The Sad Story of American Hunting Rifles

[bthest86]

Lever guns were designed for killing lots of Confederates. Later, people found that they were useful for killing lots of Indians as well. The Indians found them useful for killing lots of cavalrymen in Montana. Half a world away, the Turks found them useful for killing lots of Russians. And only after that did people find them pretty nifty for downing game in the wilderness in between killing.

My point? That lever guns were "war guns" before they became "hunting guns" just like bolt-actions and semi-autos. A lever gun is as much a "hunting gun" as an AK-47 is a "hunting gun." Because lever guns were in fact the AK-47s of their day.

 

[Soap]

Why does some from Purd - yeeeeeeeeeewww think he knows anything ?

Hopefully we'll know how to put the smack down on OSU this fall! I feel a redemption comin' on!

And as much as I love levers, the bolt guns certainly have their place.

 

[Onmilo]

All rifles have their place.
Heck I would hunt with a Plasma Pulse rifle in the 40 watt range if it were available!

 

[Shawnee]

"I feel a redemption comin' on! "


LOL !

Well, you know the Midwest - I never talk or bet until the games are over.

 

[elmerfudd]

When I bowhunt, it's with a recurve and even wooden arrows. I just don't like the modern compound bows, nor all the associated gadgets like sights, rests, etc.

I hear you on that. Compound bows seem like one hell of a weird anachronism to me. They're not historically correct or relevant and they aren't even close to being as effective as firearms. They really only exist to exploit American game seasons and gun laws.

That said, I've got one, but they really don't speak to me at all.

 

[Art Eatman]

As I mentioned, I had a Winchester Model 1895 in .30-'03. It was in competition with the Krag for US military use. And, then the Springfield. One reason for the discontinuance of the '95 was that it was awkward to reload while in the prone position. A rate of fire thing. It certainly wasn't the cartridge...

You commonly read, "The .30-30 has killed more deer than any other cartridge in North America." Well, yeah, that may be. It's also wounded and lost more deer than any other because of the typically rough sights and rapidly-decaying trajectory when the distance isn't gauged correctly.

One aspect of scoped rifles--not common for lever guns--is hunter safety in our more crowded world. Very early morning, or more likely late evening, more than one hunter has been mistaken for a deer because of poor light. (I realize this is not a problem for our careful and highly skilled THR folks, but we're few out of millions.)

I dunno. I like the old lever guns. They're fun. I load with 2400 and 100-grain carbine bullets and just have a ball, plinking. But they strike me in general as just more limited from the standpoint of all-around use.

FWIW, Art

 

[dmazur]

Just to thoroughly confuse things -

Winchester brought out the 1895 at a time when the world was changing to spitzer bullets. This was definitely a different looking model, with its internal box magazine.

I understand around 300 thousand were sold to Russia, with a modified receiver so the rifle could be loaded with stripper clips. Chambered in 7.62x54R.

The US had a few for the Spanish American War, chambered in .30-40 Krag.

These were definitely military lever-actions. They even had bayonet lugs!

Later, Winchester offered the 1895 in .30-06, in a civilian version marketed at hunters.

I have a 1895 reproduction, in .30-06, that I had shortened to carbine length. It doesn't balance in one hand quite as well as a Model 94, but it is accurate and it points well. I use it for hunting in timber. Some day, I hope to get a blacktail with it...

Of course, I also have a bolt-action .30-06, for hunting more open country.

But for "quick shooting" in timber, it's hard to beat a lever action. I happened to like the .30-06, so that's what led me down this path. I looked at the BLR, but I just liked the old Winchester 1895 design better.

I think folks have been turning military arms into hunting rifles for quite a while.

 

[Harve Curry]

I believe it was the Turks who bought the Evans lever action to fight the Russians. Evans was a under hammer lever action that had a magazine in the stock that held 28 rounds, or the earlier version held 32 rounds. I have a sporting carbine that uses the 44 Evans long, it's about equivalent to a mid range 44 mag.

 

[U.S.SFC_RET]

Shawnee's Last paragraph.

However - there are still – surprisingly – some Neanderthal lunatics around who actually attempt to harvest game with old Roman Candles like the lever-action 30/30s – some of them even without scopes with heat-seeking reticules - because they simply don’t know any better and never got passed Y-1939-Compliant. But they probably can’t hold out much longer.

If you want to get rid of one of these out dated junksters, I will pay the shipping just to clear your safe.

 

[Vaarok]

Up till WW1, most folks still used frontstuffers, actually. There wasn't surplus like we know it now. Everyone who was in the Civil War probably had their service rifle, but cartridge guns were very expensive, and a relative luxury, all things considered. The levergun was in development simply because of hostility, and was the military forerunner to the semiautomatic. However, early designs didn't handle spitzers or high-pressure long-range cartridges, and the race was on to develop one.

The Krag failed, got dumped on the market, WW1 occurred with tons of doughboys learning the joys of smokeless bolt-guns, and suddenly everyone wanted to upgrade during the post-war boom. Lots of disposable income, too.

It's a decent historical summary, but too biased in favor of leverguns. Leverguns were an evolutionary step that for a while reigned supreme, but like every other firearm short of the select-fire autoloader, was eclipsed by something more versatile.

 

[Phil DeGraves]

Got a Winchester 94 in 30-30 that has killed a lot of game.

Now, let's not blame the gun!!

The Lever was developed during the Civil war as a military weapon, not a hunting arm, along with the old 44-40.

The 44-40 didn't come out until the mid 1870s. The original Henry was in .44 Rimfire as was the post war 1866 Yellowboy (and for that matter so was the 1872 Colt Cartridge Revolver). The other "lever" of the Civil War was the Spencer which was also chambered for a rimfire cartridge of larger caliber.

 

[kwelz]

I really don't get the whole point here.
Lever actions are nice. While I don't have one yet, I really want a Marlin Guide gun in 45/70. They have a purpose, but to say that they are superior just because people used to use them? Not to mention that most of the "facts" in the OP are wrong.

Look we all like different types of forearms. Most of mine tend to be Polymer and Aluminum. However I can still appreciate a well made vintage guns and in fact have a love of old Military firearms.

Does this mean that my preferred gun is better? Well sure it is, but only in the task that it was made for. The progression of firearms technology does not mean that new things are pointless or old styles are obsolete. It just means that we have more options. And to me this is a very good thing.

Lever Actions are not the only "real" Hunting rifle any more than bolt actions or Semi autos are. They are different tools to do the job. I don't understand the Them vs. Us attitude lately. It is getting a bit tiring.

 

[Joe Demko]

I just stopped in to note that the finest rifle in the history of rifles, the Savage 99, is a lever action. To the best of my knowledge, it was not designed as a military weapon or marketed as such; though I am open to correction by anybody who can cite proof otherwise.

 

[goon]

The 30-30 with a 170 grain bullet zeroed at 150 yards should only be about 2" high at 100 yards and about 4" low at 200.

Courtesy of http://www.remington.com/products/ammunition/ballistics/

The 30-30 has plenty of power in close, easily enough to reliably drop a deer.
With a reciever sight or a low power scope to maximize the accuracy potential of the round, I'd feel fine trying a shot out to 150 yards (assuming I was in practice). But I'd prefer to get closer.
When I hunt, I prefer to get close enough to whack them with the stock.

 

[Ivy Mike]

I don't see anything sad about Americans equipping themselves with an ever wider variety of high quality arms. Sounds to me like the biggest contribution the old hunters made was a love of the sport and handing down tradition. Modern day weapons simply give us things like better accuracy, better reliability and better bullets with which to take game.
Sure the .30-06 may have been designed to take two-legged prey but it works quite well on the four-legged variety as well.

 

[JShirley]

I just stopped in to note that the finest rifle in the history of rifles, the Savage 99, is a lever action

But, Joe, the 99 was not typical. It could stand higher pressure, and had a detachable box magazine, instead of being tube fed.

J

 

[TCB in TN]

While I love a good argument as much as the next guy and since I am a lever gun guy myself, I would love to take Shawnee's side in this. That said I can't. In all reality just about every type of action can be effective or at least as effective as the shooter can make it. If I am in the deep woods, driving thickets and the like then a good ole lever gun is good medicine. If I happen to be stand hunting power lines or hill top to top then Ill be only to happy to pull out my bolt rifles to do the deal. I also like a good semi and have no qualms with using any one of them.

 

[redneckrepairs]

Damm hand , i too regret that the lever action went the way of the single action revolver . However both were replaced because something better came along . Deal with modern firearms design heck the garrand , 1911 , m14 ect.. i have it on good authority are more effecent systems than the lever and saa days . Heck i have a pre 64 winchester mod 70 that all in all i outshoot my buddy with his NM m1a ( m14 if you need the lesson ) . That just makes me a more careful shooter . and for the record i could not do it with a mod 94 in 30-30 lol . BTW the rifle that i carry in the pickup on the ranch most now is a cheap savage scout . It will do its part shooting minute of coyote out past 600 yards if i do my part . It will also shoot hand tossed pop cans or clay pidgens if i do my part . A lot of folk talk about how good a shot they may be at long range , dammed few can talk about how a target appears out there , much less how to get a round from your rifle to ontarget . I dont have " mad skills " i do ranch and shoot way out there a lot . Yes rifles have gone to an " unpleasing " level , however many of the " ugly cheap " guns shoot better than the classics . while handwork has went from hell to non existent and pride of ownership has left us with the glock guys bragging there is a reason , technology has replaced the gunsmith . For good or bad we are sentenced to firearms that one might not take pride in but anyone can afford . I dont like nor do i own a glock pistol , i dont like but i do own a savage rifle with a syn stock . the cheap assed savage tho it does not lend its self to groups hits what i shoot at . Pride ?? i own rifles for that ... Meat on the table tho there is not a one that beats my cheap turnbolt , and frankly when i beat it to hell and it rusts i dont feel guilty . Take from the post what you will .

 

[HorseSoldier]

I like the old lever gun designs, like many others have said, but the original poster seems to be arguing that the bolt gun only got ahead of the lever gun by virtue of some sort of underhanded derailing of market forces. This just isn't very true. There's definitely a place for both (and all manner of other flavors in guns), though I think I'd give the edge to the bolt gun for versatility.

 

[HGUNHNTR]

I don't like lever guns, there I said it!

For some of us the enjoyment of the hunt is the real pursuit, not the game.

 

[ArmedBear]

The bolt gun may or may not be more versatile, but it's a helluva lot easier to clean than a Winchester.

That said, bolt guns were introduced as battle rifles, and levers were the earliest form of assault rifles.

Neither were conceived as hunting rifles.

There actually ARE actual hunting rifle designs out there, like the Farquharson, the Winchester High Wall, Ruger No. 1, H&R break-actions, T/C break-actions, various double rifles, drillings and vierlings, etc. None of these have any sort of a military pedigree.

However, lever and bolt actions are both sporting adaptations of military rifles.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

That said, bolt guns were introduced as battle rifles, and levers were the earliest form of assault rifles.

Neither were conceived as hunting rifles.

Actually, lever guns were developed as general-purpose hunting and self-defense weapons. Through an accident of history, the Civil War broke out just as they were being developed in their first successful forms.

 

[goon]

BTW - I think Savage submitted a rifle to the military for a trial in the early 1890's. It wasn't the 99 or even the 95, but it was a predecessor that shared the basic design. I don't know if he started designing a rifle with the intention of the military adopting it but he at least took a crack at getting it adopted by them.

 

[MCgunner]

Bolt guns are capable of better accuracy, but levers are capable of 2 moa or less, so whadda ya really need? I only have one lever gun in .357 magnum. I'd like a BLR some day, like that rifle. A .30-30 would be okay, but I really don't like tube mags and flat point bullets in a serious hunting rifle.

There actually ARE actual hunting rifle designs out there, like the Farquharson, the Winchester High Wall, Ruger No. 1, H&R break-actions, T/C break-actions, various double rifles, drillings and vierlings, etc. None of these have any sort of a military pedigree.

Perhaps not those specific models, but the single shot certainly had its day in rifles like the Martini-Henry or the Springfield trap door. There were Sharps rifles used in the Civil War, too. I mean, the Remington 700 was designed as a hunting rifle, not a military rifle, was it not? How about the Savage 110?

 

[ArmedBear]

Well, that's true. The Sharps and Martini-Henry were falling block rifles. The trapdoor has no modern descendants, with good reason -- though I've seen the old ones work fine for hunting.

So that leaves break-actions of all sorts. They're some of the only "true" hunting rifles.

Therefore, who cares?