Marlin Firearms Forum banner

Marlin Model 989 M2 Carbine .22LR - LOTS of pics

57K views 67 replies 35 participants last post by  scottlebo1961  
#1 ·
I saw a 989 M2 (the model with the box magazine) at a small gun show a while back. I was browsing the tables when this "M1 carbine-looking thing" caught my eye.
I had never seen one before and REALLY wanted to buy it, but I didn't have much cash on me, and had to walk away. I did get the guy's number in case I wanted to see if it was still available later.
It was in fair condition - nothing looked horribly "wrong" and it wasn't banged up, but the stock looked "blah", and there were a lot of worn spots on the metal. I wouldn't think a collector would be interested in it as it was clearly "well used". It had a commemorative medallion on the side of the butt stock and he was asking $175.

I did some research and learned that Marlin first made a 99 M1 in 1964 - a shortened, slightly modified 989/99C that used a tubular magazine.

(excerpt from a Marlin book)
The marketing thought behind the Model 99M1 semiautomatic carbine was to capitalize on it's hand guard, short barrel, and M1 suffix to the model number as it was felt that the casual similarity to the Cal. 30 U.S., Carbine, M1 would appeal to the thousands of WWII veterans who had trained and carried into combat the larger caliber M1 carbine. It must have worked, because over 160,000 of this model were manufactured.
The Model 989 M2 was introduced in 1965 and produced until 1978.
Identical to the 99 M1 except that the tube magazine was replaced with a detachable, 7 round box magazine.
Two 7 round magazines were furnished with the model 989 M2 through 1969. In 1970 the practice was discontinued.

From 1965-1970 the suggested retail price was $49.95 (it creeped up to a whopping $73.95 in 1979 )

The more I read up on them and saw images online, the more I wished I had bought the one I saw at the show. "Oh well, maybe one day."

Well, good things come to those who wait and I just happened upon one again that was in a LOT better condition AND for less money. I still didn't have the extra money to buy it, but I wasn't willing to let it slip by me, so I bought it anyway with the plan of selling off some items to cover the cost of the purchase so I wouldn't actually be out any money.

Here she is!

Marlin Model 989 M2 .22LR circa 1969 per serial number.



It is missing the rear sight which is a common issue on these carbines as the rear sights were mounted to the grooved top and made to be easily removed in order to install a scope. Many owners did just that and in the process rear sights were misplaced and as the carbine changed hands, it did so minus the lost rear sight. I would like to find one if I can.

I paid $140 cash for it.
Purchased locally, so no shipping, and no FFL transfer fees. (legal here between PA residents for long guns)
The seller included the vintage (you can tell it's old by the lettering) Tasco 601E 4x15 scope that was already mounted on it.
Also included are TWO original magazines.

Overall condition is much better than it even looked in the photo I saw before going to get it.
All metal is perfect and only a few minor handling marks on the stock.
This one has fine checkering on the grip area - something I hadn't noticed in any photos I've seen of these little carbines.
The front sight is solid. (apparently some tend to come loose)
The front barrel band with the sling mount has a little play in it. That and the missing sight are the only "negatives" I can see.

I can't wait to try it out. :)

























 
#5 ·
Thanks!
I thought it was a good price even before I saw it in person. When I actually had it in my hand to look it over I had the urge to pull out another $20 and give it to him. LOL
Cripes, you pay that much for a new, plastic, Mossberg Plinkster these days.

Nice tiger stripe in the wood, too!
Yeah, they show better than I thought they would in the photos.
I just used my phone - maybe I can get some better shots with a camera.
I'm wondering if I polished it up some the stripes would pop out more.


That stock is a mystery to me thus far. I haven't seen any others with checkering, so I don't know if it's original, or not.

I'll try to get an even tighter shot of the checkering to show the detail.
 
#6 ·
Excellent example there! Ya done real good. But, it would look better if it was sitting next to my 99M1.
 
#7 ·
Here's a pic of the worst flaw - some dings on the stock.
I took the photo at an angle that would accentuate the damage. None of the finish was damaged - looks like something was pressed into it.
It's not as noticeable in person.







A few light scratches on the other side that aren't deep - just scratched the finish a bit.
Probably from the buckles of a sling at some point.






There are a couple of miniscule marks on the bottom of the stock where the support hand would hold the rifle that I couldn't get to photograph well enough to post. I suspect they are from a ring finger.

That's it. The overall finish is even and unworn. I'll bet I could make those light scuffs disappear by wiping it down with something.
I've never had a wood stock that was nice enough to bother with "making nice" before, so I'll have to look into what would be the best way to "polish" it up a bit.
 
#9 ·
I really like that checkering on there !! Was that factory done?
As I said above, it's a mystery to me at this point.

I'm sitting here examining it closely and I CAN see a TEENY, TINY variation in one part of the "outline" that surrounds the whole pattern.
The space between the line and the checkering is a LITTLE wider at one point on one side than on the other.

I know literally nothing about how checkering is applied - either by hand, or commercially, but I would assume that there would be NO variation with commercial checkering.
Do they just "press" a pattern into the stock?

If someone did this by hand, it's pretty amazing.

Time to go research how checkering is done, I suppose.
 
#12 ·
Thanks!
The closer I look, the more I believe you and the others are correct, and you are absolutely correct about the nice checkering job.

I'm a graphic artist and I have a pretty good eye for things that are even/uneven/centered, etc., and this checkering is nice and even throughout - VERY symmetrical. So much so that it caused me to doubt that it had been done by hand initially.

I looked up "checkering a rifle stock" and watched a few Youtube vids. Holy CRAP that's a labor-intensive process.




If you click on this image, it will take you directly to my Photobucket page and display the image.
By clicking on the magnifying glass in the lower right the image will open in another window.
AGAIN click on the magnifying glass in the lower right and the image will display quite large allowing you to see the checkering in much greater detail.




On one hand, I'm disappointed that the stock has been altered. On the other hand, I wasn't looking for a museum piece/collectible.
In the end, I think I have a really nicely done semi-custom carbine that is one of a kind and the checkering alone was probably worth more than what I paid for the rifle! LOL
Either way, I'm super happy with it. The only way I could be happier is by locating an original rear sight for it.
 
#15 ·
congrats on the new rifle
 
#18 ·
Wow. I really didn't expect to hear so many compliments on such a simple, little carbine.

I also wasn't quite sure what a "good price" would be for one.
I wanted one, one made itself available at a price I could afford, and I jumped on it.
I always figure that if I'M happy with the purchase, the price paid isn't really relevant.
That said, it does sound like I did "OK".
 
#22 ·
Fine looking rifle. Congratulations. Great photos as well.
 
#25 ·
Thanks, thank you, and thank you very much!


A fellow over in Beaver Falls was selling one just like that.Wish I had jumped on it...lol
I appreciate your hesitation. (wink)


That little scope......ackkk. Get a decent scope for that beauty if you pass up the Tech-sights.:biggrin:
Heh. I'm not much of a scope guy. I only have three rifles with scopes - each on 22s and each came with the rifle when I bought it.
I've never had much interest in long range shooting. (and I realize a 22 isn't a long range shooter) I'm more inclined to own and shoot firearms meant for self defense and as such, I have little need to shoot out past 100 yds and I like open sights. (even though my aging eyes are starting to see the benefit of a scope)

I looked at the Tech sights, but it seems you need to replace the front sight as well for them to work due to the height, and I'd rather not do that.
If I'm wrong, let me know.

It may be easier and less expensive to simply outfit it with a better scope. With the checkering, a scope looks right at home on it anyway.
 
#26 ·
I took it to the range today for a quick function test.

It passed with flying colors.
Image


The Winchester Super X ammo HP ammo failed miserably though.
I had two that didn't feed properly, shaving part of the nose off the bullet as it jammed up on the feed ramp and I think three "duds" that didn't fire, and then one stovepipe.

The other three types of ammo worked fine. (Golden Bullet HP/Fed Lightning round nose/Thunderbolt round nose)


I have pics to post later after I get them uploaded.
 
#28 ·
The rifle range was occupied, so I couldn't use the 50 yard backstop. I found a spot to myself - I believe this is roughly 35 yards.
Not a big deal as I wasn't shooting for accuracy so much as I was checking to be sure the carbine WORKED.




I didn't have a lot of time, so I only took these four types of ammo with me.
Due to time restraints I only fired one 7 round mag of each type followed by one "mag dump" that I emptied with rapid shots. (without a hitch)

Two types of HP (hollow point) and two types of round nose ammo.





I started with 7 rds of the Federal Lightning (I believe this is also sold under the "Champion" name) followed by 7 rds of Remington Thunderbolt. Both round nose bullets.

All shooting was done from a standing position with my support arm resting against a roof support post.




The target is a cereal box, unfolded. ("Family size" Lucky Charms for those taking notes)
The hits circled in pen are the Fed Lightning - those circled with marker are the Rem Thunderbolt.





Next up was the Remington (hollow point) Golden Bullets (7 rds) followed by 7 rds of Winchester Super X hollow points...





For the Golden Bullets I aimed for the bottom of the outer ring. The Winchester Super X rounds were aimed at the right edge of the outer ring.
Golden Bullet hits marked with "squares" in pen. Super X hits marked with squares in marker.

There were multiple "issues" with the Super X. (note only 6 hits instead of 7)



With the Win Super X ammo I had a dud/failure to fire on the first shot. I removed it and reloaded - it fired the second time around. Of 7 rounds, this happened 3 times.
I also had two rounds jam as they were being fed. The noses were catching and shaving chunks off. (see photo below) One worked the second time I tried it, the other just wouldn't feed and I had to discard the round. I also had one failure to eject (it came right out using a pick) and one stovepipe with the Super X.








After all that, I had to go, but I loaded one mag with Thunderbolts and let fly as fast as I could into the berm with no issue.
Yay!

All in all I was pleased. It was a pretty small sample, but like my old pump action, it seems that this likes round nose bullets. Further "testing" will be required to confirm. ;)


 
#29 ·
Great gun! The only thing that would make it better (being a Marlin purist) would be the addition of a "period" Marlin Scope. The Model 300 or 300A (fixed 4 x 20) or Model 500 or 500A (variable 3 to 7 x 20)were offered in 1969. These days, they are a bit hard to find, but would really add to the package!