So what's the big deal?
Got one, shoots and functions great, but what makes it better than one without the JM?
Remington's initial offerings were crap. Numerous issues with function, assembly, and appearance.
There were good examples to be had, and I understand the rifles are improving noticeably.
So what does Remington have to do with a JM stamped Marlin.
FWIW, my was born in 1979. Didn't think Remington was involved with Marlin then.?
Remington has nothing to do with the JM stamped Marlins....hence the desirability. Remington's initial offerings of the Marlin brand were fraught with problems, due to an inexperienced workforce which had NO experience in manufacturing lever action rifles.
All of the JM stamped Marlins were assembled by skilled craftsmen, who typically had many years experience and some amount of pride in their work.
The possible exception is last JMs produced when the workers knew they were out of a job and couldn't care less about their work.
The "Remington" issue didn't start showing up until about 2010.
Muleshoe,
I think the original answer implies you already knew Marlins are now made by Remington.
The new Remlins (Marlin made by Remington) started bad, but are getting better for the most part. I'm not convienced they are crafted in the USA. There are actually better crafted Rossi rifles in comparison to some of the new Marlins.
They are still a "working man's" rifle, but now you are getting what you pay for -Vs- the craftsmanship bargain from the "JM" versions.
I always felt Marlins were worth much more than they were selling for new, not anymore.
Yep, I did know Remington has taken over and the quality from what I hear has not been good. Just didn't know what Remington had to do with a JM stamped Marlin. Did the JM stamp stay on right up until Remington took over?
That is correct.
I understand there were issues with the latest JM stamped ones, due to apathy from the workers. Hard to do your best when you know you're losing your job.