something overlooked so far....
All the comparisons about speed of firing, reloading, and range limitations are overlooking one simple fact. Not everybody needs (or wants) more than "Good enough".
With a very few exceptions, lever guns are hunting rifles. Even the lowly .22LR gets hunting use in lever guns. A rapid second shot is a benefit, but honestly, how much can any of the commonly hunted animals move in the 1 second that even beginners can manage to work the lever?
Yep an average guy with a semi can beat a good guy with a lever, over a string of aimed shots, by a little bit. Usually. SO what?
A .30-30 that's easy to carry (slim, flat and not AR tall, top to bottom) is plenty for lots of folks. Sure, its last century's tech, but deer don't know that.
Thats the main reason they are still so popular. Yep, the bolt gun pushed them out of overall dominance, eventually, but they refuse to go away, and not just because of cowboy nostalgia, but because for a large segament of people they are a good gun that does everything needed, and within that "narrow" scope, they do it damn well.
Sure, some of them jam. Everything jams. Sometimes because its worn, broken, or just made bad, but sometimes because the shooter doesn't really understand proper use and maintainence.
And lever guns are not alone in that. ALL guns can have it happen. Different designs resist failure better than others, but everything has its limits.
Notice how a lot of those touting the superiority of the semi auto always seem to refer to military designs, or their civilian counterparts. Sure, they are rugged, and capable of tolerating a lot (relatively) of abuse, but they were designed and built to do that. Don't see any of them telling us how much more rugged and reliable a Rem 740 is compared to a Marlin 336.
Not that the Remington series auto rifles are bad, they aren't (individual examples aside). They just aren't military grade rifles, and were never intended to be. They make a point of saying how no (significant) military ever adopted the lever gun, so it must be inferior. OK, again,so what? If all I need is a deer gun for the woods, a 7lb .30-30 works for me better than a 9lb .30-06. Why do you think generations of Americans sporterized all those poor suffering GI issue bolt guns? Some of it was just for style, but the basis was to get rid of what wasn't needed for hunting.
You can certainly pack a heavier, more rugged rifle than needed into the field, and if things go badly wrong, you will likely be better served than with a lighter, more "fragile" rifle. But until that day, is it worth packing the extra weight? The right answer is different for each of us.
I've hunted with all action types, and each is a joy in some ways, and a curse in others. How much of each, depends on what you have, and what you do with, and to it.
