[blue today]

I am trying to figure out what years from 2007 to present would the serial numbers be. I read some information, but does not pin point the exact serial numbers with those years.

I need to know so if I come across a new Marlin in the store that I don’t buy a lemon. I can’t take any chances. I want to stay away from those guns manufactured during the transition from Marlin to Remington owned company.

Are the serial numbers prefix goes the same for 336s, 1895s, 308mx?

I want to buy a older Marlin or a New Remington Marlin and hope to stay away from any warranty problems.

 

[1128]

Stay away from the New Remington Models. If the Barrel does not a "JM" proof stamp on the left side check it carefully. Most likely it will have a proof of "REP" on the right side.

 

[pisgah]

My #1 piece of advice -- LOOK at the doggone thing before taking it home! I am always puzzled by folks who post saying, "I took it home, then realized that the stock had a huge gap at the tang, front sight cocked to the left 1/8", lever wouldn't cycle" etc., etc. New or used, I examine any rifle as minutely as I can without disassembling it before I plunk my money down, and this avoids at least 99.9% of all the problems I am likely to encounter.

In general, the older the Marlin, the better chance you will find no manufacturing flaws. Anything made before the crossbolt safety was added is just about guaranteed to be A-1. Folks have been giving the new "Remlins" down the road for poor quality, but the two I have examined so far were better-looking and smoother-working than any I saw coming out of the Marlin factory in the past 10 years, so just being Remington-made does not necessarily indicate a lemon.

 

[TNWoodsman]

I saw one the other day with a JM on the right side. It was new and clearly assembled in NY. The fit and finish were ok.

 

[Rachethead]

It seems that the vast majority of Marlins with problems have a 91 or 92 serial number prefix; but there are members here owning great guns with those serial number prefixes to include me, so the answer to your question is that there IS NO RULE other than common sense. Make sure you 1) have enough gun knowledge that you can properly evaluate a gun prior to purchase; and 2) you get something in writing telling you that your money will be refunded if you learn your rifle has the droop and won't zero. Maybe some day all lemons will be painted yellow; but until that time, the best and only policy is BUYER BEWARE.

 

[shooter69]

I have an 1895gs with aserial # 92 and it is without flaws and a great shooter.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Look anything over really good.

I just saw a JM marked 336W last weekend new on the rack that had hiddious looking wood.

 

[Halwg]

Look anything over really good.

I just saw a JM marked 336W last weekend new on the rack that had hiddious looking wood.

336W's have birch stocks. Yes, they are hideous, but they are cheaper than a 336C with walnut. Would I buy one? No, but a lot of folks want a less expensive gun. You get what you pay for.

 

[Mr Fixit]

Nothing wrong with a 336W, had a trigger job done, added a 3-9x40 scope and Hornady LE's...I'm good and I don't lose any sleep over a scratch or dent in the stock. After all it's still a Marlin heart pumping in that baby! ;D Mr fixit

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

The stock didn't have stain all the way into the checkering. The cheap looking wood isn't bad as a whole, but they could at least get stain on the whole thing. It was the darker walnut wannabe color and then the bright white of birch blotchy in the checkering. If it adds too much cost to do that they would be better to forget either the checkering or the stain and make it sure is all the same.

Even a base pickup has a complete coat of paint.

 

[dale]

I stay away from any lower than 93 (2007) unless I can really check it over.

 

[robert4570]

I was at a gun show this past weekend and seen 2 stainless 1895 GG at 2 different vendors with some light colored hideous forearms that didnt match the stock . Both had serious gaps in the pistol grip area of the rear stock .I seriously gave both of these guns a good once over and just could NOT buy either one.
They must have laid off the QC dept or the machininst have made slight adjustments to the machinery ...sad. ???

Cant remember the prefix # on these 2 , they had MR S/N's .

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

I stay away from any lower than 93 (2007) unless I can really check it over.

How do you date the newer serial numbers? The existing charts don't really apply to the new ones it seems.

Mine is a MR10XXX, I am curious just what year it was built (bought it new last spring)

 

[RIF]

Look anything over really good.

I just saw a JM marked 336W last weekend new on the rack that had hiddious looking wood.

I have a 336W that is the best shooting 30-30 I have. I thought so much of it I bought a walnut stock to put on it! If an accurate gun is what you want, you probably will have to buy several and choose from them, and send the ones you do not want down the road. A local dealer here offers a lifetime deal where if you bring the gun back he will give you what you bought it from him as a trade towards a gun of equal or lesser value. Maybe you can talk your dealer into this deal too?

 

[TNWoodsman]

Badly mismatched wood goes back to the 1970s. I've seen forends that were completely white sapwood on guns with dark walnut buttstocks.

Most modern manuf. companies don't really have a Quality Department. The assembler is supposed to take care of quality.

I've never seen a nice looking 336W but they shoot just fine.

 

[AINT NO FISH]

I purchased a '94 .357 CB 20" barrel new with 91 starting serial No. shoots and functions well. Internet purchase, guess I was lucky.