Marlin 39 to be resurrected

A lot of unrealistic expectations here. I miss Marlin. The real Marlin. Not the Marlin that existed 100 years ago. Well both, but I am not able to travel back in time. No more Model A Fords either. Marlin, in the final days, was building a fine line of rifles and they had the safety and rebounding hammer. There is an easy kit to remove the safety. For the NON COLLECTOR, the safety is an EASY FIX. Expecting Ruger to go build a replica gun from the past is unrealistic!! Ruger will be moving forward and not backwards. if Marlin was in business they would be moving forward. I would like backwards, but that is crazy talk. If the last guns the real Marlin built were junk, then I am at a loss. Who are the people here? Really, what is this forum about collector nostalgia or practical people wanting Marlins? Ruger cannot build a collector gun!! As posted already, it is not practical. By definition the collector stuff is old and out of production.

The reason the old bluing on the Marlin was duller and better was becasue it COST LESS. To much blue scares the animals. OMG, does anyone actually believe that line??? I dont want the gloss blue becasue it adds to much cost, not because it scares the game. Marlin was a great value. A little too much rewrite of history going on here. If Ruger is over doing the finish, I agree all a Malrin needs is a finish like the American's no more and no special effort to do less.

Vz.58 said:

I have a 39a 1954. Ballard rifling. It's a fine little rifle. Feel grateful to own it. I did play around with a "golden" I think it was with the rebounding hammer just wasn't too keen on it. Returned it. If ruger wants to resurrect the 39 in some form I hope it's a success. Most of these resurrection guns I have seen are pretty pricey. That sorta rules out a kid being able to afford one. That's kinda too bad. It is a business though, cutthroat at that, and the bottom line is profits.

Click to expand...

So can we agree it is better for MOST of us if Ruger builds gun most or more people can afford rather than cater to the 1%? Marlin was never an elite gun. Even the 39A could use some internal redesign to make manufacturing practical. My min expectation is zero plastic, zero alloy, nice walnut and an ACCURATE barrel. It should cost more than a Henry because it would be a step up from Henry. it should cost less than a comparable Miruko, if there is a comp. Labor in Japan is higher than the USA and the Miruko's get a more expensive finish.

For a 22 lever I would be fine with a 39B, non takedown. Perhaps part of the internal redesign would allow for 22mag. Some part reduction. Externally keep as much of the 'look' as possible. That is how business should work. Smart. And those with a safe full of Marlins, self included can be happy for what they have. No need to crap all over the new stuff just to try and boost the vaue of your collection. I know, I am a big time crapper myslef. CZ as an example.

vepr762 said:

People still think Remington had a "custom shop". All they did was buy Dakota Arms, said you could pay Dakota Arms $3000+, and Dakota Arms would build you a "custom" 39A . Dakota Arms was where Remington sent you when you wanted something special done. Remington didn't have the experience or facilities.

IIRC Dakota Arms was bought from Remington and is now Parkwest Arms. I'm not 100% on that, but I believe I read an article about the sale.

Click to expand...

Define custom here. Remington had a custom shop in Ilion, NY, what all they offered is not known by me, but engraving, custom rifles, etc.... was done there. Wasn't the first synthetic stock mtn rifle a custom shop offering?
They may have bought Dakota Arms, but a section of that shop was dedicated to the Remington custom shop. I know this because I know the shop and the guy that trued the Rem 700 actions for their rifles. And the amount of trued actions coming out of his shop for Remington, was pretty substantial. Were they all used in Rem custom shop, I have no idea here. And, any rifle coming from their custom shop may not be full on custom in a true sense, but they were a better product than factory run of the mill. I am sure, they were limited as to what could be outsourced to produce a rifle, mainly stocks.
No doubt any custom 39A was a Dakota product, not Rem, as they were managed by different people and ran separately.

No, you can't go back in time, but you can buy as many old Model As and old 39s as you'd like; they made millions of both...2.2 million 39s since 1922. No, you can't buy them for $10, but you can't buy a house for $8,000, or Apple stock for 1980 prices either. The purists will never be happy with a reproduction/reintroduction, anyway, especially one marked "Ruger," but they represent only a very small number of potential buyers.
So, who wants a brand-new 39A, and how much will they be willing to pay? That's the question Ruger faces. If a new 39A costs $1000, how many will just go buy a vintage rifle? How important is buying new with a factory warranty to you?

If it happens, it happens, but, no matter what happens, the weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth will continue.

Seems like a tempest in a teapot to me.

fourbore said:

I hit the like for the rebounding hammer comment then I read the quoted above. This is not true. I did buy Marlin's for the accuracy. First one was a surprise and that resulted in more purchased. I was not a collector buying a name. I hated the safety but I found I could live with that. The Winchester 94 Safety button was an abomination. Marlin not so bad. And later a screw was marketed to replace the Marlin button. Problem solved.

Click to expand...

I've also been surprised at the accuracy of my Marlin 39M... and also my Winchester 9422 and my late '50s Browning ATD-22 (SA22). And at the three Winchester 67s I own. I wonder if .22 LR ammo has just become so much more consistent and the tolerances tightened up over the years. I'll stand by my statement above but rephrase it: people who are looking for superlative accuracy buy bolt actions, not lever actions. Even the creation of aftermarket bull barrels with match chambers, aftermarket trigger groups, and aftermarket stocks for the Ruger 10/22 since the 1990s has revolutionized our expectations of .22 accuracy. Previously, most semi autos were accepted as simply not inherently accurate, but as the industry learned more about the importance of chamber dimensions, things changed.

I find the cross bolt safety ugly, but it does work... and I taught my son to engage the safety before lowing the hammer as a good habit that protects the user from ADs. In the field, I don't use the safety, just cock the hammer when I'm ready.

TEDDY BEAR RAT said:

No, you can't go back in time, but you can buy as many old Model As and old 39s as you'd like; they made millions of both...2.2 million 39s since 1922. No, you can't buy them for $10, but you can't buy a house for $8,000, or Apple stock for 1980 prices either. The purists will never be happy with a reproduction/reintroduction, anyway, especially one marked "Ruger," but they represent only a very small number of potential buyers.
So, who wants a brand-new 39A, and how much will they be willing to pay? That's the question Ruger faces. If a new 39A costs $1000, how many will just go buy a vintage rifle? How important is buying new with a factory warranty to you?

If it happens, it happens, but, no matter what happens, the weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth will continue.

Seems like a tempest in a teapot to me.

Click to expand...

Agreed. On the other hand when you have a couple million older rifles to compete with, it helps if they are high priced on the used market.

There‘s always the question of how much someone will pay for a new lever action .22 LR. I have a couple BL-22s, three 9422s, an uncheckered XTR, a Trapper, and a Legacy, and a Marlin 39A. They pretty well cover the higher quality options.

The BL-22s is still in production and while it has never been inexpensive, prices are not crazy either. A brand new Grade 1 BL-22 can be had for $700-$750. The Grade 2 BL-22s are a couple hundred more. Prices for a Grade 1 in used excellent condition are in the $500-$550 range.

Those new BL-22s still sell well as $700-750. Personally, I never quite understood why folks who buy Henrys for $400 don’t just spend a little more and get a much better quality BL-22. But those $500 used BL-22s are not always available in a gun shop.

The 9422s I‘ve owned 3-10 years have all greatly appreciated. $700-$750 would get a excellent condition 9422 XTR with no box 10 years ago, and the going rate for them doubled since then.

They are priced high enough now that I’m glad I bought mine when I did. I don’t think I would pay $1500 for even a new lever action of comparable quality to a 9422. Ironically back when I bought my 9422 XTR people told me I paid way too much at $700 for what they felt was a $450 gun.

I recently bought a 1946 Marlin 39A (Ballard rifling, factory drilled and tapped tang, no safety and no rebounding hammer). It is an older reblue and thus a $500-$600 rifle. That compares $1000-$1200 for a rifle from the same era in similar condition. There are a surprisingly large percentage of reblued Marlin 39s and 39As out there and ai think that speaks to their value as shooters rather than just solely collectors. over the last few years I have passed on a few excellent condition 39As and I only regret not buying one of them (priced at $995 a few years ago).

I bought this 39A so as a shooter so the reblue doesn’t bother me. I intended from the start to put a vintage Marbles tang sight on it, so I was looking for an older 39A with the D&Td tang.






So…my thoughts are that Ruger is going to have to price them competitively with the BL-22 and keep the price in the $750-800 range. Once they start getting much over that and into the $1000 range, they will be competing with a lot of nice vintage 39As.

So, I stumbled across a pre-cross bolt 39A in a local pawn shop with some dust on it... it has been sitting for a while. But... the bore is pristine, the bluing is pristine, the stock is pristine, the wood-to-metal and metal-to-metal fit is very, very good. I figure it's from the early 1980s. Honestly, it looks unfired... really. What is something like this worth? Let's say it's 98% and may have been fired but, again, the barrel still has bluing in the muzzle. No, it hasn't been refinished.

Regarding the Ruger-Marlin 39A, if they did them in stainless steel they'd sell like hotcakes, and there's no competition from used or new .22 lever-actions. Do a K39M first, then a K39A, with laminated stocks, retail them for $1000 ($699 dealer pricing) and you'd hear a tremendous sucking sound as enthusiastic purchasers ordered them by the thousands.