/lgg/ levergun general - kill some injuns edition

Thread theme https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PYI09PMNazw

File: 1.jpg (6KB, 500x115px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 500x115px

I've been looking to get the Henry Big Boy Steel rifle but I prefer the loading gate over the tube magazine, is there a rifle out there similar in design to the Henry with a loading gate or should I just get over it and get the Henry?

>>33745465
should i put a buttpad on my rossi? buttstock is too curvy imo.

>>33743639
>his son mark

the first wesley

>>33745465
>similar in design to the Henry

in what way?

>>33745597
Mostly every way, I like its look, shape, the steel finish, and I hear they are really enjoyable to shoot
The only thing I'm on the fence about is the tube magazine because I have a preference to loading gates.

>>33745528
kek'd

File: tmp_29695-DSC_0008_71122524186.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

Do lever action shotguns count?

File: Sitting_bull_by_W_Notman_1885.png (1MB, 817x1060px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 817x1060px

Hey, Injuns like leverguns too!

File: 1873-carbine-rifle-19-in-44-mag.png (138KB, 1004x353px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1004x353px

>>33745701

File: IMG_3608.jpg (505KB, 3264x863px) Image search: [Google]

505KB, 3264x863px

.444 Marlin. So fun

>>33745465
Tube feed is as good or better than a loading gate. At least for the applications people actually use leverguns for, which are going to the range, hunting, or blasting varmints. Yes, tube loading is mildly slower, but you're not at the Little Bighorn and nobody's going to scalp you if you can't reload fast enough, so who cares? The Big Boy holds 7-10 rounds depending on the caliber. If you need to reload a seven-round rifle to kill a deer, there's something seriously wrong, and it's not your rifle's loading system.

File: the ride never ends.jpg (231KB, 863x752px) Image search: [Google]

231KB, 863x752px

>>33745974
>Tube feed is as good or better than a loading gate.

File: 024-scul.jpg (38KB, 341x454px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 341x454px

>>33745974
>Tube feed is as good or better than a loading gate.

>>33745981
>>33746014
You know how I know you've never actually used a loading gate?

(Hint: It has to do with a lack of boo-boos on your hands from gate edges or overly stiff springs that have to be shortened before you can actually get a round in reliably)

File: laughing padawans.png (561KB, 854x740px) Image search: [Google]

561KB, 854x740px

>>33746048
>he doesn't know proper technique for using a loading gate

File: IMG_4442.jpg (297KB, 1842x999px) Image search: [Google]

297KB, 1842x999px

>>33746048

>>33745768
What is this and how do I get one?

File: 029-scul.jpg (32KB, 341x454px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 341x454px

>>33746048
>boo-boos on your hands from gate edges

File: maxresdefault.jpg (49KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 1280x720px

Still not seeing the "loading gate is better" argument other than muh tradition and muh cowboy movies.

>>33746217
Still not seeing the "disassembling your fucking magazine to reload it is better" argument besides muh fat figers and muh having the coordination of an infant with fetal alcohol syndrome

>>33746089
Uzkon lever action shotgun. Depends on what country you live in

>>33746250
>Still not seeing the "disassembling your fucking magazine to reload it is better" argument besides muh fat figers and muh having the coordination of an infant with fetal alcohol syndrome
It's mechanically simpler with no downsides that are relevant to its current uses.

Convince me not to buy this
>caliber and barrel length that I want
>$200 cheaper than I usually see
http://www.gunbroker.com/item/639025779
Also how hot can I load for it?

>>33746515
>Also how hot can I load for it?

It's still a toggle link action, so I wouldn't go overboard.

>>33746433
>no downsides that are relevant to its current uses.

Also true of a single shot rifle. Punches holes in paper just as well and is much, much simpler.

Heck, even a bolt action rifle is simpler, and has wider applications.

A lever action rifle is bought, presumably, because one has an interest in historical weapons and their use. My mauser wouldn't be the same if I had to screw off the baseplate to reload it, despite the fact that that wouldn't really stop me from shooting paper with it. I don't see why I'd put up with it in a different type of gun.

>>33746530
Right, but I was told that I could use slower pistol powders or fast rifle powders to get higher velocities, do you think that would be a good idea?

been thinking about a rossi 92, but i've heard they can take a lot of work to get running smooth.
also not sure which caliber to go for.

>>33746534
So, muh tradition and muh cowboy movies, just like I said. Which, hey - if that's your thing, fine. But that doesn't make a loading gate a better system for any rational or practical reason - it's entirely emotional.

>>33746660
The entire point of owning a lever action is interest in either the history or the pop culture lore of the old west.

That said, if you do use your lever action for practical purposes too, the loading gate is easier to load while walking, sitting, crouching, laying, or otherwise not being at a bench on a shooting range.

>>33746677
>That said, if you do use your lever action for practical purposes too, the loading gate is easier to load while walking, sitting, crouching, laying, or otherwise not being at a bench on a shooting range.
Okay, so what's your scenario for having to reload while doing any of that? Again, if you have to reload a seven-round rifle to kill a deer, you've got bigger issues than what loading system your rifle uses.

>>33746694
Shooting anywhere there's not a bench would be the only """practical""" one, but like I said, I wouldn't put up with having to unscrew my Mauser's base plate to reload it despite the fact that I'm never going to use it in anger or need more than 5 shots at once, so I don't see why I should put up with it in a lever action just because... because...

Wait is there a reason?

>the level people will go to in an attempt to justify not having a loading gate

>>33746713
>Wait is there a reason?
Because it's mechanically simpler (reducing both cost and the number of things that could break on your rifle) with no downsides that are relevant to its current uses (as opposed to keeping you from getting scalped at Washita River).

>>33746738
>Reducing cost
Henries market themselves as a premium brand, and they seem like nice rifles though, for obvious reasons, I've never owned one. Given that a $300 Mossberg can manage a gate, I doubt the savings are that incredible, or if they are they're certainly not being passsed on to the consumer.
>Reduced complexity means less can go wrong
Why exactly did you buy a lever action again? They do have bolt actions these days you know.

You know, they actually make (or at least used to make) lever action guns with no magazine at all. It's just single shot gun that you drop the cartridge in through the top. That's probably simpler still. Why not one of those?

>>33745974
>you should choose an objectively worse system because you don't REALLY need the better one

Always one retard in the group which actually tries this argument

I usually use my lever action for blasting pests from the back of a ute, or while patrolling around the place, I can fire a shot or two, then easily top up while walking or being bumped around in the back of a moving vehicle

A tube feeding lever gun is absolutely not suitable for this, and has no advantage in any other way

>>33746738
>no downsides that are relevant to its current uses
tube mags sucks dick for hunting hog and tons of shit always get hung up in the barrel or mag itself whenever you try to fumble around with the gun since it basically adds an extra foot in length. sucks for being in ground blinds, absolute nightmare balancing that shit when you're in a treestand etc. Also no one wants to see some guy pulling apart his gun as it makes people uncomfortable since the muzzle is in a weird direction and the gun isn't being held in a "safe" aka normal manner.

keep your range use arguments where they belong, on the range. refrain from posting dumb fuck comments about Indians too as the way they attacked settlers wouldn't have shown a benefit to either system.

>>33746677
>entire point of owning a lever action...

How about they are just fun too shoot? Does that count?

>it's another "I've never used a lever gun but not having a gate means it's useless" episode

Loading gates are fine. Tube fed is fine, too.

>>33747663
>Tube fed is fine

For rimfire guns, sure. Anything bigger than that, and tube feed is a joke.

>>33746048
>boo boos on your hand from the gate edges
holy fuck you are retarded

File: waynebieber.gif (2MB, 500x268px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 500x268px

>>33745777

Trips checked

File: 3425rclose.jpg (72KB, 700x465px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 700x465px

Guys I'm looking for a lever-action rifle that is more or less as simple as the Chiappa LA 322 on the inside.
I'm considering the Chiappa now, but I want to know if there's anything that loads from the side of the receiver like larger calibers do, without having to step up to expensive ammo.
.38 Spc. costs 280 Euros per 1000 rds. while .22LR costs 61,5 Euros per 1000 rds.

Should I just deal with the tube loading or are there any other affordable options ?
And can all .357 Magnum LA rifles shoot .38 ?

>>33747615
>tube mags sucks dick for hunting hog

Again, if you need to reload a seven-shot rifle to kill a hog, your rifle's reloading system is the least of your issues and will be the least of the reasons why the rest of your hunting party is laughing at you.

>and tons of shit always get hung up in the barrel or mag itself whenever you try to fumble around with the gun since it basically adds an extra foot in length. sucks for being in ground blinds, absolute nightmare balancing that shit when you're in a treestand etc. Also no one wants to see some guy pulling apart his gun as it makes people uncomfortable since the muzzle is in a weird direction and the gun isn't being held in a "safe" aka normal manner.

In other words, you're incapable of figuring out a way to reload a rifle without endangering the lives of everyone around you.

>keep your range use arguments where they belong, on the range. refrain from posting dumb fuck comments about Indians too as the way they attacked settlers wouldn't have shown a benefit to either system.

As opposed to Wounded Knee, in which the Army bravely used a battery of Hotchkiss guns against starving women and children.

>>33748371
>For rimfire guns, sure. Anything bigger than that, and tube feed is a joke.
And the reason for this is...? I mean the logical reason, not "It wasn't in muh cowboy movies".

>>33746048
>boo-boos on your hands from gate edges
You know how I know you're autistic?

>>33746694
While I'm partial to the Henry because of its history, style, and being American made I do believe the loading gate is generally more efficient. Personally I could see using a Big Boy in either .44 Mag or .45-70, the latter of which only holds 4 rounds.

>>33751510
The original Henry design is fine. It's the .22 design they upscaled for bigger cartridges that people have problems with.

>>33751392
>I have never hunted hogs

>>33751958
Not him, but barring a supressor, how many shots are you getting off before the entire sounder bolts?

>>33751921
You mean turning the tab versus taking out the tube? Any idea why they decided to change that to begin with?

I need a .357 rifle but don't want a Henry or Rossi. An old Marlin would be nice. What's a fair price for a JM stamped model?

>>33752560
Tube mags work.

Tube mags where you have to load them by removing the tube, like the Henry and most .22's have their drawbacks. Dent one sometime. Now you can't even remove the tube to clear the gun. Your hand will 99% of the time get in front of the muzzle when loading one- and- think about this- this is a gun meant for a beginner.

On balance, .22 tube mag components are easy to come by, from Brownells or Midway.

Henry...who knows. I won't own one because they look like an overweight girl with a club foot. Sure, maybe that pussy is good, but it's still an overweight girl with a club foot.

I have a Post-64 Montgomery Wards version of the '94, and a Marlon Model 336 A, which is sweet. My total investment in those two is about $227.00. Look around at pawn shops and the used rack. Most shooters, er, tactical gimmick consumers- are busy buying lowers these days.

>>33752696
Interesting, thanks for the tips. Next time I'm around one I'll check it out.

>>33752696
I don't have any problem with the tube mag in a .22 because a .22 is a .22 and they're like $300 with relatively good quality otherwise.

The original Henry 1860 style of loading is good by me too since it's how an actual weapon was loaded, and is not that bad of a system if you're not planning to lay down in mud and dirt a bunch with it.

On the other hand, I don't see how someone can spend 1k to drop .30-30 or .45-70 into one of those little bullet-shaped cutouts and not feel like they've purchased a very expensive toy in place of a gun.

I will die unfulfilled if I don't own a Winchester model 1895 in my lifetime. Damn, why do they have to be so expensive? I'll blow $2k on just about any other rifle and not bat an eyelash, but I just can't bring myself to pony up for a nice one of these.

>>33746089
Ban-country compromise of a compromise.

If you live in the US, you don't.

>>33746694
Let's see..
>shooting on private land or anywhere other than a commercial range
>hunting (be it stalking or treestand or riding in the back of a truck genociding pigs), since out of the approximately 50 game animals and over 200 nongame animals in North America that can be legally shot with a centerfire rifle, only 6 have a 1 per [time frame] requirement ANYWHERE and many states don't even have that
>as a ranch rifle/truck gun
>on horseback
So...once again, pretty much anything anybody is even capable of doing with a rifle that isn't sitting at a bench at a commercial range.

>>33751921
>The original Henry design is fine.

Yeah, and then 6 years later Winchester took that design and made it a million times better by giving it a loading gate and a forestock.

>>33746539
Are you an experienced reloader (and I mean genuinely experienced, not "I've been doing WWB clones for 3 months") that has access to Quickload or a piezoelectric pressure gauge?

It's possible to get some pretty crazy velocities out of older revolver rounds when fired through rifle barrels by tinkering with which powder you use, and doing so without breaking SAAMI max pressure. But it's tricky, and gains over SAAMI-spec book loads aren't as high as you'd think. I'd also never shoot one out of a revolver so you'd have to segregate the ammo if you owned multiple guns in it.

File: IMG_0233.jpg (270KB, 800x1108px) Image search: [Google]

270KB, 800x1108px

>>33745777
Indeed. Who doesn't?

>>33746738
>reducing the number of things that could break on your rifle
Lets see...
On the one hand you have a loading-gate rifle with a 5-piece magazine (mag tube, mag spring, loading gate, loading gate spring, shell catch). Every part is tempered steel.

On the other hand you have a tube loading rifle with a 5-piece magazine (mag tube, inner tube, mag spring, shell catch, cross pin). The very thin inner tube is aluminum and the cross pin isn't tempered.

Now. With one you will never have to remove any part of it from the rifle. With the other you have to take the long, thin-walled hollow aluminum tube clean out of the gun, exposing the (plastic) follower.

People bend, dent, or otherwise render nonfunctional this tube LITERALLY EVERY SINGLE DAY, not to mention break or lose the plastic follower that's only retained by a shallow crimp.

People simply don't break loading gates. They may wear out with time and lots and lots of use, but it's not something that's permanently broken by dropping it on concrete or carelessly whacking it against a table or tree.

File: IMG_20170424_203749.jpg (506KB, 2486x1108px) Image search: [Google]

506KB, 2486x1108px

I love me some levers. Wouldn't mind upgrading at some point, but one's been putting venison into the dehydrator every year, the other has been defending against the squirrelpocalypse with nail driving accuracy

94 Ranger 30-30
96/22 Ruger

>>33752964
Exactly. Choosing the Henry is like choosing the first Apple product because it didn't use a mouse.

>>33745826
ooo, ooo, ooo. Can I come over some time?

I've only been able to fingerfuck a consignment at the LGS - loved the short stroke lever, but not fond of the trigger (to be fair, it was dirty as fuck from what I could see)

>>33753041
So first it was "I'm incapable of killing an animal I'm hunting in under seven tries", then it was "I'm incapable of loading my rifle without endangering people around me", and now it's "I'm incapable of loading my rifle without damaging it".

Yeah, I'm beginning to see the problem here. You're right - don't buy an expensive Henry rifle.Buy some beater piece of shit, or better yet, don't buy any guns at all.

>>33753370
Don't suppose it ever crossed your mind that you're arguing against multiple people?

Blows my mind that people actually defend tube loading, its worse in every single way

What possible shooting situation is made easier by pulling the fucking magazine apart and either balancing it out the end or holding onto it in some other way, while having hold your rifle upside down and at an angle while dropping the rounds in, (also eliminating the ability to top up the magazine easily)

rather than simply pushing the rounds in from a normal shooting position

The only advantage is not dealing with spring tension which is pretty minor to every other massive draw back

>>33743591
>injuns
>not refering to them as godless heathens or savages
Git gud and dawn your union blues.

>>33753460
>Blows my mind that people actually defend tube loading, its worse in every single way

It's a pretty common habit among fanboys. They've at least partially defined their identity around a particular product, and so they must defend it to the death because it represents themselves.

>>33753457
>Don't suppose it ever crossed your mind that you're arguing against multiple people?
They all have the same argument, so who cares?
>>33753460
>What possible shooting situation is made easier by pulling the fucking magazine apart and either balancing it out the end or holding onto it in some other way, while having hold your rifle upside down and at an angle while dropping the rounds in, (also eliminating the ability to top up the magazine easily)
So... you've never loaded a pump shotgun? Because it's damn near the same thing - point the gun in a safe direction, flip it over, and put the rounds in.

Wanna know how I know you're a noguns who learned about firearms from playing vidya?

>>33753370
You keep listing reasons why the advantages of a loading gate aren't that big of a deal, and you haven't given any reason why tube loading is better

You aren't doing a very good job of convincing everyone here that tube loading is better by saying "loading gate is better but the advantages aren't a big deal"

>>33753566
I don't think you've ever touched a pump-action shotgun if you think it is in any similar to tube loading.

>>33753571
>You keep listing reasons why the advantages of a loading gate aren't that big of a deal, and you haven't given any reason why tube loading is better
Yes, I have. Twice already. Scroll up.

>>33753566
That's a straight up retarded comparison to make, a pump action loads the same fucking way as a lever gun with a loading gate, easily slipping rounds in from a natural shooting position. You don't remove the fucking magazine spring and hold it somehow, then drop shells in from the front of the gun.

Still waiting to hear how tube loading is overall better than a loading gate

>>33745777
Yeah, Custer found that out the hard way.

>>33753605
>I don't think you've ever touched a pump-action shotgun if you think it is in any similar to tube loading.
Tube loading involves an extra step that should be no problem unless you're a spastic doofus who has no coordination whatsoever. Other than that, it's pretty much the same damn thing - point the gun in a safe direction, flip it over, and put the rounds in. The fact that you talk about tube loading like it was brain surgery tells me more about you than it does about it.

>>33745826
lever guns with scopes just don't look right.

>>33753642
>Still waiting to hear how tube loading is overall better than a loading gate
Still waiting for you to scroll up to where I said it twice already.

>>33753636
"It's mechanically simpler" its a fucking flappy bit of metal which you push rounds through, one extra moving part. nothing about it is more complicated or prone to failure than any other part of the rifle.

My car would be mechanically simpler without power steering, aircon, ABS, electronic fuel injection etc. that doesn't mean any sane person would prefer a car without these features because one of them could possibly fail at some point.

>>33753746
>"It's mechanically simpler" its a fucking flappy bit of metal which you push rounds through, one extra moving part. nothing about it is more complicated or prone to failure than any other part of the rifle.

Even better, the loading gates removes the need for the easily damaged inner magazine tube.

>>33753746
>"It's mechanically simpler" its a fucking flappy bit of metal which you push rounds through, one extra moving part. nothing about it is more complicated or prone to failure than any other part of the rifle.
>My car would be mechanically simpler without power steering, aircon, ABS, electronic fuel injection etc. that doesn't mean any sane person would prefer a car without these features because one of them could possibly fail at some point.
Wanna know how I know you've never actually even seen a levergun IRL? It's the fact that you've apparently never heard of anyone complaining about a stiff loading gate, or one that won't feed right, or that pinches their fingers, or that needs its spring adjusted. Because that's a complaint you'll hear *constantly* about leverguns.

>>33753787
>Even better, the loading gates removes the need for the easily damaged inner magazine tube.
Also, not being a spastic idiot removes the possibility of damaging your rifle while trying to reload it.

File: 30-30-2.jpg (3MB, 5184x3456px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 5184x3456px

no sure if i should get another 30-30 so i can actually shoot 30-30 or a 45-70 next.

>>33753697
"An extra step"
You mean unclipping the mag spring, balancing the mag spring hanging out the front or holding it between your legs or wherever else you can, holding your rifle in a certain position and dropping rounds in from the front of the rifle, then sliding the mag spring back and clipping it in. And if you fire off a round or two and want to top the mag up, you need to do it all over again.

As opposed to slipping a round into the receiver right next to your hand which can be done from any angle

your argument here is literally "the objectively worse system is better because it's still usable"

>>33753867
>You mean unclipping the mag spring, balancing the mag spring hanging out the front or holding it between your legs or wherever else you can, holding your rifle in a certain position and dropping rounds in from the front of the rifle, then sliding the mag spring back and clipping it in.

Yup. None of which is hard to do if you aren't a spazz.

>And if you fire off a round or two and want to top the mag up, you need to do it all over again.

Again, 7-10 in the Big Boy. How many do you need to kill a hog or a deer? If the answer is more than that, please stop owning firearms.

File: 2016-02-06 23.08.35.jpg (3MB, 5312x2988px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 5312x2988px

1968 Winchester 94 .30-30
1951 Winchester Model 61 .22 s/l/lr (yeah I know not a lever gun)
Henry Bigboy .357/.38

>>33753810
Never had issues like this on my model 94 or 92, and if I did, I can easily fix it.

I do have an issue with my browning bl22 when I'm wandering around shooting rabbits. and that's the fact that I can't easily top it up after I've had a few shots, I have to stop walking, clear the rifle and catch the live round. Hold it upright and remove the mag spring, stick it between my legs and drop rounds in from the top like a retard. It's a .22 though so I don't have any other option. But it makes me glad to have my model 92 with a loading gate which I can top up without even looking at it, rather than a Henry which I'd have to do the same retarded ass routine that I do with the browning.

>>33753913
You're still using the argument of "my objectively worse rifle is better because it's still usable despite being objectively worse"

Not everyone hunts for meat, some people cull feral animals from a moving vehicle where being able to top up without disassembling their rifle is essential.

Would you buy a car which didn't have any doors, and you had to open the boot to slide in and out of it? Your logic is "yes, because it's mechanically simpler and not that hard"

File: laughing asari.jpg (76KB, 500x474px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 500x474px

>this one desperate Henryfag trying to convince himself that his rifle hasn't been hopelessly outdated for 150 years

File: Rio Bravo.jpg (272KB, 3000x606px) Image search: [Google]

272KB, 3000x606px

>tfw you know a large loop 1892 is stupid but you want one anyways

>>33753041
Some whitesmithing could probably make a worn out gate work again, although it wouldn't be pretty.

>>33752690
I picked one up for around $850 a few months back. Love it, I'm getting some leather for it soon.

>>33745465
You mean every rifle after the OG henry. Really depends on what you wanna pay. I would go with Beretta/Uberti/Taylors/Cimarron etc since they actually look right, have better options and are built extremely well

>>33746061
what is it, help me, explain it to me please

>>33753370
You have literally never seen a driven hog hunt have you? You can wrap your head around the idea that it's not just sitting in a tree waiting for a perfect shot and that it not uncommon for dozens of pigs to be taken in one outing, nor is it safe to hunt large groups of large, powerful tusked animals

>>33753566
A pump shotgun uses a loading gate though and you can do it with one hand while the gun is slung if you really want

>>33753913
>None of which is hard to do if you aren't a spazz.
You mean as easy as not pinching your finger on a loading gate because using the next cartridge has always been the solution. If it were purely a matter of coordination as you imply, using a tube loader still requires more work than a loading gate, so tell me again why it's actually superior

File: 1873-special-sporting-rifle_2.png (494KB, 2000x704px) Image search: [Google]

494KB, 2000x704px

talk me out of getting this is .357 and adding a tang peep sight

This sounds like a gun sin but bear with me, a mares leg or carbine, with an integrally suppressed barrel. For hd you could easily manuver it around corners, also comfortably shoot .44mag 357 mag. It could also be a good truck gun.
Suppressors on levergats looks good awful and sounds cringey, but they actually suppress quiet well.
So you get to pack the punch of those big pistol calibers in a semi small package that doesn't blow your ears out and you can get a comfortable follow up shot with

>>33755101
>integrally suppressed barrel

so where is the magazine going to go?

>>33753571
>>33753746
>>33753810
Jesus Christ, all of you autists shitting up this thread.

This is coming from someone with no particular brand loyalty. I've had Henrys and Winchesters and Marlins and like them all. The loading gate is better for topping things off. It has more practical application when you're shooting a lot or hog hunting and you need to top off your rifle on the go. The tube feed method, however, isn't some clunky and broken thing. It works, and it works well, as long as you do what any responsible gun owner does and take the time to get to know your guns manual of arms and practice using it. The loading tube is legit faster to load and unload once you get it down. It's just fine for plinking and range duty and hunting bigger game where you're not sending more than a few rounds downrange anyways. It is perfectly fine for certain applications. I get it if some people have actually tried the loading tube and don't like it. No biggie, it's your choice, and stick with what you like. But for the love of Jesus quite being such a god damn sperg about it. Both sides have their advantages and disadvantages. Ultimately they come down to personal preference and what you have fun with. Stop being such goddamn autists about a reloading system and just post some sexy lever raifus and quit shitting up my thread.

>>33745465
Marlin 336

>>33755275
>all of you autists

Glass houses and all that, sperglord.

>>33754937
sounds like you're better off with a standard capacity semi auto salt raifu at that point anyways. a low-cap lever gun is kinda retarded for that

>>33755287
I'm not the one filling up the thread with the same pointless debate that seems to find its way in here every time a /lgg/ thread is up.

loading gate / tube is more or less a subjective thing. Again, I see the merits of both and they have different applications.

>>33752488
> Late to reply, and not him but. . .

I can normally get off 3 shots before they get too far. They normally run about 15 yards, stop to see if danger has passed, then rinse repeat.

>>33755275
>all of you autists

You mean one Henry autist doing mental gymnastics to convince himself that tube loading is superior.

>>33755311
>I'm not the one filling up the thread with the same pointless debate that seems to find its way in here every time a /lgg/ thread is up.

Really? 'Cause it seems like you are.

>>33746217

It's faster and you don't have to break contact between your shoulder and the stock to reload. What is there to argue?

>>33746539
Unless you are a very experienced hand loader, just use the slowest pistol powders that you can find published load data for, a 44mag with a charge of 2400 or h110 will gain more from a long barrel than the faster powder that produces the same velocity in a short revolver barrel.
I have found 44mag data for use with h4198, but it was very old.

>>33754124
>there are leverfags that think their funs are anything but cool collectables in 2017.
Lmao all lever guns are outdated. Cuck

>>33753370
>Says the guy incapable of not pinching his fat sausage fingers in a loading gate

>>33747401
>drop rounds into magazine instead of pushing against spring pressure
>no advantages

>>33751392
>Again, if you need to reload a seven-shot rifle to kill a hog
>kill a hog
>a hog
>a
Fuck you're retarded.

>>33753370
>Yeah, I'm beginning to see the problem here
That your favoured type of rifle has multiple different issues that even slightly more modern designs don't have to deal with?

>>33753913
>How many do you need to kill a hog
>kill a hog
>a hog
>a
You did it again!

>>33746048
>he doesn't know how to push the rounds in using other rounds

>>33757268
>Letting the cartridges touch
That's like going ass to mouth

>>33755311
>loading gate / tube is more or less a subjective thing
No, it isn't, as is reflected by the fact that loading gates very quickly took over from tube loading and that nobody ever even bothered to make a pump-action shotgun that loaded in the same retarded way as the henry did, they just loading gate models. It's an obsolete technology, why don't you start arguing for binging back flintlocks while you're at it they have their advantages too technically.

>>33757276
*they just did loading gate models

>>33753141
>96/22
just found a new cool gun, thats sweet

File: 7-gh006mml_1.jpg (10KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 480x480px

Anyone want to bet Henry is coming out with an all-weather for the mare's legs?

>mfw /k/anuck and the smallest gun is the mares leg (so pretty too)

>>33757276
Dude, arguing over whether a certain feature is obsolete or not is pretty irrelevant considering that the firearm we're talking about had become obsolete by the early 1900s.

>>33746660
The only reason Henry uses a tube mag is because its cheaper to make, God your retarded

>>33751401
Because if you want to do cowboy action shooting good luck reloading on the fly

File: 1488210980490.png (13KB, 555x407px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 555x407px

>>33752863
>1895
I feel you

I'm just gonna settle for a BLR in 7mm rem mag and a long ranger in .243

>>33759281
See, that there is a sensible argument for a loading gate.

Get what you get to suit your purposes and needs.