You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Is this a JM stamp?
- Thread starter 2DaMtns
- Start date
I would say that it is a JM stamp. Worn out tool perhaps help obliquely when struck. However, and no expert, I would rather avoid all rifles from either Marlin or Remington from around 2008 to about 2014 unless I have been able to do a through and unhurried inspection of the rifle. If a rifle functions well and looks good I would care less as to the stamp. Just me though.
3M
3M
In any case the JM stamp if present should usually be found on the left side of the barrel just forward of the receiver and serial on the tang. Remington puts their stamp just forward of the receiver on the right side and on the left is the date code and the serial and laser ID is on the left lower receiver. At least that is how it is on my JM and REM rifles. I am sure the exceptions might be more prevalent than the rule over so many years until today.
I looked at a 336 rifle for purchase today and passed on it, the JM stamp was not full and clear, left side, forward of receiver, serial on the tang, the M was there, the J was not complete. That is not why I passed, that matters not to me, I did not like some of the fit and finish on it and their was a little more wear and some rust pitting than I like for the price they wanted. I guess I am particular, and I want a 35 Rem instead of another 30-30 I suppose.
I looked at a 336 rifle for purchase today and passed on it, the JM stamp was not full and clear, left side, forward of receiver, serial on the tang, the M was there, the J was not complete. That is not why I passed, that matters not to me, I did not like some of the fit and finish on it and their was a little more wear and some rust pitting than I like for the price they wanted. I guess I am particular, and I want a 35 Rem instead of another 30-30 I suppose.
Last edited:
FrankenMauser
New member
Yea, that's a bad JM stamp.
Very bad.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7f1MumAJTLo
As Scorch said, finished rifles, just prior to packaging, got the JM stamp as a proof mark after test firing. (Head space checked before and after firing a SAAMI proof load.) But, it has been verified by Marlin employees, engineers, and managers that the location didn't matter (which side of the barrel, and how far from the receiver) and some inspectors weren't, exactly careful in making sure the stamp was 'square' with the barrel to provide a clean and legible marking.
The stamp was applied by hand, not by machine; which is why any time spent looking at Marlins will show evidence of stamps that were off of 'square' in every way possible.
Among other less-than-perfect markings: I have one that's just an "M" and the right side of the oval. I used to have one that was the J and a line from the M, with the left side of the oval. And I had (might still have) a barrel that had a winking smiley face - a "U" from the bottom of the J and two dots from the bottom of the M, over the bottom of the oval.
Very bad.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7f1MumAJTLo
As Scorch said, finished rifles, just prior to packaging, got the JM stamp as a proof mark after test firing. (Head space checked before and after firing a SAAMI proof load.) But, it has been verified by Marlin employees, engineers, and managers that the location didn't matter (which side of the barrel, and how far from the receiver) and some inspectors weren't, exactly careful in making sure the stamp was 'square' with the barrel to provide a clean and legible marking.
The stamp was applied by hand, not by machine; which is why any time spent looking at Marlins will show evidence of stamps that were off of 'square' in every way possible.
Among other less-than-perfect markings: I have one that's just an "M" and the right side of the oval. I used to have one that was the J and a line from the M, with the left side of the oval. And I had (might still have) a barrel that had a winking smiley face - a "U" from the bottom of the J and two dots from the bottom of the M, over the bottom of the oval.
The reason I am fairly confident it is a JM stamp is that I see part of the oval and the beginning of the letters adjacent to the oval so it is pretty clear to me, having seen similar in my search for the perfect Marlin over the last 50 years give or take, that the stamp is a pretty poor example of an off square effort at a JM stamp. And it is in the place that I see most, at least of newer pre-Remington Marlins, where the stamps are often found. The oval leg gives it away, to me. Could be wrong, no expert here for certain. I can clearly see the REP stamp on my two Remington Marlins as it is machine made. On my JMs, not so much.
If the rifle is nice and you like it I would not keep that from allowing me to purchase it. But like I said, for about two years before to about two or even three after circa 2010, the transition period, I would scrutinize it very, very carefully.
3C
If the rifle is nice and you like it I would not keep that from allowing me to purchase it. But like I said, for about two years before to about two or even three after circa 2010, the transition period, I would scrutinize it very, very carefully.
3C
I had a 2009 JM rifle and the stamp was not clear. At some point the stampings became an afterthought. Yes it was a North Haven JM rifle. No there wasn't anything wrong with it other than the stamp.
Now I have the same model just a few years older vintage. My favorites are the 336A with the forend cap and red stained wood.
Now I have the same model just a few years older vintage. My favorites are the 336A with the forend cap and red stained wood.
Sure Shot Mc Gee
New member
No its not.