Lever Action Strength / Weakness

[Pete44ru]

FWIW, there's some interesting levergun reading in the July 2010 issue (#251) of RIFLE MAGAZINE, in the Spotting Scope column by Dave Scovill about levergun strengths, with details and pics.

Among other things, he says it's not so much action design, like toggle-link M73 vs M92/94 & M95/336, as it is about the front of the receiver's machining "Achille's heel" - to wit, the thinness of the web betwixt the threaded barrel hole and the magazine opening/hole, treultingant thin barrels/chambers and failure there before at the bolt/firing pins.

Apparrantly, takedown actions are stronger than non-takedown, because of the additional .4" support afforded by the takedown plate to the barrel/mag juncture.

There's even pic of failed barrel(s), etc.

Good reading.

.

[adirondakjack]

Yup. Any time ya use a big bore barrel and a thin, flat-sided receiver to keep weight down, ya ain't got a helluva lotta meat at the barrel root. Them newfangled stick shift guns with the "lever" on the side and big, fat, round recievers are ugly as sin, but they do have it over a levergun in that respect. But Mauser et al didn't invent that either. Look to yer Rolling Block action as well.....

[meanc]

Never had one fail, probably never will. Within proper working parameters, I doubt anyone here will ever blow out a barrel.

I've seen more banana peeled than I've seen blown at the chamber/reciever

[jnyork]

Never mind using a little common sense and good judgement with your reloading.

[Griff]

"Banana peeled" muzzles are usually caused by a plugged barrel; whereas when the receiver is breached, that's either too hot a load, or an obstruction near the chamber.

I look at the main difference in design strength between the toggle links & the locking lug as two-fold; 1 - the toggle links ONLY mechanical locking device is just the straightened links. Enough rearward thrust and they will bend... as they are designed to. 2 - Locking lugs actions have different strength levels depending on the lug's engagement, mass, & geometry. The more "inclined" the lug, the easier the action opens and closes. This is a good thing, until there's enough rear thrust to do that for you. But it should be readily apparent which take more thrust before the bolt can be FORCED open.

However, IMO the main lack of strength is due to the lack of support at the front of the bolt. In the case of the toggle link, the bolt is out there floating across the carrier mortise the length of the cartridge, with it's nose held in place by the extractor and the "nubbin" bottom of the bolt that forces the case under the extractor. Not what I'd term good support. It's not any stretch to see how the bolt could be torqued out of alignment, leading to significant problems.

The locking lug actions of the later Winchesters have minimized bolt torque thru the use of rails on each side of the bolt with matching slots in the receiver walls. With Marlins being similar in their use of an enclosed bolt. However both systems are compromized by the thinness of the receiver walls.

I'll just have to trust those with greater experience and metalulrgical analysis skills to explain how all of the above and that .4" between chamber & magazine relate in the instance of a catasrophic failure. But, in the case of repeated "heavy" loads all oth those issues I mentioned are battred and pounded until something moves and headspace grows. Which in turn, exacerbates the punding and battering, until you get a lever popping open, or worse.

Anyway, that's my story, & I'm stickin' to it!

[O.S.O.K.]

That issue is sitting on my bedstand waiting for me to consume it.

[Peter M. Eick]

While I read the article and can see his point, I find it odd that we don't see many blown up that way around here or on other forums. I cannot honestly say i remember one that I have seen a picture like that of the gun blown out that way.

To me, I thought about it and racked it up to another thing not to worry about. I don't try to make my 94's into my 308's. I am pretty darn happy with them just they way they are and with 30 grns of 3031 and a 150 grn softpoint, I get very good accuracy and good results.

[Malamute]

While I read the article and can see his point, I find it odd that we don't see many blown up that way around here or on other forums. I cannot honestly say i remember one that I have seen a picture like that of the gun blown out that way.

To me, I thought about it and racked it up to another thing not to worry about. I don't try to make my 94's into my 308's. I am pretty darn happy with them just they way they are and with 30 grns of 3031 and a 150 grn softpoint, I get very good accuracy and good results.

I agree with you Peter. I have however, seen pictures of several that the barrel let go underneath, and personaly seen one early (1970's) Marlin 95 45-70 barrel that had a crack on the underside of the chamber area. The gunsmith that had it said he'd seen one other one as well. I believe the issue isnt so much the "thin, flat sided reciever" so much as the distance between the barrel and mag tube. The Marlins in 45-70 are running a fairly fat cartridge in an action that was designed around the 30-30/38-55 class of cartridge. It necesitates machining a groove in the bottom of the barrel for the mag tube to fit. Obviously it can be done, but that is the one thin spot that can cause trouble.

The discussions that most often come up about the strength of various makes baffles me. None tend to wear out or come apart in regular use, and when pushed to their limits, don't tend to "blow up", but stretch and become unusable. Unless one intends to push one past their intended uses, the "strength" doesnt mean much. Interestingly, the make that's most often considered strongest, hasnt been in the instances I've heard of when pushed past their limits. However, as concerns most of us, who cares?

I run the 45-70 up a ways, but nowhere near the limit of what it will do safely. It simply isnt any fun to shoot above the levels I run it in the 1886 Browning, and seems quite capable of dealing with the medium size bears that inhabit the neighborhood.

"One more thing not to worry about" pretty well sums up my thoughts n the matter.

[Pete44ru]

FWIW, "maximizing", or loading any particular cartridge to as much (or more) than a rifle can stand just doesn't appeal to me.

If the cartridge I happen to be using won't "do the job", then I'd rather just get a cartridge/gun that will.

Like the man said: "Use enough gun".

.

[Old Savage]

I think this one was a 450 Alaskan before it came apart, saw the guys surgically repaired hand too.

[J Miller]

http://www.leverguns.com/articles/taylor/blowups.htm

From JimT some time back.

Joe

[1894cfan]

http://www.leverguns.com/articles/taylor/blowups.htm

From JimT some time back.

Joe

Thanks for posting that, Joe. I got some '06 ammo some time back that came from a friend of my brother that's been sitting around and have been thinking about shooting it in my 03/A3. The load that I've been shooting in it was 47gr IMR 4895, that was shooting to point of aim at 200yds. I think I'll pull the bullets, dump the powder and reload them all over again with the IMR 4895. I do NOT want to blow up a riffle that I spent $800 on!