As they are the same action, would that be OK?

I don't want to talk about something forbidden and get banned.

Will be picking up my new 1897 in about a week.

I don't think you have anything to fear.:)

That's a sweet rifle, for sure.

What sort of gun restrictions do you have to deal with in PR?

No problem. Tell us about it when it arrives.

Bye
Jack

The 1897 is already bought and paid for. I just haven't picked it up as I'm waiting for my wife to go on a trip before I bring it home. (Pathetic, isn't it?). I'm also bringing home a CZ75-B in 9mm. While she's on her trip I'll go to the range everyday!

In Puerto Rico You first need a gun (owners) license issued by the PR Police Dept.. That allows you to have up to two handguns in your home and to buy 50 rounds of ammo per year. With that done , you can get endorsements to said license for A) Hunting, B) Target shooting C) Concealed carry. Don't have the Hunting endorsement, so I can't say much about that one. The target shooter requires you belong to a gun club, allows you basically unlimited number of firearms and ammo. Concealed carry allows you to carry (one) concealed(Duh!) handgun of any legally owned by you.

These licenses are good for 5 years. The cost has changed since I last did mine, but mine cost about $120.00. I think when i renew in 2006 it'll probably run about $500.00. This has something to do with the number of guns registered in my name and also with the concealed carry permit, as lawyers have to get involved for the latter. The membership in most gun clubs run about $65.00-$75.00 per year. I belong to two. An indoor range for handguns and rimfire rifles with 50 foot range close to home, and an outdoor one further away with a 25 yard range and a 100 yard range for rifles.

Other than that, I believe there are no Class 3 allowed at all (fully automatic) and all other FEDERAL laws apply as well.
Also not many Blackpowder guns, as you would need a special and different license for explosives or destructive devices (demolition) in order to be able to have black powder. Same for re-loaders. So it really isn't worth it to re-load unless you shoot 10,000 or more rounds a year.
No exceptions for Curio or Relics either. You want a wall hanger, weld the barrel shut.

Off the top of my head, that's it! But I've probably forgotten something.

Now you all know more about the gun law in PR than you ever wanted to know!

We survive, somehow.

Went and picked it up today. Couldn't wait. Although I won't be able to go try it out until next week. Mine is the 1897T NIB made in 2002. 20" octagonal barrel. The rear buckhorn sight doesn't seem too good. I'll try it and if I don't like it will try a receiver sight. Any ideas on wether the Williams or the Lyman is better?

Went and picked it up today. Couldn't wait. Although I won't be able to go try it out until next week. Mine is the 1897T NIB made in 2002. 20" octagonal barrel. The rear buckhorn sight doesn't seem too good. I'll try it and if I don't like it will try a receiver sight. Any ideas on wether the Williams or the Lyman is better?

Hey I'm confused! :confused:

What is a Marlin 1897 that was built in 2002?

I've heard of the Marlin M39, 1895 and 1894 - but never the 1897.

It's a straight-stocked 39A action with a 20" octagonal barrel. Remember the Carbine/Mountie versions? Same thing with better wood and fancy barrel.

The Lyman is made from a steel-based alloy and the Williams is 100% aluminum. The Williams is more common and usually cheaper. The Lyman looks better. Functionally, they're more or less identical (Lyman 66 and Williams FoolProof aka FP).

It's a straight-stocked 39A action with a 20" octagonal barrel. Remember the Carbine/Mountie versions? Same thing with better wood and fancy barrel.


It looks nice. I found it on the Marlin website on an archived page(because it doesn't show up on the main webpage.)

http://www.marlinfirearms.com/firearms/leverAction22/1897T.htm#

http://www.marlinfirearms.com/firearms/images/firearmImages/1897t.jpg

(because it doesn't show up on the main webpage.)

That's because they've discontinued it for '04, for some reason.

My DSL was out for a few days, so I've been out of touch. Tried the 1897T yesterday at an indoor range of 50'. Functioned well, had no problems at all. The jury is still out on the sights, as the indoor range isn't well lit and I couldn't form an opinion on the sights for my eyes yet. Maybe next Weds. I'll be able to go to the outdoor range. I'll keep you posted.

In the meantime, i'm happy.

Went to the range last Thursday and Friday. fired off about 200 rounds. Can't aim well with the standard sights. Would like to get the Williams FP39 sight. Thats the one that fits the Marlin 39A. Should fit my 1897 T . Two questions for anybody out there. My receiver is not drilled and tapped on the side, only on the receiver top. I've heard reference that Williams makes a sight that attaches using those top screws.
I've even seen it noted that way for the model 1894. I haven't found any notations to that effect for the FP-39. Are they ALL made to attach to the top now, or do I need a different part number than FP-39? Second, is this going to work OK with the factory front sight? Or must I replace that one also? I might not mind a Williams Firesight front, but need to know in advance what I'm getting into. :(

Any help is appreciated.

I would think even Marlin Model 1892s would be welcome here! :)

Question:

Wasn't the 1897T originally available with a 24" oct barrel? Did it feature the rebounding hammer? I really like the longer barrel's balance and the nice old-timey look of the rifle but would much prefer to avoid the rebounding hammer.

Thanks-

Sky C.

Yes, the Marlin 2001 catalog lists it with the 24" barrel. Mine was manufactured in 2002 and has the 20" barrel. For my tastes it looks and feels better with the shorter barrel.

2001 also had the rebounding hammer. I think they've had that for a long, long time.

The earlier model with the 24" octagon barrel was the 1897 Cowboy and was renamed the Texan when the barrel was shortened to 20". Marlin introduced the hammer block safety and rebounding hammer in 1988 on the 39AS and 39TDS lever-action rimfire models.

Tom

Tom, thanks for the info. Didn't catch the name change when I looked in my 2001 catalog.
Sweet rifle to shoot! Makes me look good!

I'm jealous. Take care and have fun. Swany

Will do, Swany!

Drilled and tapped the receiver side for the Williams 39 FP receiver sight and installed one. Replaced the .500" high front 1/16" brass bead for a .420" high firesight. Removed the original semi-buckhorn rear sight. Went to the range today and I can shoot it MUCH better now.

As I did all the work myself, including the drilling and tapping, I am quite happy and proud. :D

Now I just have to try different sized apertures. ;)

Good deal. I wish I could use those sights on my guns, but unfortunately now pretty much have to go with optical sights now that diabetes and age are getting to my eyes.
Rich

Squid, give this a try. Make up a cardboard fake sight and tape it to your receiver. All you really want to do is look at the front sight through the hole in your fake sight while holding the rifle to your shoulder, not shoot. If you can see better, go ahead and get the receiver sight. Make the hole .093" to .125" as clean cut as you can get it. I punched mine with a tool to make holes in leather. If you have never used them you may be in for a surprise! Looking through the little hole allows you to see the front sight a lot better than before and you don't really need to see the rear sight at all.

Is the tang on your 1897 drilled and tapped for a tang sight? Actually, a tang sight is more in keeping with the era of your straight grip, octagonal barrelled Marlin than a receiver sight. I have a 39a with a Redfield receiver sight, but they're not made anymore. I also have a Rossi Model 62 pump with an octagon barrel on which I have a Marbles tang sight. It works very well, and gives an even longer sighting plane than a receiver sight. Both Lyman and Marbles make excellent tang sights. The Marbles one is click adjustable for both windage and elevation. I don't know about the Lyman. Williams makes what they call a Guide Receiver sight (WGRS) that will fit on top of your already drilled and tapped receiver. IMHP, it would be rather ugly up there, looking as though it didn't belong. A WGRS will probably need a higher front tight, too.

FWIW

Xzec.

Went to the range last Thursday and Friday. fired off about 200 rounds. Can't aim well with the standard sights. Would like to get the Williams FP39 sight. Thats the one that fits the Marlin 39A. Should fit my 1897 T . Two questions for anybody out there. My receiver is not drilled and tapped on the side, only on the receiver top. I've heard reference that Williams makes a sight that attaches using those top screws.
I've even seen it noted that way for the model 1894. I haven't found any notations to that effect for the FP-39. Are they ALL made to attach to the top now, or do I need a different part number than FP-39? Second, is this going to work OK with the factory front sight? Or must I replace that one also? I might not mind a Williams Firesight front, but need to know in advance what I'm getting into. :(

Any help is appreciated.

Check out the site oneraggedhole.com/index.htm
They talk about a type of aperutre sight that is easy to install. Currently fitting the Henrys and Winchesters. I emailed them about my 1897CB and received a nice reply that very soon the web site would be updated to include the Marlins.
Good luck

Lefty and Mainiac: Thanks for the info, but I already drilled and tapped the receiver side and installed the Williams FP-39 sight. Go about 5 posts up and get a better description. It works great!

No, the tang is not drilled for a tang sight.

By the way, Tom G, the Lyman sight is listed in the catalogs I saw as also made of aluminum, same as the Williams. Maybe they used to be made of steel before?

As long as we are on the subject, I've heard it claimed that receiver sights are "rugged". Well, in my opinion, and only with the Williams as an example, they seem rather delicate to me. I think it won't survive a fall as readily as a scope, particularly a small 1-4X-20mm scope, much less the original sights. I'll estipulate that they probably won't go out of whack forr the life of the rifle, but I don't think that is the same as "rugged". Opinions?

Installed a "reduced power" Wolff mainspring on the 1897 T.

It made the trigger pull lighter and the effort(?) to cycle the lever less. At the range, however, I had some misfires with Blazer .22LR ammo. They seemed to be well dented by the firing pin, so it could be the ammo. Next time I go I'll try with Winchester's T-22 and see if I get any misfires. If I do, out comes the Wolff, back the original. If I don't I'll measure the trigger pull with both and report it here, together with the part # from Brownells and the price. The installation is easy.

Measured the trigger pull with both the original and the Wolff "reduced power" mainspring. Due to the procedure used to measure pull weight I'll quote two numbers. The first is the heaviest that still wouldn't trip the trigger, and the second is the one that always tripped the trigger. The samplings were done in 8 oz. increments and the results good to within 2-3ozs.

The original spring held at 4.75 lbs. and broke at 5.30 lbs.

The Wolff spring held at 2.64 lbs and broke at 3.17 lbs.

That works out to a 40% reduction in pull weight. The effort to work the lever is also less, as it is the same spring being cocked. But effort over that arc is hard to measure.

As far as the misfires go, I had problems with the same ammo on my Ruger MKII. But haven't tried other ammo in the rifle yet. Will report later.

Brownell's Part number for the spring is #969-000-108 $7.49.

Troble was the Blazer ammo. Tried it yesterday with a variety of other ammo with no problems. tried Blazer again and had two mis-fires and two failures to extract in ten rounds!