The Marlin 39 Club

Status
Not open for further replies.
HighVelocity and Pgidley, welcome to you both.

HV, I haven't read your other thread yet, but will after work.

Pgid, it's cool your first THR post was here, and that the venerable 39 helps bring in new folks to our fine forum.

Experts will be along shortly with answers and suggestions re your finish questions.
(Trust me, you don't want my advice on that. :uhoh: :D )

Yes, please, pics when you get a chance.

Nem
 
I come with a problem.

My 39a has a flaw that I did not notice when I bought it. Namely, the rear scope mounting hole is buggered. UTTERLY. There seems to be no threading left, and there is even a big chunk taken out of the receiver metal adjacent to the hole, like someone was pounding with a screw driver.

Is there any solution to this? Even if it is just cosmetic, as this is a horrid eyesore.

 
the rear scope mounting hole is buggered

If the receiver was drilled and tapped on the side
for the traditional receiver peep sight, I would
locate a Williams Peep Sight and cover that hole
nicely. (My 336 has a peep sight, but my 39M has
scopemount; it would be convenient to have them
both configured similarly.)

added: 51 pages, 1,252 replies; 44,992 views;
is it just my perception, or is the 39 really that popular?
 
I'd rather not go to a receiver sight, I like the gun as-is (though the buckhorn sight picture is... unimpressive). I may consider it if there is no other option, as the gun does have the moutning holes for a peep. Those Williams sights aren't cheap though!
 
Zinj, sorry to hear of this.

Wow. I'll say buggered. :what: What kind of barbarian ... oh, never mind. Moot point now.

Do I understand correctly that you're not interested in mounting a scope? (Or am I making an unreasonable assumption?)

If you don't want a scope, I'd have a smith insert a plug, perhaps accompanied by some kind of sealer (??), just for the cosmetic end.

If you do want a scope, I'd think the thing to do would be to plug both existing holes and drill/tap two new holes further forward. Actually, in that case, there wouldn't necessarily be a need to plug existing holes since the mount base would cover them.

Others more knowledgeable [strike]may[/strike] probably have better ideas.

Nem
 
Yeah, I have no need for a scope on this rifle. I was thinking that it might be possible to tap the hole for a larger screw, but I have no idea of the praticality of that. I also am concerned about how much that would cost.
 
added: 51 pages, 1,252 replies; 44,992 views;
is it just my perception, or is the 39 really that popular?
Click to expand...
Carl, I keep asking myself that as well.

Same applies to the 336 club. Both threads consistently rank near or at the top of Rifle Country for number of views.

Of course, we've got a lot of pages (more than most), but on top of that, they just seem to be immensely popular rifles.
(I mean, it's not like we're giving out free ice cream or ammo or anything. :D )
 
Pgidley;

T'were me, I'd refinish both, shoot the gun, and not look back. Congrats on finding a sweetheart, she'll treat ya right.

900F
 
I was thinking that it might be possible to tap the hole for a larger screw,
Click to expand...
That sounds reasonable to me, Zinj.

Seems a smith could do it easily, or even a metal fabricator.
I can't imagine drilling/tapping a little hole could cost more than $10 or $15.
 
Thanks CB900F, I think that's what I'll do during the summer when theres not much else to do. The disassembly required for that would give me the opportunity to clean up the little bits of rust on the metal as well. I had her out today, and it eats everything I fed it, not nearly as picky as my 925. It'll be interesting to see what I can shoot more accurately with, the 39A with a tang sight or the 925 with a 4x scope. My bets are on the 39A.
 
Pgidley;
Welcome. Congrats on your 39a. I also have a 39a from 1955 that has 2 different colors of wood. In my case the stock is kind of red and the forearm is more brown. I allways thought that someone may have refinished the forearm. But after a couple of years of looking at other 39's, I've come the the conclusion that it may have come from the factory that way. I was going to refinsh my wood as well but now I'm just going to leave it alone. However if you are good at refinishing wood you could really bring out the grain in that walnut.
 
Model 39-A

I just bought a Model 39A. The serial number is E15211. When I check the mfg date with the link in this thread, I get instructions to drop the letter E from the number. When I do that, I get a date of 1887....the E is slightly back from the serial number...is it part of the serial number or not?? One other thing odd is that the manufacturer stamped on the barrel is :The Marlin Fire rs Co. New Haven Conn. The rifle is old but I don't think 1887 is correct.
Comments:
 
Thanks

Thanks rimfirerick. I knew it was rather old. I bought it just recently for $100. The fellow who sold it needed some cash and it looked like a good rifle. I have shot it now about 50 rounds and it is very accurate, actually surprising so for a rimfire.
 
Got a package in the mail today.

The Model 39 scope mount rail I ordered is here.

So far, so good.

I ordered The Bsquare mount from SWFA.

http://www.swfa.com/pc-1355-477-b-square-interlock-one-piece-base.aspx

This rail is different because it's not flat like the one I got with the rifle.

This one has a cross section that's more "U" shaped.

I'm hoping that this shape will lend some rigidity to my scope in the same way that the shape of an "I" beam resists bending.

If it does, then it's the answer I've been looking for.

It's got more slots cut into the top, so that should allow more flexibility to mount stuff on it, too.

I've got to mention SWFA in here, too.

I ordered the mount off their website (In the link above) it was easy, their pricing was two bucks better than the Bsquare website for the exact same part, and it got here nicely packaged and very quickly.(Two days!)

Two thumbs up!

P.S. Still no email reply from Leupold.
 
Last edited:
I just took my 39 apart.

I pulled the stock off, and took the hammer out.

There was a very slight surface rust forming on everything inside the stock, so I cleaned that all up and lubed it so things will stay nice in there.

I pulled the hammer out, and took a look at the hooks.

Not too bad, but not beautiful, either.

I took a super hard extra fine finishing stone, and ever so gently smoothed the face of the hook. Think of a polishing action more than a reshaping.

I fitted it back together, and checked the engagement.

Those hooks were fifty thousandths tall. I mean, safety is one thing but this is ridiculous.

I took a diamond hone and cut maybe 10 or fifteen thousandths off the outer edge, making the hook on the hammer shorter so the trigger requires less travel to release.

The face where the trigger meets the hammer is still blue, so I'm confident that I didn't lose any hardening by doing this.

I took a small screw driver and reached into where the trigger return spring is. I grabbed the free end of that spring and pulled it up as far as I could, hyper extending it a little bit and making it lose some of it's tension.

I cleaned all the abrasives out, lubed everybody up with a light synthetic grease, and put it all back together.

Much better!

It's still kinda heavy, but nowhere near as bad as it was.

The long, gritty pull is now acceptable, and much smoother.

I think with a little further break in, it's going to be fine.

That trigger was breaking it's self in, but the butt kicking the old rifle put on it last time just made me want to go ahead and do something with it.

Now... to see how it shoots.

Isn't there some kind of contest going on somewhere?
 
Well gents, I went in to my local gunshop, paid a deposit, and ordered a new Marlin 39A today. Can't wait to get it!
 
Congratulations! Now the wait. Maybe it takes so long because they have to rifle them the other way around for use down under. ;)

DJR
 
I think you're on to something there DJR! :D

As it turns out the bloke at the store said it'd be only a 3 month wait. I have a feeling he told me 12 months initially so I would give up and buy something that he had in stock...
 
The scope mount on my 39 was tight. Real tight.

I put it on there myself, and used blue locktite.

When I tried to take it off, it didn't want to cooperate. The heads on the screws started to smear... and I was in trouble.

No biggie. I brought my propane torch home from work and warmed that puppy up. I heated the aluminum mount until the paint was just beginning to smoke. A good rap on the end of the screwdriver and some judiciously applied torque got them out.

39eotech001-1.jpg

I got the new mount hoping it would be a little more rigid.

It has a different shape and I had hoped that it would not flex like the original.

39eotech002-1.jpg

It mounted up nicely.

39eotech003-1.jpg

The new mount has more slots, and it has a better dovetail shape on the rails so the rings mount better. This rail is more like the "Picatinny" type setups found on AR15 stuff.

I'm not sure I like the look. I will say that this rail is equal to the original in terms of strength, but no better. I can take my fingers and make it flex 1/8".

When the scope is mounted to it, and the length of the scope adds leverage to the thing, it's going to be rubbery just like the original mount.

If it flexes just a couple of thousandths of an inch, it will drastically affect your group size.

Running three rings on the scope stiffened it up before, so I guess I'll do that again until I get a better mount.

Here's a cheezy vid I made showing the flex in the scope mount.

(Click on the pic to watch the vid)

th_39eotech004.jpg
 
I'd wait until you get your scope back from Leupold and start the process from scratch.

If you still think there is a significant problem you might think about drilling and tapping a hole out there on the overhang somewhere and screwing a nyloc type set screw down onto the barrel. It would eliminate the flex and shouldn't mark the barrel. Just a thought.

DJR
 
That's an idea, DJR, and maybe I'll try it.

Mo, I don't know about the whole scout mount thing...

Meanwhile, I'm going to keep shopping for something better.

Conetroll stuff is steel, but it's expensive and the rings are very close together. I'm afraid it won't let me move the scope back far enough to get the cheek weld right.

The answer is out there... I just have to find it.
 
Frank, I honestly don't think the flex you demonstrated is going to affect the sighting when actually shooting. You are putting an abnormal amount of pressure in an abnormal direction on the mount. In practical use, there will no flexing as long as the scope is mounted tightly in the rings, the rings are tight in the mount and the mount is fastened tightly to the receiver. The major thrust vector is going to be parallel to the mount, not perpendicular as when you are causing the flexure.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Y
  • Locked
Which model marlin 39 ?
Replies
19
Views
870
Assassin
A
K
  • Locked
Marlin 39A mounty, how much would you expect to pay?
Replies
11
Views
1K
JohnBT
J
D
  • Locked
Marlin "Golden 39A" Question
Replies
2
Views
1K
georgeky
G
A
  • Locked
Marlin Lever action pics
2 3
Replies
55
Views
7K
AStone
A
A
  • Locked
The 336 Club
136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145
Replies
4K
Views
850K
If1HitU
If1HitU
Back
Top