Lever action or semi-auto .22?

Lever action or semi-auto for a .22

  • Lever Action

    Votes: 82 53.9%

  • Semi-Auto

    Votes: 70 46.1%
  • Total voters
    152
Status
Not open for further replies.
I have a Henry .22 as well and to me the point of shooting .22 is all about interaction with the gun.
And no semi auto or even worse hi-cap gun can ever give me the same feeling like a lever action or pump gun where *I* get to throw the brass.
 
Another reason to get a lever is that if you shoot a center fire rifle with a lever action...you know one of those unimportant calibers that aren't chambered in a semiauto...like 30-30, 444, 45-70, 45-90, 50-110, 348, 358, 475 turnbull, 470 turnbull or some of the alaskan cartridges, not to mention the 357, 45 LC, 44 magnum (unless you get an old ruger semiauto), 44-40, 38-40 and various winchester specials.

Lever actions are nostalgic yes, but very practical as well, considering the testimony of the marlin 39 being the most popular continually produced rifle of all time and winchester 94's historical sales record.

So not liking them is ok. And, liking them is ok. The question asked by the OP is subjective.

Military application has very little bearing, but if you want to know the last time a lever action was used in combat you could google Jerry Shriver and 444 marlin.

L.W.
 
From the Marlin website, "A must-have for every gun collector. It has been in continuous production longer than any other rifle in America."

From the wikipedia, "The Marlin Golden 39A represents the oldest and longest continuously produced shoulder firearm in the world."

Another plus for the lever is it's identity with America. It was invented and used here with great success for hunting, the 'winning of the west', and the big bores were considered the express rifles of the day. TR used some in Africa.

Levers are practical solutions for pilots in Alaska wanting a short repeater for their planes (or so I'm led to believe), regular people wanting a hunting/plinking rifle without the 'bad' image of a black type rifle, and persons desiring a strong platform to fire rimmed cartridges. So they just aren't for 'cowboys and indians' anymore, neither are bows and spears but that's a different thread...

And I'm no historian...but the Battle of Little Bighorn was lost by tactics, not necessarily by a certain rifle.

From my understanding, a column was split off decreasing firepower, up to that time a government equipped military unit had not suffered a major defeat from indigenous peoples and might of led to some over-confidence/hubris. Soon afterwards, a British Unit would suffer a similar battle - clearly outnumbered at Rorke's Drift, but survive.

These Battles occurred in 1876 and 1879 respectively. The levers in production today...Marlin 39a has been produced since 1891, the 92 and 94 clones since 1892 and 1894, the 1886 well since 1886, the 1895...you guessed it 1895.

So the toggle link levers (1873/1876) could've been available during Custer's time...so could've cannon, gatling guns etc. Regardless of the firearm, it's up to the Commander to use his forces in the most efficient and tactical manner in a risky environment. Failure achieved on the battle field leaves people arm-chairing the decision making after the fact.

Just because a military uses a firearm doesn't necessarily endorse it at the best weapon for a certain nonmilitary applications. And, autos are very good if you shoot the round that they are designed for, but lose some reliability when one starts messing with bullet weights and velocity.

Lastly, like I said in a post above...this is subjective...like what's more fun playing in a water hose or playing in a sprinkler?. There's no right answer. A marlin 60 and a 39a are both darling little rifles. Both dangerous and deadly toys that everyone should have a chance to play with if they desire.

L.W.
 
You don't see lever guns in use by any army for a reason. They haven't been used since the 19th century. You can't fire one from behind cover nearly as well as a bolt gun or a semi-auto.
Click to expand...

Jeff Cooper was a huge fan of lever guns with ghost ring sights...don't count them out. He ran the guns at gunsight and found them to be a close 2nd to his much revered "scout rifle" configuration bolt action.

Anyway, I voted lever because they are more fun than a barrel of monkeys...plus I now have to buy one since the kids want one desperately.
 
Jeff56 said:
Isn't the AK-47 the rifle that has been built more than any other rifle? Last I heard it was far and away the most produced rifle by far.

I just read a quote from a discussion of the battle of the Little Bighorn. I think it applies very well here. Again people are free to like what they want but this quote reveals a lot of the history of the lever action guns vs. the breech loaders of the 19th century.

"If fired too fast them Springfields heat up and the ejector sticks. I recokon the agents have fitted out the hostiles with repeaters, which can panic a man unless he realizes our pieces got twice the range of there Winchesters and Henrys."

This is taken from a novel written by Thomas Berger called "Little Big Man". The attention to detail in that book is astounding actually. Very little he wrote was wrong as far as the details of the time period went. The part about the Springfields sticking is the very issue I mentioned earlier concerning Custer getting defective rifles for political reasons. It's a David and Bathsheba situation almost. Grant wanted Custer dead so he sent him out with defective Springfields. They had worked very well in other battles. At any rate none of the soldiers who knew the subject even wanted a lever gun. That's just how it was.

This is why I don't get the whole cowboy shooting thing. The lever guns were more popular with the Indians than they were with the cowboys and the soldiers. The white people preferred rifles with greater range. The Indians, who fought from horseback and liked to fire quickly, liked the repeater lever guns. The army never did adopt the lever designs in large numbers.
Click to expand...
grant did not sacrifice the seventh just because he didn't like custer. the springfield was a solid dependable design even if it was slow by other standards.the rims on their cartridges were to soft and and jammed the arm on ejection. anyone got time to give a history lesson
 
If I chose a 22 lever gun, I'd get the marlin. They are $$. Mod 60 works for me, if it jams i can fix it in 30 seconds, including time to get the pliers out of the bag. Never did like the single shot bolt 22 I traded for when i was a kid, guess my friend didn't like it much either. I have a 30-30 marlin which is fine. It does what I want. Both are reliable and inexpensive to shoot, will accomplish the task required of them. Buy what you want to shoot and enjoy it.
As for the Custer fans, he was a jerk, one of the Westpoint grads that Lincoln had to put up with (and there were many who didn't have a clue as to fight a war of any kind). He was so arrogant HE chose to NOT use the repeaters offered. Personally, I found that any was the State Department gets it's hooks into, we loose. I don't know what rifles were used at the Palo Duro fight, but the weapon and tactics worked. The Peacemaker didn't WIN the west anymore than the lever gun, but it worked, was cheap and could be used to drive nails also. The break action revolver was used for most WAR action after it was invented.
 
goodness gracious just buy what gives you that fluffy feeling and maybe next year buy the "other" choice.. just playing with you, my favorite rifle for a long time was a 357 levergun and my best shootin' buddy made fun of it for sooo long that I made the stupid choice of selling that gorgeous pea-shooter just to shut him up. No really I had the stupid notion I had to sell agun, to buy another.
what was I thinking??
 
Jeff56 – No, it still remains the Mauser bolt action and variants! The AK is duty issued in more countries then any other weapon but not all of the countries build them…A few companies make them and export them to the various satellites, where Mauser sold the manufacturing rights also to that country.

”Little Big Man” by Thomas Berger was a great read of historical fiction and so was the sequel “The Return Of Little Big Man” …It was made into a movie starring Dustin Hoffman and Chief Dan George but it still was fiction.

The archaeologists state that only a 2 to 3 per cent of the thousands of rounds collected had pry marks…What I don’t understand is where the 7th got thousands of rounds fired off…The trooper carried forty in his pouch and maybe another forth in his saddlebags…210 troopers x 40 rds = 8,400 divided amongst the five plus different (Medicine Tail Coulee, Calhoun Hill, Deep Ravine, Nye-Cartwright Ridge, Finley Ridge) sites that Custer’s (Not Reno’s) command put up resistance, losing troopers at each one—last stand hill only had about 70 bodies on it after the battle…268 may have died but that also included Reno’s battle (47), civilians and scouts.

  1. 1. Fox, in 1993, notes that only 3.4% (3 out of 88) of .45/55-caliber Springfield cartridge cases from the Custer battlefield and 2.7% (7 out of 257) cases from the Reno-Benteen field exhibit any indication they were pried from jammed weapons-- ^ Fox, Richard A., Archaeology, History and Custer's Last Battle, 1993, University of Oklahoma Press, ISBN 0-8061-2998-0, pp. 241–242
Custer’s troops didn’t get faulty rifles, at the behest of Pres. U.S. Grant, that were returned from other troops—they got brand new ones…What they didn’t have was experience with them or any degree of training and especially marksmanship since they didn’t have any kind of weekly target practice because ammo was expensive to transport in from the East and scarce.

Custer was not offered any repeaters that he turned down—he turned down two gun carriage mounted Gatling guns with caissons, extra men and horses thinking them too heavy etc. for a lightning strike he was hoping to accomplish.

Whether Custer’s troops carried Winchesters wouldn’t have helped them, not against 5,000 plus hostiles and the same argument was put forward by the proponents of the lever action, they could carry more, lighter ammo, for the same weight and attacked by the same statements as today by the opponents of the lever action, they could kill at greater distances, more effectively…The problem lay in that the army seldom, if ever, got into long range shooting battles with the Indians—who avoided pitched battles at all costs and would only maintain “holding actions” to allow their families to get to safety.

As to the Indians having vastly superior firepower, they certainly did, just not in repeating lever action rifles but in the bow and arrow…Many of the Sioux stated they got their first rifle, ever, at or after the battle…Yes, they had some but nowhere near the numbers you’re suggesting just as they had some trade muskets.

Also a few points of fact…at the time of his death George Armstrong was only a light colonel not a general…During the Civil War he was “breveted” to major general but those are only temporary titles used in expedient measures.
Custer held the final slot, the absolute bottom of the roll, in all studies except sabre drill and horsemanship…Also, he and his whole class (of 1862) never completed the whole course at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point …They were jumped into the military in June of 1861, some to the Confederates but most to the Union.

Both ammo’s would have been fired from the same rifles, just the heavier kicking rifle rounds would hurt the shoulder more BUT none of the longer cased brass was found at the sight…Also, remember that the .45-55-70 Gov used copper not brass shells and “the troopers soon discovered that the copper expanded in the breech when heated upon firing; the ejector would then cut through the copper and leave the case behind, thus jamming the rifle”

As to fire power, first off the troop loses 20% of it’s manpower in horse handlers and they wouldn’t have been able to add their strength until the final stand(s), by which time the troop had probably lost 50 to 60 percent of the troopers.

Grant couldn’t have cared and didn’t one bit about Custer and he couldn’t have sent him to his death since Grant didn’t know what was happening out west, who Terry would send in which direction to scout “for the hostiles” (since no one knew where they were) and there were many troops out at the same time as Custer so you can forget any conspiracy theory of Grant vs. Custer…The accusations were correctly directed at Belknapp and only as an off shoot towards Grant since he being his superior.

For further reading try:
Court Martial
Kuhlman….. Charles….. Legend Into History And Did Custer Disobey Orders At The Battle Of Little Big Horn (1957 Edition)
Frost….. L…… The Court Martial Of George Armstrong Custer
Murray….. Robert A…… The Custer Court Martial~ (1964 Edition)
Shoemaker….. John O., Col. ….. The Custer Court-Martial (1971 Edition)
Jones….. Douglas C…… The Court Martial Of General George Armstrong Custer (Historical fiction but a great read)
General info:
Nightengale….. Robert….. The Little Big Horn~ (1996 Edition)
Pennington….. Jack L. ….. Custer, Curley, Curtis: An Expanded View Of The Battle Of The Little Big Horn (2005 Edition)
Pennington….. Jack L. ….. The Battle Of The Little Bighorn: A Comprehensive Study (2001 Edition)
Progulske, Donald R. & Frank J. Shideler….. Following Custer (1974 Edition)
Sklenar….. Larry….. To Hell With Honor: Custer And The Little Big Horn (2000 Edition)
Archaeology:
Barnard….. Sandy….. Digging Into Custer's Last Stand (2003 Edition)
Fox….. Richard Allen, Jr, ….. Archaeology, History And Custer's Last Battle (1993 1st Edition)
Hardorff….. Richard….. Camp, Custer And The Little Big Horn (1997 Edition)
Hardorff….. Richard….. The Custer Battle Casualties ll: The Dead, The Missing And A Few Survivors (1999 Edition)
Hardorff….. Richard….. The Custer Battle Casualties: Burials, Exhumations And Reinterments (1989 Edition)
Rankin….. Charles E. ….. Legacy: New Perspectives On The Battle Of The Little Bighorn (1996 Legacy Symposium Edition)
Reusswig….. William….. A Picture Report Of The Custer Fight (1967 Edition)
Scott….. Douglas D. ….. Archeological Perspectives On The Battle Of The Little Big Horn (1989 Edition)
Scott….. Douglas D. ….. They Died With Custer: Soldiers Bone's From The Battle Of The Little Big Horn (2002 Edition)
Tauton….. Francis B. ….. Custer's Field: A Scene Of Sickening Ghastly Horror (1989 Edition)
Tauton….. Francis B. ….. Sufficient Reason? An Examination Of Terry's Celebrated Order To Custer (1989 Edition)
Little Big Horn, Battle of:
Brown….. Dee….. Showdown At Little Big Horn (19 Edition)
Patten….. Louis B. ….. The Red Sabbath (19 Edition)
Sandoz….. Mari….. The Battle Of The Little Big Horn (1966 Edition/Signed)
Kershaw….. Robert J. ….. Red Sabbath: The Battle Of Little Bighorn (2005 Edition)
Wa-shi-ta, Battle of:
Brill….. Charles J…… Custer, Black Kettle And The Fight On The Wash-ita (19 Edition)
Hoig….. Stan….. The Battle Of The Wash-ita: The Sheridan Custer Indian Campaign Of 1867 - 69
 
This is an issue that mostly boils down to preference. For the vast majority of people who buy a rimfire gun, the form that the action takes is more about making a statement than it is about resolving a debate over effectiveness.

If you've got an affinity for the American west and old-school designs, go with a lever gun.

If you like modern stuff, get a semi-auto.


That said, I prefer semi-auto guns because they're just as accurate, easier to shoot from prone, and clearly faster to operate.

If you have any interest in running a rimfire rifle at a Steel Challenge match, the semi-auto will have an advantage over a lever gun because it is faster, and depending on the model you purchase, easier to accessorize with a red dot scope or the like. You'll also spend less time prepping in between strings, especially if you run a rimfire semi-auto that can take the higher-capacity magazines like the ones made by Black Dog Machining.

This is the semi-auto rimfire gun I run for steel challenge:

attachment.php
 
FWIW - I was at a LGS today and saw a really nice used Browning BL22 for less than the price of a new Henry - like $100 less. For the money, guess which one I'd be taking...
 
I have the Henry H001T and can shoot it all day. Light, accurate, smooth action, and fun to shoot.
 
lever action all day. i also have a 39a. first and favorite gun. never gotten a tired arm from shooting. didnt like a scope on it though, because it was a little heavy to carry. i think semi autos are typically lighter, if that matters.
 
The reason a levergun is such a good 'one rifle' is that it is so versatile. It is a generalist rather than a specialist, so almost by definition, other firearms are better at particular things, but few rifles can do it all as well as a levergun.

In .357, for example, you can shoot 200-grain hardcasts that are fine for protection from bears, 158 softpoints for hunting, and light .38 wadcutters for plinking or home defense. The rate of fire is only a hair slower than aimed fire from an AK, so they are perfectly appropriate for self-defense. And a Trapper-length levergun is about as light and compact as any rifle can be, without folding. In 30-30 your range and power are about the same as an AK, but even in .357 the power is pretty good using decent ammo, and with a .44/.45 and heavy ammo, there is probably nothing you can't hunt in North America. Are these weapons to hunt at 500 yards, or engage the Taliban in Afghanistan, no, but for a civilian with multiple needs, it sure covers a lot of bases well.

If you want 'one rifle' that can do it all, and still be lightweight, 'PC', and legal in every state, the levergun is about perfect.
 
I've tried a few .22 lever guns and I just don't enjoy them. Maybe if I was a collector I would go for them but I can't see a reason (for me) to get a lever instead of a semi-auto or bolt action.
 
If limited to a Henry lever, I vote SA (not that it is a bad rifle, but because there are semis that I consider better than the Henry for a similar or lesser price). If the Marlin were included, I'd have to change my vote. I have to question your decision to leave out the pumps, as they are the most fun IMO.

:)
 
3 words- Henry Octagon Barrel. Had the gun for 3 years now, very accurate and not a single problem.
Click to expand...

Finally! Someone who owns one! Was it worth the price? I haven't ran across any used ones. Are there any plastic parts on it? Judging by the pics, it appears to not have the same plastic metal band as the entry model.
 
I don't think it's possible.
Click to expand...
And judging by your extremely limited experience, I'm not surprised. Jeff, the problem is you, not the levergun. You can't blame the design of a rifle for your own physical limitations. Millions of leverguns have been produced, millions of folks still shoot and hunt with them. So you might want to consider, if only for a moment, that there just 'might' be something to it.
 
World class competitions and military use? Are those the only viable uses for a rifle? How accurate do you need a 200yd rifle to be? Why do you need a rifle to shoot sub-MOA if all you're shooting is deer in the woods? Why would you want to operate a levergun when the action can do it all for you? Well, some of us don't want all of our lives automated. Some of us prefer leather over nylon. Some of us actually use iron sights!!! Some of us don't drink the semi-auto Kool Aid. Some of us like brunettes. Some of us like to shift gears. Some of us like red, others like blue. Nobody uses a side by side for professional sporting clays, does that mean you can't hunt with one? Should everybody scrap their Purdey double for a Benelli auto? Open your eyeballs and realize that people like different things and their reasons for doing so may even be as strong (yet more viable) as your reasons against. Yet here we are, expending all this energy trying to explain it to someone who doesn't "get it" and obviously never will. Someone who can't see past their own nose enough to realize that just because YOU don't have a use for something, does not make it useless.


Look you like what you want but don't make these wild allegations about what my experiences are.
Click to expand...
Since you think that a semi-auto can be fired much faster than a levergun, then yes, it is reasonable to assume your experience is lacking. Because anyone who has spent a significant amount of time with levers KNOWS that for aimed, controlled fire, they give up very little if anything to a semi-auto. The ONLY statements to the contrary come from those who have no clue what they're talking about...ahem.
And to be honest I can fire an AK very quickly aimed. It would be something to see a lever gun equal that speed. I don't think it's possible.
Click to expand...
 
I don't want to argue with you Craig but I'd appreciate it if you don't make assumptions about what I know.
Click to expand...
I'm not making assumptions. I'm coming to logical conclusions about your experience based on your statements. Once again, just as with your claims of sub-MOA accuracy out of a Marlin 60, I'm putting you on the spot and asking you to put your money where your mouth is. Every statement you've made here has been heavily biased, mostly unfounded and definitely much of it comes from inexperience.


What you said here is a borderline personal attack...
Click to expand...
Hardly. I'm challenging you, that is all. I'm staying on topic and my statements are about your experience, not you, not your mother or your dog.


I do have to say anyone that thinks a lever can keep up with a semi-auto in rate of fire is just plain wrong.
Click to expand...
True, any monkey can dump a semi-auto quicker than a levergun. However, for controlled, aimed fire (an ever present stipulation), there is little or no difference. Engage your brain. In the time it takes you to bring a semi-auto down from recoil, the lever is worked quickly and without thought. The result is the same. If you really think otherwise, it's because of your lack of experience, your lack of skill and/or your personal bias. I own several examples of both, I love both and I am proficient with both. You can't make that claim. I shoot one or the other nearly every day. Actually, I've probably spent twice as much time with semi-autos and bolts over the last few years than levers. I'm here to tell you that there is little practical difference in rate of fire between levers and autos, for controlled, aimed fire.


Even if you can work the lever and pull the trigger as fast as someone can just pull the trigger (not possible) you could never match the rate of fire of an AK that swaps mags every 30 rounds.
Click to expand...
Who cares??? Obviously a levergun is not an assault rifle. No one said it was.


And who said guns were only useful for hunting.
Click to expand...
Nobody here.


Any further responses on this subject will be ignored. Have a nice day.
Click to expand...
How convenient.
 
lighten up guys plinking is supposed to be fun.
Click to expand...
+1, lets get back to how much fun it is to put a dozen Colibris in a Marlin 39 and have a shooting gallery match with a couple friends (hey, that gives me an idear for a new
rim-match target!). :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Milkmaster
  • Locked
Semi-Auto or Lever Action?
Replies
3
Views
433
DMK
DMK
Y
  • Locked
Lever action that fires semi-auto rounds?
2 3
Replies
56
Views
3K
Grumpy_old_Fart
Grumpy_old_Fart
Skribs
  • Locked
When are each of the actions preferred?
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
tahoe2
tahoe2
C.R.
  • Locked
Favorite action
2
Replies
25
Views
1K
d2wing
d2wing
P
  • Locked
Anything a lever action can do, a pump or semi-auto can do better" true or false?
2 3 4
Replies
90
Views
10K
Art Eatman
A
Back
Top