Ruger buys Marlin

Old Hat said:

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.

Click to expand...

Those old Ruger M77 rifles were made with cast receivers. My recollection is that back in the 80's most of those Ruger M77 rifles were at best sub 2moa guns on a good day with good ammo.

You apparently like polished blued steel and wooden stocks....but are you willing to pay the $1k plus it takes to get them?

A Ruger American Ranch, with the matte finish and polymer stock will normally shoot rings around a vintage M77. I prefer substance over style.

The Ruger M77 was a $300 rifle in the early 80's. The Ruger American Ranch would be around $125 in 1980 dollars. There were no newly made rifles in 1980 that cost $125 and shoot as well as a RAR.

Just because Ruger doesn't make firearms that fill your needs is no reason to trash them. They sell every firearm they make, someone must like them.

MechAg94 said:

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.

Click to expand...

I doubt you get your cake and can eat it too. Ruger is not going to do cast and forged, they will do one or the other. Remington spent a lot of time and money reverse engineering and converting to CNC data the Marlin supposed drawings. I do not know the strength comparison of Ruger's casting technology vs forged steel and machined parts. If it is the same or better without having to add material as in thicker, clunkier looking and heavier then I might not complain. But, I seriously doubt Ruger can cast a receiver equal in strength to alloy or stainless alloy steel machined forgings without having to add material thickness or changed the shape of the parts. But if they can, as strong as or stronger, well---.

One of (of many) the nuances of Marlin lever rifles, for example, the way the base plate fits into the receiver. The edges of the receiver are very fine and sharp which when the parts are assembled the seam is nearly invisible, very fine and clean. You are not going to do that with cast parts.

Blue Brick said:

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

Click to expand...

Ruger could have likely had a pump action 12 Gauge shotgun any time they wanted. If memory serves, the patent on the High Standard Model 200 (aka the Sears JC Higgins Model 20) expired back in the 1960s.
Really nice guns too, I have a Sears-marked model and she's such a nice shooter. I believe Armscor currently makes a copy.
I could definitely see picking up a Ruger-made version. Nice 3" chamber with a hefty cast receiver capable of eating the burliest of magnums. Ruger could even make spare parts for the older guns if such a market is viable.

Cannibul said:

They didn't get the equipment. They got the name and the IP.



Remington didn't move equipment. The equipment at Marlin was worn out. It had more worth as scrap. That's why Remington had such a hard time producing working rifles. There were no current blueprints. Documentation was basically "back of a napkin" if it was written down at all. Most of the knowledge on how to build Marlin rifles was locked up in the heads of the workers. There were very few of those workers who were offered the chance to move and even fewer who did.

Remington basically had to reverse engineer the Marlin products.

Click to expand...

Ruger does not "need" the machines or old drawings from 1901, they need the CAD/CAM files and they are good to go.

BHP went from forged to cast and eveyone agrees the cast frame is better and no one complains about it being bigger.

It it could be done 25+ yrs ago, it seems reasonable that Ruger could do it today.

I don't claim to know Ruger's real capabilities or intentions, but Ruger certainly can use dimensional parts scanners to create part-specific drawings, which are then imported into their in-house mechanical engineering tools to create subassembly and top-level drawings. It just takes the investment in the scanner and the process behind it to create a drawing package suitable for prototype construction.

They don't need Remington's / Marlin's vellum. What they need, at a minimum, is the legal ownership of the design IP - and that's certainly part of what they bought.

Stophel said:

Unfortunately, most of the buying public doesn't care. They don't care if it's forged, cast, or MIM. They don't care if it is hand fitted or well finished. They don't care if it has locks, safeties, or any number of other extraneous lawyer-recommended doo dads. They don't want traditional. They don't want "Fudd guns". They are incapable of even discerning the difference between a fine hand fitted firearm and one that is slapped together with MIM parts. They want black, plastic, and tacticool. They want rails and lights and adjustable stocks and high capacity magazines. They want cheap.

Look how much traditional gun offerings have dwindled over the past several years. Oh, there will always be some people who want traditional quality. Cowboy shooters and others. But how much longer these buyers will remain in large enough numbers for major American manufacturers to keep on catering to them at all, I don't know.

Click to expand...

You're kind of splitting hairs a bit, no? Before the days of CNC and fancy materials like ultra fine grained tungsten carbide, hand finish and fitment would have been the mark of the finest craftsmanship, but now it's possible to get beautifully machined surfaces right out of the milling machine or lathe. Production processes and repeatable quality benefit from automation, they are not harmed by it. That's the thing to remember, is that if you have to hand fit parts for a gun, you have to hand fit their replacements. Companies didn't offer hand fitment of things on a regular basis unless it was for one of two reasons. 1. They had to as a manufacturing step and couldn't do it automatically. 2. They could offer the same product at a justifiably higher price point. Nobody wants to employ someone to sit there with a file for 8 hours a day if they don't have to. And now with CNC, waterjets, lasers, etc. there is no reason to do so because the parts are just as good.
You're drawing a distinction where none exists. Machines make nicer parts than humans these days.

And this is the question of economics. This question, probably more than all others, is what made Ruger the success it is today. While you might associate MIM parts with cheapness, the simple fact is that lots of people just don't care because it simply doesn't matter. Ruger made its bones on high quality castings and later with MIM parts. They are an industry leader in these processes and it wouldn't surprise me one bit to someday find out that any number of MIM parts in Kimbers and Springfields and the like, were made right there in AZ by Ruger. I'm sure some long non-disclosure agreement protects that little secret but that's what my money is on.
While many people looked down their noses at anything less than a hand finished Colt 70 series, Ruger was cranking out the P-series pistols that would eat any ammo you threw at them, didn't care if it was stupidly over pressure. They would generally live with abuse and neglect that would have rendered that hand filed and polished Colt as scrap. Even today, there are hundreds of thousands of P series pistols that will tolerate a steady diet of +P+ 9mm 25 years later. They won't win any beauty contests but when you don't make much money and want a reliable gun to protect your family, they are one hell of an option.
And now with the AR pattern coming out of patent protection some years back, everybody can use readily available materials and machinery to make high quality parts. The AR15 has become the Small Block Chevy of the gun world. AR's are now cheaper than AKs and arguably, have never been of higher quality.
In fact, the AR that I'm most looking forward to trying out, is the WWSD 2020 with the all-polymer lower because it's innovative as hell.

Cannibul said:

Those old Ruger M77 rifles were made with cast receivers. My recollection is that back in the 80's most of those Ruger M77 rifles were at best sub 2moa guns on a good day with good ammo.

You apparently like polished blued steel and wooden stocks....but are you willing to pay the $1k plus it takes to get them?

A Ruger American Ranch, with the matte finish and polymer stock will normally shoot rings around a vintage M77. I prefer substance over style.

The Ruger M77 was a $300 rifle in the early 80's. The Ruger American Ranch would be around $125 in 1980 dollars. There were no newly made rifles in 1980 that cost $125 and shoot as well as a RAR.

Just because Ruger doesn't make firearms that fill your needs is no reason to trash them. They sell every firearm they make, someone must like them.

Click to expand...

Cannibul said:

You apparently like polished blued steel and wooden stocks....but are you willing to pay the $1k plus it takes to get them?

Click to expand...

Well, yes, I DO like wooden stocks and blued steel on a classic rifle!

And I’m not trying to “trash” Ruger in any way. I own Rugers. My experience with them is why I have the opinion I do. I think Ruger pistols are absolutely excellent, overall. I think, perhaps, that younger guys into “shooting” and older people into hunting have different opinions on long guns. Tactical has a place. I like tactical. I like utilitarian. I carry a fiberglass stock and stainless into bad hunting conditions....

A part of my point, is that Ruger is competitive selling plastic stocked utility rifles. They’re not for me, and no rifle maker should have to make a rifle they’ve started selling “more accurate” later! In the utility competition, others already do it better, imho. A new M77 bolt’s function isn’t that “slick”, compared to others. As I said, I regularly carry a plastic stocked gun. I’m not “trashing” them, it’s the truth.

If any American company could bring back a forged and “fit” stock rifle, it’s Ruger, because it has to be done with cost and profit in mind, and also, a great warranty helps consumers spend more, knowing it’s going to work out in the end. I am willing to pay more for more quality, personally.

Case in point: Ruger 10/22. It’s a quality made rifle with a solid finish in wood, not grade A but solid. The Marlin 60 is nothing special, and the front sight is probably cocked off center, but for all the cheapness in the aluminum and wood on that gun,... it works! The action is more reliable with the tube feed than the 10/22 for me. And it’s been made the same “cheap” way since 1960. I would never have bought a Mod 60 if I were completely satisfied with the Ruger 10/22. But like I said, I’m willing to pay for quality, and still I bought and prefer the Model 60 in spite of the cheapness of it. I think Savage has existed on that utility and just plain shooting good. Savage is “champagne shooting on a beer budget”, and Ruger is competing in their wheelhouse.

Now, you might say, “It’s only .22’s.” But I think it’s telling that the 2 largest sellers of 22’s in the country, have been to this point selling on vastly different reputations. The 10/22 is for those who can’t stop modifications, who enjoy that, a “custom aftermarket” gun. So it’s not really a Ruger you’re aiming for in the end! The Marlin is for the traditional owner who wants a gun that works great out of the box.

I would be interested in a 10/22 that shoots,(& runs) like a Marlin. Somehow I feel that if they upgraded the 10/22 it would cost 4-500$ though, as the nice longer ones are already nearly there... while the Marlin is 1/2 that cost.

Perhaps Ruger’s biggest challenge in all of this is going to be in the board room! Profit! They currently like a big profit margin, and will probably hold to that no matter.....but it will take some risk and some marketing to convince the investors public that their long term growth be less profitable?, more sustainable, and much longer lasting. At least that’s what I feel is the other option.

Browning should be a guide to them. They don’t advertise as much. They don’t flood the space with lots of Talo special editions and 15 models. But they quietly prosper. And they still make, if not own, the market on “slick” looking wood-stocked rifles. Will Ruger choose to really compete with FN, Sako, on some level, now? I kind of doubt it at this point. I think they stay more utilitarian and more tactical.

That’s why I wonder about Marlin. For them to “make Marlin great again” (lol), they have to change tact a little or even a lot as a company! Though it could yield new markets and long term sustainable growth.

Oh, and btw..... it doesn’t take 1k dollars to get a wood stock, blued barrel.... to the poster who said that. Again, pick up a Browning.

Clean97GTI said:

In fact, the AR that I'm most looking forward to trying out, is the WWSD 2020 with the all-polymer lower because it's innovative as hell.

Click to expand...

Basically . . . the CavArms/GWACS lower will be back in production?

Ruger did not want or need the machines because they got the Intellectual Property which is the CNC programing and engineering drawings and along with that, the brand name and rights. And Ruger DOES need that IP or they will be back where Remington was trying to figure it out. The vendetta against Remington aside, they did not get sufficient engineering, drawings or CNC data to build the product. Sure, parts can be scanned, Ruger could do that, you think that Remington could not, did not? Been there and done exactly that in my former position and it is not exactly that simple.

The 10/22 is for those who can’t stop modifications, who enjoy that, a “custom aftermarket” gun. So it’s not really a Ruger you’re aiming for in the end! The Marlin is for the traditional owner who wants a gun that works great out of the box.

Click to expand...

Why is it that theres always a few ppl that think they can speak for the millions of owners? It's about as close to utter BS as possible.

Out of me and my friends/family, there are about about 8 10/22s and none of them are modified beyond a scope or dot. There's a cpl other brands... browning comes to mind.

There's 1 Marlin 60 in the groups and sits in the back of the owners safe with a broken buffer. Instead of fixing in AGAIN, he just uses the much more durable 10/22

My oldest 10/22 has over 75k thru it watch out a single part replaced and it's extremely reliable... always has been. None of the other in the group have been modified or parts replaced too.

I've never heard of a 60 doing half that round count on a single buffer.


The 60 is svelte compared to a 10/22. It's a nice trim package that shootss well. It's a nice blue collar 22lr rifle.

They may be a little more accurate but maybe not as the only side by side comparison Ive seen here with pics of results didn't show the 60 to be better. And that member also said he preferred the 60 over the 10/22


But enough with the posts that portray the 60 as the savior of 22lr from the spray and pray, unless heavily modified, 10/22.

“But enough with the posts that portray the 60 as the savior of 22lr from the spray and pray, unless heavily modified, 10/22? “

Man, what is up? Where do you guys get this attitude of “gun loyalty” from, to the point of getting really touchy and borderline rude about what someone else’s opinion is? I’m old. Us old farts don’t (at least most of us ) don’t or won’t insult anyone’s personage over a different opinion on a gun.

A gun is a tool. That’s all it is. When I die all my stuff will get sold or rust down. I have no real loyalty to any gun, or car company, or anything that isn’t really important. I want to have loyalty to my family, neighbors, friends, fellow Americans I don’t even know. I would gladly trade my favorite gun for a truly great hunting dog, or better still time to spend with kids and family hunting, if I was offered that trade.

My point is, we all like certain themes in guns, because those themes, classic guns or tactical, add to the experience we can have with other people in a “pure” sense. Hunting with Pap’s old single shot with black tape on the broken stock, because when you do, you can almost smell, remember the smell, of his gentlemen’s hat and morning coffee. But those who go to the range to try and one up the next guys on ferrarri AR features will never get it. They’re missing the real enjoyment and its a shame. The gun isn’t the “thing”. It’s the “thing” that helps you get to THE “thing”.

As to the Marlin 60. It’s a cheap gun. I said that already. I haven’t modded my 10/22 either. The Marlin is absolutely more accurate for a semi auto than the Rugers, for me. And many other Ruger owners and sellers have said same. The Ruger is more sturdy construction and more versatile on ammo (as marlins break with hyper velocity). Marlin being more accurate stock, is practically a rule in Wikipedia by now.

So you see, I’m not knocking Ruger! I’m not starting a dumb “best gun” argument for a brand loyalist. I have no brand loyalty myself. It keeps me objective.
I simply was enjoying the discussion on what Ruger does now. Because it’s interesting. Brand loyalists crack me up. Jobs ran Apple into the ground the first time around. If they weren’t ran by bean counters after his 1st stint, and left adrift, he might never have been able to come back in a hostile takeover, lol. That's crazy to think about. The largest tech company in the world today, might never have been!

The point is, nothing is guaranteed. Just because Ruger has been a solid company doesn’t mean their prosperity and market share will continue increasing. And buying Marlin is a major move, so now they have opportunities to either prosper in new ways, or fail to make the buy a boon, fail to expand very far beyond what they already are. It’s just a thought. And I appreciate that discussion.

But again, I wasn’t running down anyone’s guns, though I cannot understand why people get mad about a legit critique of a tool? My 60’s cockeyed front sight annoys me. If I weren’t running a scope it would really annoy me! If my 10/22 had a better fitting stock (adult), ran better, shot a little better, and handled a touch better, well, I’d never pick up the Marlin.

Overall, I’m glad to see Ruger step in, and excited about the possibilities, though truthfully cautious about it all, given the different strengths of both companies.

danez71 said:

Why is it that theres always a few ppl that think they can speak for the millions of owners? It's about as close to utter BS as possible.

Click to expand...

I never assumed I was speaking for anyone...
I just don’t understand why you would think that I am, or really why you’d be offended by it?

One thing that played into what I said there, id the marketing of the 10/22 you get at stores and dealers. It’s the first thing they say, how much stuff you can do with them.

chicharrones said:

Basically . . . the CavArms/GWACS lower will be back in production?

Click to expand...

A product improved version yes. there are a number of vids about the development of the lower over on Youtube on the InRange and Sinistralrifleman pages.

danez71 said:

My oldest 10/22 has over 75k thru it watch out a single part replaced and it's extremely reliable... always has been. None of the other in the group have been modified or parts replaced too.

Click to expand...

we have one in the family (as far as some guns my father and I "dip from the same pool") that according to the Serial# is a 2nd year of production gun, i would not care to guess as to the round count, I know that I personally put close to 3-4K (the majority of 6-8, 500rd bulk packs,) through it one year. AFAIK nothing has been replaced on this gun as of yet, I'm pretty sure dad hasn't swapped any springs even and i KNOW i haven't, Probably time to put a new recoil spring, or more likely put a new spring, guide-rod , and bolt handle assembly in retire the original to a labeled bag. anyway the gun is almost 60 years old and the last time I shot it running on all original parts, and still chugging along with better accuracy than most .22 auto loaders seem capable of.

danez71 said:

Why is it that theres always a few ppl that think they can speak for the millions of owners? It's about as close to utter BS as possible.

Click to expand...

Complains about a dozen people speaking for the 7 million 10-22s and their owners on how the m60 is more accurate out of the box, then proceeds to speak for the 11 million m60s and their owners on reliability with a sample size of 1.

You so funny

alexander45 said:

Complains about a dozen people speaking for the 7 million 10-22s and their owners on how the m60 is more accurate out of the box, then proceeds to speak for the 11 million m60s and their owners on reliability with a sample size of 1.

You so funny

Click to expand...

Well, no.

I'm going by a sample size of the whole internet and real life.

If you have any examples of 60s going 30k-40k on a single buffer I'm all ears.

I said that I've never heard of one going half that round count. I did not say I havent personally seen one do it.

That's not a sample size of one.

Then I gave an example of one PERSON that decide to stop replacing a buffer and just use his ruger because it's more durable. He likes the trim feeling of the 60 but doesn't like changing buffers.


It's common knowledge regarding the buffer in the 60. Im not speaking for them.

The Marlin loyalist speak for themselves everytime they recommend changing it.


What's funny is that you looked past the forest to critique a tree.

Old Hat said:

But those who go to the range to try and one up the next guys on ferrarri AR features will never get it. They’re missing the real enjoyment and its a shame. The gun isn’t the “thing”. It’s the “thing” that helps you get to THE “thing”.

Click to expand...

So the gun isnt the thing, it's the thing to get to the thing. I agree with that.

But its a contradiction to say that the AR guys are missing out on the real enjoyment because they're using the wrong gun to be able to smell Paps hat.

I think that they are building they're own memories that they'll be able able to smell plastic lid of the empty Starbuck cup later in life when they pick up that AR... which supports your theory that it's not that gun... but goes against your conclusion that the AR guys dont experience the "real enjoyment".


"Speaking for" may not be the right term but saying things like ' AR guys dont experience the real enjoyment ' or ' the 60 is for hunters and the 10/22 is for tactical tinkerers ', is presumptuous at best.


For the record, from what you said, my age would put me in the hunter catagory and I don't own any pistol gripped long guns.

danez71 said:

If you have any examples of 60s going 30k-40k on a single buffer I'm all ears.

Click to expand...

And what makes it even worse as far as 10/22 Vs. Mod 60 is, the 10/22 is going "Wait you need a buffer to run right?!?".
In the 10/22 the action is designed such that there is no need of a buffer, the current "thing" with putting Delrin bolt stop pins in 10/22 has little to nothing to do with reliability. But is instead almost entirely from sellers of 10/22 upgrade bits finding out they could sell 1/2" pieces of Delrin rod for $5-8, and then creating an artificial reason/need for putting one in. All that little plug of Delrin really does, is eliminate the clack of the bolt meeting the bolt stop pin, but that's not a compelling reason to pay $5 for a 3 cent piece of plastic.
Sample of one but the story is typical, my previously referenced 1965 production gun is still running strong with nothing more than finish wear on the bolt stop. does anyone out there have a 55year old mod 60 still chugging along with all original parts?

My friend got furloughed last Tuesday. No Marlin work being done at all. He is out of the loop. He is selling his house and moving out. No word of Ruger taking any of the Marlin employees with them. He leaves in two weeks for warmer climate.

I honestly forget Marlin makes anything besides lever guns and I have two model 60 sitting in my safe. I do like the tube feed magazine, one less part to keep track of when running out of the house quick on a last minute squirrel hunt. I do hope Ruger keeps the 60 because even though detachable magazines are better in most ways there is still some advantages to a fixed mag. If the 60 goes away are there any other rifle to fill that spot? Looking through the old Marlin models that I'm not old enough to remember I do get a bit excited about pump rifles and double barrel shotguns. Realistically I see Marlin as just going on in much the same way they have been for the past five years but with better quality control and some cast parts showing up. I highly doubt Ruger will change up anything too much to alter the external appearance or handling significantly. Ruger paid for an established brand in the lever world and part of the establishment is the looks and handling. Time will tell and I do know Rugers customer service will help me buy with confidence from a company with new owners.

Do anyone think Ruger will keep making the Marlin Lever Action .444 rifle?

If1HitU said:

Do anyone think Ruger will keep making the Marlin Lever Action .444 rifle?

Click to expand...

Don't see why they wouldn't. it fit into a similar, "just enough to warrant production" market as the .35 Remington version of the mod 336.

The Marlin cartridge that I personally think won't be coming back, though some will want it to, is the .450. with the resurgence and technological updating (new bullets) of the 45-70 in the past 20 years, and the appearance of rounds like .450 bushmaster, i just don't see there being a large enough market to justify it's resurrection.

Detritus said:

Don't see why they wouldn't. it fit into a similar, "just enough to warrant production" market as the .35 Remington version of the mod 336.

The Marlin cartridge that I personally think won't be coming back, though some will want it to, is the .450. with the resurgence and technological updating (new bullets) of the 45-70 in the past 20 years, and the appearance of rounds like .450 bushmaster, i just don't see there being a large enough market to justify it's resurrection.

Click to expand...

That one is something that I never got. It seems like there is simply no point in a .444 and 450 cartridge while 45-70 was a thing. Was Marlin even currently producing the 444?
And Ruger has its own big magnums in the .375 and 416 Ruger and a couple of the compact magnums too. I'd be looking for those in the next generation of Marlin lever guns, fitted with the same barrels in the M77 and/or American lines.
And an 1894 in .480 Ruger to accompany a Super Redhawk or Super Blackhawk sounds like a winner to me. Sell them as a matched pair for under $2000.