Loading gates and tubes

[somethingbenign]

So I've seen plenty of controversy about Henry specifically regarding how they load. I understand that the gates can be a pain (figuratively and literally) for many so the tube load comes as a God send. The gate also is extremely ingrained in the tradition of lever guns as well as, in my opinion, opens one of the greatest advantages of tube fed guns; to be able to top off on the fly. I've mentioned it a couple times but never got a solid response or maybe I just missed it, has anyone tried making a rifle that has both a loading gate but with the easily removable tube for front loading? I can't imagine it would add too terribly much to manufacturing costs especially to designs that already have a loading gate. Is there some issue from an engineering point that I'm missing that makes this dual loading concept a problem?

 

[js8588]

Yeah, Rossi did it with their 454 Casull lever guns.

 

[somethingbenign]

Yeah, Rossi did it with their 454 Casull lever guns.

How did that fair for them?

 

[js8588]

How did that fair for them?

Pretty well from the reviews I've read on various forums.

If Rossi could manage it, Henry sure as heck can. Inertia, however, is a powerful force.

 

[somethingbenign]

Hmmm well I'll just have to swing by the Henry suggestion box. I hear so many great things about Henry with the only draw back being the lack of a gate it just seems like the smart business move but I'm neither a business man or privy to their financial plans. I would hold out hope for one of the other manufacturers to pick up the concept but I don't see near the desire for innovation from any. They already have what I imagine to bet the more expensive part to engineer and make down, making a twist lock on the follower should be small potatoes in comparison.

 

[eastbank]

loading gates can be modified to work very easy, the loading gate springs are most times very strong, much stronger than needed. my older Winchester,s and marlin s are very easy to load on the move with two or three shells in the loading hand and pushing them in with your thumb( 73-92 winchesters and 94 marlins being the easies of all lever actions). with the tube loading its a different animal as you must grip the rifle in a alkward postion and you must see that you don,t lose the tube. standing either the tube or gate would be ok.

 

[jimherb]

I suppose the loading gate comes in handy if you are fending off a tribe of zombies. But for my purposes, the tube works just fine. Tube tops up pretty easy between deer.

 

[eastbank]

topping off a gate or adding a quick 2-3 rounds is a lot easier then topping off the tube gun . with the tube out or dropped your lever action repeater turns into a single shot.

 

[Fine Figure of a Man]

It isn't a big deal to me but I prefer a loading gate.
Tube loading is kind of a three hand operation and if you top it of you are putting your hand in front of the muzzle of a loaded rifle.

 

[792mauser]

Not a big deal to me.
I prefer a loading gate but since I'm not contractually married to the rifle I can do as I please.

Either way in my Winchester 92 30/30 or a borrowed Marlin, I normally only single load em since I hate looking for my brass in the grass, err dirt.

And have occasionally used 168 gr match bullets to prove a point to friends with the latest and newest loudenboomers that mimic shotguns at 50 yds. I haven't put it on paper but I can hit the big steel target at 300 yds reliably with em.

 

[Varminterror]

Tubes came first, gates were an upgrade. They remain to be so. Gates for me.

 

[jmr40]

If someone is making a reproduction of a gun that initially was loaded from the tube then the reproduction should be true to the original. If making a reproduction of a gun that used a loading gate the reproduction should be true to the original.

Personally I don't want to have my fingers near the muzzle of a gun while loading it. And the 22's I've owned that loaded through a tube have proven to be less durable long term than loading from a gate. It has nothing to do with being able to top off, but I'll take my lever guns with a loading gate.

 

[someguy2800]

There is nothing wrong with tube loading. I just want a gate just because. There is just something about sliding cartridges in a gate. Same reason I wouldn’t buy a tube loaded or mag loaded shotgun, or a revolver you have to load by removing the cylinder. It’s unesssary messing around and it robs me of the tactile experience.

 

[George Dickel]

My first rifle was a .22 with a tube magazine, I currently shoot silhouette with a Marlin 39A which has a tube magazine so I really don't understand the problem with them and have no problem loading with them. I also have a Rossi 92 that utilizes a loading gate that has so much spring pressure on it that it is a chore to load. If the spring was weaker it would make it easier to load but as it is a tube would be quicker for me. I really doubt that I will ever need the ability to load through the loading gate on the move. If there is a zombie apocalypse that is why I have an AR.

 

[Riomouse911]

I have both tubers and gaters... the lack of a gate or the presence of one won’t sway my decision to buy another lever as there are pluses and minuses for each.

Now, if I could stumble onto a nice BLR in .358 I could buy without sending the wife into “Another gun!?!?” shivers then there’ll be no need to worry about either one!

Stay safe!

 

[somethingbenign]

Wasn't really looking to start a tube vs gate war. In fact I was inquiring as to why companies don't do both and have a larger market. I do agree on reproduction pieces being true to form but I don't really care if the gun is an old or new design, only if the gun speaks to me.

 

[Llama Bob]

I don't think there's many people looking for a tube load. There's some that tolerate a tube load because they like the price or other features of the gun.

 

[cfullgraf]

Loading gates or tube loading does not really make a difference to me.

For in the field, a loading gate gun would be more convenient and safer for topping off the magazine.

I recently bought a Henry 327 Fed Mag rifle. This will be my first experience with a center fire tube load lever gun. I have a couple 22 rim fire guns that have tube loaded magazines. I may change my mind once I get around to shooting it.

 

[Elkins45]

How often do people fire so many shots at a deer that they need to top off their gun? I've been killing deer with a rifle for 30+ years now and I've never emptied a magazine.

I don't own a tube loading lever gun, but I wish all of mine gave me the option. Gate and tube combo wouldn't be something I would care much about, other than to up the resale value to the people who feel strongly about wanting a gate.

 

[VVelox]

Not fond of tube loading as it can't be done quickly.

A loading gate allows for very quick loading via speed loader.

What I would really love to see are ones designed to take detachable box mags. Either sten style out of the side or extend the receiver a bit so the lever and mag length is not an issue.

 

[bannockburn]

Have never been a fan of tube loading. Will always go with a gate if available.

 

[eastbank]

to say I like loading gates would be a understatement, I only have one center fire lever action and that is a marlin cowboy in 32 H&R magnum. and when I load it, it seems like I,m working with a bayonet

 

[fpgt72]

I wonder if these same people that just love their henry levers are the same ones that can't stand a model 66 and think that the 10/22 is just so much better....me thinks they are....and one more thing....is it generally a good idea to be moving your hand around the business end of any gun....generally goes against what I always thought....and before you get started yea yea yea.

Really it is a personal decision....and really for the shooting 99.9% that we do it really does not matter....if you need to "top off" between shooting at a deer you need to find another hobby, you should only need one.

Having the bullets in a tube is just not the best way to do it with centerfire blammo....there is a reason we don't see tube loading AR's and such.

Now all that said, I am firmly in the gate camp, I will not own a center fire lever gun without the gate. nothing else to say, and I see no reason past cost to make a gun without a gate...there are just less parts, less machine work...it is flat cheaper no other way to say it, and the current lever guns (aside from 22 and that is a well duh) that do not have a gate is a pure cost measure....now I am sure we will see fans of their henry rifles on here saying this that and the other....more parts = more cost....more holes in the gun that need finished= more cost. The reason henry does it is cost...sure they will try their best to sell the idea of this or that...but trust me pure cost.

 

[someguy2800]

I can see certain people that would honestly prefer a tube loader, like if you have arthritis or something, but most people want a gate if given a choice. How Henry has not listened to that for so long I don’t know.

I feel like I’m loading a muzzle loader when I load a tube. It’s just silly to me for anything but a 22.

 

[GBExpat]

My 1922-mfr .32-20 Marlin 27S loads via tube and my two 1983-mfr .44 Marlin 1894S rifles load via gate.

I prefer the gate-loading featured in the 1894Ss, but the tube-loading does not keep me from enjoying the heck out of the old 27S.