Marlin 39AS Question

[JEBar]

admitting up front that I've never been a Marlin fan and I know little about them .... it is my understanding that the difference in a Model 39A and Model 39AS is the AS had a safety .... I've read a good number of post that mention Model 39A rifles as being JM Marlins .... Question : are there Model 39AS rifles that are JM Marlins

[bandit1250]

admitting up front that I've never been a Marlin fan and I know little about them .... it is my understanding that the difference in a Model 39A and Model 39AS is the AS had a safety .... I've read a good number of post that mention Model 39A rifles as being JM Marlins .... Question : are there Model 39AS rifles that are JM Marlins

Being the safety started started in 1988 there is plenty of JM Marlins with the "AS" on the barrel. They used it for a while and eventually went back to just the A. Not sure on the years of start and finish. After 2009 there was very few Marlin 39A' models that were probably made when Remington took over. Maybe just enough to use up all the parts from the old plant. My friend had a Remington model that had fantastic wood but he never fired it and sold it. It brought really good money so it found a new home. Only Remington made one I ever saw.

[North Country Gal]

As above, plenty of JM Marlins with the AS designation out there, since Marlin went with the safety in the late 80s and Remington didn't buy out Marlin till 2008.

Note that AS designation not only indicates a cross bolt safety on the 39, but also a rebounding hammer. The rebounding hammer was something added on the 39 when the safety was added, but not on the centerfire models when the safety was added. That rebounding hammer on the 39 AS has been a source of controversy with some 39 fans. Usually works fine and most owners have no problem with it. When it doesn't work, though, it can be a real headache. The other issue is that a lot of 39 fans claim the rebounding hammer made for a crummier trigger, but I can't verify that because all the Marlin 39s I've owned were pre-safety models.

In terms of resale value, JM Marlins without the safety bring higher prices, but even more so with the 39 because those models didn't use a rebounding hammer.

Lastly, note that 90s vintage JM Marlins vary a lot in the fit and finish and QC department. Have had some great ones and some not so great. In fact, I knew a gunshop that just stopped carrying Marlin lever guns in the mid 90s because they got tired of sending them back. The QC was that bad. Marlin started to have some serious financial issues in the 90s and that continued up to the Remington buyout. My advice on those late vintage JM Marlins is to inspect before you buy. Don't assume its a great gun just because it is a JM vintage.

[JEBar]

info appreciated .... ours is shown below .... it was passed on to us after the death of a friend of over 50 years .... I believe it to be a JM but need to make sure when we get back home .... everything from looks to operation of the action to trigger pull are fine .... as a firearm I have no interest in it whatsoever but because of its history it will stay in the family .... its weight and balance are such that it isn't a youth's rifle; none the less, when his father (our son) says he's ready I've decided to pass it on to our oldest Grandson

[Hatchdog]

I have a 2009 39A with the rebounding hammer. My issue with the hammer is since I scoped the rifle I installed a hammer extension. Even with the light weight of an aluminum extension it caused light strikes leading to failure to fire quite often. Once I removed the hammer extension all has been fine. A side note, this rifle is very accurate and fun to shoot. It’s heavy, similar to carrying a centerfire hunting. Note the JM stamp where the barrel and receiver meet.

Edit. JEBar, looks like we posted at the same time. I don’t see the JM stamp on either side of your barrel but not to say it’s not there somewhere.

519A6505-C02D-446B-9137-417114B149C9.jpeg

[JEBar]

understood on mounting a scope .... I put one on ours and did have to install a hammer extension .... have since removed the scope but not the hammer extension .... haven't had any problem with light strikes but I've fired so few rounds through it that might not mean anything

[BigAl52]

I as well have a later model I got very reasonable. Had to put a new improved extractor in it but now it works great. Its very accurate and I do enjoy shooting it.

[bandit1250]

The rebounding hammer is a much bigger problem than the cross safety. The rebound causes a vibration through the rifle that some claim is detrimental to accuracy. I was always kind of happy when I was collecting 39 A Marlins to run into a safety model as they were usually a bargain and I ground off the rebound strut and had a good shooting and very reliable 39 A to hunt with and used it like you would a internal hammer rifle. Grinding the strut off then a lighter hammer spring was needed and that actually helps with the trigger pull. Squirrel hunting I loaded the gun and put the safety one with hammer back and put the safety off when getting a shot at a squirrel and levered another round in and back on safety. Also could carry with the fired round left in the chamber until ready to shoot a squirrel and lever a live round in. Marlin actually recommended the safety be used even with no mods to the hammer strut. I keep factory struts in my box to return the rifle to rebounding hammer before selling one or trading. Don't pass up buying a "AS" if it is a nice one. They can be made to work well and be very reliable. All this stuff Marlin went through was trying to fix something that wasn't broken to start with. Same dumb thing Ruger did with the MK series hand guns.

[Sir Henry]

I don’t have anything to add but am reading every word of every thread because I’m in the market for a 39A.

[Rifletom]

I have a 2009 39A with the rebounding hammer. My issue with the hammer is since I scoped the rifle I installed a hammer extension. Even with the light weight of an aluminum extension it caused light strikes leading to failure to fire quite often. Once I removed the hammer extension all has been fine. A side note, this rifle is very accurate and fun to shoot. It’s heavy, similar to carrying a centerfire hunting. Note the JM stamp where the barrel and receiver meet.

Edit. JEBar, looks like we posted at the same time. I don’t see the JM stamp on either side of your barrel but not to say it’s not there somewhere.

519A6505-C02D-446B-9137-417114B149C9.jpeg

Looking at Hatchdog's pic of his 39AS, his has two more holes/screws[?] forward on the port side than mine. Also, mine is drilled/tapped for a receiver sight. port side, just under top rear screw. Mine is from 1957. Anyone else have one like that? Interesting the subtle changes over the years. And I couldn't see "JM" stamp on JEBar's either. It is usually right at the barrel/receiver, one side or the other as Hatchdog mentioned.

[Ernie]

This is one of mine from 1954. Has mounting holes tapped on receiver and 4 tapped holes on the barrel. Not sure what they are for. Have another from 54 with a period Weaver scope mounted but it is buried at the moment.

CrlyKnqjTKmb4NJfak28iA.jpg

[North Country Gal]

Remington made guns will have a serial number that starts with MR and also the MR stamp instead of the JM on the barrel. Note that there were a few "transition" 39s with a mix of markings in the 2008-09 period when Remington was moving everything to N.Y. and using old JM inventory parts.

Again, not all Remington made Marlins are bad - I have friends with the "Remlins" that love them - but those early years following the buyout were the ones that gave the Remington such a bad rep and it's been hard for them to overcome.

Also note that it's no coincidence that the Marlin lever models that required the most fitting are the ones that have given Remington the most grief.

The simplest Marlin actions (and the most modern) with the least fitting required are the 336/1895. Remington has done a pretty good job with these models. Friends that have them like them.

The 1894s have been tougher for Remington because they are a much older action and need a more precise fitting. Remington has made a committment to get these right and recent ones I've seen looked fine.

By far, the model that has given Remington the most grief is the 39. That split receiver action needs a lot of hand fitting. (If you've ever taken a 39 apart into its two sections, you'll notice that one section will have the last digits of the serial number stamped on the inside.) This explains why regular production on the 39 has ceased and is now a Remington Custom Shop, only, offering.

[Travlin]

The Marlin 39 from the custom shop is about $3500 so I guess that my 39 has gone up in value. Remember the 39 was never chambered in .22 magnum like the H.R.A. rifles are.

[Ojaileveraction]

Remington made guns will have a serial number that starts with MR and also the MR stamp instead of the JM on the barrel

MR and Serial number on the left side of receiver and a REP stamped on the barrel instead of JM

[JEBar]

MR and Serial number on the left side of receiver and a REP stamped on the barrel instead of JM

the serial number of our 39AS is stamped immediately behind the hammer

[North Country Gal]

My mistake on the barrel stamp. Yes, REP.

JEBar, what are the first two digits or letters of the serial number on yours?

[JEBar]

JEBar, what are the first two digits or letters of the serial number on yours?

I don't know, its in NC and I'm in Texas ... as noted in the opening post, I've never been a Marlin fan .... my Grandfather introduced me to firearms an hunting .... his big game hunting rifle was a Winchester Model 94 30-30 .... he had no use for Marlin or Savage rifles, guess from early on I adopted his brand loyalty .... I do keep a list with me of serial serial numbers of the firearms that are important to me .... in thinking about it, other than its a long standing habit, I can't think of a good reason for doing so .... the serial number of his Model 94 is on list, the one for the 39AS isn't .... I have already learned a good bit from this thread and that info is appreciated

[Sir Henry]

I’ve learned a lot also.

[North Country Gal]

Interesting that you should mention the Winchester versus Marlin thing. In talking to collectors, I've learned the Marlin lever guns, prior to WW II, were more expensive than Winchester lever guns and considered higher grade guns, even by some Winchester fans. These are considered highly collectible lever guns, never produced in numbers to keep up with Winchester.

After WW II, Marlin changed direction and modernized their 30-30 lever gun design to make it simpler and a more cost effective gun to produce. Winchester, of course, refused to modernize their gun designs and kept producing them in the old cost intensive way. Finally caught up with them in 1964, of course.