Just a quick set of shots comparing side by side a Remington Marlin SBL and a Ruger Marlin SBL. SBL stands for Stainless (steel) Big Loop (lever). The rifle was introduced to the market in 2007 coincident with the purchase of Marlin by Remington. The rifle was an immediate hit and quickly obtained a large following that got larger with the rifle starring in Jurassic World, then Wind River and a cameo in the Kingsmen Golden Circle. The stock is CNC milled grey laminate with some blanks having brown and of course black.
Unfortunately after the move to Ilion there was about a two year period where quality was pretty bad, toward the end of the run the rifles were factually quite good. Anyone who does not want to hear that due to some anti-Remington bias, I regardless stand by the statement. A later Remington Marlin SBL is likely a very good rifle. As to what an SBL would have been like had it been built by Marlin pre-Remington, who knows as it did not exist. And Marlin, especially but not exclusively, in later years needed no help from Remington to build some crap.
Things to look at, high polish forged and heat treated receiver. You might notice the more rounded edges, particularly in the lever. Also see the checkering. The Remington checkering is somewhat fuzzy, the Ruger is more typical of other Ruger products and is quite sharp, both suffice as to the intended purpose but the Ruger feels right.
The Ruger forearm is somewhat slimmer and the belly is reduced as well. It feels good in hand but so does the Remington, especially if you have big hands.
The rear stock fits a little tighter on the Ruger. The traditional ebony cap is gone and in the place is a laser engraved Marlin Cowboy. The Remington has a Decelerator pad and the Ruger has a pad that has Marlin embossed in it, maybe in house supplied. Both are nice but the Ruger pad is softer.
I noted that the upper screw of my Ruger pad was loose and then it turned out the hole was too large for the screw, so I fixed that easy peezy. The Ruger has a red and black bullseye which is odd because traditionally the (black and white) bullseye was reserved for walnut stocked rifles only.
Moving to the barrels, the Remington rifle has Ballard cut rifling, 18.5 inches. The Ruger rifle has hammer forged barrel and rifling. The Ruger barrel was increased in length by .5 inches so as to allow for the possibly useful threaded muzzle. Both rifles hold 6 plus 1 in the chamber in near full length tube magazine.
The Remington has the Lever Rail from XS and the Ruger has an in-house rail, very similar. The Ruger front has a tritium insert and is rather bright in dim conditions. However, for hunting, the XS sights are better and more precise, for (bear or dinosaur) defense the tritium sight is preferred
.
So, when I dig into the innards I find that the Remington is adequately finished where it counts for function, where it is not functional not so much. The Ruger is finished anywhere and everywhere and the extra level of care is easy to see. Again, the functional areas of the Remington are good enough, the Ruger is even pretty.
Accuracy, I cannot yet say. The Remington can shoot under 1.5 inches at 100 yards with hand loads and factory ammo. It will often clover leaf and is not prone to throwing flyers unless I let it lead up. It likes a clean barrel. Smoothness of action, well, my Remington has about 3,000 rounds from Buffalo Bore to home brew Trail Boss subsonics. The action is very smooth and the rifle functions reliably. It does not like over length rounds or huge met plats like on some 430+ grain cast lead bullets and may get a hitch while cycling. Cycle it like you mean it and it is happy. I have only run dummy rounds in the Ruger thus far and it is smooth, very smooth.
Much of what differentiates this rifles is not visible. The heat treat pre-processing that Ruger does is more difficult due to the need to now machine hardened metal but it results in a better product with no warpage or deformation from the heat treat. That is just one example. The finish detail to parts goes the extra step and it is clear that Ruger meant to deliver a fine product worthy of the Marlin Cowboy. And, to any who just cannot accept it, the receiver is indeed forged, heat treated and then CNC milled. It is not cast.
For what it is worth, I agree with the online reviews, this may well be the best Marlin ever built. The SBL is a working rifle, purpose built to live in harsh conditions with little care and able to deliver punishing power (on both ends) to whatever might be deserving. Does the rifle live up to the hype, yes! Does the Ruger look like an expensive rifle, yes, because it is!
And no, neither are for sale. You will pry them only from my cold dead hands and with two .45-70s slinging huge chunks of lead, that might be a hard row . My brother will use one, I the other.
Long Live The (Marlin) Lever Gun
3C
Unfortunately after the move to Ilion there was about a two year period where quality was pretty bad, toward the end of the run the rifles were factually quite good. Anyone who does not want to hear that due to some anti-Remington bias, I regardless stand by the statement. A later Remington Marlin SBL is likely a very good rifle. As to what an SBL would have been like had it been built by Marlin pre-Remington, who knows as it did not exist. And Marlin, especially but not exclusively, in later years needed no help from Remington to build some crap.
Things to look at, high polish forged and heat treated receiver. You might notice the more rounded edges, particularly in the lever. Also see the checkering. The Remington checkering is somewhat fuzzy, the Ruger is more typical of other Ruger products and is quite sharp, both suffice as to the intended purpose but the Ruger feels right.
The Ruger forearm is somewhat slimmer and the belly is reduced as well. It feels good in hand but so does the Remington, especially if you have big hands.
The rear stock fits a little tighter on the Ruger. The traditional ebony cap is gone and in the place is a laser engraved Marlin Cowboy. The Remington has a Decelerator pad and the Ruger has a pad that has Marlin embossed in it, maybe in house supplied. Both are nice but the Ruger pad is softer.
I noted that the upper screw of my Ruger pad was loose and then it turned out the hole was too large for the screw, so I fixed that easy peezy. The Ruger has a red and black bullseye which is odd because traditionally the (black and white) bullseye was reserved for walnut stocked rifles only.
Moving to the barrels, the Remington rifle has Ballard cut rifling, 18.5 inches. The Ruger rifle has hammer forged barrel and rifling. The Ruger barrel was increased in length by .5 inches so as to allow for the possibly useful threaded muzzle. Both rifles hold 6 plus 1 in the chamber in near full length tube magazine.
The Remington has the Lever Rail from XS and the Ruger has an in-house rail, very similar. The Ruger front has a tritium insert and is rather bright in dim conditions. However, for hunting, the XS sights are better and more precise, for (bear or dinosaur) defense the tritium sight is preferred
.So, when I dig into the innards I find that the Remington is adequately finished where it counts for function, where it is not functional not so much. The Ruger is finished anywhere and everywhere and the extra level of care is easy to see. Again, the functional areas of the Remington are good enough, the Ruger is even pretty.
Accuracy, I cannot yet say. The Remington can shoot under 1.5 inches at 100 yards with hand loads and factory ammo. It will often clover leaf and is not prone to throwing flyers unless I let it lead up. It likes a clean barrel. Smoothness of action, well, my Remington has about 3,000 rounds from Buffalo Bore to home brew Trail Boss subsonics. The action is very smooth and the rifle functions reliably. It does not like over length rounds or huge met plats like on some 430+ grain cast lead bullets and may get a hitch while cycling. Cycle it like you mean it and it is happy. I have only run dummy rounds in the Ruger thus far and it is smooth, very smooth.
Much of what differentiates this rifles is not visible. The heat treat pre-processing that Ruger does is more difficult due to the need to now machine hardened metal but it results in a better product with no warpage or deformation from the heat treat. That is just one example. The finish detail to parts goes the extra step and it is clear that Ruger meant to deliver a fine product worthy of the Marlin Cowboy. And, to any who just cannot accept it, the receiver is indeed forged, heat treated and then CNC milled. It is not cast.
For what it is worth, I agree with the online reviews, this may well be the best Marlin ever built. The SBL is a working rifle, purpose built to live in harsh conditions with little care and able to deliver punishing power (on both ends) to whatever might be deserving. Does the rifle live up to the hype, yes! Does the Ruger look like an expensive rifle, yes, because it is!
And no, neither are for sale. You will pry them only from my cold dead hands and with two .45-70s slinging huge chunks of lead, that might be a hard row
. My brother will use one, I the other.Long Live The (Marlin) Lever Gun
3C
Last edited:
Just kidding, great posts.
