Guns Magazine.

“We’re mighty proud of it,” said Mark Gurney. “But it’s not a Ruger Marlin. It’s a Marlin.”

[ … ]

In July, 2020, Remington filed for its second Chapter 11 bankruptcy in two years. That fall, Judge Clifton R. Jessup, Jr. of the Northern District of Alabama approved the sale of Remington’s non-Marlin firearms business to the Roundhill Group for $13 million. Ruger got Marlin for $28.3 million.

Ruger’s intent? Use lean manufacturing methods to build traditional Marlin lever rifles to original or higher standards of quality. Quite a task! Ruger CEO Chris Killoy and VP Mickey Wilson had visited Ilion before 2020’s auction. A prompt move was imperative; winter was in the wings. Ruger’s engineers arrived to plan extraction of 40,000-lb. loads, take the measure of tooling to be transferred and ready it for the 650-mile journey. The destination was Ruger’s Mayodan, N.C. plant, where the company builds most of its bolt-action American rifles and its AR-556.

In November, Darryl Freeman, facilities chief at Mayodan, kept decommissioning crews working overtime to accomplish a two-month job in one. They did — finishing December 9 just as snow came to Ilion. The 150 tractor-trailer loads included 450-odd pallets of unfinished and out-of-spec parts. At its new digs, Marlin would be assigned a 105×180-foot cell bringing parts in a compact loop through 53 steps in lever-rifle manufacture. Materials would be fed and people stationed to make the most efficient use of space and movement.

Bruce Rozum, whom I knew when he’d headed R&D at Marlin, had moved to Ruger’s Newport, NH as chief engineer. Now he tapped North Haven’s auto-CAD drawings to design a hybrid production model holding CNC tolerances of 0.002″ on a rifle developed 125 years ago.

I remember this, and honestly I simply do not get the sentiment that it’s a Marlin, not a Ruger.  I cannot fathom why the Marlin brand would not want to be associated with a great firearms manufacturer like Ruger, and I also cannot fathom why Ruger wouldn’t get a great deal of credit for having the vision to bring back the Marlin brand, make it better, and give customers what they wanted.

It’s a Ruger Marlin.  That’s good enough for me.

The best deer cartridge you never shot!

Sorry, I can’t embed the YouTube shorts, just link them.

One can only hope that 35 Remington is next in line for Marlin.  Think 200 grains moving at around the same speed as the 30-30 160 grains, or in other words, 30-30 on steroids.

I like it.

But I do find it a bit off-putting that Marlin won’t formally announce their plans.  We shouldn’t be left to the vicissitudes of the rumor mill.

Writer Nick Harvey (from Australia) addresses a question from a reader.

Q: For years Marlin promoted Micro-Groove rifling as enhancing the accuracy of their rifles. If this is true, why don’t they use it on their big-bore rifles in .444 and .45-70? This has got me wondering if Micro-Groove rifling isn’t just another sales gimmick.

– Dave Edwards

A: Over the years I’ve tested quite a few Marlin rifles which had Micro-Groove rifling and found them to be very accurate.

For a while it was used on big-bore rifles, but then a problem reared its ugly head: the fine rifling does not work well with lead bullets unless you are super careful when reloading with regard to the alloys and velocities you are using.

Many handloaders found that when using lead bullets, especially at higher velocities, Micro-Groove barrels leaded up badly.

Marlin got so many complaints about this that they went back to ‘regular’ rifling, which Marlin calls Ballard-type. I believe the .30-30 and .35 Remington still had Micro-Groove rifling, because these calibres are generally used with jacketed bullets.

Ruger has now begun limited production of Marlin lever-guns under its ownership, and so far only of the Model 1895 in .45-70 with standard six-groove barrels. It’s not yet clear whether they’ll use Micro-Groove rifling future production.

On the subject of accuracy: back in the 1960s Marlin claimed a Micro-Groove barrel was 25% more accurate one with than conventional rifling. True or false? Search me! I’ve never noticed any difference when shooting lever-guns with either type of rifling.

Great answer, and thanks for the perspective and information.  I didn’t know that.

I was talking to an FFL a few days ago about Marlin’s production line, and he said that word on the street is that the 30-30 won’t be the next rifle they produce.  I forgot which one he told me was next, but I hope it’s the .35 Remington.  I don’t think it was.  Of course, there are still Marlin 336s in .35 Remington to be had, but the ones in excellent condition are going for > $1500.

If any FFLs out there are reading and have access to more information on what Marlin (Ruger) is producing next in line, let us know in the comments.

I’d like to have one.  On a final note, I’ve never seen 30-30 ammunition that was unjacketed, so his answer makes good sense.

Field & Stream.

First, Ruger moved Marlin manufacturing to Mayodan, North Carolina. Then they changed the blue Marlin Man logo to Ruger red. And finally, after about a year, they announced that the 1895 SBL in .45/70 would be the first of the third iteration of American-made Marlins.

[ … ]

Remington purchased Marlin in 2007. They didn’t run Marlin very well, but in 2009 they did introduce the model 1895 SBL in .45/70. It was a better thought-out version of Marlin’s popular Guide Gun. It didn’t have the silly integral muzzle brake, but it did have a full-length XS Sights’ Lever Rail and a large loop lever. I purchased the first 1895 SBLs I found and have used them to take everything from bear in Alberta to buffalo in Africa.

[Editorial Note: Remington didn’t run anything very well, being owned by financial engineers bent on squeezing every last drop out of the company]

I was reluctant to report how well this rifle shot for fear of being thought a charlatan. I tested four loads from a sandbag rest at 100 yards using Leupold’s intermediate eye relief (IER) VX-2, 1.5-4×28 riflescope. The average for 12 3-shot groups—three, 3-shot groups with each load—was a stunningly small 1.125 inches. And two of the loads averaged less than an inch. Just let that sink in; this is a sub-MOA, big bore, lever-action rifle.

I’m sure it’s a fine shooter.  And I’m sure Ruger will do a great job with this line of rifles.

What I’m not sure about is availability.  I recently saw at a local gun store this very rifle going for nearly $2000.  Furthermore, availability is virtually non-existent (which is a corollary – when availability is limited on a high demand item, the price will be high).

Ruger is going to have to do better than what I’ve seen in order for the price point to be reasonable.

American Rifleman.

“So we’re planning a mid-December launch of the Marlin product line,” Ruger Chief Executive Officer Christopher J. Killoy commented. “…[I]t’ll probably be less than the market wants. In fact, I’m sure based on the overwhelming demand we’ve seen from consumers and retailers, I’m sure it will be fewer guns and fewer SKUs than the market wants, but we will launch it probably on or about December 15, somewhere in that time period, begin those shipments to distributors.”

The earliest offering will be a classic, too. “The first sample that I saw came off the line a few weeks ago and it was a beautiful model, 1895 in 45-70 caliber and it just looked gorgeous,” Killoy said. “So we’re very excited about that and we are on track to that into Q4 launch.”

As for finding any available in mid-December, he cautioned, “And again I expect there’ll be lots of calls and e-mails in…looking for more Marlins because the first samples frankly, were just outstanding.” The above image is an 1895 from the company’s 2006 catalog, and likely doesn’t represent the first ones scheduled to appear.

Well that’s too bad, because I love the look of the gun with its beautiful pistol grip Walnut stock sleek lever design.  I hope it doesn’t look much different than what’s in the picture.

I’d like to see them distribute the 30-30 soon.