30AS vs 336 in .30-30

[marineimaging]

O.K. lever gunners, I walked into Believers Pawn the other day and there on the shelf was a Marlin 30AS at about 87-90% outward. Innards a little dirty but not bad in terms of wear. So I plop down my first installment and leave feeling pretty good. A week later I have a little extra cash so I decide to put it in 'tween' payments. Waiting for Michelle to finish with a customer I am scanning the rack when suddenly I hear a "boing-g-g-g-g" as my eyes spring back. There's another one but this is a 336 with original furniture and from where I was standing it looks to be a few points cleaner that the 30AS and the furniture is a major plus. I put both guns side by side and immediately go all googley over the 336. Only problem is it is significantly more than the 30AS. The owner agrees to come down to almost what I was paying for the 30AS so I jump on it. Here is what leads me to the question. One thing that stood out to me was that there were visible lathe marks on the bolt for the 1991 30AS but on the 1984 336 the bolt was smooth as silk. Both of them had superb rifling but again, on the inside of the bolt track with a light I could see more machine marks on the 30AS but nothing on the 336. Is there anybody familiar with the 30AS or the 336 and if so, do you know if Marlin had any significant quality issues regarding the years 1991 and 1984? The older one obviously looked in better condition due to the better machining quality, at least in my opinion. Still, that might not mean much if they were having quality issues back then. Here is a 336 (top) vs a 30AS (bottom). This bolt (top), from Numerich for the 30AS also has the type of tooling marks I am referring to while the one for the 336 (bottom) looks just like the on in the 336 I upgraded to. So the question is if this is consistent and does it make any difference to anybody that knows?

 

[Aryeh Jay]

O.K. lever gunners, I walked into Believers Pawn the other day and there on the shelf was a Marlin 30AS at about 87-90% outward. Innards a little dirty but not bad in terms of wear. So I plop down my first installment and leave feeling pretty good. A week later I have a little extra cash so I decide to put it in 'tween' payments. Waiting for Michelle to finish with a customer I am scanning the rack when suddenly I hear a "boing-g-g-g-g" as my eyes spring back. There's another one but this is a 336 with original furniture and from where I was standing it looks to be a few points cleaner that the 30AS and the furniture is a major plus. I put both guns side by side and immediately go all googley over the 336. Only problem is it is significantly more than the 30AS. The owner agrees to come down to almost what I was paying for the 30AS so I jump on it. Here is what leads me to the question. One thing that stood out to me was that there were visible lathe marks on the bolt for the 1991 30AS but on the 1984 336 the bolt was smooth as silk. Both of them had superb rifling but again, on the inside of the bolt track with a light I could see more machine marks on the 30AS but nothing on the 336. Is there anybody familiar with the 30AS or the 336 and if so, do you know if Marlin had any significant quality issues regarding the years 1991 and 1984? The older one obviously looked in better condition due to the better machining quality, at least in my opinion. Still, that might not mean much if they were having quality issues back then. Here is a 336 (top) vs a 30AS (bottom). This bolt (top), from Numerich for the 30AS also has the type of tooling marks I am referring to while the one for the 336 (bottom) looks just like the on in the 336 I upgraded to. So the question is if this is consistent and does it make any difference to anybody that knows?

I don’t know about those particular Marlin rifles but I have a Marlin 1894 in .44 Magnum and had a Marlin1895 in .45-70. Both were gorgeous. I later had to sell the 1895. In the 1990s I got into Cowboy Action Shooting and picked up a Marlin 1984 in .45 Colt. It shot great but as you noticed on the 1990s gun, there quite a few machine marks. I was looking at replacing my 1895 and saw one at my nearest Cabela’s. It was of recent manufacture after Freedom Group took over and the rifle was horrible. It looked like sand molded cast iron.

 

[Phil 1:21]

Pre-Remington 336 all day, every day, hands down.

 

[marineimaging]

I don’t know about those particular Marlin rifles but I have a Marlin 1894 in .44 Magnum and had a Marlin1895 in .45-70. Both were gorgeous. I later had to sell the 1895. In the 1990s I got into Cowboy Action Shooting and picked up a Marlin 1984 in .45 Colt. It shot great but as you noticed on the 1990s gun, there quite a few machine marks. I was looking at replacing my 1895 and saw one at my nearest Cabela’s. It was of recent manufacture after Freedom Group took over and the rifle was horrible. It looked like sand molded cast iron.

That is exactly what I thought. I was looking at one at Academy in Tomball and the price was almost exactly what I was paying for the 1984 model 336 which is gorgeous in spite of a few nicks (but no surface rust and the furniture is almost perfect). The young clerk was telling me how he had bought one and it was a great shooter and all. I asked him if he knew if the receiver had been machined from a forged block or if it was cast? He looked at me and shrugged. I showed him the differences in the bolt and told him about sintered parts and how manufacturing techniques had changed to make them cheaper. He finally looked at me and had the saddest look. "I have been tooked (sic) to the river and cleaned plumb out."