It's settled... Lever Actions must have side-gate loading port.

I want one that loads in the butt plate like a Spencer!

Just because Henry has bowed to popular opinion does not make it right. I really don’t care either way. If it makes you fell all warm and fuzzy that’s great. Never had to top off my rifle while prone or riding a horse. These are the two supposed advantages of the side loading gate. Hope I never need to really do either. I am a terrible horse rider. If I need to load a lever prone something is horribly wrong.

mcb said:

I think the fact that Henry has put side-gate loading ports on all of their lever action guns (except their replica of the original Henry, rimfires, and their modern box magazine feed lever action) should put the final nail in the coffin of those claiming the side-gate is not a requirement for a good and proper lever action.

Lever actions have side-gate loading ports! You may disagree, it is a free country, but you can still be wrong in a free country.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Click to expand...

Agree. I understand why .22 rimfires are tube loaded, but good grief, I don't know how they stayed in business selling centerfire lever action rifles without loading gates! There's simply no reason to NOT have a loading gate!

35W

And I thought a good and proper lever action had a rotary magazine......................

Side loading gates is one of my primary dislikes about most lever actions.

I agree on the .22 style pullout tube for a centerfire gun- a complete joke. However, I do fully appreciate the loading systems on functional replicas of 1860 Henry and Spencer weapons- those are very cool and interesting.

I agree, it would be like a human with no belly button.

mcb said:

That would be an improper lever action arrangement. Rotary magazines are for 10/22's and Johnson rifles.

Click to expand...

Poor imitations of the original. The legendary Mannlicher Schoenaur is a very good imitation, some might say improvement, on the original. I too, prefer my levers with pointy bullets, but a lever with a box magazine does seem weird.

mcb said:

Lever actions have side-gate loading ports!

Click to expand...

Was there ever any debate about this? Anything other than is heresy.

I don't like loading guns where my hands have to be inches from the muzzle while having the muzzle pointed just inches from my face. Having a side loading gate eliminates those hazards. I'll give Henry credit though. They kept the mag tube loading as an option along with the side loading gate. I wouldn't load it there, but this should be an advantage over traditional lever guns making it possible to easily clean the mag tube or clear jams.

I still won't be buying a Henry. I acknowledge that they are good rifles, but even with the addition of a side loading gate they still stray way too far from traditional lever gun styling. The only purpose of owning a lever gun is for nostalgic purposes. They offer zero practical advantages over other guns and a lot of disadvantages. If it doesn't look and function like something from the 1870's-1890's I'm not interested. And between Marlin and Winchester there are something like 20 million guns out there that do.

R.W.Dale said:

Side loading gates is one of my primary dislikes about most lever actions.

Click to expand...

Why would that be? (just wondering)

I agree that lever action rifles should have side gate feeding. I wonder how the new offerings from Henry will affect the prices of the remaining tube fed only models?

Hokkmike said:

I agree that lever action rifles should have side gate feeding. I wonder how the new offerings from Henry will affect the prices of the remaining tube fed only models?

Click to expand...

even on my pre 64 Winchester it’s just never a smooth operation. Rimless cartridges do slightly better al la 35 Remington

I think Henry is probably doing this because of concern Ruger will destroy them, which they probably will. With the Marlin action back in the hands of a respected company, Henry's market will shrink. this is just good planning.
I know this may alienate the old customer base, but it will take them into a new market.
I shot a Henry 357 a while back, and loved it, but would not buy it for this very reason, now, assuming prices don't go up too much, I may. I love my 1894, but the Henry was way smoother, no double clutch, and it worked with flatpoints.
All that said, I'm waiting for Ruger to explain how plastic parts are "actual more expensive, but worth it for their better quality" on their lever guns.

stringnut said:

Never had to top off my rifle while prone or riding a horse. These are the two supposed advantages of the side loading gate.

Click to expand...

There is one more advantage....the ability to top off the magazine after shots fired without disabling the rifle, just like a tube-magazine shotgun. Perhaps not all that useful for hunting, but very useful for a lever gun kept for defensive purposes. I have friends and mentors whose primary home defense gun is a lever-action, and I suspect quite a few lever-action .357’s fill that role in U.S. homes.

Since Henry is keeping the magazine tube unchanged, anyone who prefers not to top off via the loading gate can still do so in the traditional Henry manner, via the tube.

If I used my Marlin 357 or 44 mag lever gun for a HD rifle I should be able to take care of the situation with 8-9 shots. If not I doubt another 8-9 will fix the problem. I would more likely use my 9mm Camp Carbins with 12 to 20 round mags over the lever action anyway.

I had one of the Marlin 32 mags they made several years ago and it didn't have a side gate. It was straight tube loading just like a big 22 rifle. And it was a complete non issue to me. Not having a sidegate did not diminished the fun I had shooting that gun. And with proper gun handling I never had my face in front of the muzzle or had my hands where the muzzle was pointed at them.

Its not a necessity. Its just common sense. Haha.

Howdy

Not too long ago Henry stated that they did not put side loading gates on their rifles because it would weaken the frame.

Looks like they have changed their tune.

Driftwood Johnson said:

Not too long ago Henry stated that they did not put side loading gates on their rifles because it would weaken the frame.

Looks like they have changed their tune.

Click to expand...

It may weaken the frame but it probably reinforces their bank account by adding a side gate.

Side gate? No, detachable box. A pair of Marlin 62s. Dull stock is a .30 carbine. Glossy stock is .256 winmag.

R.W.Dale said:

Side loading gates is one of my primary dislikes about most lever actions.

Click to expand...

Ditto.....
I like shooting levers but never really felt an advantage when hunting except the fact they carried enough ammo I didn't have to carry reloads......course I think I only ever actually fired more than one shot a couple times.

Tubes easier to load and unload.

I'll probably get one of the henry .45-70s eventually, and may go looking for a non gated one. But it doesn't matter enough for me to work super hard at it.

LoonWulf said:

Tubes easier to load and unload.

Click to expand...

Ah, there is a good reason to have both the side loading gate and the ability to remove the tube.

In general, I've never been comfortable cycling rounds through the action to unload the magazine of a lever gun.