336 strength

[406 Savage]

So Win beefed up the '94 receiver to chamber the .307 .356 & .375 and increased the cartridge brass thickness to deal with higher pressures. Did Marlin change or beef up anything on the 336's used for the.356 & .375 chamberings? If no, then why couldn't the .375 brass be used for improved or +P 30/30 32WS & 25/35 cartridges in newer 336's.....

[Tycer]

Mmmmmmm

[earlmck]

I had a 375 in the Marlin for a while; I could see no difference between it and my other 336's in 35 Rem or 30/30. I don't think Marlin did anything to beef 'em up.

[Grizz]

https://gunsmagazine.com/gear/the-50-alaskan-lever-gun/

the 50 alaskan has been built on winchester and marlin frames. it was a topic of discussion for quite a while, AND i "think" i remember something to the effect that some smiths were re-cutting the threads in the receiver . . [???] perhaps to form an acme thread ? someone around here with better memory and better bookmarks might be able to post up whatever dialog exists concerning this . . .

[JimT]

One of our recently passed brethren ... Buck Elliot ... could have spoken at length on this subject. He destroyed more than 25 336's trying to get them to reliably shoot the 454 Casull.

He also destroyed about that many Model 94 Winchesters in the same process. And came to the conclusion that neither was suitable for such a high pressure cartridge.

Some years ago he wrote me about the experiments and how the guns came apart. Part of the problem was the angle of the locking lug. It caused the bolt in the Marlin to ramp upward, cracking the receiver. I do not remember how the Winchesters failed but both left no doubt they were not the guns for the cartridge.

For those interested, the Winchesters lasted longer than the Marlin, though not by a lot. I was privileged to fire one of the Winchesters in 454 Casull before it started to loosen up. Even if it had worked I would not have had one. The recoil was pretty fast and hard.

[Grizz]

was that the frame stretching? i recall something about that

[JimT]

was that the frame stretching? i recall something about that

I believe so .. though I don't really recall all the details. The one thing that stood out to me was the bolt ramping up as it set back, due to the angle of the locking lug. Both the Marlin and the Winchester locking lugs are angled.

MARLIN 336

dsc00445_1024x576.jpg

WINCHESTER 94

Model 94 Closed.jpg

[Grizz]

was that the frame stretching? i recall something about that

I believe so .. though I don't really recall all the details. The one thing that stood out to me was the bolt ramping up as it set back, due to the angle of the locking lug. Both the Marlin and the Winchester locking lugs are angled.

MARLIN 336 dsc00445_1024x576.jpg

WINCHESTER 94 Model 94 Closed.jpg

think the frame stretching altered the headspace.

the locking lugs are what i think is better in the 86 and 92, it looks like a much better lockup in battery.

[Griff]

IIRC, much the same as the experiments with the Winchester 94 in developing the 375Win, the Marlin locking lug causes the bolt to press against the top of the receiver and the Winchester 94 it causes the rails to separate, whence the "Big Bore" added beefiness around the area of the lug. The article I had downloaded was on several computers back... somehow never made the migration to the latest ones. I have a Marlin 375, one of the earliest ones, as the serial number dates to 1978, bought new in box in 1980. I USED to run it at full power, but now I load in the .38-55 range and feel much more confident in having a rifle that'll last both my and my son's lifetimes.

[BenT]

When Marlin developed the 308MX,338MX, and 450 Marlin, they went from the square barrel threads to V threads with a higher TPI to give the barrel more thickness at the chamber for a little higher pressure. But like everyone has said the locking lug is the weak link with a Marlin. Back in the late 60's or early 70's Marlin tested the 250 Savage in the 336, but the tapered case created too much bolt thrust. But I do think a 25-35 AI would be a fun project in a Marlin.

[Malamute]

Actually, I believe the marlins tend to spread the sides of the receivers, the bolt forces them outwards, and theres not all that much surface area engaging the locking bolt to breech bolt and side slots in the receiver.

I recall Dave saying the Winchester 94s tried to have the bolt ride up against the angled locking lug.

The take-away on all of it was that none "blew up" when they failed, the just got so loose they wouldnt function ir werent safe to shoot, but I dont think any catastrophically failed. The receivers stretched in Winchester 94s, visibly he said, especially angle ejects with the right wall lowered.

Winchester 94s have a web of steel behind the locking bolt, I dont believe the extra metal was to keep the sides from spreading, at least straight apart, thats a marlin problem, and I believe it was deemed mostly cosmetic in the final analysis, like they were doing something extra special since the rounds were so powerful, when it really didnt matter that much in the 94s if the heat treat was right.

Keep in mind Marlin didnt sell very many of 307 and 356s on the 336 action, they marketed them, but I dont think they made many and I think one chambering was dropped very quickly. And yes, in his tests with 454, all the guns they tried failed fairly quickly but the marlins seemed to fail more quickly. I believe he said a 1920s Winchester 94 held up longest, though I think 40 or so rds was about the most any lasted before loosening up too much to function.

Back the the original intent of the question, what exactly do you want to achive performance wise by having heavier brass? Its going to increase pressure right off the bat having less volume. Generally people increase vlume or case capacity ti improve performance, such as the 30-30 improved by Ackley, or 307 and similar alterations. Adding barrel length also improves velocity. Using the better bullet shapes improves longer distance velocity retention. For example compare Hornady 170gr with Speer 170 gr ballistic coefficients, and drop at 300 yards with exact same sight in distance etc, not the smoke and mirrors Hornady used with the flex tip bullet data.

Go check William Iorg posts at shooters forum, hes worked with various loads and guns and barrels of 30-30, 30-30 improved and other variations on the 30 cal lever theme. Lots of interesting reading there. I just settled on the standard 30-30 with 150 gr bullets. Slightly better velocity than 170s, generally reported to put deer down a little faster, and I havent seen any particular negatives mentioned, yet the old advice is generally "but use the 170s because penetration and reasons" but its not usually stated clearly as to why the 150s arent enough. Both seem to work fine for the most part regardless. if you want more velocity, buy or load 150s or 125-130s.