[Tomjohn]

I looked at a 336 today but was at a bit of a loss to identify it. Here's what I know: It's a 336 with no suffix. It has no button safety. The front and rear sights are removed and it is top-mounted with a scope. The serial number under the lever begins with a 73. There are no letters, but maybe six following numbers. Oh, - and it has a phenolic buttplate with standard, rather than Phillips, screws.

Now here's the tricky part: it's painted black - stock and all. Even the scope. I can't tell what kind of paint, but it flakes off a bit under fingernail pressure. The paint looks like spray paint and is kind of matte. Under the paint (in the few places where it is flaked off) I cannot see any bluing - it all looks silver (or stainless). It's especially noticeable on the magazine tube where some paint has flaked. I couldn't see enough of it to tell if it was stainless or simply de-blued. I can't tell what the stock is made of, but I think it's walnut - I can just barely see the grain under the paint.

I checked the Marlin Manuf. Date code on this site and can't find a 73 prefix. I also don't know if Marlin ever made a Stainless without a 336 suffix. The gun is $200 and I need to know if it's worth it, given that I will have to strip and refinish the stock and fore-end, not to mention the metal. Everything, by the way, is painted - lever, hammer, etc.

Any opinions are welcome.

Thanks,

Tom

 

[Rachethead]

If the gun has a 20" barrel and full-length mag tube, it is a 336RC whether the barrel is stamped so or not. Sound like an abused gun that someone has painted in an effort to hide all the rust; and since you can buy a good used original for another $50-75 bucks, I'd let the dealer hang onto this jury-rigged piece of crap unless he'd be willing to sell it for $100 and make my restoration efforts worth while. And no, Marlin did not offer a stainless 336 in 1973.

 

[Tomjohn]

I'm not sure it's rusted because all I can see under the flakes is bare shiny metal. I guess it could have been sandblasted. I thought perhaps someone spray painted a stainless gun black to make it a less conspicuous hunting rifle....

The Date Code chart on this site says that 1973 guns were coded 27 (subtracted from 100 gives 1973) - which is why I wasn't sure of the date.

 

[Abel]

$200 is ok for a project gun. $150 would be more better...

If you want it, buy it. You can always brown the steel with some Birchwood Casey Plum Brown barrel finish. The reason that I recommend browning is because it always turns out better than home brew bluing.

 

[Mr Fixit]

Welcome aboard first off Tomjohn, secondly, right above these topics are the stickies, read the one by Tomray on buying used Marlins. My thoughts on the rifle are that it could have been an alright rifle and somebody sanded/sandblasted it to hopefully give the paint a good base to stick to BUT..............there's is always the other side, left out and neglected, pitted, rusted, etc. I'd be checking that one out real good and then I'm not sure I'd drop 2 bills on it. Scroll on down the forum list some and you'll find all kinds of info in the reference section, don't hesitate to ask a question here, no body is going to get up on you for it, I keep telling posters....There are no stupid questions! Mr fixit

 

[Shenandoah]

Welcome to the MO web site from west Texas.
I have to lean toward what Abel says. There are enough cold, wet nights left this winter to justify a project gun. $140 - $150 Out The Door could give you some room to justify the project. Never know what type of scope lurks under the paint. Iron sights for the Marlin are not too hard to come by and again, you never know what is just a coat (or two) of paint away as far as a stock goes. Look closely for cracks. Before you talk deal check the bore and cycle the action a few times. If the bore is good you might have a nice project piece. Shenandoah

 

[Brian in FL]

What can I say, I'd pass on this one, especially at that price. I wonder what all that paint is hiding.

 

[hogbear]

Tomjohn,
I have a marlin 336 that has been painted with what appears to be some type of automotive paint. This rifle was given to me or I wouldn't have it. The bore is good, the action is smooth and the rifle is accurate but I would not have taken a chance on buying it for any price. If I could have found a polite was to have turned it down as a gift I would have because , like you, I wonder what the paint hides. The wood was walnut and I have refinished it and it looks good. I am thinking about stripping the paint off the metal and having it reblued. In the places where the paint has chipped, the metal appears to have been sanded. For that reason I don't have a clue what I might find under the paint. At least I don't have any money in mine so I could have it blued unless there is some surprise under the paint job. It is this mystery that causes me concern. If I were you I would leave that rifle alone. As others have said, there are good Marlins on the used market at good prices. Even a "beater" with part of the original finish on it that shows no serious damage would be a safer bet than these "paint jobs". Be careful. hb

 

[trapper-xx]

Check out my post from last Oct. Examine the one you're looking at well. You may have found a worthwhile project rifle.

Rebirth of a model Glenfield 30A



http://www.marlinowners.com/forums/index.php/topic,78203.0.html

 

[Tomjohn]

Thanks, everyone. I actually offered $150 at the time and was turned down. I had decided that, in my mind, it was worth $150 just to see what the old gun had to offer. Like some of you suggested, I didn't think as a project gun it was worth $200, but wanted to make sure it wasn't hiding something more alluring. Besides, I like the idea of salvaging something that most people would reject out of hand. I'll probably check back later to see if the guy will take less, but at this point I'm not going to take the plunge.

Trapper - xx - that was a sweet job you did on the Glenfield 30A. Talk about making a silk purse out of a sow's ear! I have a lot of years experience as an antique furniture restorer, so the restoration itself didn't intimidate me. I just wasn't sure it was worth the time and energy.

 

[lot_45]

Not sure if you are still wondering about the serial number?

Between changing from the "letter" to the "number" prefix there where a year or two where the first two numbers designates the year.
I have at least a half dozen that follow this trend. The rife you looked at is most likely a 1973 vintage.

 

[Tomjohn]

Not sure if you are still wondering about the serial number?

Between changing from the "letter" to the "number" prefix there where a year or two where the first two numbers designates the year.
I have at least a half dozen that follow this trend. The rife you looked at is most likely a 1973 vintage.

Actually, I was still wondering about the contradiction in the serial # - thanks for clearing that up.

Tom