Old Marlin's vs Old Winchester's

[Jim Watson]

Having to debate it on the internet just shows how hotly contested a market niche it is... or was.

 

[Sav .250]

The Winchester 94`s (before the cross bolt safety) have something the Marlin 336 will never have and that`s the "it factor."
It has history. Charisma. The 94 has been around since 1895. Memories from all over .
As far as fit/finish goes. it`s good.
The Marlin 336 has been around since 1948. Fit and finish (the older ones) is good as well. It`s a solid, well made weapon.
A blue collar one for sure.
I think the Marlin 336 is a little more broader in the hand if carried that way. The 94 feels slimmer.
I don`t think there`s a sliver of difference between the two when talking about fit and finish. Course I`m judging that on the older
models.
I have both in older models and they both look and feel great to me. Some may have a preference and that`s fine but you can`t go wrong with either.

 

[magyars4]

I've owned a number of them both over the years...still have a few.
Winchester has the name.......gets my vote.

 

[Old Stumpy]

The 1894 Winchester design is ingenious in that it is so simple. Many don't like it because of the "drops-pants" action, but it accomplished what Winchester wanted from Browning.
It was the same size as an 1892 but it handled more powerful cartridges (.32-40 and .38-55) and with the introduction of the .30-30 cartridge in 1896 it could give the .30-40 Krag a run for its money.
Winchester 1894s were great rifles up to 1964. They had forged steel receivers, walnut stocks, steel buttplates, machined steel lifters, and better sights than the later rifles.
I had a 1958 carbine that was a tack driver. You could not miss with it.
JM Marlin quality alway seemed pretty consistent.
There isn't much difference between my 1969 JM 336 and the 1980s 336 rifles that I owned.
Even JM Marlin rifles made in the early 2000s were excellent quality, although a loose rear sight seemed not uncommon.
Marlins are easier to remove the bolt from for bore cleaning, which is a definite plus.
But the 1894 Winchester action is more open and easier to clean without disassembly
Marlins seem more robust in appearance and that styling is seductive.
I never owned a Winchester 1894 that did not function perfectly all of the time.
All but one 336 Marlin worked well that I owned.

 

[Gordon]

Why not? The hotshots usually use 73 repros because they can be shot faster than a 92 or Marlin; especially with some gun$mith work.

Because I just want to shoot normally like I would to hit targets in K zone. All this slip trigger stuff not for me. They are extremely smooth levering and short stroke with the pistol length cartridges. Also very easy to maintain with the removable side plate. With loads I would ever feed it not worrying about the weak looking toggle lock up. Pretty gun from elegant times. I was allwsys amazed the originals were fairly popular in .22 short !

 

[cdb1]

The Marlin 336 has been around since 1948.

Many, including myself, would say the 336 is a 36 with minor modifications and as such are the same rifle. With that line of thought the 336 has been around as long as the Winchester 94.

The Winchester 94`s (before the cross bolt safety) have something the Marlin 336 will never have and that`s the "it factor."

I felt the same way until I was in my 50’s. Since then I feel the opposite.

 

[Old Stumpy]

Many, including myself, would say the 336 is a 36 with minor modifications and as such are the same rifle. With that line of thought the 336 has been around as long as the Winchester 94.

The model 1893 begat the model 36 and the model 36 begat the model 336.
There is little difference between the 1893 and 36 beyond minor manufacturing changes and different sights.
The 336, on the other hand, changed from a square breech bolt running on frame rails to a round breech bolt, from an open receiver to an ejection port, and from flat springs to coil springs.
The 336 was less expensive to make, no doubt, but was also stronger.

 

[Jim Watson]

My .30-30 is a Remington but my .44-40 is a Winchester.
Marlin? Sure, but it is a .22.

 

[Old Stumpy]

Usability. Is part of function. The Marlin is more useable to me.

I have always found the standard pistol grip on Marlin 336s very appealing and attractive.
It's more comfortable to shoot and so more usable.
However, I would not bet against a good 94 Winchester man for speed and accuracy.

 

[Mosin77]

They’re both great guns. They’re both reasonably priced, too, so if curiosity gets the better of you it wouldn’t be hard to get both and decide first hand which one floats your boat.

Having handled both extensively, my conclusion is that any Marlin from the 1940s-early 2000s feels like a great rifle and is probably well made. After the mid 50s they did away with the machined anti-glare pattern atop the receiver and went to a matte finish. Effective but feels cheaper. By the mid 80s they have the stupid crossbolt safety which I don’t care for but which doesn’t affect the quality of the gun. After the Remington takeover it’s a crap shoot.

The pre-64 Winchesters are nice. But they don’t feel as solid or slick to me as a good Marlin. They feel cheap and chintzy by comparison. (But you could also say the Marlin feels basic and unsophisticated compared to the Winchester. This is all very subjective.)

The post-64 are not bad guns but feel cheaper. They use a strange powdered (I think) metal alloy receiver that looks ok when new but doesn’t age gracefully and looks very ugly with some finish wear. Also very hard to reblue apparently.

I prefer a nice 1950s Marlin with Ballard-type rifling and a waffle-top receiver. They carry almost as nicely as a Winchester and shoot nicer. But they don’t look as iconic as the Winchester, which seemed to appear in many old west films in place of its harder-to-find predecessor model 1873. The Winchester is probably going to cost a little more, all things being equal, and be less optimal for a scope. The Marlin will be easier to clean.

 

[cdb1]

The model 1893 begat the model 36 and the model 36 begat the model 336.
There is little difference between the 1893 and 36 beyond minor manufacturing changes and different sights.
The 336, on the other hand, changed from a square breech bolt running on frame rails to a round breech bolt, from an open receiver to an ejection port, and from flat springs to coil springs.
The 336 was less expensive to make, no doubt, but was also stronger.

Point taken.

 

[CraigC]

My preference is both. I like both and have multiples of both. Were I to choose, I'd choose the Winchester without even thinking about it. I think there's a lot of nonsense when this topic is debated. Including the idea that new Marlins are crap and the JM guns are so much better. Sure, there was a dark time when Remington was discovering that it was the old Marlin employees who were able to make the most of the old Marlin machinery but once the kinks were ironed out, the new Marlins are very good. Even better fitted and finished than the JM guns, which were not all that stellar to begin with. I will say that the later Winchester New Haven tang safety guns were much better than those that immediately preceded them. I won't own one of the crossbolt guns. Even so, two of my favorite Winchesters are commemoratives from the era of the powdered steel receivers. After 40-50yrs, they are still doing quite well. I'll also say that the current Miroku guns are better than anything else produced domestically, ever.

 

[cdb1]

I'll also say that the current Miroku guns are better than anything else produced domestically, ever.

I agree.

 

[guyfromohio]

I'll also say that the current Miroku guns are better than anything else produced domestically, ever.

I agree with that. I absolutely love the Mirokus. I have an 1892 in .44mag, an 1885 HW in .45-70, and an 1892 With 24” octagon barrel in .44mag in layaway. I’m always looking for trappers. I found one the other day from a retailer, but it’s in .45 and although, usually a big fan, I didn’t love the maple so I passed. Still time, but $1400 is a lot of coin for a meh. I have nothing else in .45 Colt, so I think it would just collect dust.

 

[H&Hhunter]

I really like the older 336 Marlins. 94’s feel loose and rattley to me. But they both seem to feed function and shoot about the same. I’d take either for a truck gun. I don’t own either at the moment.

 

[Gordon]

I gave a Ranger series Trapper 30-30 Winchester 94 to a son , 15+ years ago, to pack around when he was doing post Doc. work in geology in the Northwest thru Montana. He loved it because it was almost tiny and light and seemed simple and would not seem military . It quit firing with light strikes after the first outing he took it on, in serious bear country ! The gun was made in the low point of Winchester IMHO , early-mid 90s, . It seemed made all of MIM Diecastings and cheap springs ect. and had the cross bolt safety . I had put a Williams Fool Proof sight on it with twilight aperature. He dis assembled it completely (like a good boy) which was a huge chore , and found a peened soft firing pin !!, crummy springs , casting sprues all over not dressed down and even a crack forming on the big hoop lever ! He was disgusted but bought aftermarket up grades for it and after months got it running smoothly and reliably. He has many other options today, but he still prefers that gun for camping in bear country , with 170 grain Coreloktd ammo. He had one agressive bear encounter when he had it at hand , in Montana a few springs back. He fired a warning shot as the bear was almost across a river after him and his pit bull. The bear changed directions in it's swim, so he didn't have to use it , but he said the rifle did feed properly and he had a bead on it's head . I was embarrased giving my son such junk (allthough since have made it up many times ) but it was a learning experience for him

 

[Gordon]

Alas this paragraphs by Chuck sums up my feelings about the domestic 1992 up to around 2006 1894 Winchesters
From 1894 to 1963 the Model 94 lever action rifle had been manufactured using high quality forged steel parts and stocked in genuine American black walnut. The metal finish was a highly polished blue and in the later part of that era the stock had a gloss finish. It was a very solid and handsome rifle, a legend in its own time, and an American icon. It was also the world's most popular sporting rifle, and still is with over 5,000,000 sold by 2001.

The changes to the Model 94 were relatively minor, but never the less devastating to the 94's reputation. Stamped sheet steel parts were substituted in non-critical areas for formerly forged steel parts. The most visible of these was the shell carrier, which raised cartridges from the magazine to the breech, and stood out like a sore thumb every time the action was operated. The loading gate became a stamped and riveted part, which was also obvious. And hollow steel roll pins, which just plain looked cheap, replaced the solid steel action pins. These were not the only changes, but they were the most obvious changes and, as I recall, the ones which drew the most criticism. As a lingering result of these changes, pre-1964 Model 94's are worth about 50% more than equivalent post 1964 models in similar condition on the used market.

Regardless of vintage, the Model 94 has always been a reliable rifle, the kind you can depend on. A Model 94 is easy to carry and feels good in the hand. It is also a nearly perfect rifle for the mounted rifleman, and is still found in saddle scabbards all over the West.

 

[CraigC]

I really like the older 336 Marlins. 94’s feel loose and rattley to me. But they both seem to feed function and shoot about the same. I’d take either for a truck gun. I don’t own either at the moment.

Living in the humid south, if I was shopping for a leveraction truck gun at the moment, I'd look real hard at the hard chromed Henry all-weather model.

 

[Old Stumpy]

Something that the Marlins can never beat is that the Browning designed Winchesters 1886, 1892, and 1894 have modern spring-loaded ejectors.
No matter how slowly or how ineffectively you happen to operate the action they will eject an empty casing or loaded round reliably.

 

[Old Stumpy]

There is a world of difference between pre-1964 1894s and those made after. The pre-1964 guns were great.

The post-1964 1894s varied up and down in quality and manufacture. Some guns had stained birch stocks that were poorly fitted as well.
But one that I owned had a really nice black walnut stock that was well-fitted along with a decently made (if cast) lifter that looked and worked great.

I was unaware that they had gotten that horrible in the Ranger series, but these were the cheapest in price of them all if I'm not mistaken.[/QUOTE]

 

[Old Stumpy]

While the Miroku Winchesters are very nicely made, they are not perfect.

I bought an 1873 short rifle model in .44-40 and noticed that they had screwed up on the sights.
The fit and finish was excellent but the front sight was made too high obviously.
All that I have seen have had the rear sight fitted with an excessively high step elevator wedge which lifts the rear sight an abnormal amount to compensate. It works but looks odd.
Probably a factory fix after the problem was discovered.

 

[oldcoot]

I have 336 JM IN 30-30 AND 35 calibers great rifles, the 94 Winchester kicks the he&& out of me so I wont shoot them, I have no problem with recoil from 300 mag's or 375 h&h mag.

 

[Mosin Bubba]

I have a pre-64 Winchester, they're just as nice as their reputation. Have a Ranger 94 as well, it's obviously not as nice as the pre-64 but it's a solid rifle in its own right. I have no problems with it.

The 336 is too chunky for 30-30 IMO compared to the svelte Winchester, but put it in 45-70 and it's just about ideal.

 

[Old Stumpy]

I have 336 JM IN 30-30 AND 35 calibers great rifles, the 94 Winchester kicks the he&& out of me so I wont shoot them, I have no problem with recoil from 300 mag's or 375 h&h mag.

A .30-30 carbine has more recoil than a .375 H&H rifle.
Who da thunk it?

 

[SwampWolf]

When it comes to which brand looks the "rightest" when it comes to cowboys carrying carbines in their scabbards when the West was being won, I don't ever recall John Wayne toting a Marlin. Nothing looked the part more than a Winchester. Of course, "looks" aren't necessarily everything..