[Squirrel Stalker]

My dealer ordered six 1894SBL guns and one will be for me. I was thinking, how nice the gun would look with walnut instead of laminate.I don't know if the forearm is shorter than say a regular 1894, and maybe a 39 buttstock would fit.SS

 

[keyston44]

One of the local dealers here had an 1895 SBL that had a walnut stock on it. The proof mark was REP so I'm sure it was one that Remington pieced together. It did look good though. Key

 

[MJ]

........................

 

[44-40 Willy]

Yes, but from the way I heard it, they got BATF permission to do so.

 

[MJ]

...........

 

[eaglesnest]

Willy---

Thank you for the quick reply!
I believe you, but it makes no sense. Sheeesh. Unbelievable huh?

Must mean even THEY know no one wants the stuff anymore. Why else would they want to do this?

Remington is destroying everything they touch.

It is my understanding that they are using parts made in North haven before the factory closed to make rifles in NY, hence the CT label. Same with the receivers with 91 serial #'s. It could be Remington wrecking everything, but I think it is coming from little higher up.

 

[44-40 Willy]

The info that I got was from one of the former Marlin employees that Remington got permission to keep using the North Haven adress on the barrel rollstamp even after the barrels were to be made in Ilion. I trust the guy and have yet to find him the least bit untruthful.

 

[Halwg]

The info that I got was from one of the former Marlin employees that Remington got permission to keep using the North Haven adress on the barrel rollstamp even after the barrels were to be made in Ilion. I trust the guy and have yet to find him the least bit untruthful.

I believe the excess parts explanation, but this one I don't believe. I think the BATF would be receptive to Marlin using parts they already had made and stamped from North Haven, but you aren't going to convince me that they are allowing barrels that are made in Ilion to be stamped North Haven. If you scan and post the letter from the BATF allowing them to do this I might believe it, but I'd still be skeptical.

 

[Brian in FL]

I don't believe that Remington is roll stamping Connecticut info on Ilion made gun barrels either. If that were the case, why wouldn't they continue the use of the JM proof mark? As long as the barrel was properly proofed, what difference would it make to continue to use the old proof mark if they were really trying to fool anybody?