I handle guns at work every day but took a real close look at a couple brand new Marlin rifles yesterday. One was a stainless 1895 in .44 Mag and the other was a stainless XLR.

Is it just me, or are these things rather crudely assembled these days?
A couple specific areas I noticed: On the 1895, with the action closed, the front of the "bolt", where it should line up with the front of the ejection port, doesn't fit even close. There's a good 1/16" of an uneven gap. Also, the back of the bolt sticks out at least 1/8" from the back of the receiver when it's closed. The machining on the internal parts is rough and uneven as well.  

On the 336s, the visible part of the bolt and the extractor in particular show rather ugly casting marks and again the back of the bolt is not even close to matching up to the rear of the receiver, and sticks out unevenly. The last thing I noticed was the front of the receiver, looking down from the top, where the top of the forend ends, there are small "ears" on both sides. These both have metal slag curled up over the top from apparently the polishing process.

On both guns, the bottom of the receiver, where you'd hold the gun carrying it one-handed, the frame overhangs the bottom plate with rather sharp edges as well. There are uneven gaps between metal and wood as well, though that's a pretty common problem, which I understand takes a lot of labor hours. But the rest of this, especially on a stainless gun, is just finish polishing.

I looked at an older (but still with a crossbolt safety, so not that old) used Marlin on the rack to compare, and while it's not a custom-fit gun, all the areas I mentioned above were much nicer-looking. Clearly a lot more attention to detail was paid at the time of assembly.

So my question is –– is this a product of Remington-ownership influence? I've always been impressed with the value of the Marlin rifles, but with this kind of finishing work, for the money they're asking for them these days... I just don't know.  The Rossi/Taurus guns keep looking more attractive, as does the Mossberg 30-30.

Any other thoughts?

I have to agree.  The older Marlins I've seen are built with much more attention to detail and probably worth their premium price while the new Marlins are poor relations at best.  When I was shopping for a 357mag levergun I stopped by a few gunshops and looked over some new Marlins (both birch and walnut), a few Cimarrons (LSI Pumas with better wood and sights), a few LSI Pumas (both the oct bbl rifle and carbines), and a used but new looking Browning B92 (it was beautiful but sadly outside my budget).  
To be honest, I felt that of all the ones I looked at, the birch stocked Marlins were the bottom of the heap fit and finish wise followed closely by the walnut stocked Marlins.  Their actions were not smooth and the triggers felt gritty.  In fact, one of the expensive Marlin 1895 Cowboys I handled was so poorly fitted that I couldn't believe that it left the factory in that condition.  It had to be a mistake to release it but the fact is that they did.
The Browning was clearly the 'best of the breed' as it was absolutely beautiful with a smooth action, however, it was over twice the price of the Rossis.  The Cimarron had nice wood but was priced up there with the Browning. The poorly made Marlin 1895 was almost as much as the Cimarron.   I chose the LSI Rossi as the best
value and I actually bought both my 24" oct bbl rifle and 20" carbine LSI Rossis from Bud's Guns because they were considerably cheaper.
After I gave them both action & trigger jobs and replaced the stupid safety with a plug they both run like a top and feed both 38spl and 357mag quite well.  Then I replaced the sights on both with Marbles and added a tang sight to the rifle.  Finally, even though I was lucky enough to get both with decent stocks, I rubbed some oil into them and it brightened them up a goodly bit.  The best part was that both Rossis together including the sights cost me less than the Browning.  It was beautiful and ready to go right out of the box but I couldn't quite afford that much money on a single rifle when I knew I wanted both a rifle and carbine.






 

You get what you pay for.  Bottom line is gun manufacturing has passed its hay day years ago.  You once had folks that took pride in making quality guns.  Now, everyone is cutting corners to spead the process up and save a few dollars. Remember the whole pre-64 win vs. post 64? I own older marlins and newer ones.  You CAN tell the differance in fit and finish.  But, my newer marlins are built like sherman tanks and will take quite a bit of abuse. As long as it goes bang when I need to, I am happy.

It is sad to see Marlin quality suffer so terribly over the last few years, specifically in the late 90s and recently, thought I have not seen it personally, I hear nothing but bad stories about some guns.  The new production Marlins that I have seen have a good fit and finish...

My biggest grip is the wood really, it's terrible.

Though I will always love my Marlins and I own quite a few and will continue to purchase more, but they won't be new production ones that is for sure.

I know the Marlin haters will have a ball with this thread, but what are you going to do, it's just like everything else.  Same thing happened with Winchester.  Their quality suffered big time and the New Haven plant eventually shut down.  

Hopefully Marlin will find the error in their ways and they will get back on track with their quality control, though I applaud them for coming out with newer designs rather then just crank out the same old stuff year in and year out (like winchester too...).

Why have I heard such conflicting accounts of Marlin quality? I have an 1895G I bought last year, and I think the fit & finish is very good, and the walnut stock is great. The checkering is crisp and clean, and the wood finish is flawless. The action of the rifle is a bit on the heavy/clunky side, but it's not too bad.

I've heard Marlin quality suffered in the past decade or so, but had been making a comeback. Now I hear they all basically suck? What gives? Is it spotty quality control or a production issue?

I bought a new 1894  in 44 mag about 2 years ago; fit, finish, and quality of the wood were excellent, for a 500 dollar gun.  I did not buy it because it is pretty, but to use, this gun is built like a tank.  Would have bought a puma; it not for their safety, or a Winchester; if they were not priced so outrageously high.  
Recently I have been in the market for a 45/70 lever action, and while looking at various gun-shops and handling quite a few examples, I have not found any in the condition you described most appear in very good condition.  
I am not a marlin lover, or making excuses for them, there are a lot of new guns out there, from every manufacturer that should not have made it past quality control.  
In short my marlin does what I want it to do, she will stack bullets on top of each other at 50yards and at 100 will shoot a "small apple" sized group.  I can't argue with that.

What is important to you, cost, fit /finish or function?  It is a three way balance where if you chose two the third will suffer.

True, HOWEVER, the Marlin lovers talk continuously about the Marlins as 'heirloom quality' rifles and the sad fact is that today they just can't make that claim.



Also, why would anyone say that function has to suffer because of a quality fit and finish.  It sounds to me like you're making excuses for a poor approximation of the formally great Marlins.

You can turn a new production Marlin into heirloom quality, just like you can with almost any modern firearm  -but it also depends on how you take care of it.  Older Marlins were heirloom quality too, but there is a difference between keeping it in a closet for 40 years and burying it in the backyard for 40 years.  A Henry is made the cheapest pot metal you can think of and it has heirloom qualities as well, just don't go driving over it with your truck.

As for Function, new production Marlins also function, yes some are rough and some have ungodly wood and machine marks, but they work, and will continue to work until you really fuck them up.

I don't want to sound like the Biggest Marlin fanboy in the world, but those are some moot points, especially when other lever guns suffer from the same symptoms.  

Actually, Marlins aren't anywhere near the 'heirloom' quality you'd think. Besides their poor fit and finish, they commonly have feeding issues; a problem the cheaper Rossis have only occasionally.  Consider this post from a current thread on Leverguns.com titled, "Questions on Marlin 1894 .357 Feeding" and some responses from some of the knowledgeable folks there.
OP - "My brand new out of the box .357 Marlin 1894
doesn't feed reliably at all.  It picks up the cartridge from the mag
fine, but when the nose of the cartridge starts into the chamber the
shell hangs up on the left side of the chamber mouth.  It is enough to
etch the side of the case almost every time.  If I can place the
cartridge in perfect alignment with the chamber and close the action, it
works flawlessly.  Anything picked up by the carrier and "action
worked" doesn't chamber without a minimum of hangup or drag due to the
side of the chamber.  
The problem occurs with both factory and
handloads, so there is no question with case sizing issues.
I
cannot find anything wrong with the mouth of the chamber.  
Is
this something that Marlin would fix if contacted or am I going to have
to get ahold of one of the levergunsmiths from this board to fix this
problem?"
Response - "It's not a new issue.  Marlins are noted for very finicky feeding, which
is mostly, but not entirely a timing issue.  If the carrier is
PERFECTLY timed, it'll feed about anything of the right OAL ya stuff
into it.
BUT, they rarely are perfectly timed nor stay that way
very long.  CAS shooters who run em hard and fast know this.  Yet they
can be made to feed almost anything, regardless of bullet shape or OAL
(even empty cases) slicker than frog snot on a wet glass doorknob."
Response - "Very commonly heard issue with the recently manufactured 1894. When the
folks that knew how to build them are no longer....... 1886."
They can be slicked up to run well just like the cheaper Rossis can but out of the box Marlins are much more picky loading ammo than many other brands.  I'm not bashing them but I am pointing out that the current Marlins are living off a reputation of quality that they simply don't currently deserve.





 
 
 

I'm starting to think that lever actions in general can be looked at through the same lens as the modern 1911 pistol. Yes, you can get production-level guns that work most of the time, but if you want an actual nice rifle, you're going to have to have a custom shop work it over.

How do the high-dollar Italian import leverguns stack up?

If you're talking about the Chiappas, then they have some internal problems with some.  Chiappa is working at correcting them but for now the Brazilian Rossis imported previously by LSI and Braztech and now by Rossi are both cheaper and their actions a better made.
BTW, both my Rossis came out of the box just fine and fed anything I wanted them to.  I did action and trigger jobs on them not to make them reliable but rather to slick up the actions, lighten, smooth, and crisp up the triggers, and get rid of the silly bolt safeties.





Edit to add:  For the money, I think that the Rossis are a good place to start at $400 they don't cost an arm and a leg.  Then you can add better sights and if you want, better wood and still be money ahead over the '92 Cimarrons and '92 Pumas which are just in fact Chiappas.  I stopped by a Sportsman's Warehouse the other day and they had a nice looking '92 Cimarron (Chiappa) in 45LC.  It had nice wood and a great ladder rear sight, however, it was priced at $900 and it still screamed for an action and trigger job!!!  





I can buy an LSI or Braztech imported Rossi for about $400 with it's better action and internals and then add a expensive , $140 ladder rear sight and a $120 walnut stock set and I'll have a better made and more reliable carbine that's just as pretty with the same sights for about $660 plus another $240 in my pocket for ammo!!  Besides, taking a bit of time to learn about one's firearm is rewarding not only in being able to work on it if necessary but also because you gain an understanding and appreciation about it and how it works.



 

I'm going to chime in with my .02.

I love Marlin's as much as anyone. My first .22LR a Marlin 39A is still in my safe. I bought it in the late 70's early 80's (can't remember). My dad's first deer rifle is a 336 in .30/30 that was made in the 60s. Great looking and shooting rifle. Great fit and finish. My 39a has a great fit and finish.

8 1/2 years ago I bought a brand new 1894s in .44 mag. It had a nice fit and finish to it. Regrettably I sold that gun a year ago. I am still kicking myself.

Back in October of 2009 I ordered a new 1894 from "The Exchange" off of gunsamerica.com. No complaints with the dealer. Their service was fine and the price was the best I could find on a new one at the time - $485 plus shipping.

When the new 1894 arrived I was very excited. Upon taking it out of the box and examining it I was very disappointed. The walnut looked like cheap plastic. The fit wood to metal fit looked like it was performed by a child learning how to woodwork. The metal had machine marks in several places around the receiver. The bolt stuck out past the back of the receiver and had a beveled edge where it probably was accidentally hit by a sanding wheel or something similar. The rear sight was not seated properly in the dovetail channel in the barrel - there was at least 1/16" gap between the bottom of the sight dovetail and the bottom of the barrel channel. I sent the gun back to Marlin with a detailed list of my issues. I had never fired the rifle.

They sent it back very quickly. New rear sight - scratched my barrel installing it and forced it into the dovetail channel rolling over the steel on the edges of the channel on the barrel. The replaced a front sight screw. The wood to metal fit looked better. I removed the buttstock from the action to discover that they didn't refit anything. The gun tech filled all the gaps with dark brown putty. I scraped it off the action and out of the stock and the fit was back to the beginning. I called Marlin again to share my disgust. I ended up selling the rifle locally for $500 and I had $525 in it. I didn't care about the $25.

Locally I found a new rossi 92 in a gun store. 20" octagon barrel, case hardened receiver, and decent looking wood. The fit and finish was much superior to the 1894 that I had just sold. I ordered a rossi 92  from buds. Glad I did. It fires flawlessly with different ammo. Looks great, and feels great. Gotta love that octagon barrel and case hardened receiver; it just looks great.

I still love Marlins, and have an 1894c on order.

Their quality control has gone to pot. What do I expect for $500? I expect a product that is quality. I'm different though. I keep my word, and if I make anything to put my name on it - you can bet the farm it will be near perfect. I hand make custom longbows and recurves as a hobby, so I know what it takes to make a quality product.

The sad thing is America - as a whole - just doesn't care. People's character is getting worse by the day, and the unfortunate thing their genes are passed on to more ignorant, lazy, sorry individuals.

I spent an hour and a half yesterday picking up trash for 1.5 miles on the side of the road in front of my parent's farm where I grew up. The trash is from ignorant white-trash rednecks disrespectfully throwing it out as they travel the road.

Sorry if I am off topic, but I make no apologies for my statements.

Not at all off topic.  Your experience parallels mine.  After seeing the older Marlins some friends had I was ready to buy myself a new one.  However, when I started to shop and discovered how different they were in quality now I decided to pass.  That's when I saw my first Rossi.  



It was also an old one with a really dark stock which turned me off.  Later, a shooting buddy got a new Rossi 44mag carbine from Bud's and what a difference.  He also heard about Steve's Gunz and his DVD so he got one, slicked his up and he was happier than a pig in shit! That's when I decided I had to have both my 24" rifle and 20" carbine and so the quest began.  The rest is history.



Funny thing, the group in our club that's into leverguns has fallen into two factions; one with older Marlins who swear by them but strangely haven't bought any new ones and then the other that have Rossis and keep buying new ones.

I love mine. The woods not the prettiest but now that I have taken it out and scratched it on briars, it doesn't matter. I couldn't ask for a better trigger. I am using hornady leverevolution ammo and getting good results with it.

My "roommate" has an older marlin. The wood is prettier but it's glossy with white trim, kind of garish for the woods. Mine seemed easier to sight in, I still feel uncomfortable about that, I think I should go back and reseat the scope or something.

Both have killed what it was shooting at so we can't complain. Neither one of us paid a lot for our marlins.

It's kind of awesome that mine has the "thrown down a driveway" look, but what I really did was use it!



Mine when it was new

My 1894  44 mag has a little bit of the "thrown down the driveway" look to it.   I didnt like it at first,  but now i do ––-  its not a safe queen waiting for its time in the treestand,  i keep it close at hand most of the time.   Cheers for guns we're not afraid to use !

An 1894SS followed me home today, and fit/finish looks fine to me. I don't have any experience with older ones, though.

The 1895 SBL I bought a few months back was sickening. I ended up taking the rail & sights off & refitting it all. Whoever is putting these things together at Marlin has no pride in what they do or themselves. If this were my dept. they would be rooted out & fired.

The new ones I've seen are pretty close to junk status out of the box....

I did buy a 39a a year ago that has been nothing but a pain in the ass. Wouldn't feed, wouldn't extract certain brands of ammo, would jam with the lever down. Internals revealed a sloppy mess of junk parts that were poorly made and poorly fitted. I tackled it first. Spent days working on it. Didn't matter... Sent it back. Waited over 10 WEEKS and didn't get any response until emails were sent to every Marlin .com address I could find. Got it back. New barrel, new poorly made guts, new bolt, etc... Worked ok for several hundred rounds and then fell apart again. It's going back. Their plant in North Haven is a dump. I drove the thing there the first time to hand them the ammo that FTE'd 100%. And I mean a DUMP. Nobody working in that hellhole would give a crap.

I bought a 1894 in 44mag around the same time. Fed ok but had 5-7" groups at 100 yards with frequent fliers that didn't even hit the 3'x5' backboard! I sent it to McPherson for a total tune-up. Spent $400.00+. Came back gorgeous and 99% reliable feeding with handloads. Shoots very accurately now at 100-150 yards. It's a shame there are no more craftsmen working at Marlin.

America will rise again. But only after she's burned to the ground I fear....

My "roommate" got a marlin bolt xs7c in .308 yesterday, it looks very nice! We are going to try and shoot it today. She got the one with the camo stock. I'll have to post pics later.

I got a 336 in 30/30 about three years ago... i love it.

That's disheartening.  

My brand new guide gun has a canted barrel.  I don't trust Marlin to do the repairs in a timely fashion, so when I get the funds (other guns are more important right now) it's going over to Wild West for repair and an action/trigger job.

My first and last off-the-shelf Marlin.  Fuck'em.

I think you've hit on the root cause of the problem.  Marlin recently announced that they were closing and relocating the CT plant. The employees probably have known about it for a while, but maybe not.  Certainly once the employees did know about it, a certain number will have quit and moved on, and some of the ones left will no longer "give a shit".  I suspect that a lot of parts that were previously rejected have been recycled to try to push as many rifles out the door as possible before the factory closes.

That said, I'd been wanting a stainless Marlin 44 mag for a long time. It was about 5 years ago I looked at two they had at Bachman Pawn in Dallas. The wood to metal fit on both of them was terrible, as was a stainless guide gun they had.  I don't see the stainless 1894's very often, but made a point of checking them out when I did see one.  The stars fainlly aligned while I had the money in my pocket and I bought a nice one last year.  I'm still hoping to find a nice 1894css (Stainless 357), but I'm not in any hurry.

I think that this has a lot to do with it.

I drive by the Kenna Drive factory on I-95 a few times a month around lunch time.  The groupings of employees out on their cig break has gotten smaller despite the weather getting better.  Clearly this is contrary to what one would expect a firearms manufacturer to be experiencing given the unprecedented gun craze.  

As far as the perceived attitude of the workers....they are factory workers, not artists or craftsmen.  I'm not sure what that one guy was expecting.  If you drove up the highway to the Pratt & Whitney jet-engine plant, you'd be so put-off by their workers overall appearance and attitude so much that you would probably never fly in a plane again.  However the fact is that the guys know their shit and usually do it quite competently.   These folks usually sought and took the job because it allowed them to just concentrate on doing one or two tasks well without giving a crap about anything else.   Combine that with their impending unemployment, and you have exactly the situation we have been seeing in American Industry nationwide for the past 30 years or so.  I've learned to never judge our Nation's industrial workers on appearance, and to give them the benefit of the doubt.  They are a dying breed and when they are gone, so are their skills.  The world, not just the U.S.A loses.  

As far as the stocks and build quality go, yeah it isn't what it used to be.   This is a symptom of "do more, with less" mantra of the efficiency cult that accompanies being bought out by equity firms.  Additionally, Marlin was NEVER a premium firearms manufacturer.  They never retained or replaced the skilled craftsmen that they honestly did not need to remain competitive in their market.  They always were made to a price-point a notch below cross-town rival Winchester.  When Winchester stopped being competitive, Marlin stopped having to stay competitive and this was reflected in their manufacturing.


I will say that living in CT and going to CT gun shows, you do see some absolutely beautiful Marlins of every model leak out of the factory.  A few times they had been explained as being "hand-picked" stocks for an employee of the factory or otherwise diverted.  So the capability is there, but the reality is that various forces preclude perfection on every, or even most rifles.

You've done made up your mind, but my 1894FG got back from the factory for a timing issue Monday. I mailed it back 27 April. Doesn't get much better than that turnaround wise. Yeah, it shouldn't have needed the trip in the first place, but I'll put up with a $29 USPS ride back. Two weeks beats the hell out of the two months Sabre had my AUG earlier this year.

BS. Lever actions in general haven't been considered a preimium gun in this country for decades, but Marlin was producing the best ones built. The fact that the cross town rival shut down and Marlin didn't says a lot. I also can't remember any time in the past ten to twenty years when a Winchester 94 was more expensive than a Marlin 336, so the notch below price-point logic is not there either.

ok.

Winchester ceased to exist under U.S. Repeating Arms for a number of reasons. CT sucks to do business in, it was being run by employees and managers that bought it out from Olin and didn't know how to run a modern company, and was under the worst era for the firearms industry that this nation has ever seen (late 80s to early 2000s).  They didn't have any capital, or any way to secure any to innovate, so they competed by producing (or at least a perceived) higher level of finish, which ate into profit margins because your average lever-gun deer hunter had it set in his mind what a lever gun should cost and that was that.  The market for lever guns was shrinking.  There was only room for one player to play profitably, and marlin cut costs instead of increase them.   Marlin had three big things going for it.  Big Bore, Optic options, and Cost.   I'm not just talking about lever guns either, but Marlin never competed against the Model 70 or 52, or 1903 or 63.  All good guns.  I'm not elevating Winchester to something they were not, but you may want to look at if you are elevating Marlin to something that they are not.  I will cover myself by saying that I am talking about pre-`64 Winchesters if I am talking about non-lever guns.   If I am talking about their lever guns in the context of this discussion, it is of the USRAC guns after the management buyout. Winchester made some turds and turkeys after `64, but for the most part, their lever line and model 70 retained competetive levels of fit, finish, and accuracy.  

Never said that the winchester was considered "premium" as I have no idea what "premium" means to you.  That could mean Browning, or Cooper, or Wetherby, or it could mean something else entirely.  The fact is that Marlin always competed on cost, and Winchester tried to compete on name and legacy,  In CT, where they were both made, the Winchester name gets another 10%-20% added onto the price every time.  Now that they are finally gone, they get the perceived panache and premium that they tried to sell when they WERE making them.  Odd how that works. I take that as a sure sign to buy Marlins, as they are clearly headed to the same fate as Winchester.

Either way, the sure as shit don't make them like they used to  

Ain't that the truth....

Agree somewhat  with the last line, but other than that, it's a bunch of Connecticut focused  rambling. Pre '64 was almost 50 years ago,  price point discussions of those times really no longer matter much. I don't consider Marlin a "premium" maker, but they've built more varied and interesting leverguns in the past few years than Winchester ever dreamed of. That apparently had some sway with the buying public. The 336SS I picked up last week is  built as well as it gets, so they still know how. YMMV.

I'll agree with your last line as well then  

But make mine an 1894CSS

Thankfully, my hatred of the crossbolt safety has spared me experiencing the  shoddy Marlins. My 'newest' one was made in 1978.

This.





I bought an 1894C this morning NIB. They said it was the last one but after seeing a big blemish on the top of the back stock I asked them to check if they had another. And of course they looked and found one "downstairs"
, and it was absolutely georgeous and I bought that one. No two rifles are alike. As far as the wood goes, it's like buying a guitar. No two trees are identical. If you inspect a rifle and it looks like shit, don't buy it. If you do, you knew it looked like shit BEFORE you bought it. To buy something that looks like shit and then complain that it looks like shit is kinda silly.

Couple of years ago purchased an 1894 Cowboy in 45LC.
Brand new  gun. I actually cut the factory tape off the box to open it.
Fit and finish were typical.
On initial firing it would not eject!
Went back to Marlin. They made good but it took 8 weeks to get my gun back.