Advice on Lever Action

[Stix]

Ok...so i want a lever action...Just for plinking & fun, with maybe a little hunting.

Im thinking an old Win 32-20, maybe an 1892 (i only say that because ive shouldered & shot them & quite enjoyed it ).

But as a general rule i know nothing about them (levers in general, not even differences even in winchester models), particularly on what to look for when it comes to what may be dodgy. (for example are some actions known for being unreliable, buy one thats been rebarreled or original..or even what price constitutes being ripped off etc.

Adverts on abused guns etc vary quite considerably in price, for what (to the untrained eye) appear to be much the same condition rifle going by the description , so,
Can anyone give any advice on what to look for, what brand &/or models to avoid. (im not a fan of Marlin, for no reason other than i dont think they are as good looking as the Winchesters, but i wont completely discount them either).

I realise its a big question to answer, but even any very brief opinions of what you like & why would be greatly appreciated

(I am a reloader, so fully intend to roll my own & im really looking forward to experimenting here & im terribly desperate to get one in my arms & start killing those pesky soft drink & beer cans )

Thanks in advance.

[Mick280]

How much do you want to spend mate?

[Stix]

Hmmm...
Well to get a bargain would be great, but in reality im happy to spend a fair amount for any given gun.

Ideally sub 1k, but will consider more based on the individual...(based on used prices i see on the net--if i need to consider more i will)

[bladeracer]

If you want to be able to shoot cast bullets don't get the Microgroove Marlins, pay extra and get the CB models.
If there's any chance you might want to scope it, the side-eject actions generally work better with scopes than top-eject. Top-eject also tend to toss the brass around.
Another significant difference is how they load. I quite like being able to load and unload via the loading gate, although I understand some lever actions don't allow unloading via the gate. I can't get used to loading a rifle from the muzzle, at least not without a ramrod

[Mick280]

Stick with the mainstream pistol calibers if you are going to be doing some plinking as well as hunting,I think they will prove more versatile and brass is easy to come by!!
Eg: .357 Mag - .44 Mag - .45 Colt.
I'm a huge fan of Winchesters ( Originals and Miroku built )
I use an 1892 for both Single Action and a bit of scrub hunting and wouldn't even try to guess the amount of rounds it's had through it trouble free!!
Mick

[No1_49er]

I prefer Marlins because of the ease of takedown for cleaning.
If it's a rimfire, undo the takedown screw and split the action. Job done, now clean the barrel.
Centrefire? Remove the lever screw, slide the bolt out, insert chamber/rod guide and clean.
Try that with your 92.
BTW, the use of lead in microgroove barrels being a problem is a bit of a furphy. As with a lot of info' on loading with lead, it's a learning curve. Projectile sizing, hardness, gas check?, crimp or no crimp, type of powder - where to stop. And was it ever a problem in the microgroove M39 rimfire? Nope.
Go Marlin.

[marksman]

I like the blr brownings for a hunting lever gun, owned one in 30-06 was a real good gun but I sold it, money talks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGrXb18vF-o
but if I were to want a classic for fun it would be a winny commemorative
probably in dirty 30
the commemorative's are just made better and usually not flogged out

[Mick280]

I like the blr brownings for a hunting lever gun, owned one in 30-06 was a real good gun but I sold it, money talks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGrXb18vF-o
but if I were to want a classic for fun it would be a winny commemorative
probably in dirty 30
the commemorative's are just made better and usually not flogged out

A BLR in .223 is next on my list!!
True on the Commemorative,I have a Legendary Frontiersman in 38/55 and it's a real pleasure to shoot!!

[bigrich]

well stix old mate, i've had winchester '94 and marlin 336 both in 30-30. the winchester was a really clean one from 1974 with no saftey. . hammer was cocked or uncocked, simple. winchesters are slimmer and more pointable than the marlin and have two locking lugs at the rear of the bolt. i loved it in using it, but being a bit ocd, found it a lot more mucking around to clean. as No1-49er points out with a marlin you take out one screw and the marlin is apart in seconds . 30-30 was a okay round , but as mick280 points out pistol calibers, especially 357, are cheap to shoot. i got rid of my '94 cause i didn't want to ruin it , looks as well as the "balance", by mounting a scope to compensate for my eyes. it was a top eject as well. i tried a scope on my marlin and it was as heavy as a bolt action. i was looking at these as a scrub/ute type gun, tried a cva scout single shot in 45-70, decided i wanted a rifle with the ability of a quick follow up shot should i need it,scope mounted, good "punch", compact, cheap to shoot accurate carbine. hence i now have a 308 ruger scout on it's way. will probably get a five round mag as the ten shot hangs out to much for my liking. if i had good eyes, i'd probably still have that '94 30-30 but. ya don't need a sling as they are a nice light, portable, balanced well built gun. model '92 in 357, 38 would be the choice for a plinker, 357 is more accurate than 44 i'm told . these guns are popular so they can be harder to find for sale at times than a 30-30 .just a few thoughts mate . cheers

[in2anity]

Hi Stix - Marlins and Winchesters are considered the best in lever circles. As Blade has pointed out - steer clear of microgroove marlins if you plan to shoot cast - they can be made to shoot cast alright, but it's basically an uphill battle. They just don't stabilize lead properly. They might look promising at 50m, but stretching them out will see accuracy un-intuitively go out the window. If you carefully analyse your targets looking for yawing you can actually see hints of this. Do yourself a favor, don't go there.

As yu probably know, Marlins come pre-drilled and tapped to take a rail, making them a cinch to scope. This makes the early stages of load development a lot easier - but eventually becomes irrelevant if you plan to settle on irons. This leads on to the next big point - sight radius. Marlins aren't really designed to take a tang - sure it can be done, but a hole needs to be drilled into the tang to take the second screw - and sometimes the serial number is situated here complicating the matter. Furthermore, the shape of the Marlin stock is generally not conducive to a fold-down mid-range tang, and over time may well dent the timber. So with Marlins most people simply mount an aperture receiver in front of the hammer - this sacrifices sight radius. And believe me, the longer the sight radius, the more accurately you can shoot. Once you shoot a long sight radius rifle and then go back to a 16" or even 20" you really notice this hindrance.

So on to Winchesters; Winchesters are the bomb. They are solid, reliable, accurate and well suited to iron sights. The reason for this is the 1892 is more designed to take a tang. A 24" Winchester with a rear tang/vernier can be shot VERY accurately. This is probably the most popular combo in silly-wet. Just remember though, a heavily recoiling gun makes using a tang a little trickier.

I suppose this leads on to caliber choice- IMO there's not really any practical need to go bigger than the 30/30 - sure 44mag and 45/70 are novel, but big pills like that are not something that's smart to plink with all day long (for a variety of arguable reasons). Calibers like the 25-20, 32-20, 357 are really popular due to their mild recoil (and cost-effectiveness). Whatever you go with, make sure you get a formal report on the barrel condition using a bore-scope - accuracy starts with the barrel and a lot of the old winchesters will suffer from pitting (resulting in sub par accuracy).

FWIW the two refurb 25-20 winnies on abused guns seem pretty reasonable...

[No1_49er]

Winchesters are the bomb. They are solid, reliable, accurate and well suited to iron sights. The reason for this is the 1892 is more designed to take a tang. A 24" Winchester with a rear tang/vernier can be shot VERY accurately. This is probably the most popular combo in silly-wet. Just remember though, a heavily recoiling gun makes using a tang a little trickier.

That might be a bit of a stretch. If you have a peruse of this years NRA National Championships, you will find that marlins were 74, to 47 Winchester, excluding other "lesser" rifles. Calibre 30-30Win 80, to 38-55 20. As to sights on those rifles, 77 receiver mount against 49 tang.
Whilst the numbers in the pistol cartridge matches were a bit closer to being equal, the favourite was still Marlin/Receiver.
The rimfire results are hugely in favour of Marlin, being 84 to 15 Winchester, and 77 receiver sights to 51 tang.
I'll let the numbers speak for themselves.

[in2anity]

That might be a bit of a stretch. If you have a peruse of this years NRA National Championships, you will find that marlins were 74, to 47 Winchester, excluding other "lesser" rifles. Calibre 30-30Win 80, to 38-55 20. As to sights on those rifles, 77 receiver mount against 49 tang.
Whilst the numbers in the pistol cartridge matches were a bit closer to being equal, the favourite was still Marlin/Receiver.
The rimfire results are hugely in favour of Marlin, being 84 to 15 Winchester, and 77 receiver sights to 51 tang.
I'll let the numbers speak for themselves.

I might be a tad bias also I'm coming from a pistol cartridge perspective - as your numbers show the marlins are obviously bloody popular in rifle class.

[Mick280]

That might be a bit of a stretch. If you have a peruse of this years NRA National Championships, you will find that marlins were 74, to 47 Winchester, excluding other "lesser" rifles. Calibre 30-30Win 80, to 38-55 20. As to sights on those rifles, 77 receiver mount against 49 tang.
Whilst the numbers in the pistol cartridge matches were a bit closer to being equal, the favourite was still Marlin/Receiver.
The rimfire results are hugely in favour of Marlin, being 84 to 15 Winchester, and 77 receiver sights to 51 tang.
I'll let the numbers speak for themselves.

I might be a tad bias also I'm coming from a pistol cartridge perspective - as your numbers show the marlins are obviously bloody popular in rifle class.

Yet,I shoot Single Action regularly where you will shoot 100 + rounds a day ( 60 Pistol Cal - 40 Rifle Cal ) and over the five years I've been shooting it,I reckon I could count on one hand the times I've seen a 92,94 or an 86 jam up on the line!!
The Marlins have the numbers when it comes to this also!!!

[juano86]

Rossi 92's are well priced.
got a 16" in .357 / 38 special and its a load of fun!

Have had no issues with it at all.

[Gamerancher]

Try this.
https://www.usedguns.com.au/Product.aspx?p=132435

If you reload you can load down with 10gr of trailboss behind a cast bullet for cheap, low recoil, accurate plinking or load her up to full house loads for pigs ,goats etc.

[bladeracer]

BTW, the use of lead in microgroove barrels being a problem is a bit of a furphy. As with a lot of info' on loading with lead, it's a learning curve. Projectile sizing, hardness, gas check?, crimp or no crimp, type of powder - where to stop. And was it ever a problem in the microgroove M39 rimfire? Nope.
Go Marlin.

I agree that it's a learning curve, but it's a learning curve that is not required with cut rifling.
Can you shoot soft lead bullets out of a Microgroove barrel?

[in2anity]

BTW, the use of lead in microgroove barrels being a problem is a bit of a furphy. As with a lot of info' on loading with lead, it's a learning curve. Projectile sizing, hardness, gas check?, crimp or no crimp, type of powder - where to stop. And was it ever a problem in the microgroove M39 rimfire? Nope.
Go Marlin.

I agree that it's a learning curve, but it's a learning curve that is not required with cut rifling.
Can you shoot soft lead bullets out of a Microgroove barrel?

My latest theory about this is microgroove and tighter twist barrels go hand-in-hand. The modern 336 is a 1:10 which is a little tight for lead. In contrast the cut-rifle XLR (and a winnie 94 for the matter) is only a 1:12.

[bladeracer]

My latest theory about this is microgroove and tighter twist barrels go hand-in-hand. The modern 336 is a 1:10 which is a little tight for lead. In contrast the cut-rifle XLR (and a winnie 94 for the matter) is only a 1:12.

My '94 in .44 Mag is 38"-twist according to their website. It starts to shoot respectably at around 16BHN at .432". Still nowhere near as well as it shoots jacketed though.

[Noisydad]

I’ll back the advice on original Winnie’s. I got a 1911 built 92 in .44-40 with a 24” barrel off used guns. Looks a little “old” on the outside but shoots good enough with the right sized lead and black powder to win comps. You can pick gems like that for around the 800 mark.

[Stix]

Try this.
https://www.usedguns.com.au/Product.aspx?p=132435

If you reload you can load down with 10gr of trailboss behind a cast bullet for cheap, low recoil, accurate plinking or load her up to full house loads for pigs ,goats etc.

Thanks Gamerancher... i contacted them immediately & it was already sold.

[Stix]

I notice no one has mentioned the Henry's or Rossi...im keen on the Wini's but thought id ask how the Henry's & Rossi fair...?

[Wm.Traynor]

Both my Rossi and my Mossberg were junk. Flogged the Rossi off owing to deteriorating mental health and bought the 464 Mossberg. Kept it but has cost me money and trouble to fix. Only bought the Rossi to begin with because of all the bad reports about Marlin and the great expense of Japanese take-down Winchesters.

[Gamerancher]

Honestly Stix, I don't reckon you could go wrong with something along those lines. Like I mentioned, cheap plinking loads for the .30-30 are easy and the ability to load up to tackle pigs and goats is there if you want it. Haven't had a minutes drama with any of the dozen Winchesters I own, from 120 year old Model '92 through to a 1990's build AE '94. Calibres from .32-20, .30-30, .38-55, .35 Win, .44 mag and .45 Long Colt. I've used them for hunting and competition and they have never let me down.

[bladeracer]

I notice no one has mentioned the Henry's or Rossi...im keen on the Wini's but thought id ask how the Henry's & Rossi fair...?

I still want some Rossi's in .357 and .44, but I bought the Henry .22 and the build quality doesn't impress me.

[Stix]

Thanks guys.

Another silly question...but is there anything in particular (such as age/model number) that governs things like side eject & milled receiver for scope...?
Im just wondering how one knows if any given lever rifle has these features or not...? Or is it just a case of 'you know from experience' type thing...?

[bladeracer]

Thanks guys.

Another silly question...but is there anything in particular (such as age/model number) that governs things like side eject & milled receiver for scope...?
Im just wondering how one knows if any given lever rifle has these features or not...? Or is it just a case of 'you know from experience' type thing...?

SE indicates Side-Eject or AE for Angle-Eject.
I think almost anything can run a scope, just that some are much simpler. With top eject you generally run a scout scope or offset the scope to the left side. The Henry's and Marlins should all be setup for scopes.
I know there is a scope mount for the Rossi but I don't recall how it mounts, I think it's offset.

[Daddybang]

Thanks guys.

Another silly question...but is there anything in particular (such as age/model number) that governs things like side eject & milled receiver for scope...?
Im just wondering how one knows if any given lever rifle has these features or not...? Or is it just a case of 'you know from experience' type thing...?

94 Rangers are pre drilled for scope and are an AE. Just a budget version of the 94 but still a solid lever.
2nd from left.

IMG_20180820_145845~3.jpg (1.65 MiB) Viewed 7603 times

[Gamerancher]

Marlins are side eject and will take a scope, angle eject Winchesters were made so that those that want to use a scope could. Most will be pre-drilled for mounting receiver sights, ( Williams, Lyman, Redfield ). Personally I've never seen the need to mount a scope on a traditional lever gun. I can get my levers to group at acceptable levels for competition shooting out to 200m with iron sights, both barrel and receiver, more than adequate for hunting also.

Off-hand group @ 150m .38-55.jpg (411.86 KiB) Viewed 7603 times

[bladeracer]

Personally I've never seen the need to mount a scope on a traditional lever gun. I can get my levers to group at acceptable levels for competition shooting out to 200m with iron sights, both barrel and receiver, more than adequate for hunting also.

Off-hand group @ 150m .38-55.jpg

It's very useful to be able to use a scope during load development.

[Gamerancher]

Never seen the need.