This is my "new" 1978 Glenfield model 40 .22LR. They seem to be pretty rare, as not much useful information turns up in a Google search, so I thought it would be a good idea to document it a little.
They were made by Marlin (as all Glenfields were) and are nearly the same as the Marlin Model 49, which seem almost as rare. I haven't had much chance to shoot it yet, but it groups nicely so far, and cycled well on Federal Bulk, Remington sub-sonic, and Winchester Super X sub-sonics. I like the gun a lot for it's design and operation, but I'm falling in love with it's style and uniqueness. It's just begging me for a scope so I can see what it's really capable of.
01 rifle right.JPG
It's mostly identical to Marlin model 49, and seems to have many interchangeable parts with the marlin model 60.
02 rifle left.JPG
It feels slimmer and lighter than the model 60, though it feels more front heavy to me, and the barrel looks longer when looking over the sights.
03 crop circles right.JPG
Closeup shows the scroll work stamped into the receiver, and the checkering in the grips.
04 crop circles left.JPG
I think that the scroll work looks like crop circles. Does marlin know something that we don't?
05 disassembled right.JPG
Disassembled for cleaning. The butt plate and the fore grip were removed so that I could wash the wood. I didn't bother to take the butt stock off as that surface is sealed against the receiver.
Five picture per post limit... to be continued
06 disassembled left.JPG
Disassembled for cleaning viewed from the left. Though it's obvious that the rifle has not fired many rounds it was inoperable when I bought it because it was so dirty inside. It's like a brand new rifle now.
Close up of internal components. Note the action assembly side plates. They appear to be modified model 60 side plates cut, drilled and recessed to fit the model 40's trigger guard. Note also the finish of the bolt. More on that later.
EDIT: Right in the middle of this picture you can see the two trigger guard screws that hold the entire action in the receiver. The long screw goes in back. If you swap them, and put the long screw in front, then it will cause the action to bind. Thanks to fellow forum member Nervousmini for kindly providing this information.
08 internal wear.JPG
A closeup of the stamped scroll work. That little chip in the finish is the worst thing wrong with this gun. Looking through the ejection port you can see how little wear there is inside the receiver.
09 internal wear 2.JPG
Viewed from the bottom very little sign of wear can be found. If you've spent any time at all cleaning the Marlin model 60, 70, etc... this should look very familiar to you.
10 receiver top.JPG
Top of the receiver. Again, very similar to to the models 60, 70, etc.
Five picture per post limit... to be continued
Last edited by pokey; 07-19-2012 at 10:17 AM.
11 barrel and tube with lug.JPG
Barrel and tube magazine. Note the lug for the fore grip. It free floats around the magazine tube, but is dovetailed into the barrel.
12 fore stock with brass insert.JPG
Bottom view of fore grip. I thought the little brass insert was interesting. It appears to be just a shouldered sleeve acting as a washer, though it may be acting as a pillar. I'll have to take a closer look at that sometime. It had wood stain and finish on it, but it was all cracked and peeling so I gently scratched it off. I like brass.
13 trigger group right.JPG
Assembled action and trigger group (minus the breech bolt and recoil spring). The screw hole under that front screw was poorly stamped, and a burr damaged the screw's threads when it was assembled at the factory. I filed away the burr and re threaded the screw and the threaded hole in the trigger guard. It's like new now.
14 trigger group left.JPG
The rear screw can not be fully tightened, or else the side plates will pinch the disconnector, and hold it down when the bolt is slid back to chamber a round. The gun can not be fired with the disconnector in it's down position. I loosened this screw just enough to let the disconnector move freely. I had to figure this out at the range, but you can check yours at home now.
EDIT: The disconnector had fairly large burrs all oround it's edge from it's original stamping. I removed it, deburred it and polished it's friction surface. I can fully tighten all of the sideplate screws now without any issues.
15 bolt right.JPG
Here's a close up look of the nice (if not perfect) finish on the customer facing side of the breech bolt. Be sure to look at the next few pictures too.
Five picture per post limit... to be continued
Last edited by pokey; 07-19-2012 at 10:12 AM.
16 bolt left.JPG
This is the side of the bolt that the customer does not see when the gun is fully assembled. I hope this was just a "Friday afternoon" bolt, and that they didn't all come like this. There's more...
17 bolt bottom.JPG
The bottom is no better than the left side, but that's not the worst of it yet...
18 bolt top.JPG
Gah! Can you believe that Marlin would ship a gun like this in 1978 This looks more like something that they'd do now under Remington ownership. I've never seen anything like this on any of the other Marlins that I've worked on. I'll sand and polish this one, and see what happens, but I may just wind up replacing it with a new one if it fits too loose.
19 springs compared.JPG
1978 Glenfield Model 40 (Marlin model 49) recoil spring (bottom) compared to a 1979 Marlin model 60 recoil spring (top) The model 60 spring is both thicker and longer. The model 40's bolt and recoil spring are much more difficult to assemble than the model 60's because the receiver is so much taller (nearly twice the height). My guess is that they chose a lighter spring to make assembly easier. So far the gun works better with the Model 60 recoil spring in it. Please note that while both of these springs are kinked, I'm not the one who kinked either of them. I have never kinked a recoil spring, and I don't plan to.
O.K. That's all for now. I'll follow up with a more complete range report when I can get some quality time in. Thanks for having a look.
Last edited by pokey; 07-10-2012 at 11:37 AM.
I have fixed that nasty bolt. It's shiny like a mirror now on three sides (I didn't touch the bottom yet). I just had to see how she would shoot. I put a scope on this gun today, and got to the range just before it closed. I also wanted to see how that short, weak spring would work, since it appears to be the one that came with it. Well, that spring is toast. I had a lot of misfires because the bolt didn't close all the way. I also had a lot of flyers that for now anyway I'm also going to blame on the bolt not closing completely.
I only got to pull the trigger 30 times, and of the thirty, only twenty-five bullets were fired. I was shooting at 50 yards. It took me a bit to adjust the scope enough to get them on the paper. Even though I had the scope, I couldn't really see the holes from the bench, because the sun was setting, and it was drizzling. (there's a roof over the firing line, I didn't take my new darling out in the rain) Once they were on the paper though (if you don't count the flyers), I shot two groups that I'm very happy with. One group is three holes touching 1/2" x 3/8" measured outer edge to outer edge, the other is five holes almost touching 5/8" X 7/8" outer edge to outer edge. The centers of both groups are 10 clicks to the right, and 11 clicks low, but I ran out of time for another adjustment. Assuming these flyers go away when I change the spring, this gun is about twice as accurate as my Model 60. I have my fingers crossed.
Here are the scans of the targets if anyone is interested. Sorry they are a little wrinkley, like I said it was drizzling, and they dried like that.
These are home made targets. If anyone wants them I have slightly better versions in both PDF and LibreOffice (formerly Open Office) printable on 8.5" x 11" paper.
I have removed the recoil spring that was in the rifle when I bought it, and replaced it with the used one (pictured above) out of a 1979 model 60.
I went back to the range last Friday to test it out, and sadly we were just plagued with bad ammo. About 15% - 20% of the rounds we fired had a muzzle velocity lower than the sound barrier. This was happening on every gun that we brought, so it was not the fault of the rifle in any way that I can think of. When one round stayed in the barrel, we called it quits for the day. It was good ammo, just a bad batch.
Of the shots taken that did appear to travel at the correct speed, all cycled the gun perfectly. There were no jams of any kind other than with the "bad ammo." Also the gun seemed to group VERY well. We were shooting at 50Yds, and a majority of the "good" shots were close enough to touch one another. The shots that went slower than expected also grouped well for the most part. They just did it four or five inches low. I didn't bother keeping the targets because 1. they were all spoiled by the "bad" shots, and 2. a passing shower drenched them.
There are 0 replies to this thread at this point, but it has over 150 views. By that I think I can conclude that a couple of people are mildly interested in how this gun performs. If I can manage to get to the range and put a few good shots through this gun, I'll update one last time for those people.
1946 Marlin model 39A project (not working yet)
1978 Glenfield model 40 (Marlin model 49DL)
1996 Marlin model 60
Team 60 member #90
Team 49.22 member #1
Hey, you can't say that in America!
I have a 49, but mine is one of the originals the first couple years before them made the 49DL. It doesn't have checkering or scroll work.
The Older I Get...The Better I was...
Team 444 Member #175
Team 35 Member #2
Team 39 Member #10
Marlin League #26
338 MX...It's not your father's lever action!
This is really a great thread, following your rescue of an orphan, rehabilitation of same, and performance at the range. Shows a lot of persistence on your part. Your love for this gun is obvious. Nice job and a great report!
Yes.. I thought it was a good report also. Thanks for sharing.
same here ,thanks