Experience with the Marlin 336C in .35 Rem
#1
Thread Starter
Spike
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
I'm new here. I'm pondering getting a Marlin 336C in .35 Rem. Why? Because in some places I hunt for whitetail deer, the shots are really close. I'm talking 20-50 yards in fairly thick cover. I usually use a .270 or a 7mm-08, and I've had perfect success with each. However, since I love guns and I keep trying to come up with reasons to buy more, I feel the need for a bigger, slower bullet in a lever action. Anyone here shot many deer with a .35 Rem? The deer I've shot at close range with my other rifles have run off before dropping, even with good shot placement. Will a .35 Rem have more "thump" and knockdown at close range than the .270 and 7mm-08? I looked at the .358 Win in Browning BLR, but it may kick a good bit more and it costs a lot more, and I don't think I'm gaining anything in knockdown power. Bullets are a lot harder to find in .358Win too. I'd love to hear your thoughts on the .35 Rem.
#3
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,926
Likes: 0
First, according to my count there are over 15 some rifle cartridges used successfully on deer. So you can spend some money owning them all.
The 35 Rem. was successful for years, as long as you didn't have a 200 or 300 yard shot on a deer.
Of course it was falling out of popularity with many. way back thirty and forty years ago.
One young hunter got kidded because he was using that slow, fat cartridge, while they had moved on to more modern calibers like 30-06, .308 and .270. Of course, the .35 Rem hunter would call up a buddy or two to come see the deer he harvested.
The hunter specialized in sole hunting in the swamps. He spent some time at the rifle range and was only interested in dropping a deer where he shot it.
Of course that was in old times. His mind wasn't cluttered with all those new high powered cartridges, that have a number and followed by "fourteen letters". How could that hunter possible compete today with these cartridges, seen as essential.
Oh, he still has the old .35 Rem. Marlin rifle, he hopes to get out later this month, for some deep woods hunting.
The 35 Rem. was successful for years, as long as you didn't have a 200 or 300 yard shot on a deer.
Of course it was falling out of popularity with many. way back thirty and forty years ago.
One young hunter got kidded because he was using that slow, fat cartridge, while they had moved on to more modern calibers like 30-06, .308 and .270. Of course, the .35 Rem hunter would call up a buddy or two to come see the deer he harvested.
The hunter specialized in sole hunting in the swamps. He spent some time at the rifle range and was only interested in dropping a deer where he shot it.
Of course that was in old times. His mind wasn't cluttered with all those new high powered cartridges, that have a number and followed by "fourteen letters". How could that hunter possible compete today with these cartridges, seen as essential.
Oh, he still has the old .35 Rem. Marlin rifle, he hopes to get out later this month, for some deep woods hunting.
#5
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,305
Likes: 0
From: Adirondacks
I hear ya!I've got a 7x57 and a .280 but also have a hankering for a Marlin lever most likely in .35.I doubt it will make any difference in how far they go before dropping but it's a really nice gun/cartridge.
#6
I own that Marlin 336C in .35 remington you're talking about.
http://www.impactguns.com/store/336C-35REM.html
#1 I'll never scope it (it's for those quick shots in thick cover).
#2 I was in NJ and hunted the tri-state area and wanted a cartridge that could handle black bears as well.
#3 .30-30 ammo is much easier to find, as a rule.
http://www.impactguns.com/store/336C-35REM.html
#1 I'll never scope it (it's for those quick shots in thick cover).
#2 I was in NJ and hunted the tri-state area and wanted a cartridge that could handle black bears as well.
#3 .30-30 ammo is much easier to find, as a rule.
#7
Thread Starter
Spike
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
I use the 130 gr Hornady SST in the .270 and the 138 gr SP "Light Magnum" for the 7mm-08. I consider perfect shot placement in the low front shoulder that hits the heart or lung area near the heart. These are close shots (20-50 yards). I said I had perfect results (one shot kills) but not perfect shot placement. I had good shot placement (which is kinda where I defined perfect shot placement). I guess if I had perfect shot placement I'd hit them in the heart every time. I did hit more than one in the heart though, and it ran several yards. I don't see any shock from the bullet strike. It's like I'm shooting them with a compound bow. I hit one 8 pt through the front shoulders at 20 yards with the 7mm-08 and it bulldozed it's way out of sight using the back legs only. Really wierd.
Last edited by cullbuck; 11-01-2010 at 01:14 PM.
#10
I use the 130 gr Hornady SST in the .270 and the 138 gr SP "Light Magnum" for the 7mm-08. I consider perfect shot placement in the low front shoulder that hits the heart or lung area near the heart. These are close shots (20-50 yards). I said I had perfect results (one shot kills) but not perfect shot placement. I had good shot placement (which is kinda where I defined perfect shot placement). I guess if I had perfect shot placement I'd hit them in the heart every time. I did hit more than one in the heart though, and it ran several yards. I don't see any shock from the bullet strike. It's like I'm shooting them with a compound bow. I hit one 8 pt through the front shoulders at 20 yards with the 7mm-08 and it bulldozed it's way out of sight using the back legs only. Really wierd.
I've always been impressed with how quickly the 270 and the various 7mm's have dispatched deer for me in the past. However, if I wanted something to put the close range thump on game, I'd look at the 444 Marlin, 450 Marlin or the tried and true 45-70.


