I didn't read the other posts about deer hunting with a leveraction pistol carbine....Don't speak on what you don't know...I've taken deer with .44mag Marlin 1894 out to 147yrds, I've also taken deer with a 7.5" super blackhawk ranges as long as 121yrds (laser rangefinder). This was using handloads that MEANT every bit of "magnum" and filled the MARLIN'S pressure rating (handguns are rated well below what the rifles are capable of) and a scope of course. I've also used a .357mag Winchester 94 and a .45 colt Marlin 1894 on whitetails at ranges approaching 100yrds. My .44mag loads rival some .30-30 loads, using 1/3 the powder.

There are a lot of reasons people discount pistol cartridge carbines: they don't think they should scope them-->why would you limit how well you know you're on target? I like scopes on ANYTHING that I'm not ONLY going to use at short ranges, they DO make your more accurate.

They compare them to handgun performance, in many pistol cartridges, slow burning powders can mean the difference between a 6" bbl and a 22" bbl is a 50% increase in muzzle energy...my loads change from 1187fps average in my vaqueros (5.5") to 1620fps average in my 1894....230grns at 1620fps and grouping at 1.7" at 100yrds is pretty deadly.

THEY DON'T KNOW HOW TO SHOOT LEVERGUNS. Probably the number one reason people discount leverguns is because they don't shoot them well. It takes a little getting used to to change over from a bolt gun to a leveraction.

[quote]ORIGINAL: Nomercy

I didn't read the other posts about deer hunting with a leveraction pistol carbine....Don't speak on what you don't know...

Are you telling me not to express my opinion!? Have you forgotten what country we're in?
All I said was that I did'nt feel comfortable taking a shot at a deer at a longer range with the smaller cartrige and that there we doubts in MY mind.

I guess I should'nt rant, I fully expected to get corrected by some know it all.

Metro

For some people back in the old West, it was a matter of convinience. Foe example, cowboys on a cattle drive might choose to carry either a rifle or a pistol. Most cowboys had pistols, but the wagon would have a rifle or two. The wagon would only have to keep one type of ammo to keep everyone supplied. For the people that carried both, it was also convenient. Anyone that did much travelling on horseback could carry a much lighter load of ammo if they used smaller calibers.

The larger "rifle" cartridges were a mainstay for the buffalo hunters and for ranchers. The buffalo hunters needed the extra firepower. The ranchers had larger bore rifles simply because weight was not an issue. They didn't have to pack a heavy gun from TX to Kansas and back on a horse. We have a large caliber rifle that was bought new in the 1800's as a buffalo gun and we still have it today. That gun is a beast. It would be a burden to carry around. I was thinking it was something like a .405 Winchester. Not sure, but it is not a number I am familiar with.

The Henry was originally offered in .44 rimfire I believe. The larger calibers didn't come until a little later.

Funny you mention this. Last night, after Mrs. Six read about that kid getting hit in the head with a .454 Casull, she asked how big a cartridge it is. I flipped through my stack of G&A and found a side-by-side comparison of the .44M/.454C/.500S&W to show her. While she was looking, the idea of a .500 S&W lever action carbine popped into my head.

I looked around on the 'Net this morning and didn't find anything mentioning it, but I figure we'll have to wait and see whether the .500 is a commerical success. It's still early in the game, and S&W might end up dumping the cartridge once the initial hype wears down. I bet that would make for a pretty interesting (and capable) brush gun.

I'd still rather go for the 1895G Guide Gun in .45-70, though. You know, just for "kicks".