Winchester vs Marlin
- Thread starter TheDutchman19
- Start date
Just my opinion
My Dad owned a Win 94 in 1967, purchased new. It was of course in .30-.30. It kicked like a mule and consequently shot like crap. Now it was the short barrel model but that straight stock just beat me up.
I have had a Marlin 39A since about 67 or 68 and it is a tack driver. Based on my experience, and the ease of mounting a scope on the 336 Marlin, that would be my preference.
My Dad owned a Win 94 in 1967, purchased new. It was of course in .30-.30. It kicked like a mule and consequently shot like crap. Now it was the short barrel model but that straight stock just beat me up.
I have had a Marlin 39A since about 67 or 68 and it is a tack driver. Based on my experience, and the ease of mounting a scope on the 336 Marlin, that would be my preference.
steveNChunter
New member
My early 70's Marlin 336 in .35 rem has a straight stock but I've never thought the recoil to be that bad. It's also a carbine barrel. The .30-30 and .35 just aren't big enough cases to generate a ton of recoil IMO.
No, they don't generate a ton of recoil, on paper. But there's more to it than just the energy figures. There is the feel of the recoil.
At age 16, I had a choice of deer rifles, a Win 94 in .30-30 or a Rem Model 600 in .308 Win. A summer shooting outing convinced me to choose the .308. The Winchester was the classic carbine, an older gun, with a steel buttplate. Shooting that gun, the way the stock fit me, with its drop and the steel butt was not a pleasant experience.
Shooting the more powerful .308 in the light Remington bolt action carbine was not as brutal on my shoulder. Mind you, the 600 kicks a lot more, but it didn't feel as bad as the Winchester, to me. Now I know that there are a lot of different things that could be done to tame the Winchester. A slip on recoil pad would have made a lot of difference, as would shooting wearing the kind of clothes one hunted in. But at the time, 40 some years ago, I didn't know that. I made my choice, and was very well served by it, and still am.
later on, getting to shoot a Marlin, with its bigger butt, pistol grip, different weight and "feel" convinced me that in a "classic" levergun, I enjoy shooting the Marlin more than the Winchester.
I have a Marlin 336, currently, as well as an 1894 (.357) and I recently traded off an 1895 (.45-70) as excess to need. I can tell you that stout loads in the .45-70 Marlin will make one forget all about the bite of a Winchester .30-30!
mxsailor803
New member
JMR - HOLY LEVERGUNS!!! You have a problem, you have too many leverguns so spread the wealth
FrankenMauser
New member
I like the Winchesters, but I prefer the Marlins. As others have said... buying a used Marlin is more likely to result in a decent (or great) rifle, than taking a chance on a Winchester. Much of that is due to the other reason I prefer Marlins...
The Winchesters are more complicated (not by much, but by enough to matter). There's more to go wrong, and many of the guns on the used market are there because something did go wrong.
Of course, it's a very nice bonus that you can pick up the Marlins and "off-brand" Marlins (Western Field, Glennfield, Kmart, etc) for half the price, or less, than that of Winchesters in the same condition.
I just picked up a fantastic '70s production 336C in .30-30 for $260, and that's barely below average around here. It is a solid rifle with a nicely broken-in and smooth action, some minor bluing wear, and two little dings in the butt stock. And it came with a mounted scope, and a good sling.
Oh, and one other thing about post-64 Winchesters....
They have a sintered metal receiver that does not respond well to bluing. So, Winchester iron-plated them at the factory, and then blued the iron plating. If you get a post-64 rifle that has a lot of bluing wear or deep scratches, and you want to fix it, it will cost you much more than the same restoration on a Marlin (or pre-64 Winchester).
The Winchesters are more complicated (not by much, but by enough to matter). There's more to go wrong, and many of the guns on the used market are there because something did go wrong.
Of course, it's a very nice bonus that you can pick up the Marlins and "off-brand" Marlins (Western Field, Glennfield, Kmart, etc) for half the price, or less, than that of Winchesters in the same condition.
I just picked up a fantastic '70s production 336C in .30-30 for $260, and that's barely below average around here. It is a solid rifle with a nicely broken-in and smooth action, some minor bluing wear, and two little dings in the butt stock. And it came with a mounted scope, and a good sling.
Oh, and one other thing about post-64 Winchesters....
They have a sintered metal receiver that does not respond well to bluing. So, Winchester iron-plated them at the factory, and then blued the iron plating. If you get a post-64 rifle that has a lot of bluing wear or deep scratches, and you want to fix it, it will cost you much more than the same restoration on a Marlin (or pre-64 Winchester).
Been there
New member
''They have a sintered metal receiver that does not respond well to bluing. So, Winchester iron-plated them at the factory, and then blued the iron plating. If you get a post-64 rifle that has a lot of bluing wear or deep scratches, and you want to fix it, it will cost you much more than the same restoration on a Marlin (or pre-64 Winchester).''
I have to agree , my father had a 1969 model which would rust if someone sneezed & the bluing came off without any encouragement. Accuracy was pretty hopeless as well .
I have to agree , my father had a 1969 model which would rust if someone sneezed & the bluing came off without any encouragement. Accuracy was pretty hopeless as well .
I had one also, it had a rust problem and I was told it couldn't be re-blued. I found out the hard way that cold blue wouldn't work either, what a mess! 94's are nice trim little rifles but I'd rather have a Marlin. Try pulling the bolt out of each one, you better be mechanically inclined if you have a Winchester!
Dirty_Harry
New member
Marlin all the way for me. My 336 in .35 is my go to deer gun. The 336 has a nice scout scope setup I like. I also have an 1895M in 450 that I absolutely love.
I have one of each. I love the way the winchester feels in my hands. Its slim and light like a modern kentucky rifle. I have a williams peep on mine. And mine is a post 64 with the cast parts not the stamped. I have no issues with how its made. And I bought it just about 6 months ago for $275. Its a little skinned up but that just means I don't have to baby it.
My marlin was made in 1978 IIRC and has the cross bolt safety plus a half cock saftery. The cross bolt saftey doesn't bother me in the least. I used to have an O-ring on it so it was disabled. It took it off and never worried about it again.
I like the fact that its easy to scope. It doesn't have a scope on it now but as soon as I pick up another VX-1 2x7 it will wear glass again. A scope just gives me so much of an advantage and the gun has shot 1" groups in the past so I know its accurate. You can only shoot as well as you can see.
My marlin was made in 1978 IIRC and has the cross bolt safety plus a half cock saftery. The cross bolt saftey doesn't bother me in the least. I used to have an O-ring on it so it was disabled. It took it off and never worried about it again.
I like the fact that its easy to scope. It doesn't have a scope on it now but as soon as I pick up another VX-1 2x7 it will wear glass again. A scope just gives me so much of an advantage and the gun has shot 1" groups in the past so I know its accurate. You can only shoot as well as you can see.
Well, not entirely true. In 1983 and since, with the advent of the "angle-eject" model (allowing you to use a top-mounted scope for those so inclined), Winchester reverted to making Model 94s (as DPris correctly stated) with all forged steel parts and a more conventional bluing.
FrankenMauser
New member
Sintered graphitic steel.
If they were cast, they wouldn't have had to plate them for bluing.
Try using a good receiver sight like the Williams or Lyman. A much quicker sight acquisition can be achieved than you can ever get with conventional irons if you use a peep sight for hunting correctly (sighting through the aperture, focusing only on the front sight and not attempting to center the front sight with the rear opening). With a little practice, you'll be pleasantly surprised as to how speedy a receiver sight can be.
For a everyday work gun I would go with a Marlin. I like the feel of a Winchester better, but I think the Marlin is tougher, simpler, and more well suited for real world use. Also, if you intend to scope it, a Marlin just looks better with glass on top. A 94 doesn't look right at all with a scope.