Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Gun writers and leverguns

crshelton,

Yep, am familiar with Paco Kelly's writing.

Did an article on the .405 for HANDLOADER about 15 years ago--but used a Ruger No. 1. Despite my collection of "traditional" lever-actions, have probably been more intrigued with single-shots than levers. In fact my latest rifle acquisition is a 1866 Springfield .50-70, the second Allin conversion. This particular rifles was actually made in 1866.

In 2003 went on an all iron-sight safari with a friend who brought as his rifle an 1886 Winchester in .50-110. Using black powder and 500-some grain cast bullets, he took four plains game animals and a Cape buffalo. I took two rifles, a bolt-action .416 Rigby and a Ruger No. 1 .375 H&H, but did almost all my hunting with the .375, taking the same animals.

In reality, however, I like just about all rifles.

Look to Hollywood to understand the popularity of certain rifles as well as most any other item in pop culture.

The days of the western movie and/or tv series is all but over. So goes the popularity of the lever rifle and single action revolver.

Look what the series "The Walking Dead" did to the price and availability of Colt snake guns if you don't believe me.

Mule Deer, we will bring you back from the Dark Side...

Beartooth bullets has some great technical articles on the 444

https://www.beartoothbullets.com/tech_notes/archive_tech_notes.htm/17

first one above...

and since when does a handloading Loony have to have a logical reason to prefer one cartridge over another?

but here you go: (1) it is more versatile than the 45-70; (2) it can provide comparable big bore killing power with less pain on the shooter's end than the 45-70

Mule Deer, advantage of 444 over 45-70 for me is the use of cheaper 44 cal. bullets that I also have on hand for handguns. The use of 180gr bullets loaded fast or slow for practice or pest. So no real advantage just works for me.

I knew Pythons had gone out of control but I didn't know The Walking Dead had anything to do with it?

MD,
Thanks - I may have that R #1 article in my .405 file. I will check later.

I love lever rifles, though I do not often (but sometimes) grab one when it comes time to hunt. I owned a 444 Marlin a few decades ago. The problem with that 444 was the short action. I have a Marlin 44 Mag, same problem, though there is a fix, I guess, with the 44, maybe with the other Marlins?? My cast bullets for the 44/444 have long ogives. I sold the 444 to someone who didn't cast bullets and he was satisfied, he only used it on whitetail and factory loads worked OK. I had a Ruger 44 tube feed way back when, it didn't last long in my rack - short action.
I have a couple of 45-70 levers, a Marlin and a '86 Winchester. The '86 is a bit heavy, but the Marlin will be on the sale block before the Winchester because of their short action. Maybe the Marlins can be modified to allow cast bullets?? I read an article somewhere...
At any rate the reason for me with the large caliber lever guns is cast bullets. With a 44/444/45-70 and cast bullets, I think the combination makes a deadly whitetail rifle. I'd use my 45-70 on elk too, if I lived in elk country and got tags every year.
I believe my 7600 Remington is much faster to get multiple fast shots than any lever rifles. My hope is to drop the game on the first shot. Hearing multiple fast shots means to me there might very well be a running deer or whatever coming fast, get ready.

Dogger,

Excellent points!

But "more versatile" hasn't been a valid point with handloaders since owning only one (maybe two) centerfires went out in the 1950's. As an example, I always loved to hear from .260 Remington fans who claim it's the most versatile modern centerfire--when they own several.

Don't understand the physics of why the .444 can provide more killing power than the .45-70, when shooting basically equal-weight bullets at basically the same velocity. But then I haven't found much difference in killing power with a bunch of cartridges!

Bugger,

All of which is why I tend to prefer single-shots over lever-actions with larger rounds: There isn't any problem with "action length."

When repeat shots MIGHT be required, as I noted earlier somebody who really knows how to work a bolt-action can fire aimed repeat shots just as fast as with a lever-action. If really fast repeat shots are needed, then either a pump or double-barrel is faster.

Where lever-actions really shine is when firing LOTS of rounds without reloading the tube magazine, their original reason for being--back when their primary cartridges were short, so a lot could fit in am under-barrel tube magazine. That's still a valid purpose with rimfires, but the basic fact remains that reloading a tube magazine takes considerable time--one reason it didn't take long for them to be bypassed as military rifles, their primary original purpose.

When repeat shots MIGHT be required, as I noted earlier somebody who really knows how to work a bolt-action can fire aimed repeat shots just as fast as with a lever-action. If really fast repeat shots are needed, then either a pump or double-barrel is faster.

How about someone that really knows how to use A lever action compare to A average bolt user. Lever guns are faster.

OK I get the point here that for shooting mulitiple magazines in a gun fight there are better actions than levers. But think about it, for a hunting rifle where you may have 3-6 shots at a running deer, the lever gun is hard to beat. You are working the lever which is close to the action, which is to me conducive to better accuracy because you don't get out of position with a lever. With a pump or even a bolt gun you get more out of position shot to shot. With a lever you just use your right hand or left if you're a lefty and stroke downward and back up to the same position. And in a hunting situation your return to battery is quicker and all your motion is more repetitive. Having said all that I'm a bolt guy. I try to kill on my first shot.

Filaman,

Sorry to put it bluntly, but BS.

The pump-action is fastest not only to cycle, but you don't have to remove your finger from the trigger. While some lever-actions have the trigger in the lever mechanism, most don't.

Working a lever-action requires pulling the lever down, which unless the trigger is part of the lever mechanism tends to push the buttstock down on the shoulder--especially with a rifle chambered for a longer cartridge, which requires a longer lever-throw, often even in front of the trigger. Which is exactly why so many early lever-actions had curved metal buttplates, which tend to keep the butt in the same place on the shoulder. But except for "classic" reproductions, curved buttplates are very rare--and on harder-kicking rifles tend to hurt the shoulder.

In contrast, a pump-action allows the shooter's finger to stay on the trigger, and the forward push on the forend also brings the rifle down from recoil. Which is why lever-action shotguns quickly became essentially extinct: Pumps were a LOT faster. Which is one reason so many professional trick-shot artists used them, instead of lever actions.

I don't carry a lever action Big Game rifle because it is any quicker, I am a Sheep hunter, quick doesn't matter, narrow does and because the BLR takes down , I do this regularly.
The new Miroku model 94 does as well.
I really like the old leverguns too, but I always wanted a takedown hunting rifle and after seeing a European hunter with one. I decided to get a takedown BLR.
More rifles should be available in takedown models, imo. It is nice putting it away in a dry pack when you need to.

What is your BLR chambered In? I have a non takedown 358 Win that sure is fun to shoot. Had another BLR in the past and love how they handle in the field.

m d you cant please every body .some body all ways knows more you . just ask them. any way I read most of what you wright a bunch don't interest me it is not your fault . just my interest is different I enjoyed your wright up on that 35rem bear hunter in alaska

44mc,

Glad you liked the .35 Remington article!

I realized long ago that not every reader would care about a wide range of subjects. But once reason I like to write about a bunch of different subjects (whether overall or about rifles) is that opening my mind to different subjects forces me to keep learning.

Have observed over the years that most hunters tend to make up their mind about what they prefer between ages 30 and 40. After that they quit learning. I like rifles, not just pre-'64 Model 70 Winchesters, or lever-actions, or cartridges that appeared before World War II, or whatever. As as result I often buy rifles that are outside my experience in some way, partly because they provide another subject to write about, but perhaps more to learn new stuff. Which is why my two most recent rifles are a custom, synthetic-stocked 6.5 PRC and an 1866 Springfield "trapdoor" .50-70. While not many readers are interested in both, I will learn something from each rifle, and hopefully be able to explain what I learned well enough for some readers to be interested as well--even if they have no desire to own either rifle.

Mule Deer,
Any thoughts on the Sako Finnwolf? I've been lusting for one for a while, but haven't been able to find one up here.

Have only seen a few in my lifetime, and never owned a Finnwolf, much less fired one. So dunno!

I have a couple in 243 and 308, and they are exceptional rifles. They look a lot like the Winchester model 88, but are better made. They are quite accurate and work very well. I have been helping Mike Venturino with an article on these rifles that should be done for "Rifle" magazine in the next few months...

Shrapnel,
I look forward to the article, and that is one beautiful rifle!