Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: What if...the US Army adopted Lever Guns in the 1870s?

  1. #1
    Senior Member AK-J's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    717

    What if...the US Army adopted Lever Guns in the 1870s?

    This a very fascinating conversation.


  2. #2
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Within the heart of Hell. Michigan.
    Posts
    885
    Very interesting vid. Thanks for sharing.

  3. #3
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    harms way
    Posts
    17,741
    I doubt it'd made a diff when Custer said "Where the fuck did all these Indians come from?!?!"
    "And how we burned in the camps later thinking, what would things have been like, if every security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain, whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family?"

  4. #4
    Senior Member Helen Keller's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Rockin' a Piss
    Posts
    8,394
    no matter, all would be obsolete come 1886.
    PRAISE KEK
    FATHER OF CHAOS
    BRINGER OF DAY
    IN THY WEBBED HANDS WE PLACE OUR FAITH
    SHADILAY, SHADILAY!

  5. #5
    Administrator Krupski's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    ┌П┐(◣_◢)┌П┐
    Posts
    15,653
    Quote Originally Posted by AK-J View Post
    This a very fascinating conversation.



    That's what a lot of the anti-gun assholes think... that the Second Amendment only applies to muskets.

    Based on that thinking, the First Amendment should not protect Internet traffic... after all the Founding Fathers could have never envisioned today's communication technologies.....
    Gentlemen may prefer Blondes, but Real Men prefer Redheads!

  6. #6
    Senior Member AK-J's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    717
    Quote Originally Posted by Krupski View Post
    That's what a lot of the anti-gun assholes think... that the Second Amendment only applies to muskets.

    Based on that thinking, the First Amendment should not protect Internet traffic... after all the Founding Fathers could have never envisioned today's communication technologies.....
    WTF are you talking about? The video is about a "what if" the US Army had adopted lever actions service wide instead of trapdoor springfields. Did you actually watch the video?

  7. #7
    Senior Member tank_monkey's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Kalifornia
    Posts
    7,017
    Quote Originally Posted by AK-J View Post
    WTF are you talking about? The video is about a "what if" the US Army had adopted lever actions service wide instead of trapdoor springfields. Did you actually watch the video?
    Apparently you didn't actually read Krupski's comment LOL. I rarely if ever defend Krupski, but he was opining about how anti gunners distort the 2nd amendment to only mean muskets and declare any firearms technology later than that as being 'unsuitable for civilian ownership', and then he posted in PURPLE (the color of sarcasm) his own point on how that type of logic would apply to the first amendment.

    He wasn't necessarily talking about the video, just a natural digression as to how anti gunners wouldn't allow ANY sort of adoption of better technology ... at ANY time....

    Usually Krupski's weird non sequiturs freak me out, but he didn't do that ... this time

  8. #8
    Contributor 02/2014 FunkyPertwee's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    11,163
    Quote Originally Posted by Helen Keller View Post
    no matter, all would be obsolete come 1886.

    Why?

    They seemed to think this would be a formidable outfit until potentially WW1.
    "I'm fucking furious, I'm violently angry, and I like it. If you don't know what that feels like then I feel bad for you"

  9. #9
    Senior Member tank_monkey's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Kalifornia
    Posts
    7,017
    Quote Originally Posted by FunkyPertwee View Post
    Why?

    They seemed to think this would be a formidable outfit until potentially WW1.
    I think that the bolt action is a superior design myself. So I agree that when bolt actions with blind magazines became the norm, it would replace the lever action. The bolt action can take much more powerful cartridges safely. Also I've never understood the appeal of the lever action. I don't like firing them and the lever is not that comfortable to cycle (on the fingers).

  10. #10
    Contributor 02/2014 FunkyPertwee's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    11,163
    Quote Originally Posted by tank_monkey View Post
    I think that the bolt action is a superior design myself. So I agree that when bolt actions with blind magazines became the norm, it would replace the lever action. The bolt action can take much more powerful cartridges safely. Also I've never understood the appeal of the lever action. I don't like firing them and the lever is not that comfortable to cycle (on the fingers).

    I believe their point was that a less powerful cartridge coming from a gun that may be weaker but provide better firepower would allow for tactics that may have been superior than those used with slower, more powerful weapons.
    "I'm fucking furious, I'm violently angry, and I like it. If you don't know what that feels like then I feel bad for you"

  11. #11
    Senior Member Helen Keller's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Rockin' a Piss
    Posts
    8,394
    once smokeless came about in 1886 the speeds/engagement ranges rifles produced outclassed almost anything you could deliver in a lever action.
    PRAISE KEK
    FATHER OF CHAOS
    BRINGER OF DAY
    IN THY WEBBED HANDS WE PLACE OUR FAITH
    SHADILAY, SHADILAY!

  12. #12
    Team GunsNet Bronze 07/2011 T2K's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Charleston, South Carolina
    Posts
    945
    No army in the 19th century wanted to be the one with the less powerful, shorter ranged rifles. No army in the first half of the 20th century wanted that either!

    The Ottoman Empire, I believe, did adopt lever actions in the 1870's but eventually they switched to bolt actions.

    The Soviet adoption of the M1895 lever action in 7.62 x 54R is an interesting exception. That saw action in WWI.

  13. #13
    Moderator & Team Gunsnet Platinum 07/2011 O.S.O.K.'s Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Deep In The Heart of Texas
    Posts
    9,363
    The other aspect of this was the thinking that a soldier with a high-capacity magazine would "waste" the ammo. This thinking prevailed into WWI which is why the magazine cut-off feature was present even at that time...
    ~Nemo me impune lacessit~




  14. #14
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    harms way
    Posts
    17,741
    Quote Originally Posted by O.S.O.K. View Post
    The other aspect of this was the thinking that a soldier with a high-capacity magazine would "waste" the ammo. This thinking prevailed into WWI which is why the magazine cut-off feature was present even at that time...
    In the civil war, Johnny Reb and Billy Yank had to account for every cartridge. If they couldn't, or lost any, it came out of their pay.
    "And how we burned in the camps later thinking, what would things have been like, if every security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain, whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family?"

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •