Remington/Marlin Model 795 questions

[mick53]

Hi,

I'm confused a bit.

I'd like to buy a Model 795 rimfire rifle.

Here's what I've read so far:

1. "Only buy an older Model 795, ones with the JM stamp. The 795 has gone downhill sense Remington started making them."

2. "The Remlin 795s (Remington/Marlin) are every bit as good, maybe better, than the older JM stamped Model 795s".

3. "After Remington bought Marlin, the Model 795s they were putting out were VERY problematic. But the 795s they're producing now are great."

These are three very different views.

If #3 is correct, how does one tell the difference between the good Remington/Marlins and the problematic ones?

Thank you.

 

[Mosin Bubba]

I would just skip the hassle and buy a Mossberg Plinkster. Exact same gun but a little cheaper, and no QC issues I'm aware of.

 

[mick53]

Funny you say that. I was looking at Plinksters and almost bought one except for two things.

The Plinksters are so light.

Then I picked up a "Remlin" 795 and it was heavier, not by a lot, but heavier enough that I liked it a lot more. It just feels more substantial to me.

And they're really not the same gun. For one thing, Plinksters now have only fiber optic sights or are sightless and have to be scoped.

I don't like fiber optic sights, but I do want a rifle with sights.

The extra bit of weight plus the sights are why I decided on a 795. And no, I don't want to spend $60 for those Plinkster Tech Sights.

 

[Mosin Bubba]

Funny you say that. I was looking at Plinksters and almost bought one except for two things.

The Plinksters are so light.

Then I picked up a "Remlin" 795 and it was heavier, not by a lot, but heavier enough that I liked it a lot more. It just feels more substantial to me.

And they're really not the same gun. For one thing, Plinksters now have only fiber optic sights or are sightless and have to be scoped.

I don't like fiber optic sights, but I do want a rifle with sights.

The extra bit of weight plus the sights are why I decided on a 795. And no, I don't want to spend $60 for those Plinkster Tech Sights.

Guess they've changed it then. The one I have is just a black bead.

 

[mick53]

Guess they've changed it then. The one I have is just a black bead.

With a hooded sight, right? I looked and never found a used Plinkster with plain ol' iron sights.

I called Mossberg and was told they no longer make that version, that those sights were on their first model Plinkster, Model 37001, I think he said.

How long have you had yours?

I hate when manufacturers have a good product and then they just have to tinker with it.

I saw a Plinkster with no sights but it did have a flash hider/muzzle brake. Yep, a muzzle brake on a .22 rifle.

I'm sure some folks like it, but it's not for me.

 

[Mosin Bubba]

With a hood sight, right? I looked and never found a used Plinkster with plain ol' iron sights.

I called Mossberg and was told they no longer make that version, that those sights were on their first model Plinkster, Model 37001, I think he said.

How long have you had it?

Yep, with a hooded sight. I probably got it around 2012, '13 or so.

 

[mick53]

Yep, with a hooded sight. I probably got it around 2012, '13 or so.

Had Mossberg left well enough alone, I'd probably have a Plinkster right now. And not bugging you guys with questions.

I could have forgiven the lightweight aspect of the Plinkster, but when combined with the way they now make them with no sights, or sights I don't like, they put themselves out of consideration.

Anytime I see any manufacturer saying, "New and improved," I always think, "Cheaper for the manufacturer to produce." And cheaper does not often translate to improved.

 

[Mosin Bubba]

Anytime I see any manufacturer saying, "New and improved," I always think, "Cheaper for the manufacturer to produce." And cheaper does not often translate to improved.

Ain't that the truth.

 

[mick53]

Now back to the original question.

What's the story on the newer Marlin (Remington) Model 795s?

 

[VoodooMountain]

It's a cheap 22.
It's fine.

About the only 22 rifle I would stay away from is the mossberg plinkster.

I'm not sure what you are expecting of your rifle but the 795 is accurate and reliable. I hate that the mags stick out so far from the bottom but that's not a Remlin issue.

 

[mick53]

It's a cheap 22.
It's fine.

About the only 22 rifle I would stay away from is the mossberg plinkster.

I'm not sure what you are expecting of your rifle but the 795 is accurate and reliable. I hate that the mags stick out so far from the bottom but that's not a Remlin issue.

I'm hoping it to be accurate and durable, like I would expect any rifle I'd buy to be.

Is it? Well, I don't know. As I said, I keep reading different things. That, my friend, is why I'm asking questions.

And if Mossberg were still putting out the ORIGINAL Plinkster, the Model 37001, I would gladly buy one as well as a Marlin 795.

 

[mick53]

It's a cheap 22.
It's fine.

About the only 22 rifle I would stay away from is the mossberg plinkster.

I'm not sure what you are expecting of your rifle but the 795 is accurate and reliable. I hate that the mags stick out so far from the bottom but that's not a Remlin issue.

So Voodoo,

Do you own a Model 795; are you speaking first hand about it?

If you DO own one, is it older or newer, a JM Marlin or a Remlin?

If you own one, would you post a photo of it and describe your experience with it?

 

[maxxhavoc]

I have one from about 2011. It is pretty much like VoodooMountain said. It is cheap, feels cheap, shoots well and is reliable.

Accuracy is on par with my 10/22, but the stock feels like a kid's toy and it is barrel-heavy as far as balance goes. A wider wood stock would improve it a lot. Like most 22 rifles, LOP is short.

You said you didn't want tech-sights on a Mossberg, but every .22 I rifle have, which includes Savage, Henry, Ruger, Marlin, and Rossi, need better sights. Barrel-mounted irons are bad, and I actually prefer the Rossi (pretty much the same as a Mossberg 702 except the stock) sights over the stock Marlin-type "blade and Spring" sights which are a pain to adjust windage. They also only have 5 or 6 settings from bottom of adjustment to top. Meaning you are usually a little high or a little low. The Rossi sights (which I assume are the same as the Mossberg) have 30+ clicks lock to lock...yes they are plastic but easily adjust for windage and elevation.

With that said, I have Tech sights on the Marlin, Rugers, and Rossi. They give a NM-AR type front post, windage and elevation on a good peep sight...and 6-7" of additional sight radius. If you are serious about shooting irons, you need them. Even with the Marlin. It shrinks my group sizes on all by about 20%. They are a great investment, makes any of them a new rifle.

 

[Charlie98]

Like all new 'Marlins', you will need to look at the individual firearm itself... the metal to wood fit, the machining of the metal, if the action seems smooth enough to work, if the barrel is aligned correctly. They are entry-level budget rifles, you get what you pay for. Once you get it, I would break it down as far as I could and clean everything out, lube it up... and then take it for a test drive. It's all you can do.

I agree... the best sights I've ever seen on a .22 rifle were the ones on my very early Ruger 10/22... it was a very good rear notch and an actual brass bead, but every other set I've had stunk. I have TechSights on my 10/22 now, I don't care for how they look, but they sure do work. I have a Williams peep on my Marlin 15, which works very well, but the big block of a front sight defeats some of it's utility, I'll probably outfit the rest of my .22's with the Williams.