Pump and lever actions
- Thread starter October
- Start date
- Status
mljdeckard
Member
I knew someone else would mention Terminator 2. I'm sure a lot of pawn shops got cleaned out of lever shotguns in 1991.
My dad has a Remington 760 in .257 roberts that is beat to snot. He says it makes him look like a really good shot. When we are hunting deer in dense trees or sagebrush, it's the one he takes. The other day he thought really hard about a 760 in '06 in a pawn shop.
My dad has a Remington 760 in .257 roberts that is beat to snot. He says it makes him look like a really good shot. When we are hunting deer in dense trees or sagebrush, it's the one he takes. The other day he thought really hard about a 760 in '06 in a pawn shop.
AStone
Member
I wrote that last night, but this morning I'm second guessing myself,
not sure of the accuracy of my statement.
I know that levers (and I think pumps) are capable of more pressure (better bolt seal) than semi-auto.
But do levers really have a significant advantage in that regard over pumps?
Levers and pumps (and autos) vary widely depending on how the bolt locks up. All can have a weaker lockup (for example, a tilting bolt that locks in the rear), and all can have lockups that a stronger than many bolt actions (rotating bolt that locks into a barrel extension). The weakness of gas autos is that cartridges of a higher pressure than the gas system is rated for can overstress components when cycling.
Action type has no bearing on how a much pressure a gun can handle, it is how the mechanism locks.
Action type has no bearing on how a much pressure a gun can handle, it is how the mechanism locks.
AStone
Member
So let's compare a Marlin 336 (lever) to a Remington 7600 (or 760) pump.
How do they compare in "locking"?
How do they compare in "locking"?
The 7600 has a rotating bolt that locks into the barrel extension. This is about as good as a bolt action rifle. I am not as sure about the Marlin, I believe it is a tilting bolt, and I think it locks at the rear. The Marlin is a fair amount weaker than the 7600.
mustanger98
Member
I don't think I'd bet on that. Observe that the .450Marlin (basically a .45-70 on steroids) is chambered in the 336 Marlin action under the names of Guide Gun and Outfitter. Observe that the .450 is a belted magnum. Who wants to shoot that in a weak action?
Note that the .450 Marlin is chambered in the Model 1895, which is a strengthed version of the 336. And the weakness of these locking types isn't so much that they are going to blow open when you are shooting, rather they end up "loose" from too many high-pressure loads. This is due to increased wear caused by the weaker lockup, i.e. the recess that the lug on the bolt tilts into begins to deform and lengthen, for example.
EDIT: Just checked, the SAAMI max for the .450 Marlin is 43500 psi, similar to the .30-30. For comparison the Remington 7600 is chambered in .308 Win, which is specified at 62k.
EDIT: Just checked, the SAAMI max for the .450 Marlin is 43500 psi, similar to the .30-30. For comparison the Remington 7600 is chambered in .308 Win, which is specified at 62k.
oneshooter
Member
Lever shotguns
I don't seem to have any trouble shooting skeet with my 1887. Even doubles are fine. As long as there is a breeze to blow the blackpowder smoke away!!!!
Oneshooter
Livin in Texas
I don't seem to have any trouble shooting skeet with my 1887. Even doubles are fine. As long as there is a breeze to blow the blackpowder smoke away!!!!
Oneshooter
Livin in Texas
The Marlin 1895 in .450 Marlin (43.5k psi) also has a different barrel attachment than the same gun in .45-70 (28k psi). I don't know the exact difference, but it has to do with the way the threads are cut from what I understand.
Also, from 1997-2000 Browning manufactured the BPR (Browning Pump Rifle) and chambered it for all the usual hunting cartridges. The BPR appears nearly identical to a BAR, minus the cocking handle, when the bolt is closed. The bolt has a rotating lockup, as does the BAR. The particular BPR in my safe is chambered for .300WM (64k psi).
Also, from 1997-2000 Browning manufactured the BPR (Browning Pump Rifle) and chambered it for all the usual hunting cartridges. The BPR appears nearly identical to a BAR, minus the cocking handle, when the bolt is closed. The bolt has a rotating lockup, as does the BAR. The particular BPR in my safe is chambered for .300WM (64k psi).
mainmech48
Member
I agree with what zinj has said. The multi-lugged, rotating bolt on the Remington 760 (and the Browning BLR, for that matter) is capable of withstanding the same pressure levels as modern BAs. It's self-evident; they're chambered for the same cartridges.
I also think he's right about the Marlins. The main shortcoming of the system is that headspace can increase with wear from extensive use or high-stress loadings more quickly than in some other arrangements. It is not uncommon at all to find well-used Marlin 336s which show marked signs of impending case head separation on fired cases, usually the dreaded "bright ring" near the base. To be fair, I've seen this most often on examples where a lot of handloads were known to have been used, and almost always by folks whose primary definition of 'improvement' was to see if they could 'beat' factory velocity numbers.
FWIW bockscar, that 28,00 CUP figure represents the SAAMI maximum for 'safe' use in actions like the Springfield 'Trapdoor', Remington Rolling Block, original and repro Sharps, original 1886 Winchesters and the like. Most factories hold that down to about 21,000 CUP as extra margin because of all the 120-plus-YO antiques out there. In the loading manuals the most often used maximum pressure figure for use in modern Marlin 1895s is 40,000 CUP.
The .450 Marlin was designed with the belted case to absolutely preclude it being chambered in any .45-70 expressly because the average pressures would destroy any weaker action should some idiot ignore the headstamp and try it. The '95s so chambered may well use a different thread on the action and barrel, but as they use the same action for the .444, which operates at very similar pressures, and .45-70 it wouldn't seem to make much sense from a manufacturing standpoint, IMO.
I also think he's right about the Marlins. The main shortcoming of the system is that headspace can increase with wear from extensive use or high-stress loadings more quickly than in some other arrangements. It is not uncommon at all to find well-used Marlin 336s which show marked signs of impending case head separation on fired cases, usually the dreaded "bright ring" near the base. To be fair, I've seen this most often on examples where a lot of handloads were known to have been used, and almost always by folks whose primary definition of 'improvement' was to see if they could 'beat' factory velocity numbers.
FWIW bockscar, that 28,00 CUP figure represents the SAAMI maximum for 'safe' use in actions like the Springfield 'Trapdoor', Remington Rolling Block, original and repro Sharps, original 1886 Winchesters and the like. Most factories hold that down to about 21,000 CUP as extra margin because of all the 120-plus-YO antiques out there. In the loading manuals the most often used maximum pressure figure for use in modern Marlin 1895s is 40,000 CUP.
The .450 Marlin was designed with the belted case to absolutely preclude it being chambered in any .45-70 expressly because the average pressures would destroy any weaker action should some idiot ignore the headstamp and try it. The '95s so chambered may well use a different thread on the action and barrel, but as they use the same action for the .444, which operates at very similar pressures, and .45-70 it wouldn't seem to make much sense from a manufacturing standpoint, IMO.
AStone
Member
Very interesting and informative reading here about this pump v. lever lock seal deal. (Whatchamacallit)
Honestly, in the last year or so, while seeking my first CF rifle in decades, I looked at Rem pump rifles - especially the 7600 and 7600P, in part because I was enamored of the idea of an action virtually identical to my 870. (I tried out a few bolts, but just realized I'm just not a "bolt" guy. Give me levers and pumps.)
But in the end, at least for now, I decided that for my needs, the Marlin 336 would be better suited.
If I ever want to add a CF rifle with in something like .308 Win, I'd likely take another look at that 7600.
(We'll have to wait and see how the new Marlin 308MX does.)
Honestly, in the last year or so, while seeking my first CF rifle in decades, I looked at Rem pump rifles - especially the 7600 and 7600P, in part because I was enamored of the idea of an action virtually identical to my 870. (I tried out a few bolts, but just realized I'm just not a "bolt" guy. Give me levers and pumps.)
But in the end, at least for now, I decided that for my needs, the Marlin 336 would be better suited.
If I ever want to add a CF rifle with in something like .308 Win, I'd likely take another look at that 7600.
(We'll have to wait and see how the new Marlin 308MX does.)
Dave Markowitz
Member
According to a survey done several years ago by the Pennsylvania Game Commission, the single most popular deer rifle in Penn's Woods is the Remington slide action (760, Six, 7600, etc.) in .30-06. PA does not allow hunting with semiauto rifles, so the deer hunters here have adopted the next fastest action. Let me tell you, a Remington pump can be shot fast. I have heard some mighty impressive "bursts" out on the state gamelands.
The barrels on Remington slide action rifles are free floating and they have a reputation for very good accuracy, on par with bolt action sporters. It's not unusual for one of these to shoot MOA with the right ammo.
The rotating bolt design of the Remington slide actions makes them strong enough to handle high intensity rounds like .243, .308, .270, and .30-06. Compared with bolt actions, they may not have primary extraction that's as good, however.
The barrels on Remington slide action rifles are free floating and they have a reputation for very good accuracy, on par with bolt action sporters. It's not unusual for one of these to shoot MOA with the right ammo.
The rotating bolt design of the Remington slide actions makes them strong enough to handle high intensity rounds like .243, .308, .270, and .30-06. Compared with bolt actions, they may not have primary extraction that's as good, however.
DC3-CVN-72
Member
Dave Markowitz, this is what I was trying to ask in my #19 post, thanks.Eleven Mike
Member
The Kel-Tec SU-16. I wouldn't call that quasi-military.
Doesn't Ruger have an automatic in .44 Magnum?
I would say the Kel-Tec is on the line. It is marketed as an alternative to banned rifles for AWB areas. It fills the same niche as the Mini-14 does at this point in time. That is not really in the same market as the BAR or 7400.
And I forgot about the Ruger Deerfield, although I think they dropped it from production this year.
Eleven Mike
Member
Marketing-schmarketing. It's not derived from or a copy of any military arm. It's black, but so are a lot of hunting rifles. It does take M-16 magazines, though.
Hmm. Now the super-tacticool C version is pretty mall-ninja, but the other versions are not.
Or maybe it belongs more in the foraging gun category. Fold in half and stick in your ruck-sack kind of thing.
More importantly, though, we can certainly agree that the semi-auto is not the preferred arm of most hunters. Or can I say that without getting Zumboed?
mustanger98
Member
I wouldn't say you'd get totally Zumboed, but we have to remember so many Remington 740's and 742's and BAR's. My Daddy had a 742 Woodsmaster in .30-06 when I was a kid; it was a beautiful rifle, almost too purty to take to the woods. And Mini-14's... there's been plenty of guys hunted with them too; just have to be sure you can hit a deer anywhere in the eye or ear. A rifle don't have to be black to be a semi-auto any more than it has to be purty to take hunting. That said, after the first round, mostly all a semi-auto is is something to tell the guy on the next ridge how bad a shot you are and how you just missed your deer. ***shrug*** I do my huntin' with a .30-30 levergun. Sure I have other rifles and support and defend that right, but what more do you really need?
Just its general characteristics make it neither fish nor fowl, kind of like the Mini-14.
The caliber for one thing. .223 will blow apart small game, yet is generally considered too light for deer. It isn't tweaked out for accuracy, unlike a varminting bolt-gun or AR. It does seem like it would do a good job coyote hunting, but coyote hunting is one of those catch-all categories (since everything from .22LR to 12 gauge buckshot to .30-06 is used as a coyote gun).
And I would say it is a quasi-military design of the same order as the Mini-14. The bolt is based on the AR design, as is the magazine. IIRC the gas system is taken from the AK. Compare that to the Mini-14, which uses an M-14 style bolt, and a scaled down version of the M-14 magazine. The gas system of the Mini-14 is based on the M1 Carbine. Neither is really a military rifle, but they fall into the same roles as civillian versions of military guns.
Anyway, back to applications, what the Kel-Tec does well is plinking, self defense, and as you stated it makes a good pack gun (whether for a camping trip or a BOB). The fact that it uses the AR-15 magazine reinforces this, as it is not "tactical-ed out" and thus can slip through those nasty state AWBs. Thus it not only has the lightweight packing gun market, but it also provides an affordable semi-auto centerfire to a restricted segment of the market.
Eleven Mike
Member
And you can trace all those Ruger and Winchester bolt guns to the military Mauser. And one could likely do the same with some lever-guns, too. But what is this about accuracy? It's not tricked out? How tricked out are the other semi-autos you're talking about?
I guess we could go round and round on this subjective stuff all day, though, so let's just agree to disagree. I guess the whole angle of marketing them to Californians as surrogate ARs kind of escapes me, because I can't imagine why anyone would want an AR. Just hate 'em.
I guess we could go round and round on this subjective stuff all day, though, so let's just agree to disagree. I guess the whole angle of marketing them to Californians as surrogate ARs kind of escapes me, because I can't imagine why anyone would want an AR. Just hate 'em.
What I am trying to say is that the Kel-Tec is built as a semi-auto plinking/defense rifle, which is not the market that commercial centerfire autos have been developed for.
Essentially, you can say there have been two lines of centerfire semi-automatic development. One that was propelled primarily by the Departement of Defense and its contractors, which has only recently seen widespread commercial production (before the 90's how many companies were producing AR-15s, or importing AKs?). The other was the big civilian manufacturers who were producing semi-autos largely for the hunting market.
This second branch of semis are not designed for high-volume fire, and are not nearly as robust as the military derived line. The BAR and 7400/7500 are pretty much the last vestiges of this family.
The Kel-Tec falls along the first path, as it is built for high volume fire, takes high capacity magazines, is chambered in a self-defense/plinking caliber, etc.
I am not trying to turn this into a Zumbo debate, just trying to say that there have been two lines of development in regards to centerfire semis.
Anyway, the point I was trying to make several posts back was that that semi-automatic rifles have not been very widely produced by the big sporting rifle manufacturers.
Essentially, you can say there have been two lines of centerfire semi-automatic development. One that was propelled primarily by the Departement of Defense and its contractors, which has only recently seen widespread commercial production (before the 90's how many companies were producing AR-15s, or importing AKs?). The other was the big civilian manufacturers who were producing semi-autos largely for the hunting market.
This second branch of semis are not designed for high-volume fire, and are not nearly as robust as the military derived line. The BAR and 7400/7500 are pretty much the last vestiges of this family.
The Kel-Tec falls along the first path, as it is built for high volume fire, takes high capacity magazines, is chambered in a self-defense/plinking caliber, etc.
I am not trying to turn this into a Zumbo debate, just trying to say that there have been two lines of development in regards to centerfire semis.
Anyway, the point I was trying to make several posts back was that that semi-automatic rifles have not been very widely produced by the big sporting rifle manufacturers.
entropy
Member
Actually, window dressing aside, the BAR and 740 series rifles derive some attributes from a military heiratage also. They both use a rotating bolt, the BAR with two massive lugs, the 740 series with many small ones, ala the M16.
It's interesting to note that with the interest in CAS, pump rifles and lever shotguns are again being produced, and are popular with people who don't shoot CAS. I for one would love a Lightning in .45LC, and of course there are many who still want a Win. 1887 because of T2. (Hopefully they will go throught the right hoops if they intend to emulate the movie gun.)
As for pumps being inaccurate, I've found the 760/7600's to be quite accurate, more so than most levers, though this is as much due to cartridge limitations as rifle action design.
The Marlin uses a falling block behind the bolt to lockup, BTW. Very solid, as is attested by the calibers the M1895 and M336 are chambered in.
It's interesting to note that with the interest in CAS, pump rifles and lever shotguns are again being produced, and are popular with people who don't shoot CAS. I for one would love a Lightning in .45LC, and of course there are many who still want a Win. 1887 because of T2. (Hopefully they will go throught the right hoops if they intend to emulate the movie gun.)
As for pumps being inaccurate, I've found the 760/7600's to be quite accurate, more so than most levers, though this is as much due to cartridge limitations as rifle action design.
The Marlin uses a falling block behind the bolt to lockup, BTW. Very solid, as is attested by the calibers the M1895 and M336 are chambered in.
mustanger98
Member
Winchester 1894/94-series rifles also use the falling block that locks the bolt forward. John M. Browning's idea.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll