The Marlin 39 Club

[wankerjake]

I've wanted one ever since I saw Cottswald post pics of his. About 3 weeks after I was getting a steady post-education paycheck I saw this one online for $335 shipped. I couldn't resist and figured I deserved it. It's an older one, came with a Weaver B4 (pictured). The scope still tracks but is not very clear, so I bought a Weaver G4 on 24hr campfire and it's not clear either. Kinda sore about that actually. So then I found a Weaver marksman and that's what's on there now. It's clear and the tube is steel but the eyepiece is plastic. I'm not sure what to do, I don't like the plastic but I like the clarity. It's tough to find a clear 3/4: vintage tube, so it seems. I've seen some 2 old weaver 3/4" scopes in the pawn shop lately and they aren't clear either.

Anyway, it's a classy squirrel rig but makes it a bit tricky with crappy clarity. We'll see how it does this year with the marksman.

[Old judge creek]

Well, I reckon I'm a 39er, too since mine is a Marlin 1897 Cowboy model with the long octagonal barrel and wearing the factory Marbles front and rear sights. IIRC, I bought this rifle back in 1998 and apparently they were a short run by Marlin as I've seen VERY few since.

I rate this rifle as an indispensable member of my battery. Quite frankly, if I were forced to liquidate my 22 rifles down to one, I do believe this one would be the last man standing.

[MadDogVAQ33]

Looking in greater depth at the schematic at Wisners (Numrich schematic does not load with Mac, iPad, or Windows) I see that the nomenclature of what I REALLY need is the Carrier Rocker and (I suppose) Carrier Rocker Spring (8G-22 and 9G). The problem is the shape of what is in my Marlin is different from the Model 1892 schematic.

Will also check Jacksfirst.com on Tuesday.

Thanks for your help.

This Marlin has always been remarkable - my Dad used to set wooden match boxes on a fence and knock them off time after time at 100 yards with iron sights. When I was in high school in South Carolina I used to use it to clip mistletoe out of the upper branches by cutting the main stem with 2-3 shorts.

[dfariswheel]

Here's a schematic that should be valid for your 39:

http://www.stevespages.com/ipb-marlin-39a.html

The carrier assembly was pretty much the same on most Marlin's up until the later 1980's when they changed it to use a spring-loaded plunger staked into the carrier instead of the carrier rocker, part 50 on this schematic.

The carrier assembly is screwed to the RIGHT receiver wall and lifts a cartridge up to the feed position..

The cartridge stop is screwed to the LEFT receiver wall and prevents a cartridge from feeding out of the magazine until the bolt depresses it.

[MadDogVAQ33]

It is the cartridge stop and cartridge stop spacer I need. Numrich Arms schematics do not show on an iPad, a MacBook, or a desktop Windows PC.

Now the hunt begins.

[Aled93]

I was told we have a pre 39 model marlin 22 lever action. I am wondering where to look to find the value of this beautiful weapon, what features to look for to verify what we have, what year it is, and how many we're produced. It has a 4 didget serial number beginning with a 5, a fold down tank site and a flip up site at the end of the barrel. It also has a side screw for taking the weapon apart.

[Badlander]

Got pics? I for one would like to see that one

[dfariswheel]

Here's some good info on identification of the Marlin's.

http://www.wisnersinc.com/additional...ARF_rifles.htm

If you have a rifle that's not marked as a Model 39 or a 39-A, you almost certainly have a Model 1897.
The 1897 was made from 1897 to 1922, when it became the Model 39.

An 1897 would have a color case hardened receiver with either a straight or pistol grip stock.
Barrel lengths were 16" to 28".

Value depends on actual condition of remaining finish and any non-standard options, such as original factory optional sights.
A standard rifle in 10% condition would be worth around $375.
One in 90% would be worth at least $2,220.

Note that these early rifles SHOULD NOT be fired with High Speed ammo due to the bolt breaking. Shoot ONLY with Standard Velocity ammo.

[Nematocyst]

Wow, this is exciting.

[philbert]

I'd like your help, please. I'm trying to decide if getting a peep sight is worth the expense. I'm thinking Skinner in Black Gold with at least one additional smaller aperature.

I took my 39A with the factory irons to the range and used an NRA A-17 target at 50'. I sent 40 rounds of Federal Bulk PHP downrange at the 10 perimiter targets and scored X five times. The average spread of those ten targets was close enough to 1 1/16th inch as to make no difference. That includes shot number 33 when I missed the scoring rings altogether. I was shooting from a bench, sitting and using my elbow as the rest. These old peepers were so tired at the end that the session was over. The longer I shot the wider the groups were getting.

Next day I took my 1956(ish) Mossberg 146B-A with a J C Higgins 4X scope and a target I copied from here, somewhere, that is a series of bulls exactly the size of a quarter. Shooting the same way I put 60 mixed rounds (the Federal bulk and CCI Blazer bulk) on the targets and scored every time. I hit X 15 times. I know I'm never going to win a blue ribbon with this talent but few edible rodents are going to escape me.

So please weigh in ... will a Skinner peep make enough difference in my "Walter" 39A to justify the $90 or so I'm thinking about? Are they no more accurate but that much easier on the old eye-bones? Tell me what you're thinking.

[PX15]

philbert:

I bought a Skinner Black Gold Peep sight for my 1996 39A. The quality and appearance of the "Black Gold" peep sight are first rate, and Andy (at Skinner) is a great guy.

I didn't keep my Skinner because I didn't want to replace my front sight, and it was necessary to counter rotate the Skinner several times before I was getting a relationship between the Skinner and the factory front sight that allowed reasonable accuracy.

Additionally when the Skinner has to be elevated by counter rotation it is not very pretty on the rifle. No sense in buying a beautiful peep sight if you have to adjust it so much that adjustment makes the final product less than appealing visually.

If YOU are willing and capable of replacing the front sight, then I'd say the Skinner will do a great job for you.

FWIW, I have a 1970 Century Limited with a Redfield peep sight (added by the original owner back in 1970, and he replaced the front sight as well at that time). I have a 1975 39A with a Williams (?) peep sight, and it is awesomely accurate. The modification was done by the previous owner who was into target shooting.

I'm 69 years old and however you go, (Skinner or another peep sight) once you get it dialed in your accuracy will dramatically increase..

Good Shootin'

Jesse

[mainmech48]

I've had a Williams "Foolproof" receiver sight mounted on my old M39M since about a month after I bought it, circa 1980. If your M39 is one which has the factory drilled and tapped mounting holes on the left rear side of the receiver, I'd highly recommend that you consider it.

Mine did not require that the front sight be replaced with a taller one to obtain a proper zero. IME, this is almost always true with other M39s, too. A few years back I did replace the stock front sight with a Williams fiber optic bead of the same height when my aging eyes began to have trouble obtaining good definition in my sight picture. The FO bead remedied this quite nicely and is also much faster to pick up on in the woods.

Williams also makes a more 'basic' version called the "5D" that lacks the micrometer 'click' adjustment feature but is just as capable of delivering fine accuracy with as the FP is and is very reasonably priced. The two models both accept the same wide assortment of different sized apertures which run about $8/each.

If yours is one of the newer models without the traditional side mounting holes, Williams offers the very compact and functional "Guide" model which uses the rear pair of scope mount holes and can be had as a matched set with a "Firesight" FO front of the proper height for a very attractive price, usually around $40-50. Installation is an easy DIY.

Nothing against the Skinners; I simply have no personal experience with them. Just saying that you needn't shell out nearly a "C-note" to get the full benefits of using a receiver sight unless you want to.

[dfariswheel]

You'll almost always get better accuracy and faster shots with an aperture (peep) rear sight. This is why virtually no military rifle uses the old open, barrel mount sights any more.

Instead of having to align the front sight with the rear sight, then align them both with the target, you simply look through the rear sight and align the front sight on the target. Your eye will automatically center the front sight in the rear peep.
This is also more accurate due to the longer sight radius and the more precise centering of the front sight in the peep rear.
This is why no target rifle that uses iron sights uses the old open sights.

Last, the peep sight gives an optical illusion that makes the front sight appear to be sharper and more defined, which makes for better accuracy with bad eyes.

[Nematocyst]

Dfariswheel, I've been reading about peeps (and ghost rings) for years, even though I have yet to switch my 39 to them (it's on the list, but first getting it over here from storage on the other coast).

(I did put a set of ghost rings on my 336, and like the concept, but not the ones I put on it. I want some other set with a smaller rear aperture.)

But that's the best, clearest, most succinct description I've ever read about them that covers all the main factors.

If you were going to put a set of squirrel hunting peeps on a 39, what would they be?

Nem

PS: I understand the quality and appeal of the sights - like the Williams on PX15's 39 - especially for those who target shoot.

For me though, it's just too much metal sticking off the side. And it's not fully rational; some of it is just aesthetic for me.

I really like Andy Skinner's receiver-top sights - just low pro and sleek - and honestly, that's my top choice right now. I'd change the front sight in a heartbeat. In fact, the front sight will be replaced when I have the barrel chopped.

[dfariswheel]

I've always preferred the Williams or Lyman receiver mount models.
For no special reason, I usually bought the Williams.
If you want to spend the money, buy the versions that have micrometer click adjustment screws.
The Williams can also be ordered with Target type knobs for the adjusting screws, but it does make the sight a little larger. The advantage is, you don't need a screwdriver to adjust the sight.

If you just want good sight, the lesser priced versions aren't as easily adjusted because you have to loosen locking screws and slide the sight, then tighten the screws back down.

The Williams and the Lyman are both made of aluminum now, where the older Lyman was steel.
Note also that you can buy various sizes of screw-in apertures so you can get the sight picture you want. A smaller aperture hole is more accurate, but slower to use.

Here's the 1950 model I rebuilt. The sight is the cheaper Williams.
In this case, I really didn't need the micrometer adjustments.

[Nematocyst]

Nice overview of the Williams and Lyman. Thanks.

Found a nice review of the Skinners by Jeff at Gunblast.

Note his fondness of the 39, even if it is the Century limited edition.

[CrackerJim]

I've got a new Henry 45 colt that I just put the skinner receiver sight on. Whether I'm shooting one of my old battle rifles or the new lever gun, my 39a that I inherited from Grandad is always at the shooting line.

I like the Skinner sight on the Henry so I just ordered one for the Marlin. Can't beat the little Marlin for plinking enjoyment.

Jim

[Alaska444]

I have a Skinner Sight on my Marlin 1894c in .357 and my Marlin .444. I have been able to shoot 1.5 inch groups at 100 yards with my Marlin .444. Great sights and they look fantastic as well.

[JustsayMo]

If you were going to put a set of squirrel hunting peeps on a 39, what would they be?

Nem: You would be hard pressed to beat the Skinner's for that application. I've used them on one of my 39's for Silhouette matches and I'm able to shoot the 40 meter chickens with a leg/body hold and the 100 meter Rams with a cover/top of spine hold. For all practical purposes I've found that even though it requires tools to change elevation and windage I can get by with one sight setting.

Since Squirrel hunting in these parts is less common my 39's primary game is Grouse. I went with a slightly smaller than the standard aperture as a compromise between precision and field of view and been pretty happy with it except in dark woods at dusk. Unscrewing the aperture gives you a very useable ghost ring for those conditions.

Another consideration is the thickness of the Skinner front sight. My preference is for a skinnier than what he typically offers and will substitute if you ask. In the field I prefer a very small gold bead to a black post though. They are readily available in a variety of heights to match your needs and ammunition.

Oh and the Century Limiteds are the BEST of the bunch...

[76shuvlinoff]

I put a Skinner post peep sight on my 39A a couple years ago. I was frustrated by it so I put it away and for a long time I focused on my sidearms..... fast forward.
A PM from a member here about the skinner renewed my interest so today I rigged up a makeshift bench (lawn chair and a barrel). I have a smaller aperture installed in the ring. At 40 yards today with my redneck arrangement and running Federal Automatch I am well within a 2" circle but that's the best I can manage today. It has been nearly 2 years since I had my 39 out. I need to learn to rotate the stuff in the locker!

I'm thinking it's not the arrow it's the Indian but what is the advantage to replacing the front sight? Is it lower? I have the factory front hooded sight on my 39A.

By the way, I'm 52 and the eyes are not great, I've been wearing glasses to correct nearsightedness since the 3rd grade.

- Mark

[tubeshooter]

If the rifle shoots to aim with the Skinner rear and the factory front, I would leave it as-is.

Looks like most people don't have to change their front sights, from what I've read.


I have a Skinner front, and I have no problem with it... but I can't use the front sight hood since it is so tall. I could probably file it down enough to use the hood if I wanted, but it's not that big a deal to me.

[JustsayMo]

I think the front sight is a preference thing. The only real reason to change it is if you can't achieve the zero you want or it blocks too much of the target to get the precision you desire. For me that is with the rear sight all the way down I want it to print point of aim or just slightly lower at 50 yards. That way if I ever have a need for a longer zero I have the entire adjustment left to get there. The front sight is a compromise (except for height) - big enough to see, small enough not to be in the way.

In the field that 50 yard zero works fine for "point blank zero" out to almost 70 yard on the game I'd shoot with a 22. I rarely have time to laser range when I'm hunting but at Grouse hunting ranges you don't need to be exact. I know if I'm 25 yards or so I need to be just below the base of the neck into the body and that will usually give me a lower neck hit which I prefer. It also gives me some latitude since the vast majority of my shots at game are offhand and the target is rarely a fully visible perfectly still critter, a wobble on my part might still yield a lethal body hit or a clean miss.

Since there isn't a lot of meat on em anyway I don't want to spoil the best part.


Back at camp Grouse fajitas are where it's at!


Find out what works for what you do with your 39 and your abilities.

[76shuvlinoff]

Thanks for the replies about the Skinner. My Skinner post type peep is up a couple threads. Were my front sight shorter I could lower the rear... correct?


- Mark

[Nematocyst]

Back at camp Grouse fajitas are where it's at!

Laughs!

Given your location in the Pac NW, I predict that
you're missing sufficient chili hotness to qualify for fajitas.

But point well taken.

I have no grouse over here, but lots of squirrel.

Squirrel fajitas. With extra chili. 4 star.

And Skinner it is. Gotta get the rifle here, though.

[Bob1959]

I am new to this board. I have a 39A I bought 3 years ago. It will only shoot 3 inch diameter groups at 50 yards. I thought it was me at first but then I bought a gun vise and still 3 inches at 50 yards.

I really expected better from this gun. I am thinking I should return it to Marlin for repair.

Is there anything else I can do? I have tried every kind of ammo I can buy and I have tried 2 different brand new scopes.

Bob