Hill People Gear Forums
HomeHomeDiscussionsDiscussionsFirearms and Sk...Firearms and Sk...Marlin 336Y - Making it field readyMarlin 336Y - Making it field ready
Previous
 
Next
New Post
8/13/2017 1:52 PM
 

Picked up my first lever gun the other day. The Marlin 336Y (or "Compact" as they seem to be marketing it now) met a lot of the specs I had in mind for a field gun... it's compact, lightweight, and utilizes the 30-30 cartridge, which is readily available and relatively cost efficient compared to some of the newer specialty cartridges in addition to being a ballistically capable round.

I plan on adding HPG's Stock Cuff and XS Sight Systems Lever Rail Ghost Ring Sights as an improvement to the buckhorn sights that come standard on the rifle as well as providing a mounting base for a scout scope. This is where I need some help... I'm looking for a scope and mount combo that will keep the scope as low to the rifle as possible. I also want QD mounts that will allow me to remove the scope and use the XS Sights if needed. I've looked through the 13 pages of this forum and seen a few suggestions. I'm between the Vortex Crossfire II 2-7x32mm and the Leupold FX-II 2.5x28mm. I'm leaning more towards the Vortex due to the cost difference, variable power, and their fantastic warranty, but I'm looking for some insight on the matter. Also looking at the Warne QD Low Mounting Rings but I'm not too sure if they would allow enough clearance for the bottom of the scope. Anyone here use the Warne QD Low mounts?

Also, while I really like the compact size of the 336Y, I feel that the length of pull could be extended just a bit. I've looked at the Limbsaver rubber recoil pads and as much as they seem like they would solve the LOP, they seem to have quite a bit of fitting issues. Does anyone have experience with Limbsaver or any other rubberized recoil pads for the 336? 

 

 
New Post
8/14/2017 5:43 AM
 

You "feel" the 336Y's LOP needs to be lengthened?  Is it interfering with your snap shot time?  Jeff Cooper was a big guy.  He arrived at a 12 3/4in LOP. Just sayin'

 
New Post
8/14/2017 12:19 PM
 
I personally prefer the original XS Scout Rail and sights to the newer monolithic one. It is lighter and a more compact design. It also sits a bit closer to the barrel. I also find it more aesthetically pleasing.

I have not experience with that vortex, but the two that Evan and I have from their PST line are good clear glass. From me that would really be the deciding factor. We both tried Burris 2-7s for awhile, but went back to the Leupold 2.5 because the superior glass actually made the Leupold seem to have more magnification at 2.5 than the Burris at 7x. I would want to compare them both before I went with the Vortex. That being said the Leupold 2.5 and 1-4 are both great scopes.

Can you cycle the action with the rifle shouldered without breaking check weld. Most bold action hunting rifles have to long a LOP and folks get used to it. Whereas most lever actions have a correct LOP, but feel short for folks used to bolt actions. This can vary a bit if the bolt action precision oriented as the different field positions can change things a bit. If do decide that you want to add a pad then I recommend the Pachmyr Decelerator as it is the best of the ones I have tried. It is not that hard to fit one to the rifle. However, spend some time with the gun first. Lever guns are supposed to be compact and quick handling. That is in part because the LOP is correct for that type of shooting.

Co-Owner Hill People Gear "If anything goes wrong it will be a fight to the end, if your training is good enough, survival is there; if not nature claims its foreit." - Dougal Haston
 
New Post
8/23/2017 3:20 PM
 

Thats a good point about LOP, Scott. I have a lot more experience with black rifles and bolt guns than lever actions. After some time with it, it actually feels very comfortable. No problems cycling the action from the shoulder, and like you said it's fast handling.

The XS Scout Rail went on without a hitch but I'm still trying to decide on a scope. I have a Vortex Viper PST 1-4x24mm on one of my ARs that I absoluely love. Their glass is top quality, and so is their warranty. I've only used their Crossfire series once, seemed clear enough. But I'm looking at Leupold's VX-2 1.5-4x28mm IER as an alternative to the Vortex. I've had good experience with Leupold in the past and I prefer variable power magnification over fixed.

 

Can anyone weigh in on variable power optics in the scout configuration? Like I said, this is my first and I'm looking for some experience. It's my understanding that IER's are meant for shooting with both eyes open and, as such, allow for overall greater field of view. How is that effected by using a 4x magnified optic? Additionally, how is the zero effected on a duplex reticle when not utilizing the full power magnification?

 
New Post
8/23/2017 3:42 PM
 
I have a Leupold FX2.5, VX2 1.25-4-28, and VXR 1.5-5. All are great scopes. The 2.5 gives a bit more eye-relief, which depending on where your scope mount is, like say a M1A Socom/Scout as it can be hard to get the variables back far enough. For look through the and actually shooting I love the VXR, but it is very heavy for what it is. I have no clue why as the rest of the VXR scopes are quite a bit lighter. For scout mounting the 1.25-4 is my go to. I have two or three at this point, including one on my 336y. The Leupold IER scopes are more a hybrid than a IER in my opinion as they mount pretty dang far back on the rifle, further than the fixed and Burris variables.

I run all my scopes with both eyes open including my NF 2.5-10 at all powers. For me it is not an issue. When I am teaching folks I teach the same thing. Closing one eye has a several negatives, and as such both eyes open is the way to go.

I am not sure I understand you last question regarding zero and the duplex reticle.

Co-Owner Hill People Gear "If anything goes wrong it will be a fight to the end, if your training is good enough, survival is there; if not nature claims its foreit." - Dougal Haston
 
New Post
9/2/2017 8:12 AM
 
In reference to the OP's last question about magnification and zero with a duplex reticle:

Short answer is that changing magnification will have no effect on baseline zero with modern optics.
You may be getting a little cross pollination with the precision community, where the difference between first and second plane scopes does require different techniques.
For your purposes, establish zero at high power, confirm the zero at low power and call it a day.
However, If you are trying to use the thicker transition of the duplex reticle for an ersatz ballistic holdover reticle, use the highest power on your scope for consistency when you figure out your appropriate holds.

That said, for a practical rifle such as this, there is little to be gained by over thinking the ballistics. Hold on hair regardless of distance. If the distance is so great that you feel the need to hold higher than hair, it is likely outside the optimum range of your carbine.
 
New Post
9/19/2017 6:48 PM
 

Apologies for my late response, was in Alaska for two weeks and then came home with a nasty bug I've been fighting.

 

To be honest, I didn't really know how to word my question, but Longeye nailed it. I didn't know if there would be a noticable zero change when using a duplex reticle at different powers.

 
New Post
10/24/2017 10:29 AM
 

Scott, what mounts are you using for this? I want to use Warne QDs but I'm not sure if there's enough clearance for lows or if I need to get mediums.

 
New Post
10/24/2017 8:40 PM
 
I am using lows.

Co-Owner Hill People Gear "If anything goes wrong it will be a fight to the end, if your training is good enough, survival is there; if not nature claims its foreit." - Dougal Haston
 
Previous
 
Next
HomeHomeDiscussionsDiscussionsFirearms and Sk...Firearms and Sk...Marlin 336Y - Making it field readyMarlin 336Y - Making it field ready