........my eyes must be stuck, lemme shake my head. There.

Good question, Art. Seems like the 357 would work fine if the 256 variants fed cartridges. Just a guess, the rimmed design of the 357 might not lend itself as well to box magazine feeding as did the 30 Carbine's rimless form, although that complaint doesn't crop up. I'm not sure whether the Marlin 94s in 357 Magnum were available at the time of the Model 62's introduction, but it could be that Marlin didn't want buyers having to choose between two platforms for one caliber--causing weakened market for both platforms. The 357's usual blunt nose profile and rimmed design just begs for a tube magazine-fed levergun.

The mirror image of your question--why not chamber the 94's for the 256 or 30 Carbine?--might be a better way to approach it. The 256 Magnum was conceived as an updated 25-20, and box magazine feeding enables use of pointed bullets not suited for tube magazines. In the 30 Carbine--which is little more than an updated 32-20, lining up milsurp 110 grain RN cartridges in a tubular magazine wouldn't give me a warm, fuzzy feeling as they shunted down the mag tube during a firing sequence. I'm likely over-perceiving of a problem there, but Murphy's Law gets no plea bargains.

Marlin 62's and their rimfire counterparts didn't sell well--the 57 competed with the really great 39/39A, and couldn't keep up. Marlin didn't want to repeat that lesson in centerfire. The 25-20 and 32-20 calibers as rifle chamberings were in steep decline already, varmint hunters wanted flatter-shooting and more accurate systems than what leverguns in the hyphenated Winchester calibers provided--222 Remington for the store-bought rifles, and 22-250 for the cranks who didn't mind building their own or having them built. Commercial adoption of the 223 Remington from the military and the 22-250 from the wildcatters largely buried the hyphenated Winchesters or their remakes. Finally, the distribution of surplus $20 M-1 Carbines filled the centerfire plinker market to capacity.

I'm sure Marlin saw all this--knew that they were also competing against all the existing Winchester 73's and 92's as well as their own Model 94's chambered in the hyphenated Winchesters--and threw in the towel on the Model 62. Seeing the strong aftermarket in converting Win 92's to 357 and 44 Magnum, they began chambering their Model 94 platform in those calibers, and they have been a steady seller since Day 1.

Just my random thoughts on the rise and fall of the Marlin Model 62.

[chasw]

You can get good .256 Win brass (formed from .357 mag) from eabco.com. Let me know if you need load data for cast bullets, I've got quite a bit from my .256 Contender carbine. The first step is to slug your barrel and measure the twist rate with a cleaning rod. - CW