Rimfire Central Firearm Forum banner

Stock Advice

4K views 24 replies 10 participants last post by  HarryB 
#1 ·
So I acquired this vintage 39a and unfortunately, the previous owner over sanded the stock at the tang. It really bothers me in a rifle made so well so I want to make it right. Should I hint a replacement and refinish with oil? Should I get both the stock and fore end so they match better? I've heard about building up the sanded area but I've never attempted such a feat.

Suggestions for stocks?

Bonus, can the color case be brought back? Not too much of N issue as I love the patina.

This gun will be a shooter, not a queen of any kind.
 

Attachments

See less See more
3
#2 ·
The case color on that rifle looks nice to my eye, I wouldn't mess with it. The colors do fade over time when the gun is used. Maybe you can find a used stock on ebay but it would be a risk as far as a perfect fit. No other ideas but a sanded stock and protruding tang bother me too.
 
#5 · (Edited)
Keep it as is. It's a shooter. The rear sight ilooks like a replacement also. It should be a Rocky Mountain with the harpoon elevator.

If you want to put the money into it to find a matching, original, stock set it will run you $200-$400.

You can't "bring back" the case coloring. You can have the receiver and lever re-cased, but that will run you another $300-$400 and it won't match the current condition of the rest of the rifle. The only person I know of that can closely reproduce the old Marlin case colors is Al Springer.

http://smbgunrestorations.com/
 
#6 ·
Vepr762 sounds like your knowledgeable about the old models. I know squat. I appreciate your thoughts. I added some photos of that rear sight, receiver, and tang. I'd like to bend your ear some more if I may:

I dont like that rear sight at all. I hope it is a replacement and I'll hunt for the original.

Better yet, and purely for nostalgia, I'd like to use a tang sight rather than a receiver peep. Should be good as is, right?

Did someone tap for a scope base along the left of the rear sight? I dont plan on any optic, just curious and didn't think a 1941 model came that way.
 

Attachments

#7 · (Edited)
Harry your rear sight looks the like the same exact sight that i have on my Henry Goldenboy. Yes it does look like someone tapped the barrel for a scope. Yes just remove the 2 filler screws on the tang and you should be able to add a tang sight. I added one to mine but i forgot what model Lyman i got for it.
 
#11 ·
have a look at Treebone Carving website and you will see some beautiful custom stocks that would really change your feelings about the wood on your rifle.

Sent from my SM-G930R4 using Tapatalk
I did see this as I browsed for a proper stock. Were I to have a custom restoration done, I'd consider it. Otherwise it's like $5000 wheels on a $1000 truck.

I have seen the post on a beautiful 39a restoration on this site. At this time, I have neither the skills nor the funds for such a project.

I appreciate all the good advice and information you have shared
 
#14 · (Edited)
OK, some really good news for you.. First thing there is a very good chance that Rifle was tapped on the Barrel at the Factory, nearly 100% as a matter of fact, for a Weaver mount. Some early ones are well known to have been and yours looks right to me as far as hole spacing and does not look like a Bubba job. The "someone" as stated earlier who drilled the barrel was in all likely-hood, Marlin themselves.

Your case color looks great. Leave that alone for sure. It is worth finding a replacement stock of some kind in my opinion. That is a very pretty Rifle and worth putting some effort and money into the stock and finding a more appropriate or correct rear sight.. Leave all else alone.


It would also in my opinion be worth finding a original tang peep too if you wanted to go that route. Yes they are pricey too. But an original sight will always hold its value, and more. A new repro tang one will not and will not look right.. The correct rear sight with the fishook elevators are not too hard to find either.

What is the hole spacing on the holes on top the receiver? Just the rear two. The front one is a screw for the cartridge guide.
 

Attachments

#15 · (Edited)
I'm going to slightly disagree with a bunch of you. This is just my .02.:D

When I was collecting the general rule of thumb was that for every extra, non factory, hole drilled into the firearm you subtract $100 in value. There are 6 extra holes. This rifle is considered an excellent "shooter", but would not be considered in the "collector" class. Just being honest here. It's a fine firearm that the OP can shoot the crap out of, take in the woods, etc.

There is no way to prove that the rifle was sent back to Marlin for any of those holes. Marlin did offer, from 1954-1956, to d&t the barrel if you sent it back, but any competent gunsmith could do the same.

The holes on top of the receiver are not spaced correctly for a Hepburn sight. The 2 reproductions that have recently sold on Ebay were $300-$350 range.

It's the OP's decision how much money he wants to sink into this. The vintage market is very soft right now. Even the high condition stuff is off. The only firearms that seem to be extremely hot and increasing in value right now are Pre 1982 N frame S&W and any original condition pre WW2 1911.

I had a special order 1897 that I had restored 12-13 years ago. A $400 rifle that I put close to $2000 into it. There were enough flaws to convince me to never spend that kind of money to restore a rifle again. I Consigned it to Jack the Dog 5-6 years ago and it closed just a bit over $1800. The current owner consigned it back about a year ago and it closed at $1500. It looked to be in the same condition when he bought it.

https://www.gunauction.com/buy/15609026

My point is....it's easy to get carried away and spend money to make something look pretty or don't fix what ain't actually broke.:D

****
 
#16 · (Edited)
Yes I edited my post as I did not think the hole spacing was the correct .900 for the Hepburn, and the Hepburn sight was likely last offered on the 97 Model. Mind is getting old ya know. My mistake. That aside. I do believe the barrel was likely drilled and tapped for the weaver at Marlin. Can you 100% prove that. No probably not. But I am still of the opinion they were. Not 100% sure on the holes on top of the reciever though. They do look to be the proper spacing of the later 39A models though.

Still a nice looking early Rifle worth some effort to make it nice. I would run all this past the fellas on the Marlin Owners forum and see what they think.

This may be a interesting for the OP to read if he cares too.

ttps://www.marlinowners.com/forum/rimfires/88098-early-39a-tapped-barrel-i-took-chance.html
 
#21 · (Edited)
I have serious doubts about the buyers. 2 guys bidding this thing up. One has 1 feedback and the other has 3. They start their fight at $600. The loser is probably breathing a sigh of relief and the winner is waking up to a hell of a hangover.

This was either a classic pissing match or 2 guys with very little common sense (or knowledge) and a lot of money. I don't think anyone on this board would pay more than $500ish for that if they saw it in a LGS.

They could have had this one for a lot less, in mint condition, and all original except for the wood finish. This was not priced right for today's market. https://www.gunbroker.com/item/858666820
 
#22 ·
Well this got interesting while I was away! I will be on the hunt for a replacement stock and may even pay a little for it. This was a gift so I have no money in it. I don't plan to flip it--I plan to enjoy it and pass it on to someone in the future to enjoy.

I'll update when find a stock and update the proper sights. Hopefully a range report too.

Appreciate the discussion folks
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top