Lever action 223?

"Prof Young" probably wants a .223 lever action because: 1. Illinois (where he lives) just passed new draconian laws for "assault" rifles, and he wants something which cycles faster than a bolt action. 2. .223 ammunition is cheaper than 6.5 creedmoor, and 223 might be a better defensive round against close multiple targets.

Some would suggest than a better solution is to move to a state where autoloading 223's are less restricted. However, that's not always feasible due to family, jobs, or personal finances.

I would be equally happy with the Browning or the Henry.
 
Last edited:
I'm worried about the Illinois "Assault Weapons" ban, as just emboldened Colorado. I'm praying the SCOUTS smacks this back into oblivion soon. Colorado legislators have already hinted they want to go further than the Illinois ban did.
 
Last edited:
I have both BLR and a Henry leverguns; I really think it's kinda a draw. I'm too scared to mar the finish of BLR so don't use it very much; The Henry is still a beauty queen of sorts but I'm not nearly as adverse to dinging the woodwork. The Henry has a better trigger IMO.
 
why?

Despite rising costs of shooting, .223/5.56 ammo (yeah, I know) is still the most affordable centerfire ammo you can buy. Low recoil makes it attractive as well. On target, it is still a formidable round power wise. All good reasons.
 
Some would suggest than a better solution is to move to a state where autoloading 223's are less restricted. However, that's not always feasible due to family, jobs, or personal finances.
Click to expand...

its also not a guaranteed solution, since states can and do change their laws. Ten years ago, the state I live in had no special restrictions on semi auto rifles. Today, you cannot legally buy or sell one in this state. (mags, too).

Little would upset me more than uprooting my home & family to escape persecution (and make no mistake, that's what gun control IS) only to find it catch up to me in a different state a year, or 5 from now,

.223/5.56 ammo (yeah, I know) is still the most affordable centerfire ammo you can buy. Low recoil makes it attractive as well. On target, it is still a formidable round power wise.
Click to expand...

I just took a quick look at Midway's ammo (only looked at the first page of each) and the cheapest 5.56mm ammo was the 55gr FMJ (duplicating M193 ball) for about $15 dollars a box (20rnds).

The cheapest .223 ammo was about $24 per box (all .223 shown were SP bullets) and oddly enough, the cheapest .308 Win rounds were ALSO $24 a box (150gr SP bullets).

So, while it seems that the least effective ammo is the cheapest, the better stuff is right there with the cheapest bigger, more effective stuff, price wise.

Light recoil? Yeah, no arguing that.

"formidable"??? Not in my book. Adequate?? yes, but there are more powerful rounds even in .22 caliber.

The thing for me, about a lever action .223 is that it looks like it doesn't do either of the .223's jobs as well as other rifles.

For varmint use, lever guns are rarely a accurate as bolt actions can be, and AR class semis are also quite accurate, these days.

And, for defensive use, the small magazine capacity would be a drawback over semis, or even a pump (like the Reminton) that takes an AR mag.

IT is quite possible a lever .223 might be accurate enough for what you want to use it for, but you won't know, until you have the rifle in your hands and test it.

Lever guns are generally good at delivering "minute of deer" accuracy, but don't have a reputation for "minute of marmot" accuracy. If you get one that is that accurate, treasure it, its a gem.

IF you're choosing .223 because its a round you like and already use, go for it. Lever guns (and all manually operated repeaters) aren't on the gun banner's radar TODAY. and won't be in their sights until after they have banned the semi auto assault rifles and other "obvious weapons of war".

Not on my personal want list, and not what I consider the best choice for what I use a .223 for, but if you want one, there's no reason not to get one.
 
OP, Browning may have halted production of the .223 version of the BLR, and as was said they're tough to find (not nearly as tough as finding one of the tiny run of .204R BLRs, but tough). That and the Henry are the ones I happen to know of. IDK if the Model 88 Winchester or the Model 99 Savage were ever chambered for the .223. I didn't think either one was, but I mention them because they're levers that were chambered for high-intensity centerfire rifle rounds with pointy bullets, so maybe you want to check into it.

P.S. don't pay attention to the nonsense about accuracy (which I think means precision). The basic design of the way an AR-15 and a Browning BLR are assembled and lock up are the same. Both use an aluminum receiver with a barrel screwed into an extension that a multi-lug rotary bolt locks into. From there, the impulse asymmetry of an AR (as well as the mass asymmetry on the barrel from the gas block) is absent on a BLR. OTOH, the asymmetry of a forend attached to the BLR's barrel is absent on _some_ AR-15s. From there, it's about the parts and workmanship of individual rifles and the manufacturer.

I've decided to not comment on range of self- or home-defense encounters and how that bears on 'accuracy' needs.
 
Last edited:
Hammie nailed it.

Yeah, Hammie is correct. With AR's outlawed, at least for now, I've got hundreds of rounds of 223 without a delivery system. I reload and have lots of 223 components so cost of cartridge is not a big deal to me. I just wanna be able to shoot them. And there is the off chance I could get really bored and try to take up coyote hunting again but a nice bolt action would work just fine for that. In the mean time, if war comes to my hometown (I seriously doubt that will happen.) I've got the m1 garand and lots of 30 06 in the appropriate clips.
If/when SCOUTS slaps king pritzker down I'll get an AR again.

Life is good.
Prof Young
 
Ever consider something like the Savage Scout in 223? Wouldn’t the magazines be compatible with ones for an AR? I have been wanting one for sometime although I would mount a scope conventionally. L
 
I have a buddy who travels to non permissive states for business quite frequently. His answer to this question is the BLR in a takedown set up.

There is also .223 in pump action configuration if you’re willing to consider that option.


Watching some hunting videos and seeing what the Aussies can do with them is pretty slick.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Ever consider something like the Savage Scout in 223?
Click to expand...

This, or a similar bolt rifle is the better answer. There are several drawbacks to using a lever action. We've all had it drilled into our brains that a lever action is a good SD choice because of all the cowboy movies we watched our whole lives. But the military rejected lever actions in favor of bolt action rifles for a variety of good reasons over 100 years ago.

You can empty the magazine a little faster with a lever than with a bolt action. but the rate of "AIMED" fire between the 2 is virtually the same.

Assuming 10 round mags are legal this (or something similar) is a better defensive rifle than a BLR or Henry Long Ranger and it's considerably cheaper.

https://ruger.com/products/americanRifleRanch/specSheets/26965.html

If limited to under 10 rounds then they make 5 round AR magazines and there are other options for small compact 223 bolt rifles with conventional magazines.

https://www.midwayusa.com/product/2695117827?pid=869625
 
apples to apples & formidable

OK, I'll accept adequate and drop the word formidable. It is certainly more cartridge than any of the pistol caliber ctgs so common in lever guns, or any rimfire. To 300 yds or so has the same trajectory more or less, as bigger ctgs, allowing for practice to those distances.

I understand the .308 v. .223 pricing as described, but how "effective" does practice ammo have to be? Saving $10.00 a box on practice ammo is pretty significant for most of us.....sure would be for me were I not a reloader. I would not, nor could I legally hunt with FMJ, though I suspect varmint critters under 50 lbs would not know the difference. There are far better .22 projectiles for SD, but nobody is lining up to take a .223 fmj center mass either. The bigger .22 centerfires are out there, say 22-250, but take about 10% more powder per shot, with a corresponding increase in blast and recoil.

If you like lever rifles, more power to you. I've taken more whitetails with a M88 Winchester than any other rifle I own, and it has nothing to do with me watching cowboy movies. A tactical lever seems a recent thing and do nothing for me. But a side feed lever requires no extra magazines for sustained fire, and the mag cannot be lost. A bando of ammo and a bit of competency with a lever carbine might well suffice for any domestic upheaval one would likely experience. It would beat a sharp stick.

But to replace the role of an AR carbine in a personal battery, I might well consider something like the Mossberg MVP ahead of a Henry or a Browning.
 
The bigger .22 centerfires are out there, say 22-250, but take about 10% more powder per shot, with a corresponding increase in blast and recoil.
Click to expand...

yes, there's no free lunch. What you get for burning more powder is also more velocity, in the case of .22-250 vs. .223, you get around 500fps or so depending on the load. That is NOT an insignificant increase.

Speed of operating the action for AIMED fire is a relative thing, but tests have been run, have run some myself with "average" shooters, and they usually come out this way, bolt is the slowest, then lever, then pump, then semi auto and the average difference in time over 5 aimed shots is about 1 second per action type, Lever being about a second faster than bolt, and so on.

There are people who are faster than average, and some not as fast, so its a guideline, not a general rule.

You could build a tube mag side gate loading lever gun in .223 (or any other round using pointed bullets) but no one does. Remington made tube magazine fed pumps and semi autos that would safely allow the use of pointed bullets. They had a unique magazine tube that allowed it. Since Remington dropped those rifles, no one else has used their system. Probably a patent issue or something like that.

Another point to consider, about why the military didn't adopt lever guns back in the late 1800s/early 1900s, the lever guns of the era simply weren't up to military requirements back then. Even the ones that fired powerful enough cartridges (and there weren't many of those) the rifles themselves were more expensive and no where near as rugged as contemporary bolt actions. Remember one of the military's requirements was the rifle had to be rugged enough to survive (most) hand to hand combat. Lever guns simply weren't good at that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top