Lever action half magazine vs full length

[lionking]

I know barrel bands and such or anything that touches a barrel can affect accuracy but what are your opinions on half length magazines vs full length? I have seen articles where a full length magazine loaded did nothing to change accuracy vs a empty magazine but what about overall length?

 

[jeepnik]

It all comes down to personal preference and individual rifle/carbine. There are so many factors that effect the final accuracy outcome that trying to determine if a single one is significant is pretty much impossible.

I have both full length tubes and 3/4 length and box magazine fed leverguns. In calibers from .22 S/L/LR to 45/70. With the exception of one with a sewer pipe for a barrel, all will out shoot anyone that has tried them.

And, no I'm not going to change that barrel. It's a family gun that's been around for generations. It only took one slob to pretty much ruin it as a decent shooter.

 

[22250Rem]

I'm with jeepnik on this one. I've heard both sides of the discussion but now feel that the difference between half length / full length magazines is not enough of a factor to be relevent when compared to other factors like barrel bands vs. end caps on the fore-end and even the barrel itself. I've got a .30-30 Marlin Model 30AS lever gun ( an economy version of the Mod. 336 ) with a full length magazine and regardless of the number of rounds in it I've never noticed any difference. It also has an end cap versus a barrel band and I've heard that that the end cap models are superior to the barrel band models. But that's what I've heard and I don't have any proven facts or personal experience to back it up although mine is a very good shooter.

 

[jmr40]

It's about weight and balance. A fully loaded, full length magazine is HEAVY. Even unloaded that is a lot of steel a long way from the rifles balance point

 

[loose noose]

Like was said earlier it is pretty much up to personal preference, I've got a Marlin 45-70 in the 1895 Model that has the shorter magazine, and a Henry Big Boy in the .357, and the .44Mag with the extended mags, which in themselves is pretty heavy, let alone loaded up. I'm over 70yoa, and find them both equally accurate, regardless of the tubular magazines length. Now you're getting into another helm of discussion when you ask about which is the more accurate.

 

[ontarget]

I think it probably doesn't effect accuracy much. Consistency in my opinion has a greater effect on accuracy and precision. If you could change from a short tube to a long tube you would likely see a change in POI. However you can't change tubes easily so we don't. So the tube mag effects the barrel consistently whether short or long. My concern would be how the weight loss from each consecutive cycle of the action would effect my shots, especially with the big bores like 45-70.

 

[montanaoffroader]

I own a Western Field 472 (Marlin 30 as sold by Montgomery Ward) and my brother owns a Glenfield 30a (Marlin 30 as sold by Sears). Both guns manufactured in 1967, mine has the full length tube, his has the short tube.

There is no difference in accuracy, both guns will shoot 2-3" groups from a rest with loads they like. Doesn't matter how many rounds are in the mag, accuracy seems to stay the same. Neither gun will win any contests, but are both plenty good enough for hunting and plinking.

Now I just need to talk my brother out of the Glenfield.............

 

[lionking]

Thanks for the replies , looks like the length of the tube really has no impact on accuracy is the consensus.

 

[Varminterror]

No effect and an insignificant effect are different things. We’re not talking about 1/4moa rifles, such the “does it matter” level is very different than for leverguns than for bolt action rifles.

 

[loose noose]

Varminterror, is absolutely correct a lever action rifle is no match for a precision bolt action.

 

[Riomouse911]

I have guns in both styles, I can't tell the difference either.

 

[Deltaboy1984]

There seems to be no difference between the two styles!

 

[Newtosavage]

I've learned to appreciate my '94's more and more over the past 30+ years. They are purpose-made for delivering a hunting-weight bullet with reasonable accuracy at reasonable distances with a quick opportunity for a follow-up shot. Sounds like a lot of criteria one would include if designing an ideal woods hunting rifle from the ground up.

The 30-30 round I shoot, even with LeverEvolution ammo or handloads, is not a 300-yard round. The rifle platform itself is not a 300-yard platform. So the platform and the round match up well. That combined with the handling and functionality are what have made the 30-30 lever action the most popular woods deer rifle of all time.

The more I shoot hunting rifles of all calibers, and especially once I started hand loading, the more I wondered why certain calibers were even chambered in certain rifles. There are many where the capability of one does not match the other (caliber vs. rifle). What good does it do to have a caliber that is capable of taking game at 500 yards if the rifle it's chambered in is a 2 MOA platform? Likewise, why choose a 150-200 yard round for a rifle capable of sub-MOA results?

I think about this more and more as I look at rifles and calibers these days.