Marlin Firearms Forum banner

21 - 37 of 37 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,383 Posts
So you have seen this before? I like the peening and re-heat treating idea.
I've seen soft parts wear because they were not of proper hardness. A good gunsmith who knows metallurgy will usually be someone trained as a machinist then advanced to being a tool and die maker and then became a gunsmith. They are getting rare as they retire and the skill is lost. They know the proper hardness for a part given it's function. Too hard is not good either because the part becomes brittle. The gunsmiths we have here only can do barrel work and chambering ----lathe work or mill work. You folks on the mainland have more gunsmiths to choose from.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,994 Posts
This doesn't look right. I don't think the locking bolt was fit/machined properly. Comparing with the locking bolt on my 1894 (DOM 1902), the angled cut doesn't extend down to the surface "X". That angled cut only extends down to surface "Y" on mine; the locking bolt fills the entire receiver slot. Unless this was one of Remington's design changes (?)

843756
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,334 Posts
This doesn't look right. I don't think the locking bolt was fit/machined properly. Comparing with the locking bolt on my 1894 (DOM 1902), the angled cut doesn't extend down to the surface "X". That angled cut only extends down to surface "Y" on mine; the locking bolt fills the entire receiver slot. Unless this was one of Remington's design changes (?)

View attachment 843756
This was not a Remington change. My JM Marlin has this angled surface at the locking lug engagement. When I was posting about my 1894, Tomray replied it's a 7 degree slope. Completely normal. It's a camming angle to drive the bolt to its final closure. The locking surface on the bolt is cut the same way.

Without a headspace measurement or knowing which 'factory' made the ammunition, we're still wandering around in the dark theorizing about the OP's problem and its cause.

I do know for certain that some careful heliarc welding to restore the receiver gouge, and careful fitting of a new locking block will cure the damage. In post #10, I asked about the ammunition. Which 'factory' made the ammunition? Was it remanufactured ammo, or super hot like Buffalo Bore? Never got a reply.

Note the angled engagement surfaces in the photo of a modern 336. Both the bolt and the locking block are cut at 7 degrees.

Screenshot 2017-09-25 at 1.44.13 PM - Edited (1).png
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,042 Posts
I had the same issue with mine. I filed mine and thought it was from the factory this way. I have been shooting it but not much. I was going to shoot it and see if it got any worse. Now I have to look at which 1894 mine is out of, both are Remlins. I was shooting reloads, not hot and not cold but medium power. I have shot this in all my 44's with no problem.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,383 Posts
After going back and reviewing the picture I noticed that the receiver was very rough. My 308MX with a stamped Rem serial number had a lot of sharp edges and crud in it but the machined surfaces were not as rough as the one in the picture. This is what led me to think that my receiver was a left over Marlin part which was assembled by Rem and stamped with a Rem serial number. Maybe just have the receiver tested for Rockwell C hardness first before you do anything. The testing only puts a small dimple on the metal (Like a primer indent) and they try to put it where it will not be obviously seen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Discussion Starter · #26 ·
This was not a Remington change. My JM Marlin has this angled surface at the locking lug engagement surface. When I was posting about my 1894, Tomray replied it's a 7 degree slope. Completely normal. It's a camming angle to drive the bolt to its final closure. The locking surface on the bolt is cut the same way.

Without a headspace measurement or knowing which 'factory' made the ammunition, we're still wandering around in the dark theorizing about the OP's problem and its cause.

I do know for certain that some careful heliarc welding to restore the receiver gouge, and careful fitting of a new locking block will cure the damage. In post #10, I asked about the ammunition. Which 'factory' made the ammunition? Was it remanufactured ammo, or super hot like Buffalo Bore? Never got a reply.

Note the angled engagement surfaces in the photo of a modern 336. Both the bolt and the locking block are cut at 7 degrees.

View attachment 843759
Thanks for the info. Here is the ammo I am shooting. To start I am gonna ask around about getting the hardness and headspace tested.
843822
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,994 Posts
This was not a Remington change. My JM Marlin has this angled surface at the locking lug engagement. When I was posting about my 1894, Tomray replied it's a 7 degree slope. Completely normal. It's a camming angle to drive the bolt to its final closure. The locking surface on the bolt is cut the same way.

Without a headspace measurement or knowing which 'factory' made the ammunition, we're still wandering around in the dark theorizing about the OP's problem and its cause.

I do know for certain that some careful heliarc welding to restore the receiver gouge, and careful fitting of a new locking block will cure the damage. In post #10, I asked about the ammunition. Which 'factory' made the ammunition? Was it remanufactured ammo, or super hot like Buffalo Bore? Never got a reply.

Note the angled engagement surfaces in the photo of a modern 336. Both the bolt and the locking block are cut at 7 degrees.

View attachment 843759
I know the angle cut has always been there and why it's there. I'm just saying that it appeared to me that the angled cut was made across the entire face of the locking bolt leg; the portion of the locking bolt shown below is not there on the OPs':

843823


It just looked different than the locking bolt on my rifle (above) and looked like a sloppy fit issue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,899 Posts
First off DO NOT file the problem down. Find out it if the ammo is within spec. I bet it is. Next check head space or have a gunsmith do it. That may be the issue. Remington did not stop tempering certain steel parts. All parts that need hardened steel will have it to meet the specs.

If you are handy with tools, lay the receiver down on a flat surface. Take a flat punch and a hammer and hammer the metal back in place THEN take a small file and clean it up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
My two pennies from an engineering perspective. I reckon it can only be two problems. 1) the locking lug is too narrow allowing it to cock over at the top and cause undistributed press on one point. 2) the machined slot that carries the locking bolt has been machined too wide causing the same issue. Hopefully it's the former as a new locking bolt can be fitted. Take the bolt out and see if the locking bolt 'frets' in the slot. If so, one of the two above is the issue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
Adding to my thoughts previous, that slot/locking lug relationship if implemented correctly will result in even (mostly) pressure across the entire contacted surface of the locking bolt to the slot. So even a little bit out will distribute most pressure to one point at the top. If you measure headspace NOW, it will most certainly be out of spec.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
I have looked around on the forum and have not seen this specific issue. New 1894 Lever action .44 mag. 1st 50rnds and a couple cleanings went great then it started to bind when cycling. Upon inspection it looks like the locking lug has dented into the receiver and mushroomed the material into the passageway of the bolt. I cannot send it back do to Ruger buying Marlins name. Has anybody seen this? Can I stone it smooth? Will it affect head spacing? View attachment 843626 View attachment 843627
Same problem here. Started cycling badly after about 200 rounds. Now wont cycle without considerable effort. Only just noticed the balooning in the receiver on strip down and inspection today. Being in the UK, there aren't really any any gunsmiths knowledgeable enough with a Marlin....clearly Junk.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,466 Posts
Try Norman Clark of Rugby he barreled my 336 and knows his stuff. The previous owner had stressed the barrel steel shooting cast and not cleaning, it took me 2 weeks to get the lead out.
As we are outside the continental US (north america) Marlin supplied a barrel via the UK main agent. This is the rifle I have posted on, I would not sell it, bullet seated in c/groove .020 th of the lands, Norman asked what bullets I loaded ? Norman does all my Rifle work give him a call, Gareth
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Try Norman Clark of Rugby he barreled my 336 and knows his stuff. The previous owner had stressed the barrel steel shooting cast and not cleaning, it took me 2 weeks to get the lead out.
As we are outside the continental US (north america) Marlin supplied a barrel via the UK main agent. This is the rifle I have posted on, I would not sell it, bullet seated in c/groove .020 th of the lands, Norman asked what bullets I loaded ? Norman does all my Rifle work give him a call, Gareth
Hi Gareth. Thanks for the info. I’ll definitely give him a call in the morning. Something tells me that a damaged receiver will not be a cheap repair, and if it’s a receiver heat treatment issue then no repair will do the job! I’ll see what he says! Thanks again.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,383 Posts
I hope you don't have one of those soft receivers. That would be a bummer. Could have missed getting heat treated. Is that a Rem made rifle ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,334 Posts
I hope you don't have one of those soft receivers. That would be a bummer. Could have missed getting heat treated. Is that a Rem made rifle ?
OP's rifle is new, bought seven months ago. See post #8. Remington/Marlin must have not hardened the receiver properly. That's what happens when companies fail. Receivers can be re-heat treated, but the cost may be more than it's worth.

Screenshot 2021-05-04 at 11.55.46 PM.png
 
21 - 37 of 37 Posts
Top