Marlin & Henry
-
- Posts: 146
- Joined: 22 Nov 2015 05:52
- Location: In the mudness
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 32 times
Marlin & Henry
Left is Marlin 336, right the Henry (never mind the filename; brain fart). As many said, it looks like the same system.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
- Mad Trapper
- 500 Shots
- Posts: 548
- Joined: 03 Aug 2013 14:04
- Location: Daniel Boone Forest
- Has thanked: 177 times
- Been thanked: 148 times
- GasGuzzler
- Moderator
- Posts: 2765
- Joined: 02 Nov 2015 19:54
- Location: Cooke County, TX
- Has thanked: 311 times
- Been thanked: 457 times
Re: Marlin & Henry
No question. I'm such a JM snob I won't buy a JM built after about 1998 unless it's a flip. They started going downhill before the sale to Remington. I'm no Henry fan but it's an easy choice to me.Mad Trapper wrote:If I had to choose one, I would take the Henry, especially if their both new.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
I've always been crazy but it's kept me from going insane.
I've always been crazy but it's kept me from going insane.
-
- 2000 Shots
- Posts: 3942
- Joined: 04 Feb 2014 05:30
- Location: SoCal Loco
- Has thanked: 137 times
- Been thanked: 610 times
Re: Marlin & Henry
From what I've read they DID start going downhill before the sale to Remington.
At least one gunrag article indicates that the tooling Remington received with the sale was up to or possibly greater than 100 years old. That the prints used to produce the rifles were REDLINED multiple times to match the tooling tolerances instead of the tooling being maintained and/or updated. As a result once Remington figured out what they actually bought they had to both retool AND reblueprint the articles one by one. It was claimed they could not in some model cases find a 'clean' and unaltered print.
That is still no excuse for sending out guns that weren't right then and it is REALLY no excuse for sending out guns that aren't right NOW but I'll give them a partial pass on the first one if they can get them right at this point.
My NewYawk 1895 seems ok.
At least one gunrag article indicates that the tooling Remington received with the sale was up to or possibly greater than 100 years old. That the prints used to produce the rifles were REDLINED multiple times to match the tooling tolerances instead of the tooling being maintained and/or updated. As a result once Remington figured out what they actually bought they had to both retool AND reblueprint the articles one by one. It was claimed they could not in some model cases find a 'clean' and unaltered print.
That is still no excuse for sending out guns that weren't right then and it is REALLY no excuse for sending out guns that aren't right NOW but I'll give them a partial pass on the first one if they can get them right at this point.
My NewYawk 1895 seems ok.