Author Topic: big bore leverguns (Read 19697 times)

GeorgeHill · « **Reply #25 on:** January 30, 2014, 11:11:19 am »

I do not care for the Browning BLR. I do not like the action, and the gigantic bolt coming back at my eye. While mechanically it is sound and I like the safety/hammer design... Overall, I just do not care for the BLR. At all.

WeTheArmed.com

Mississippi556 · « **Reply #26 on:** January 30, 2014, 06:05:48 pm »

I like the engineering, the strength, the lock up, the slickness of the action, but I just don't like the look. Never have. JMB would not have made it look like that. There was a certain elegance in his work that seems missing. Yeah, I know, purely subjective, like blondes vs. brunettes thing, beauty in the eye of the beholder. Just me.

GeorgeHill · « **Reply #27 on:** January 30, 2014, 06:09:27 pm »

No, I agree. It's missing the Browning in it.

Brandon · « **Reply #28 on:** January 30, 2014, 08:18:20 pm »

George what do you think of the turnbull 1886?

GeorgeHill · « **Reply #29 on:** February 01, 2014, 09:02:07 am »

Turnbull is very expensive but very good. They work a nice action. Much like Wild West Guns... but they absolutely rule in exterior finishing. If you can afford Turnbull - just do it.

Sent from my Neural Enigma Machine Implant.

Evil Jim · « **Reply #30 on:** February 03, 2014, 10:25:42 pm »

I WILL have a WWG Co-Pilot...
I will...

Jim

THE NORSEMAN · « **Reply #31 on:** February 11, 2014, 11:36:01 pm »

Concerning the 444 Marlin-

Quote

Winchester also loaded the '94 Big Bore for it in one of the handiest little brush carbines ever and marketed it as the "Timber Carbine". You can occasionally find a pristine one of those around - usually bought by someone who had no idea what the recoil was going to be.

I have one. Figured on the recoil due to the light/slim design of the winchester vs. some others. LOVE it. However, being a "carbine" there are things to consider-

Yes, it's short, light, and quick handling. That's why I bought it. But-

1. Recoil can be stout with full hose loads.
2. Don't know if they all do, but mine has a factory port job. Coupled with that short barrel, it's a bit on the LOUD side.

Nightcrawler · « **Reply #32 on:** February 12, 2014, 07:58:03 am »

Norseman's back!!

Mississippi556 · « **Reply #33 on:** February 12, 2014, 11:48:16 am »

Quote from: Evil Jim on February 03, 2014, 10:25:42 pm

I WILL have a WWG Co-Pilot...
I will...

Jim

A few years back some buddies and I booked a fly in float plane trip in Alaska. Tidal basin streamer fly fishing for Dolly Varden trout gorging on salmon fry coming through the mouth of a river emptying into that bay. Once in a lifetime treat for me. When we landed I noticed that the guide had two guns in the cargo bay. One was a WWG Co-Pilot. I asked him about it. He really loved the gun and talked on and on about it.

But, before he closed the door, he picked up the other gun and took it with us to the beach head where we wade fished. It was a well worn (actually pretty beat up) extended magazine 12 gauge 870 pump with peep sight setup, loaded with one ounce foster slugs.

I asked him why make the choice. He said the slugs stop better. I asked him if he had ever tested that theory. He said yes. We were in bear country. I didn't ask any more questions. Thankfully, I did not get to see a brown bear or experience the effectiveness of his choice. We caught and released a huge number of trout under his watchful eye. It was a nice day.

I still want a big bore lever gun, though.

HiVelSword · « **Reply #34 on:** February 12, 2014, 12:18:03 pm »

Quote from: THE NORSEMAN on February 11, 2014, 11:36:01 pm

Concerning the 444 Marlin-
I have one. Figured on the recoil due to the light/slim design of the winchester vs. some others. LOVE it. However, being a "carbine" there are things to consider-

Yes, it's short, light, and quick handling. That's why I bought it. But-

1. Recoil can be stout with full hose loads.
2. Don't know if they all do, but mine has a factory port job. Coupled with that short barrel, it's a bit on the LOUD side.

I love my .444! But mine is a Marlin made in the 70's. Action was decent to begin with. Slipstream just made it that much better. I wouldn't trade it for anything.

coelacanth · « **Reply #35 on:** February 12, 2014, 11:43:41 pm »

Quote from: THE NORSEMAN on February 11, 2014, 11:36:01 pm

Concerning the 444 Marlin-
I have one. Figured on the recoil due to the light/slim design of the winchester vs. some others. LOVE it. However, being a "carbine" there are things to consider-

Yes, it's short, light, and quick handling. That's why I bought it. But-

1. Recoil can be stout with full hose loads.
2. Don't know if they all do, but mine has a factory port job. Coupled with that short barrel, it's a bit on the LOUD side.

I think all the Timber Carbines in that caliber were ported. Mine is -and yes, the muzzle blast is not for the faint of heart.

Siegehammer63 · « **Reply #36 on:** March 08, 2014, 04:43:55 pm »

Thanks for all the info, support and opinion, guys! Had to walk on the .348. For being a 1943 gun, it was in good condition, except for the barrel.

GeorgeHill · « **Reply #37 on:** March 19, 2014, 08:47:15 pm »

Is .35 Remington big enough to be considered a big bore?

mattitude · « **Reply #38 on:** March 20, 2014, 10:32:38 am »

I would consider it "big bore" and for a 100+yr old round it still does a pretty good job on all but the big brown bears. I put it in the "big bore lite" catagory.

Quote from: GeorgeHill on March 19, 2014, 08:47:15 pm

Is .35 Remington big enough to be considered a big bore?

HiVelSword · « **Reply #39 on:** March 20, 2014, 12:52:52 pm »

Quote from: GeorgeHill on March 19, 2014, 08:47:15 pm

Is .35 Remington big enough to be considered a big bore?

As perfect as the .30-30 is for taking deer, I'd say any lever gun round larger than that should be considered "big bore". So yeah, .35 Remington is big bore. I've got an R8 which I'll shoot someday (sparingly)but I still have a .35 Remington lever action that's on "the list".

coelacanth · « **Reply #40 on:** March 20, 2014, 10:00:17 pm »

Well, the .348 Winchester was/is considered a "big bore" so I'd say the .35 Remington qualifies. It certainly has a lot of fans among the woods hunting crowd as does the old and nearly defunct .32 Winchester Special. Not too many .321 diameter bullets around these days. The .35 Remington will probably outlive us all.

THE NORSEMAN · « **Reply #41 on:** March 22, 2014, 02:16:43 am »

My personal line on the matter is 32 winchester special. That or smaller isn't, larger is.(Assuming it's a cartridge that was designed as a rifle round to begin with.)

Where it gets interesting is the pistol calibers- A 44? A 454? Big bore. 357 Mag? Nope.
Hard to quantify, but in practice, if it hits like a big bore, I call it such. If it doesn't, I don't.

One day I'd like to get one custom made in 357 Maximum to match my super blackhawk. I'm thinkin' a tough 200 grain slug in that long ol' Maximum case out of a 16-20" rifle barrel might make a pretty strong(but ultimately short) case to be classified "big bore".

EDIT- Also thought about the possibilities of converting one of those Marlin 1894CB's from 32 H&R into a 327 Federal...... But that's in the realm of wishes being fishes, and me having a money tree out back.....

coelacanth · « **Reply #42 on:** March 22, 2014, 02:31:53 am »

That would be an interesting rifle to work up loads for. I imagine you could get pretty close to or even exceed the performance of the old 38-55 Winchester.

akodo · « **Reply #43 on:** March 24, 2014, 11:17:32 pm »

Quote from: HiVelSword on March 20, 2014, 12:52:52 pm

As perfect as the .30-30 is for taking deer, I'd say any lever gun round larger than that should be considered "big bore". So yeah, .35 Remington is big bore. I've got an R8 which I'll shoot someday (sparingly)but I still have a .35 Remington lever action that's on "the list".

I like 35 Remington....but I m not sure I follow your logic. Would you consider a lever gun in 357 magnum or 44 magnum to be a 'big bore'? While the bore is technically bigger, the power is either in the same ballpark or even less. Right now 35 remington and 30-30 are on such even terms regarding power I really think of them in the same way I think about 270 winchester vs 30-06. In this case 270 winchester = 30-30 and 30-06 = 35 remington. I acknowledge a difference but don't see it being real in the field. And also... I recognize that the one that is technically bigger in bore, it's bullet weights often don't match the sectional density of the smaller caliber alternative.

(Yes, I have considered comparing the 30-30 vs the 35 remington to the 30-06 vs the 35 Whelen, but I think the 270 vs 30-06 is a better analogy. Also I'd call the 30-30, 32 special, 35 remington relationship to be like the 270, 280 remington, and 30-06....the 280 Rem sits inbetween the other two, is hard to find, and isn't currently loaded to the same standards as the other two, and the difference between the other two isn't so great as to actually need something inbetween)

akodo · « **Reply #44 on:** March 25, 2014, 12:31:19 am »

Quote from: coelacanth on March 20, 2014, 10:00:17 pm

Well, the .348 Winchester was/is considered a "big bore" so I'd say the .35 Remington qualifies. It certainly has a lot of fans among the woods hunting crowd as does the old and nearly defunct .32 Winchester Special. Not too many .321 diameter bullets around these days. The .35 Remington will probably outlive us all.

Again, I disagree, because big bore does incorporate more than just bore size, it implies at least equal if not more power than 'normal'.

I'd look very askew at anyone who talked about going moose hunting and wanting a big bore rifle (no mention of action type) and then stating they were getting a 35 Remington.

the 348 has a lot of energy and pushes it so far beyond the 30-30 that it absolutely is a true 'big bore level gun' even though both the 35 Remington and the 44 Magnum technically have bigger bores but are NOT 'big bore' options.

Honestly, I'd rather term a lever gun in 308 or 30-06 a big bore lever gun before I termed a 35 Remington a big bore lever gun. I sure as heck would term a 325 WSM lever gun big bore.

AKODO'S SOMEWHAT LOGICAL BUT ADMITTEDLY SOMEWHAT ARBITRARY LIST OF LEVER GUN BORE CLASSIFICATIONS
------Excluding blackpowder*------
*including those that jumped from blackpowder to smokeless powder 1890s-early 1900s, but excluding modern resurrections of blackpowder loads by the cowboy crowd)

#1 Small Stuff (and not necessarily small bore):
32-20, (in regular smokeless powder and also "HV" smokeless powder rifle only loads)
25-20, (in regular smokeless powder and also "HV" smokeless powder rifle only loads)
218 Bee
32 H&R
38 Special/357 magnum
38-40 (in regular smokeless powder and also "HV" smokeless powder rifle only loads)
44-40 (in regular smokeless powder and also "HV" smokeless powder rifle only loads)
217 zipper (30-30 necked down to 22 by Winchester FYI)

(#1.5 stuff I could see in either grouping, 44 magnum and 25-35)

#2 Normal:
30-30 (1700-2000 ft/lb ballpark)
32 WS (1800-2100 ft/lb ballpark)
35 Remington (1900-2200 ft/lb ballpark)

#3 Bolt gun in a Lever Gun's body
250 savage
300 savage
30-40 Kraig
307 winchester - rimmed version of 308 with slighly less powder capacity
308 winchester
30-06

#4 Big Bore:
375 Winchester (2200-2400 ft/lb ballpark) - 38-55 shortened and strengthened to handle modern smokless powder
35 Winchester (2500-2800) - Winchester wanted to offer something inbetween 30-40 Kraig and 405 Win in the 1895
356 Winchester (2500-2800 ft/lb ballpark) - 307 necked up
358 Winchester (2700-3000 ft/lb ballpark) - 308 necked up
348 Winchester (2700-3000 ft/lb ballpark)
444 Marlin (2700-3000 ft/lb ballpark)
405 Winchester (3000-3300 ft/lb ballpark) - Teddy Roosevelt's 'big medicine' gun
45-70 Gvt 'modern lever gun' type loadings (2800-3500 ft/lb ballpark)
450 Marlin (3300-3600 ft/lb ballpark)

Both/Either #3 and #4
325 WSM (36000-3900 ft/lb ballpark)

coelacanth · « **Reply #45 on:** March 25, 2014, 03:29:41 am »

Well, I'm with you to a certain degree but in a short, handy levergun the .30 calibers just don't get enough barrel length to reach their potential, IMO. The .35's have a better expansion ratio and do better in the shorter barrel lengths. The .35 Remington may not be ideal for moose or elk sized animals but there are a lot of dead animals that might argue the point. Inside of 120 yards the .35 Remington has proven deadly on most everything in the lower 48 and much of Canada. At the same distance the difference between a 300 grain bullet from a .44 magnum Contender and a similar bullet from a .444 Marlin levergun is largely academic if the shot placement is good.

While the term "big bore" can be debated the effectiveness of most of the calibers we are discussing has long since been established in the field.

Mississippi556 · « **Reply #46 on:** April 11, 2014, 05:25:00 pm »

Quote from: akodo on March 25, 2014, 12:31:19 am

Again, I disagree, because big bore does incorporate more than just bore size, it implies at least equal if not more power than 'normal'.

I'd look very askew at anyone who talked about going moose hunting and wanting a big bore rifle (no mention of action type) and then stating they were getting a 35 Remington.

the 348 has a lot of energy and pushes it so far beyond the 30-30 that it absolutely is a true 'big bore level gun' even though both the 35 Remington and the 44 Magnum technically have bigger bores but are NOT 'big bore' options.

Honestly, I'd rather term a lever gun in 308 or 30-06 a big bore lever gun before I termed a 35 Remington a big bore lever gun. I sure as heck would term a 325 WSM lever gun big bore.

AKODO'S SOMEWHAT LOGICAL BUT ADMITTEDLY SOMEWHAT ARBITRARY LIST OF LEVER GUN BORE CLASSIFICATIONS
------Excluding blackpowder*------
*including those that jumped from blackpowder to smokeless powder 1890s-early 1900s, but excluding modern resurrections of blackpowder loads by the cowboy crowd)

#1 Small Stuff (and not necessarily small bore):
32-20, (in regular smokeless powder and also "HV" smokeless powder rifle only loads)
25-20, (in regular smokeless powder and also "HV" smokeless powder rifle only loads)
218 Bee
32 H&R
38 Special/357 magnum
38-40 (in regular smokeless powder and also "HV" smokeless powder rifle only loads)
44-40 (in regular smokeless powder and also "HV" smokeless powder rifle only loads)
217 zipper (30-30 necked down to 22 by Winchester FYI)

(#1.5 stuff I could see in either grouping, 44 magnum and 25-35)

#2 Normal:
30-30 (1700-2000 ft/lb ballpark)
32 WS (1800-2100 ft/lb ballpark)
35 Remington (1900-2200 ft/lb ballpark)

#3 Bolt gun in a Lever Gun's body
250 savage
300 savage
30-40 Kraig
307 winchester - rimmed version of 308 with slighly less powder capacity
308 winchester
30-06

#4 Big Bore:
375 Winchester (2200-2400 ft/lb ballpark) - 38-55 shortened and strengthened to handle modern smokless powder
35 Winchester (2500-2800) - Winchester wanted to offer something inbetween 30-40 Kraig and 405 Win in the 1895
356 Winchester (2500-2800 ft/lb ballpark) - 307 necked up
358 Winchester (2700-3000 ft/lb ballpark) - 308 necked up
348 Winchester (2700-3000 ft/lb ballpark)
444 Marlin (2700-3000 ft/lb ballpark)
405 Winchester (3000-3300 ft/lb ballpark) - Teddy Roosevelt's 'big medicine' gun
45-70 Gvt 'modern lever gun' type loadings (2800-3500 ft/lb ballpark)
450 Marlin (3300-3600 ft/lb ballpark)

Both/Either #3 and #4
325 WSM (36000-3900 ft/lb ballpark)

Although I think it butt-ugly and contrary to everything JMB would have done with the appearance, let's not forget that the Browning BLR is available in both the 7mm Rem Mag and the very stout 300 Winchester Mag.

Neither would be considered "Big Bore" in my book, but the 300 Win Mag will get you 3,600 ft. lbs. of energy and close to 1,800 left at 500.

Personally, I'd take the modern lever action .45-70 at about 3,600 ft. lbs. and keep my shot distances reasonable. I shoot a single shot .45-70 with 405 grain Buffalo Bore loads and the effect on game is devastating. Out of the long 36" tube, they climb to 2100 fps which is pushing 4,000 ft. lbs. of energy. I'm a believer.

scarville · « **Reply #47 on:** April 13, 2014, 10:46:19 pm »

Quote from: Mississippi556 on April 11, 2014, 05:25:00 pm

Personally, I'd take the modern lever action .45-70 at about 3,600 ft. lbs. and keep my shot distances reasonable. I shoot a single shot .45-70 with 405 grain Buffalo Bore loads and the effect on game is devastating. Out of the long 36" tube, they climb to 2100 fps which is pushing 4,000 ft. lbs. of energy. I'm a believer.

I'm coming around to that position myself. I hunted with a BLR for several years and l like the handling. However, after shooting the more "traditional" lever actions, I am considering just getting a good 30-30, a good 45/70 then selling both BLRs.

THE NORSEMAN · « **Reply #48 on:** April 14, 2014, 11:18:53 pm »

While I may disagree at times with the exact numbers it puts forth, I have seen enough game killed to give the Taylor KO scale a large amount of weight when deciding what I do and do not consider "big bore".

First Shirt · « **Reply #49 on:** September 19, 2014, 10:54:50 pm »

My go-to brush gun is a Rossi M-92 clone in .45 LC. With 300 gr. WFN bullets seated over 23 gr. of H-110 or W-296, it will loosen your fillings, but it works like gangbusters on pigs and such within 100 yards. Nicely accurate, very light and handy.

When my granddaughters discovered pig hunting, it became my mainstay, since they're both using 7mm-08s with 140 gr. bullets. If they botch a shot (which they haven't yet, (Thank You, Lord!)) I need to be able to anchor the porker pretty quick, and I have confidence that it will do the trick.

The 300 gr. bullet, from a 20-inch barrel, gets you into low-end 45-70 territory. Although, if you need more oomph, Rossi also offers a .454 Casull chambering.