Quantcast

Tube fed magazine opinions

Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by Guvnor, Apr 26, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Guvnor

    Guvnor Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2009
    Messages:
    411
    Im looking at some marlin .22 magnums...a couple are tube fed and a couple have detachable box mags. The tube fed ones look like nicer guns but ive never owned or fired a tube fed gun and dont know what to expect. What are some of the pros and cons?

    I like the fact that they hold alot of rounds, and no sore thumbs from loading a detachable mag. But is the spring tube itself difficult to re-insert when the mag is fully loaded?

    Does it get annoying having to unscrew the tube and empty the mag when they call an "all clear" at the range, as opposed to just popping out a box mag? Or is it not a big deal for you guys?

    Thanks for the info!
     
  2. bucktail

    bucktail Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2005
    Messages:
    65
    I like tubes in .22lr, as they generally allow you to shoot shorts as well. In the WMR, that's not an issue. The tube is sleeker than most detachable magazines (ruger's rotary mag is the exception) in that it doesn't stick out and get in the way. Detachable mags are obviously more convienient for loading and unloading, but the tube isn't too bad in my experience. You can also make speed loaders out of aluminum arrow shafts or copper tubing. The detachable mag rifles generally run a little cheaper, and I generally prefer a barrel with some meat on it for a tube fed rifle, as it is one more thing that can affect the barrel harmonics. They both have their positives and negatives; get the one that fits the intended use best.
     
  3. Guvnor

    Guvnor Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2009
    Messages:
    411
    Thanks for the reply.

    This isn't going to be a battle rifle of course, so speed of reloading isn't really an issue.

    Do the tubes ever "wear out" over time?

    Are they any more/less reliable than a box magazine?
     
  4. Maverick223

    Maverick223 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2008
    Messages:
    11,269
    Location:
    28078
    I have both (albeit in .22lr) and very much prefer a detachable box magazine over a tube. Depending on the make of the weapon and manufacturer of the mag itself, I have found mag fed weapons to be more reliable, much more convenient, and in many cases more accurate. However if you get a good tube fed rifle it will serve you just as well.

    Oh and as for whether tubes wear out...yes and no. The tube itself will not, but the springs will wear out (same as a magazine but more difficult to R&R) and some take a bit of adjustment to operate reliably (although many do not).
     
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2009
  5. Maverick223

    Maverick223 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2008
    Messages:
    11,269
    Location:
    28078
    My 10/22 will shoot shorts nicely without jamming, now cycling is another issue (same as my tube fed .22lr). :D
     
  6. Vicious-Peanut

    Vicious-Peanut Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Messages:
    670
    Location:
    Texas
    I have a Marlin 60 (tube fed) and no it is not hard to close when fully loaded. About the cease-fire at the range, just pay attention to how long its been between cease-fires, or if its like my range they all a two minute warning.

    Between my mag and tube fed guns I really don't care one way or another, on a .22.
     
  7. RyanM

    RyanM Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    4,412
    Location:
    PA
    You don't usually re-insert anything. The tube stays on the gun, like with a shotgun. Unless I'm mistaken, I believe most tube-fed .22s load like the old Henry Rifle. You pull the magazine follower to the tip of the magazine using a tab (sort of like loading a Mk. II or Buckmark magazine), drop the rounds in through a cutout on the bottom, then ease the follower back down onto the tip of the last round in.

    Edit: Never mind, you do take out the thing. Whoops. It was a very long time ago, that I last fired a tube-fed semi-auto. Maybe it was a Henry clone, I forget.
     
  8. jester_s1

    jester_s1 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2008
    Messages:
    206
    Location:
    Fort Worth, TX
    I much prefer tubes simply because they don't get lost.
     
  9. edelbrock

    edelbrock Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    Messages:
    347
    Location:
    NC
    As long as you don't lose the follower for the tube. :)
    I prefer the tube also for a .22. Never had a problem with my Marlin Model 60.
     
  10. Im283

    Im283 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Messages:
    1,054
    Location:
    Knox County, TN.
    I bought a Glenfield Marlin Model 60 back in 1978. It is tube fed and holds 18 long rifle rounds in the tube.

    The rifle is easy to load and reliable . I have never has an issue with the follower or rod that holds the follower, the spring feels as sturdy now as it did 30 years ago.

    You can either totally remove the follower and housing out to reload or you can leave it partly in. Loading through a cutout in the magazine tube itself. I usually just pull the thing all the way out.

    I can think of no downside to a tube fed rifle.
     
  11. coop4u2c

    coop4u2c Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2008
    Messages:
    105
    Location:
    Winston Salem, NC
    The Marlin tube hols 12 verses their clip guns at only 4 or 7.
    Ruger's hold 9.
    Savage holds 5.
    I have a Marlin 983S .22 mag SS tube fed on order.
    I too can think of no downside to a tube fed rifle.
    336's are tube fed and no complaints there.
     
  12. 35Rem

    35Rem Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    663
    Location:
    SE Alabama
    I have an 883SS an I love it. Very accurate rifle. Holds 12 rounds, so reloading isn't as often as with the clip fed rifle. It is slower, but not hard. Very little spring pressure is required to feed, so it's easy to seat home when fully loaded.
    You don't have a magazine sticking out of the bottom of the rifle, right where you want your hand to be.
    Disadvantages: Slower reload as conpared to swapping magazines, potentially bending the tube or internal tube (can be replaced)
    You can figure out how to take the round out of the chamber and one from the magazine so it won't feed another until you cycle the bolt fully again. Makes it easy to put away with rounds in the magazine, but not in the chamber.
     
  13. 1KPerDay

    1KPerDay Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    16,504
    Location:
    Happy Valley, UT
    I can... the tube mechanism and feeding mechanism are a lot more complicated than a box magazine.

    At one point I had a Remington 581 and a Remington 582. One tube, one box. I gave the box version to my brother. Kept the other and have had lots of problems with the tube (the outer tube that's supposed to be fixed to the receiver somehow is loose and nobody seems to be able to tell me how to fix it).

    The spring-loaded feeding/lifting mechanism is one more thing to get full of gunk and stop working.

    My JC Whitney 31's tube mag follower snapped off... finding another was an ordeal. Eventually did, though.

    However, 2 of my brothers have Browning BL-22s and both work fine. The tubes look better to my eye, also.

    Another advantage of tubes is no box mags to lose, if that's a consideration. I had to buy a replacement mag for the remington as the original had gotten lost over the years.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice