Why The Lever Action?

[buzz meeks]

kaferhaus said,

Most of the time if you don't hit what you're shooting at with the first shot, you're never gonna get a chance to shoot at it again anyway...

I couldn't agree more. But I also have to say that much as I love my Mauser 98 derivatives- a pair of CZs and a pre-64 70- I get faster, better hits with my Marlin 336. My rifle points like a fine shotgun and tracks moving targets with an ease I've never found in any bolt gun. In my hands, there is nothing better for snap shooting inside of 150 yards.

I also agree that the concern with capacity and "tactical" reloads is of limited concern in the hunting field but that raises another point about the lever gun. In their more powerful chamberings, say anything north of 30-30 territory, the lever guns make darned fine general purpose rifles. They lack the range and accuracy of a properly set up sporter but they are so handy and so well suited to a variety of tasks that they are more likely to be with you. And because the cost of ownership is relatively low, I don't feel bad setting my Marlin on the floorboards of a pickup or in the bottom of a canoe.

When we turn to accuracy, we have to remember that the lever gun was never designed to be a benchrest piece. Obviously a built Remington 700 will spank the best levergun there is off a benchrest. The lever gun is meant to be used in the field. And there it is accurate enough. I'll go one further and say that there are few shooters who could bring out the all of intrinsic accuracy of either a lever action or a built up bolt gun shooting from a field position. So, are they less accurate? Yes. Does it matter? No.

 

[kaferhaus]

Lever guns are great, I own two of em.. everything that's been said about their virtues is true and it's exactly why I like them...

It just jacks my jaw that some guys have to take every thread on the board and turn it into a SHTF/TACTICAL fantasy discussion.

Maybe there should be a SHTF forum on the board for these guys.

And that Gabe fella... he sure likes to pose!

 

[Sistema1927]

"Why lever guns?"

Because they are "tons of fun".

My 1894C, 39A, and 336 will do what is needed in the accuracy department if I will do mine. I never was much for bench rest shooting, and the levers are accurate enough for field work.



(Since this picture was taken I have added Xpress sights to the 39A, just like the 336.)

 

[buzz meeks]

kaferhaus- I agree with you again. This time about the SHTF thing. Doesn't anybody just hunt or shoot tin cans anymore?

 

[JNewell]

The ROF opinions are interesting. There was an article a couple of years ago in TAR that had "time trials" using bolt, lever, semi and pump rifles. The lever rifles did not display the speed advantage you would have expected. One of us ought to dig it up and get the #s out here. It was a very interesting article -- and surprising.

 

[Magnum88C]

First I agree with the others abou tthe tactical thing.
Why does everything to do with firearms always come down to combat? Jeez.

There was an article a couple of years ago in TAR that had "time trials" using bolt, lever, semi and pump rifles. The lever rifles did not display the speed advantage you would have expected.

The order the came in was:
1.) Semi auto
2.) Pump action
3.) Straight-pull bolt action
4.) Bolt action
5.) Lever action
6.) Single shot.

Now I do have to say that a SKILLED rifleman can be faster with a lever action than most bolt actions (with the possible exception of the Enfield). But novices often have problems with short stroking the lever, and generally being unaccustomed to throwing a lever forward quickly, and returning it to battery (you basically beat the rifle into submission when speed shooting).

 

[mustanger98]

Well, as I've said in other threads, I shoot a '94 Winchester in .30-30 with a Lyman #2 tang sight. I shoot it from the bench and from standing just like I shoot my bolts. It eats anything I feed it, JSP or LFP. I've never rushed working the lever as I don't wish to beat it up so the action wears out faster. I don't have to.

Why does everything to do with firearms always come down to combat? Jeez.

While I've studied combat, I'm a sportsman, a hunter. And that's just it; everything DON'T come down to combat. But, in certain scenarios, I wouldn't be past choosing my Winchester over some other types. But, one must pick his fights and be the one to choose when and where, if possible. Even back when leverguns were cutting edge that was still highly advisable. As for so much talk that sounds like hunting trouble...

Doesn't anybody just hunt or shoot tin cans anymore?

I do. My gun club has a cast bullet match coming up in a couple of months. In intend that my Winchester and myself will be there with plenty of 165gr LFPs. My old levergun will be on the same line with Sharpses, Rollling Blocks, High Walls, and other various and sundry bigbores. In my hands, my rifle will do as well as can be expected of anything shooting cast lead. I know this because I've shot Ultramax's CAS loads before.

 

[Zeke Menuar]

Are we forgetting the Savage 1899 and M99 lever actions?
One of the most elegant and functional gun designs ever. Winchesters and Marlin's are OK but make my levergun a M99 (Thanks Grandpa).

ZM

 

[Bullet]

Quote -
I am curious what advantages the lever action has over either bolt or semi.

One of the advantages is that the lever action was in alot of the old Cowboy movies. I don't remember any bolt or semi actions at all.

 

[BADUNAME4]

My only rifle is a Marlin 1894C. The SWHTF if my wife catches me spending money on a SHTF rifle.

 

[KarbineKrazy]

It just jacks my jaw that some guys have to take every thread on the board and turn it into a SHTF/TACTICAL fantasy discussion.

Hey, you have to remember though why the lever action repeater was designed, FOR WAR! It was designed for tactical use. A 44-40 carbine Winchester 92 was an Assault Weapon around the turn of the century.

If I was in the spanish american war, I'd rather have the 44-40 then a Krag Jorgenson.

 

[Ivy Mike]

Leverguns just 'feel right' as your first deer rifle.

I wish that were the case. My first "deer rifle" was a 1903A3 in .30-06 when I was eleven or twelve. Hard enough to do with iron sights, but the ought-six was quite the kicker.

I wish I would have been using a.30-30 for my first small buck.

 

[MilsurpShooter]

Only problem I have with my lever action is the fact that I'm left handed. Only happens once in awhile but sometimes I catch the shell on my sleeve or something, or when i'm wearing short sleeves, well it's an interesting surprise.

Have a Henry .22, very accurate rifle

 

[Peter M. Eick]

Because they are light, small, handy, fit in a horse or backpack scabbard well. Have good sights for the problem at hand (usually short range quick snap shots in woods). They are the classic quick to action rifle.

I heard it (the 94 30/30) once called the "red-neck assult rifle". Kind of sums it up.

I like mine. The 94 is an easy gun to shoot well and handles great. The only change I made was to add a Williams Peep sight to it.

 

[huntsman]

I heard it (the 94 30/30) once called the "red-neck assult rifle". Kind of sums it up.

I'll agree with that Oh and it's assault

 

[odysseus]

1894...

I have been thinking about purchasing a lever-gun, I haven't shot one since I was a kid and have always wanted one strictly for "fun".

Now keep in mind also that lever guns also had some advantages in "cowboy" variants for rangers in that they had the same calibers as their handguns, so they only had to carry one kind of round, and yes a lever gun is easier to manipulate for most people while riding.

I have heard an old timer though tell me he doesn't think lever guns are good at bigger bore rounds since the action doesn't lend itself to shooting them well versus a good bolt gun locked in. YMMV, but that makes some sense and I would tend to want a lever gun in a more carbine style anyway...

I am interested in an 1894P .44 Mag...

 

[Black Snowman]

I think Sistema1927 has it. I've borrowed Kamicosmos' Marlin 44 Mag to knock down plates and that's just a really good time.

 

[kaferhaus]

Hey, you have to remember though why the lever action repeater was designed, FOR WAR! It was designed for tactical use. A 44-40 carbine Winchester 92 was an Assault Weapon around the turn of the century.

Nope it was in use by civilians long before the army started using it... In fact it took some Indians kicking our asses with them before the Army started using any of them.... and even then they only used them on a limited basis.

The general's stated they were a waste of ammo as soldiers wouldn't take time to properly aim if they had so much ammunition in the gun....

 

[ChristopherG]

Nope it was in use by civilians long before the army started using it

Correct; but it WAS DESIGNED with military sales in mind (or so the History Channel informs me, at least). And, the generals you quote were proved wrong (or at least ignored) by history, which went the way of the repeating rifle (as opposed to the trap-door Springfield they championed).

 

[mustanger98]

Guy's, I don't remember the exact year they started developing levergun, but I do know the 1860 Henry in .44 Henry Rimfire was used effectively by some Yankee units as was the Spencer in rifle and carbine configurations in .56caliber rimfire. Most of those, the individual soldier bought his issued rifle on the installment plan. After the Civil War, the nation had a glut of firearms of many different makes and models and more coming soon to a gun shop near you. While the US military had used some repeaters during the war, Ordnance had no wish to adopt them as standard issue afterward. However, I've read that during WW1 there were limited numbers of '94 carbines in .30-30 issued to some small units in small capacities such as "timber rangers" who guarded spruce forests intended for use as lumber for the building of aircraft, for example. But, by that time the trapdoor Springfield had been replaced by the Krag Jorgensen and '03 Springfield. The levergun is by no means obsolete, but it has been bypassed by military R&D and tactics calling for greater volume of fire.

 

[MrAcheson]

Nope it was in use by civilians long before the army started using it...

Incorrect. The Winchester action first appeared in the Henry and it was designed for the Civil War. The Spencer was created for the same conflict. A few of these may have been in civilian hands immediately prior to the war, but very few.

Still the lever gun was always more of a sporting rifle than a military gun, at least where organized militaries were concerned. Recent research at Little Big Horn indicate many of the indians fighting Custer may have used lever guns to produce a larger volume of fire than Custer could muster.

 

[mustanger98]

Recent research at Little Big Horn indicate many of the indians fighting Custer may have used lever guns to produce a larger volume of fire than Custer could muster.

I never saw any "may have" to it. The Indians DID use leverguns. They had the latest technology before the gov't issued it.

 

[kaferhaus]

Incorrect. The Winchester action first appeared in the Henry and it was designed for the Civil War.

The topic is not WINCHESTER lever actions... it's lever actions in general and they were being manufactured and sold in 1849.... many years before the civil war.

The Henry was not designed for the military...... some Civil war units bought the Henry with their own discretionary funds.. In fact the lever action has never been adopted by the government.

There's myth all over the place.... the library of congress would be a good place for you to validate this information.

 

[KarbineKrazy]

Maybe civilians did use them before, and I know it was never officially adopted, but the lever actions AS WE know them(the henry design, not spencer) was a defensive weapon, not for sporting...

The cartridges weren't especially for game animals. The earliest lever action I can think of used a rimfire cartridge, and it wasn't anything to powerful... Is it the Vulcan action I'm thinking of?

The lever action was built as a more efficient fighting machine.

 

[Jaywalker]

I ordered mine at retail several years ago for its broad capabilities, including to have something I could loan out when necessary. What I got was a real beauty, one possibly planned to be a commemorative of some stripe - really nice wood, very nice inletting, flawless metal work, and a crisp, three-pound trigger. It was one of those "blind hog and acorns" thing - no ability on my part.

OTOH, for all its qualities, it wasn't really functional for me as issued - the length of pull was much too long at 14". I had to go through real contortions to operate the lever - it was much harder than a bolt action with the same pull length. It cost me another $140 (local rate!) to have the stock shortened and a Pachmayr pad installed. As nice as it is, I wouldn't recommend anyone buy one, if it doesn't fit to start with.

I don't care for buckhorn sights, and I really don't like a round bead front sight, but with the $ I have in it, I can't see more in it. I'm a bolt guy, but I'm now so far under water with this thing, I can't afford to sell it to someone for the $200 people think is fair.

Jaywalker