Lever Gun as a SHTF Rifle

[MrAcheson]

The lever guns are not combat rifles. ... If they were in that class, I think the US government would have adopted them when they first came out.

Tell that to Custer. Actually the reason the government didn't adopt them was the range issue. Pistol caliber ammo maxes out at a couple hundred yards at best. This is compared to the trapdoors and other rifles of the period which have much longer reach but slower rates of fire.

 

[Kaylee]

my take is that it'd likely work, but wouldn't be ideal.

If you're in urbanized or western OR and are envisioning some kind of person-to-person conflict, I'd agree that an intermediate semi-auto, detatchable box mag carbine would be better for the application (sans legal issues after the fact). There's a reason we're issuing M16s and not Marlins.

If on the other hand you're in rural/eastern OR with those looooooong open ranges, a scoped bolt gun in .308 or up might well be a better idea.

Then of course we get into the whole "SHTF" thing as something to worry about to start with. Since you say "a rifle behind every blade of grass" I imagine we're talking more of a widespread conflict type scenario than a simple riot or something.

So... If you're envisioning being part of a military conflict on homesoil against an external aggressor (aside from the odds of such being next to nothing) I'd think that as much compatibility with the local "real guys" would be ideal... say a tricked out AR. Or alternately, filling a role your line infantry can't -- say a long range bolt gun.

But honestly, I'd think things would be pretty bad indeed for ANY US military commander to say "I need help from the local civvies, please show up with your own gear." Might be the Constitutional way, but I can't honestly see it happening. I mean, if YOU were a military commander, would you want to incorporate a mess of civilians you didn't know, didn't have a reason to trust, and with no knowledge of their capabilities into your force? You could shoot like Hathcock himself, but Lt. StandingArmy won't know that. Plus, if the situation was THAT dire, I'd bet there'd be plenty of M16s (or M8s ) lying around by that time, making any choice you made ahead of time moot.

If on the other hand you're thinking more in terms of "armed insurrection" -- I'd say a scoped T/C Contender or short range pocket pistol "HenryBowman Special" and patience would be of more value than any high dollar whiz-bang "up against the Delta boys" kinda thing. Doesn't make much since to engage the swordarm when you can engage the head much more easily. Welcome to the post-nuclear age of asymmetric conflict.

For more typical, realistic concerns however -- Mr. BadMan in your living room (or on your farmstead) at 3AM -- the levergun sounds just fine. It's been doing that duty for over a hundred years, no reason it can't do it today.

And if it's just a good reason for another toy... then just plain get what tickles your fancy.


-K

 

[Mute]

I'd take a good shot with the lever gun over a spray-and-prayer with an AR on my side of the fence anyday. Don't let the old design fool you. If you needed to protect yourself, the lever gun will do just fine.

 

[BryanP]

I own exactly 3 rifles. An AR-15, a WASR-10/AK-47 (which I haven't had a chance to fire yet) and a Marlin 1894C in .357. I wouldn't feel under-armed with any of them.

Hmm. I need a good .22 to round that out. But not this week - I have to buy a car.

 

[AnklePocket]

The takehome message seems to be to get a rifle or more that you enjoy and do some shoot'in. I've been trying to narrow it down to one rifle, but that's not fun. The final fun tally (FFT) is a DSA Carbine, Savage 10FP and Marlin 1894C.
Chances are outstanding that their only action will be at the range. Of course, if I mentioned on September 10, 2001 the possibility of 2 hijacked planes crashing into the Twin Towers the entire free world would have labeled me a paranoid lunatic.
If I would have mentioned on September 12, 2001 that the Democrat Wannabe Presidential Candidates (DWPC) would be criticizing President Bush for his war on terror I'd be labeled a cynical, angry bastard - Sorry, wrong thread. I can't shake those damn core American values.

CAB

 

[JohnKSa]

IIRC, the last time the U.S. military tested lever rifles it was using rifle ammunition but the testing was marred by several magazine tube detonations. That was a long time ago.

When the contest was between bolt rifles and lever rifles, bolts got the nod on mechanical simplicity AND the fact that it's easier to cycle a bolt rifle while you're lying on the ground.

With the advent of reliable semi and full auto weapons, no one has ever really taken another look at manually operated repeaters.

 

[matsaleh]

Tell that to Custer. Actually the reason the government didn't adopt them was the range issue. Pistol caliber ammo maxes out at a couple hundred yards at best. This is compared to the trapdoors and other rifles of the period which have much longer reach but slower rates of fire.

I just saw a show on History Channel about the Custer thing. A bunch of archaeologists/forensics types recreated the battle and mapped shooting positions from spent casings and bones and other artifacts found on the field. It seems that two factors were key in the Indians' victory over Custer's men:

1) The Indians were equipped with many Henry repeaters, while the Army had Sharps single-shot rifles. The Indians could get off about 13 rounds in the same time it took a soldier to fire 3-4 rounds.

2) The Indians fought from horseback, staying mobile all the time. The soldiers dismounted, and had "horse handlers" take their animals and stay far back from the fighting. In no time, the Indians closed in and surrounded small groups of soldiers who fought back to back on foot. Although the Sharps rifles had a much longer range then the Henrys, this was wasted because the Indians decided the engagement range, and their much higher rate of fire overwhelmed the soldiers.

Cheers.

 

[Kaylee]

Little Big Horn/Greasy Grass --

Was there last year.

Army had trapdoor Springfields, not Sharps. Still .50-70 I think.
Indians had a hodge-podge, but yes a fair amount of leverguns.

There WAS a Sharps on the field, but IIRC it was in the hands of one of the Indians, who was picking off US Cav guys from quite a distance on the secondary battle site, from which there *were* US survivors.

On the secondary site, the Indians were advancing up a several hundred yard steep incline into the Cav position. There the Army guys with their Springfields DID have the advantage.

The whole "last stand" hill was dotted with little groups of two and three markers.. every marker was laid where a man fell. Chilling.


But that's neither here nor there. The effectiveness of a weapon in an engagement before smokeless powder or the dawn of self-loading arms is NOT an indication of its performance in the modern era.

-K

 

[Al Norris]

SHTF scenarios aside, when I go out into the woods a-camping, I always have my 1894S close at hand. It helps that I've also got my vaquero strapped on. Funny thing, that vaquero. It likes the same 305gr SWC that the marlin likes!

In the type of mountainous woods and brush country that I go camping in, I don't feel outgunned at all. Besides, about a 100-150 yds is all the clear area your apt to encounter. Scoped rifles are darn near useless...and them pesky little .223's will fly who knows where when encountering all the twigs and leaves they will have to travel through. Not so that heavy 305gr., it just plows right on through.

YMMV

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

If anybody wants to get an idea of how a lever-gun will hold up in the modern era, Ashley Emerson did an interesting article for SWAT Magazine where he attended Urban Rifle at Thunder Ranch with a lever gun. You can even purchase the article online.

As I recall, the two major factors he had issues with were reloads and heat. While it was something I hadn't thought about at the time, a modern semi-auto rifle is a lot better able to handle the heat generated by firing lots of rounds in a limited time scenario. With the exception of those two issues though, I believe he did pretty well - which just goes to show that knowing how to use whatever you brought can be a lot more important than what you brought.

 

[Mulliga]

Too bad Custer was a pompous SOB who took his guys out there needlessly...:banghead:

Lever guns are pretty reliable, pretty accurate, and pretty cool.

 

[foghornl]

Hmmm

Up to 150 Yds (about the line-of-sight limit in my subdivision) the .30/30 Marlin will do just fine. I also have the US Rifle Cal .30 M1, and a Mosin-Nagant M-44 carbine for my long-distance work.

So, if war comes down my street, I think I'll be OK with my "Smoky Mountain Machine Gun."

AKA Marlin Model 30A