Ruger buys Marlin

mlankton said:

yeah but even if they go investment cast on the Marlin receivers, look at Ruger's bolt actions. Investment cast since day one and classics. Nothing wrong with casting when it's used in the same sentence as Ruger.

Click to expand...

True, but you’re thinking objectively about something that people view subjectively. If they make them thicker they will feel different. Different is bad, especially to people with small hands.

To quote Garth from Wayne’s World, “We fear change.”

jski said:

Ruger bought Marlin. Personally I think this is the best possible outcome for Marlin.

Click to expand...

I have to agree with this assertion. I like the Marlin lever guns (I have two) and I think Ruger may be the American gun maker best suited to help us continue enjoying new Marlins.

That the Model 60 is a competitor to the 10/22 seems moot. But guns have their own adherents (I have one of each) and there's obviously room in the market for both.

I would have rather had Savage own them. But I guess they were outbid. We can blabber but Ruger most likely will do okay, I sure hope so.

The Marlin M60 is probably more accurate out of the box than the lower end 1022s. But now maybe we can have Micro Groove 1022, .

I don’t know if this is good or bad for Marlin....

Marlin has two things that Ruger has not enjoyed in the rifle world, and that is a reputation for accurate shooting, and authentic (old) feeling guns.

I kind of think Ruger’s interest in Marlin had 2 fronts. One is the patented “micro groove rifling” & it’s manufacturing process. Marlin’s centerfire bolt actions, also, have really impressed outdoor writers over and over in F&S and Outdoor Life massive rifle reviews. I distinctly remember the Marlin bolt rifles shooting under 1 MOA before that was a guaranteed thing in the bolt market. Rugers of late manufacture dates don’t have that reputation in the bolt gun market, because they don’t “shoot” like Remmy’s and Marlins did, and I’ve not seen much to dispute that idea. My own experience with the 3 brands confirms the idea that the greatest knock on Ruger rifles is poor accuracy, compared to other brands, and both Marlin and Remington were ahead of Ruger in this regard.

The 2nd thing I’d think, is that by buying Marlin, they now have conquered THE greatest competition in the .22lr rifle market. Facts. Marlin sold over 11 million model 60’s to Ruger’s 5-6 million. This is just a smart move. If another company revived Marlin you’d have a direct competitor, THE greatest competitor in that market. Any Walmart shelf proves it. The model 60 is still sold out every fall around me, and IF, they ever reissued an authentic 39A at a consumer price (not a custom shop price) the wait list will be a year if not years, a Tikka T1X wait list kind of thing.

So they have that reputation, and they have a functionality that Ruger doesn’t currently have. If I wanted to shoot great groups from a bolt action hunting rifle, Ruger is not what pops into mind.

Now, I’m a little concerned that Ruger takes the knowledge from Remlin, applies it to Ruger, and folds or neglects Marlin, just choosing to let them die slow with older consumers. And Ruger, for me, has gone in a bad direction in long guns for the last 2-3 decades...
Comparing a 70’s made Ruger to a new one, is no comparison at all. The new ones work, are solid, but nothing as good as a Browning A-bolt for same money, or even shoot like the cheaper Savages do. The fit and finish is industrial functional, and not traditionally slick the way Browning still is! And there’s incredible competition there now, with Savage revived, and Tikka and Bergara now offering consumer prices on great shooting guns.

This should concern the Marlin fan. Casting instead of forging, size and weight changes ALL make the difference between a decent gun and one you really love to hunt with. Ruger has gone tactical. They sell hp rifles with 20” barrels... which is just dumb.

I hope, but in today’s bean counting, bottom line environment of stocks and mergers, I fear that Marlin might lose here. Much like Winchester was farmed out to Turkey by FN, because why have a sister company make better guns than the flagship, the same might happen here?

I’d feel better about it if not for what Ruger has done to their long guns of late......

3Crows said:

I would have rather had Savage own them. But I guess they were outbid. We can blabber but Ruger most likely will do okay, I sure hope so.

The Marlin M60 is probably more accurate out of the box than the lower end 1022s. But now maybe we can have Micro Groove 1022, .

Click to expand...

3crows that’s kinda what I’m thinking was in Ruger’s head in buying them.. see my post. I agree with your post.

I’d almost bet they dump every Marlin that isn’t a lever gun....

But it would be so stupid, too!

Would you buy a model 60 with a stainless internals instead of alloy, and with accurate sights and a walnut and figured maple stock? I know that I would! There’s more money there than in making the 10/22 shoot out of the box! And it’s overpriced.

Old Hat said:

3crows that’s kinda what I’m thinking was in Ruger’s head in buying them.. see my post. I agree with your post.

I’d almost bet they dump every Marlin that isn’t a lever gun....

But it would be so stupid, too!

Would you buy a model 60 with a stainless internals instead of alloy, and with accurate sights and a walnut and figured maple stock? I know that I would! There’s more money there than in making the 10/22 shoot out of the box! And it’s overpriced.

Click to expand...

Well, I was half way kidding but as a long time owner of many Ruger and Marlins and a fan of both companies, I still would rather have my new fav, Savage, own them.

I suspect Marlin CF bolt guns are a dead issue. Can't remember if marlin dropped them or if Remington lopped them off as unwelcome competition but i doubt Ruger will resurrect them.
Especially since they've put effort into improving the American Rifle as far as accuracy.

Well, lets wait and see how it goes. I've never been impressed with Ruger but there are a lot of people that are. I want to see if Ruger can do better than Remington did.

I'm not as fond as micro groove barrels as some of you may be. None of my more accurate rimfire guns came with micro groove rifling. I'm not talking about specialized target guns with special barrels either.

I wish my 39 had standard Ballard rifling, too. But it is what it is.

chicharrones said:

Hmmm. How many versions of the Ruger 10/22 were ever offered at one time? Currently it's 62, certainly much less back in the day. Regardless, no one has to get the entry level 10/22 carbine type if they don't want to.

Click to expand...

And no matter which version you get, they still come with a P poor trigger and bbl. ect..

All so you can start buying parts to make it, like Ruger SHOULD HAVE MADE IT, and could make it, for very few dollars more, or even less than a few dollars.

DM

DM~ said:

And no matter which version you get, they still come with a P poor trigger and bbl. ect..

All so you can start buying parts to make it, like Ruger SHOULD HAVE MADE IT, and could make it, for very few dollars more, or even less than a few dollars.

DM

Click to expand...

Speaking of triggers, any Marlin lever gun made after the cross bolt safety was implemented needs a trigger job right out of the box, IMO. While this seems to be much less so for Henry lever guns.

Considering Ruger's boss stated "Long Live the Lever Gun", I'm sure Marlin lever gun triggers will stay exactly the same as when Marlin and Remington had them.

That ought to keep the lever gun aftermarket companies happy.

chicharrones said:

Speaking of triggers, any Marlin lever gun made after the cross bolt safety was implemented needs a trigger job right out of the box, IMO. While this seems to be much less so for Henry lever guns.

Considering Ruger's boss stated "Long Live the Lever Gun", I'm sure Marlin lever gun triggers will stay exactly the same as when Marlin and Remington had them.

That ought to keep the lever gun aftermarket companies happy.

Click to expand...

The best thing I did, expensive as it was, my favorite four Marlins, three got a WWG Happy Trigger and the other a RPP trigger. Love them. No more trigger flop, smoother and more crisp. I think Wolf makes reduced effort hammer springs, maybe okay on a play rifle but not for a bear defense rifle.

And not directed at anyone, but truthfully, I like the cross bolt safety, I have delete kits in my supplies but never installed them. The CBS works, it does increase safety of handling when used and like with any firearm, train with it and it disappears. Repeating myself, Ruger would do well to build the Marlin as Remington was trying to and Marlin occasionally accomplished, the design in itself is nearly perfect, just do it justice and all will be well.

I am really hoping for a new 39A in stainless steel with an all weather stock and please build it the way Marlin built it and no pot metal and Zamack.

Old Hat said:

Marlin has two things that Ruger has not enjoyed in the rifle world, and that is a reputation for accurate shooting, and authentic (old) feeling guns.

My own experience with the 3 brands confirms the idea that the greatest knock on Ruger rifles is poor accuracy, compared to other brands, and both Marlin and Remington were ahead of Ruger in this regard.

The 2nd thing I’d think, is that by buying Marlin, they now have conquered THE greatest competition in the .22lr rifle market. Facts. Marlin sold over 11 million model 60’s to Ruger’s 5-6 million. .

Click to expand...

I agree, my Mini-14, as much as I like it, for the money should be more accurate. I doubt Marlin would have sold a rifle that inaccurate.

Also, hopefully Ruger will keep the Marlin stainless takedown .22 Papoose model, based on the 795 action.

Detritus said:

I suspect Marlin CF bolt guns are a dead issue. Can't remember if marlin dropped them or if Remington lopped them off as unwelcome competition but i doubt Ruger will resurrect them.
Especially since they've put effort into improving the American Rifle as far as accuracy.

Click to expand...

The 783 looks a lot like those marlin rifles

3Crows said:

And not directed at anyone, but truthfully, I like the cross bolt safety, I have delete kits in my supplies but never installed them. The CBS works, it does increase safety of handling when used and like with any firearm, train with it and it disappears. Repeating myself, Ruger would do well to build the Marlin as Remington was trying to and Marlin occasionally accomplished, the design in itself is nearly perfect, just do it justice and all will be well.

Click to expand...

I don't mind the cross bolt safety at all on Marlins or on other brands of guns. Not my favorite version of safety, but I'm fine with it.

jski said:

What? Nonsense! The idea that Marlin was making guns that directly competed against Ruger and hence, presented a risk to Ruger is nonsense.

Ruger makes wheelguns, autoloaders, and boltguns. They’ve never had a levergun presence. Actually, leverguns would fit in perfectly with Ruger’s existing products.

Click to expand...

I was actually thinking about Marlin’s .22 bolt action rifles and semi-automatic rifles, not the lever guns.

godale said:

The 783 looks a lot like those marlin rifles

Click to expand...

to me they look like someone left a Marlin alone with a 770 too long, and not with a good result to marketability. but i digress.

Regardless, IF the 783 is where the the marlin centerfire bolt line went, that adds strength to the doubts of Ruger resurrecting them. since if so, then Remington will want to retain the rights to the design, and that IP won't have been part of the sale to Ruger.

Blue Brick said:

Crossing my fingers for new H&R's.

Click to expand...

Blue Brick said:

Wait....ha Ruger finally has a pump 12ga.

Click to expand...

Hmmm...

You do realize Ruger didn't buy either Remington or NEF?

PSA got NEF and Roundhill got Remington.

Cannibul said:

Hmmm...

You do realize Ruger didn't buy either Remington or NEF?

PSA got NEF and Roundhill got Remington.

Click to expand...

Pretty sure you're right about H&R not going with marlin, but Remington wouldn't be a factor in what Blue Brick was thinking.
the pump he was thinking of is the H&R Pardner pump, that (IIRC) Chinese made mostly 870ish thing(so, if an import Ruger still wouldn't have the design anyway). it seemed aimed at a small market. for $60-70 more you could have an 870 (or for the same price if a big box had a good sale).

Detritus said:

Pretty sure you're right about H&R not going with marlin, but Remington wouldn't be a factor in what Blue Brick was thinking.
the pump he was thinking of is the H&R Pardner pump, that (IIRC) Chinese made mostly 870ish thing(so, if an import Ruger still wouldn't have the design anyway). it seemed aimed at a small market. for $60-70 more you could have an 870 (or for the same price if a big box had a good sale).

Click to expand...

There's no question that Ruger didn't get H&R/NEF. Hell, all ya got to do is pay attention.

Ruger has always been able to go offshore for a shotgun if they so chose. I', pretty sure that Blue Brick thinks that Ruger got all of Remington. Even if it was the H&R Pardner, Ruger didn't get NEF.

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2020/09/27/remington-asset-bids/

Thanks everyone for the discussion. I like a good conversation.

And again, I’m not hating on Ruger. I actually had the unprompted thought that they might step in for Marlin before it was ever news! Now, I can’t remember where the though originated....probably thinking that they made more sense, being American, than a foreign Co. like FN. If Winchester were still in Connecticut, as an independent, not that would truly have made sense..... but alas, those days are gone forever.

Ruger makes solid rifles, with a great warranty. But I buy rifles based on accuracy, size/fit, and weight/function, in that order. And Ruger just fails at #1. Contrast that to Browning or Winchester rifles by FN. I’ve never seen one, or even heard of one that didn’t shoot great right out of the box, driving tacks before guaranteed 1moa was a thing.

And Remington’s of late had garbage, hot trash blue jobs, sticky bolts and the cheapest plastic stocks available,....but they would all shoot! Remingtons always shoot as good or better than more expensive guns, that I’ve seen. And ultimately that’s what is most important from a rifle.

The $20 question is, “ Does Ruger care”? The sell a lot of guns, and have a great profitability as a manufacturer. Like I’d said above, I don’t like their direction on long guns. An older Ruger M77 is world’s nicer than the newer stuff. I would hope that they “start” to care, especially now that they have Marlin.

I’m not their CEO, but if I were,... I’d invest in real craftsmanship workers and forgings, for a (combined) plant... to build the classic, even new model lever guns.... guns that would rival old highly collectible Winchesters... and ALSO, leverage that factory to build forged Rugers on the high end, as well as a Ruger shotgun or two!

Some of THE most expensive guns sold are fine doubles from Italy and Europe. Does Ruger not believe that there isn’t a huge market of untapped American buyers who are carrying Berettas, that wouldn’t buy a Ruger, if that gun were made to old world quality? The most desired gun for many guys in that world is the old Winchester double shottie! They only cost 25-150k now, lol...

But you can’t make classic “old” guns out of castings. So for me, that would be the plan. A line of cast lever guns for swampers and sledders, call them Rugers, even, and make the finest old world lever guns available in the new world today! Winchesters are still pretty nice, but they aren’t as nice as they were years ago. Its the fit and finish, the case hardening, the dimensions and weight that makes the old guns so desired.

I just know that Marlin used to have a lot of different lever gun models and I am hopeful that Ruger will bring that back. If they can figure out how to put more pistol caliber lever guns on the market and keep the cost down, they will do well.

sabbfan said:

I think the people that would really want a forged frame Marlin and would not buy a cast one would probably be the same people that would want a JM stamped Marlin. If they actually do cast frames for the new Marlins most won’t notice and many won’t care since I’m sure they’d do it right.

Click to expand...

I would be okay with the cast option if the price was less. I would hope the forged option would remain even if it is a more expensive "classic" model.