please talk me out of this

[atr]

One of the members here is selling a JM Marlin 30-30 carbine. I am trying to talk myself into not buying this rifle because I already have a Win carbine 30-30.
The Marlin has a micro-grove rifling which I don't know much about. Also I don't know what the significance is of the 'JM' proof.
Is the Marlin more of a rifle than the Win?

thanks
atr

[Nueces]

The JM mark indicates a rifle made by Marlin before the Remington acquisition. Marlins feature side ejection, making them more scope (gag) friendly and they don't dump hot empties down your shirt. The flat Marlin receiver top makes top mounted aperture sights easier (thinking Skinners).

Winchesters are time tested John Browning designs and carry the western cachet of the name and history.

[Engineer1911]

The Marlin will not shoot cast bullets without a whole lot of silliness. On the other hand it will shoot jacketed bullets like gang busters. Years ago I had a 44 Magnum Marlin. My happiest day of ownership was when it went down the road. I got a XP-100 in 223 Rem in trade + $50. Best deal I ever made because I eventually sold that $147 XP for $800. OH HAPPY DAY!

[jaguarxk120]

The Marlin is a much stronger rifle by having a solid receiver. And as said the scope mounting is on to of the receiver.

[Conditor22]

That's tough, I like marlin BUT you have the win. You could use part of the money to get goodies for the win

[Shawlerbrook]

The Marlin is much better if want want to add a scope. I own many of both and like your kids, they all have their good and bad, but I love them all.

[dverna]

I have both....Like the Marlin as I like to use scopes. My M94 was bought as a "truck gun" and I paid $135 at an estate sale or would not own it.

No rational reason for you to add the Marlin unless your M94 is not shooting well, or you want to use a scope.

[trapper9260]

I got 2 Marlins. One is 44mag that I got used and shoot great for me and no problems and also had got a 30-30 new a few years ago and works good for me. I am happy with both. The 44 mag what I shoot in my RH it shoots better in the marlin with the same load also size one up from the RH and had tighter groups All works for me.

[HawkCreek]

The Marlin is a much stronger rifle by having a solid receiver. And as said the scope mounting is on to of the receiver.

No it's not, that a gun myth that just wont seem to die. Marlins are in fact weaker than their Winchester counterparts. Not a lot of difference but weaker all the same.

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/show...un-test-Part-1

[atr]

No rational reason for you to add the Marlin unless your M94 is not shooting well, or you want to use a scope

You are right there is no "rational" reason as my M94 shoots very well with cast and J's as does my Savage bolt action 30-30 which is very accurate and is scoped.

still though...the temptation is great.

[popper]

Marlin weaker than Win? Huh! Same action used in the 308MX & 444! Really? Yea, fail somewhere in the vicinity of 62,500 to 65,000 psi. Microgroove is fine for cast.
You can find the mfg. date by serial no., older ones appear to be 'better' if treated right. Marlin is a tad heavier, depending on model. If it's a shooter, it's good. It is a used rifle. Marlin doesn't get Win $$. you could get it bored to a bigger bore. Mine was a NIB with scope for 300$. Does what I want.

[dragon813gt]

The Marlin will not shoot cast bullets without a whole lot of silliness.

This is completely false. Your problem most likely came due to dimensional differences between 44 Mag revolvers and rifles. The rifles have a larger bore diameter which necessitates larger diameter bullets. Shooting the wrong diameter bullets will create problems in any gun.

Microgroove barrels like “fatter” bullets. That’s about the only “special” thing required. Size them a thousandth or two larger than normal and the rest is all the same. You may even find it shoots fine w/ the size you’d normally use. Every barrel is different and it’s the only thing that can tell you if what you’re doing is working.

[crash87]

The Marlin will not shoot cast bullets without a whole lot of silliness.

Looks like another, just spreading the myth started so long ago. I beg to differ, as a owner whom, actually shoots cast out of his microgrooved barrels, 357 mag, 35 Reimngton, 375 WCF, and 45/70. Never had to slick any of them up with "silliness".
atr, I do own a number of leverguns, in both makes plus 1 Browning. You may already have a Winchester, that should never mean you cant have another lever, make that one the Marlin.
If you need a reason, you shouldn't, but you will now be able to take two of the finest leverguns and compare them, side by side, but mostly, enjoy them!
crash87

[Texas by God]

Buy once, cry once. The Marlin might give your bolt action a run for its money in accuracy.
Mine does.
My Winchester is for inside 100yds, my Marlin with 4x scope is for beyond that.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[georgerkahn]

I have a couple Winnies, as well as Marlins. My Marlins are all of the newer vintage -- microgroove barrels, and they shoot cast bullets (one has never seen a jacket) with no difficulty. My main love is two-fold: that the ejection affords a scope mounted directly above the receiver; and, the lever is ever so easily removed for receiver to muzzle cleaning. A decade or so back I heard of a fellow selling pretty much all of his firearms, and by the time I got there only the very pristine (eg, Browning .348) and bottom-of-the-barrel ones remained. I looked at a Marlin 336 with a Tasco scope on it, and it followed me home. Several months later we had a day ducks wouldn't even enjoy -- hi-30s with snow and sleet mixed with drizzle -- but, that was the day for my (visiting) younger son to go hunting with me. More for companionship than anything else, I took the Marlin -- no way was my "good" Winchester going to be subjected to such elements. Murphy Law? We got a short window of opportunity on a 75-yard distant buck -- and, you might guess the rest of this story: That Marlin has become my 1st choice "go-to" hunting rifle. (I later learned the Tasco scope was a very early one, made for the Floridian group who put that corp together, by Redfield -- a remarkably well performing complement)
Re your "predicament" -- from my experience, I see NONE! I'd (if I had the $$$) buy the Marlin in a micro-second!
geo

[Edward]

One of the members here is selling a JM Marlin 30-30 carbine. I am trying to talk myself into not buying this rifle because I already have a Win carbine 30-30.
The Marlin has a micro-grove rifling which I don't know much about. Also I don't know what the significance is of the 'JM' proof.
Is the Marlin more of a rifle than the Win?

thanks
atr

YUP and when you can"t see much throw a scope on it .I have the same in a waffle top ,someone (D+T) it so I shot it scoped accurate but I have several so Jess made it a great shooting 38-55 ! Its still accurate to 200 yds and I have something different to cast for.:
It"s all good

[indian joe]

One of the members here is selling a JM Marlin 30-30 carbine. I am trying to talk myself into not buying this rifle because I already have a Win carbine 30-30.
The Marlin has a micro-grove rifling which I don't know much about. Also I don't know what the significance is of the 'JM' proof.
Is the Marlin more of a rifle than the Win?

thanks
atr

You have a winchester ---if you step DOWN to a marlin you will be disappointed

[sandog]

The Winchester 94 might very well be as strong as the Marlin 336, but.........
The Marlin, has been, and is chambered for such numbers as the .356 Winchester, .375 Winchester, 308 Marlin, .444 Remington and will shoot heavy .45/70 loads without a problem.
When Winchester wanted a rifle to shoot those loads, they had to beef up the 94, as the 94 had previously only been chambered for .25-35, 30/30, .32/40, 32 Special and 38-55. None of those are considered powerhouses.
Winchester felt the 94 needed a redesign to fire the cartridges that the Marlin was capable of firing, so in 1978 they came out with the "Big Bore" 1894, which used a thickened receiver.

I don't think Winchester would have needed to do that if the standard 94 was "stronger than a Marlin 336", as Hawk Creek suggested above.
Who are you gonna believe, a guy named Buck Elliot who maybe ? worked for Freedom Arms and screwed a .454 Casull barrel on some different receivers, or the engineers at Winchester ?

As far as cast bullets in the Microgroove barrels, you'll be fine. Use harder cast bullets that are .002" oversize, and if necessary, a gas check, and you'll get good accuracy.

[Beagle333]

You gotta do it. You just gotta. Everybody's gotta go through a JM marlin 30-30 at some point. And if you don't like it, they hold resale value very well because they don't make em no more. Jump right in there, I say!!! (That's my vote, anyway).

(Yes, I have a JM marlin AND a Winnie 94.)

[indian joe]

[QUOTE=sandog;4559308]The Winchester 94 might very well be as strong as the Marlin 336, but.........
The Marlin, has been, and is chambered for such numbers as the .356 Winchester, .375 Winchester, 308 Marlin, .444 Remington and will shoot heavy .45/70 loads without a problem.
When Winchester wanted a rifle to shoot those loads, they had to beef up the 94,

Being of the suspicious nature that I am ---I always wondered how much of that beefed up action was marketing blurb (most of it I reckon) and how much was factual from an engineering point

Yes they added metal at the back end around the locking bolt grooves - a nice aesthetic trick and created a "look" that was different- but the reciever walls from there forward remained the same thickness ?? I had a .375 BB94 - it was a nice rifle - well built - and they proly used a better quality steel (or should have). But I never trusted advertising BS and the BB 94 had plenty of that around it.