There was an incident in 1868, the Battle of Beecher's Island, that might have given the Army a clue. 50 men armed with Spencer rifles held off a force estimated at between 200 and 1,000 Indians for several days. The Indians withdrew after their leader, Roman Nose, was killed. The unit was composed of experienced frontiersmen and had the advantage of a good defensive position on a wooded sand bar, but one wonders what the outcome would have been if they had single shots.

"Bwoop" is the sound you hear when you design a larger receiver.

I believe that it was Bill Mauldin writing about 1941 during the transition between the Bolt-Action Springfield and the Semi-Automatic Garand that the problem so many of the older soldiers had with the Garand was that they believed that soldier would simply waste their ammunition, rather then aiming their shots. The more thing change, the more things stay the same.

I can remember wondering about this as a child and being so frustrated that that the lever action was passed over in favor of breech loaders and bolt actions! Haven't thought about this is forever! Great vid!

I'm imagining Americans in WWII with M1 garands and lever guns

California: bans SimiAutos Lever actions *EXIST

I want see this Enfield vs Winchester video

I brought this up on Bloke On the Range's channel, the comparison of lever guns vs bolt guns (specifically Lee-Enfields). The dudes in the channel were seething when I told them lever guns were faster then Enfields. I swear I had 20 euros wanting to swing on me if they ever met me in real life.

My only practical concerns would be the quantity of fouling from all that black powder, and the logistical difficulty of keeping troops supplied in the field and at remote installations. All that ammo had to be hauled in wagons or on the backs of pack animals, and carried with the troops on patrol.

I think the saying "Hind sight is 20/20" is totally applicable here. If they knew then what we know now about the future shape of warfare or ballistics and modern tactics, I'm confident they would have gone this route. Sure for prone firing lever actions arent as good as bolt actions, but this could have been worked around with say a pump action rifle instead I think. Frankly, I've shot lever actions prone and bolt actions, and depending on the bolt action, you still have to take your eyes off target and thus suffer the same "problem" lever actions did where you'd have to move a bit taking your eyes off target. That and the use of the 1895 in the hands of the Russian's showed it wasnt as ineffective at trench warfare as people thought it was too. So it's quite a realistic possibility that this could have been a good route to go. I feel it may even have advanced self loading designs a bit too if the mass adoption of quick load firearms was done.

You might consider modern leverguns in 44 magnum. It is a slight step down from 45-60, but it would make ammo pretty easy to source. And 44 Special is a good alternative to 44-40 for the squad leader. Get a few shooters together and you could emulate a possible 1880s commando unit.

I really enjoy the "what if?" lever action line of thought. I sat up for a while thinking about how this could have actually happened, and came up with something like this- 1870- U.S. Army adopts the Smith & Wesson Model 3 revolver. 1872- Due to something different than our own world, the revolver trials of 1872 do not happen, and therefore the Colt S.A. Army is not adopted. 1873- Ordinance Department notices the new Winchester 1873 rifle and .44-40 centerfire round. They begin a limited trial with the new rifle, and the Schofield is now made in this caliber as well, instead of the .45 as in our world. 1880 onward- Army doctrine has junior officers and NCO's equipped with the 1873 Winchester. The line troops still have trapdoor Springfield rifles. This is done as a compromise to the whole "they will waste ammo" thing, with the "ammo waster" weapons being in the hands of those who should know better. With doctrine being more suited to the realities of the West, there is a divergence in thinking from where we were in our world. The ramifications of this are even more food for thought. We might have been hesitant to jump on the auto pistol bandwagon of the early 1900's because our soldiers who in the 1870's and 1880's had lever guns would then be field or general grade officers making decisions. With no .45 long Colt there would have been no .45 ACP. We might have very well developed a smokeless pistol caliber cartridge (for military use) with priority on how it worked in a lever action and second on how it worked in a pistol. They may have ended up with "weird" guns that don't exist in our world, like 1895 Winchesters that fire from detachable pistol magazines, or might have had a military carbine version of the early semi auto Winchesters like the model 1907 as standard NCO/junior officer weapons before WWI. After that the timelines are just too different, but I imagine they may have developed the pdw concept (and maybe even the assault rifle) earlier than we did.

When comparing loading speed between lever actions and bolt actions that were not mag or clip fed. I feel that you must consider how easy it is to load the lever action without opening the action. So during a hesitation in fire or while moving you can continue slip rounds into the magazine.

modern training with that setup would be seriously dangerous to face.

what a hat! What a wall! What a video! What time is it! Who are you? Who am i?

Would the US have even had the infrastructure required to produce ammo in quantities sufficient to support this line of thinking at the time?

Times have changed a lot. Today's military pursues every bit of new technology. The US army had been very slow to embrace new ideas in the early 20th century. Champions of airplanes got pretty shabby treatment early on. By WW2 the embrace of technology was total. Your ideas about lever guns in the 1800's are spot on.

As someone who grew up shooting a 30-30 and then a Savage 99, I love this "what if". They are just plain fast.

Confession when i was a 10 year old cowboy (1955) my gun's would have been 1, Walker Colt 1,1866 Winchester 1, Sharps.that's not bad for a kid in the UK. (i just could not get enough western films.or a horse. in south London) love the hat.

Simunitions. Get on it! I'll volunteer.

hey, these guns work great at average combat distances! the intermediate cartridge concept leads to a round that's something like 7.62x40mm, instead of .30-06. bolt guns are never adopted, but lever actions are phased out in favor of pump or slide action guns that can be used prone. By world war 2, self loading rifles are being adopted, but since the rounds are shorter/lighter the US enters the war with box magazine fed, gas operated assault rifles.

"Better than an Enfield." I HEAR A CHALLENGE, SIR!

its so shiny!

Being a lever gun fan your line of reasoning is spot on, and I look forward to your what if experiment. would love to see a 2 gum match similar to the ones you have presented with modern arms, would be enlightening , even put the lever guns up against the bolts of ww1

It would be really cool to see ideas like this turn into a series on here. also in WW1 if the american forces were out fitted like you described in this video, the defensive capabilities of american forces in the trenches would have been staggering, due to magazine capacity and fire rate, trench raids would have been a different matter as well, since the action on a lever can be worked quickly and effectively in smaller confines than a bolt action could.

I have a .45-60 & love it. I usually just cut down .45-70 brass. I use a 292 grain bullet.

Ok this was awesome. You guys won me over with all the Lever gun content. Now supporting you guys on Patreon!

A History Channel documentary(I think History Channel) cited Custer's troops being equipped with .45-70 cartridges with copper cases instead of brass that resulted in a stifling inability to keep up any rate of fire as the hulls would become so jammed in the chambers after firing as to be nearly impossible to dislodge.

Very interesting presentation. I would think that the only limiting factor or dis-advantage to lever action repeaters would be the ability to carry enough ammunition to take full advantage of their volume of fire power. There are some indications that one of the factors that lead to Custer's defeat at the Little Big Horn was that his troopers started to run low on ammunition causing their fire to slacken. Granted, despite all of those movies, not every Indian War engagement was like the Little Big Horn battle. Also there is a story, whether it is actually true or not, that after the Civil War a northern newspaper correspondent interviewed a Confederate general. One of the questions he asked was how the general felt about fighting Union troops armed with repeaters. The answer surprised him. The general responded that he preferred fighting against troops armed with repeaters, because they had a tendency to not use fire discipline and would fire away all of their ammunition in a matter of minutes. In the time it took to replace those troops in the line or resupply them with ammunition it gave him an opportunity to make an attack against a quiet section of their defenses. If Custer's men had been armed with repeaters the battle could have gone either way; either they fired away their ammunition faster and lost the battle sooner, or the Indians fell back because of the soldiers overwhelming firepower.

I've been thinking about his whole lever action scenario for many weeks! Really looking forward to it guys :)

This is the type of show that I've never seen anyone else do. The format of your whole program ( and l am including your "In Range " and "Forgotten Weapons" as connected together as they really do compliment one another. Love your shows.... Wish I could afford more.....

Karl's excitement when Ian mentioned that he wanted an 1876 was priceless. I would give my left arm to do what you guys do! Keep doing it!

Ever since seeing the movie Zulu for the first time I have often thought of how different South Africa would have played out if the Zulus had a few hundred 1873 Winchesters. The short range a rapid fire would have set well with their close with the enemy tactics. I have always been of the opinion that a small number of Winchesters of any type would have give a huge advantage to any army from 1860 through 1890.

It be interesting seeing a video debunking common Wild West myths, or seeing a video on what firearms were actually commonly owned or used by people of that era. If I recall correctly guns like the Colt SAA were not as common as people believed them to be due to their price. I may be totally incorrect but it's interesting information

This is quite the badass and thought provoking concept. Love the video and can't wait to see if y'all go further into with actual rifles. Brilliant video my dudes.

You guys are really nerding out, and it's totally awesome.

I know one of the reasons they didn't use lever actions was the lack of easy prone firing. Not too big a deal, but was a concern in ww1 and 2

I friggin love that Wall O' Guns you have there Ian. You chose wisely.

For logistics, the Colt SAA and 1873 Winchester both in .44-40 [44WCF]. Also, the S&W is made in .44-40 as a secondary gun

Awesome stuff! This is the way history and somewhat alternate history should be taught and discussed. Great job, love what you're doing!

Holy hell. You just made a pretty damn modern squad out of 1860's tech. That's actually mindblowing. Keep videos like this coming! I want to see more, I want to see it in action!

Great video. Really interesting, but I think that as autoloading rifles became prevalent, old bolt actions still found use among snipers and marksman, but these lever actions wouldn't have had the kind of reach out ability necessary

Really great content. Gives plenty of food for thought. More please!

Interesting ideas. I love that you did this in front of Ian's wall in his office it is a better background then the bookshelf.

You boys been drinkin that devil's liquor

The .45-60 was created by shortening the .45-70 case from 2.10 to 1.89 inches. Bullet weight was listed at 300 grains, and when shot with around 60 grains of black powder, muzzle velocity was advertised at 1,315 fps.

As a civil war reenactor we did an experiment where during a tactical match ( no script battle where you actually use your tactics to fight and win) we had a guy hidden within out ranks armed with a Henry.. when the enemy tried to flank us he popped up and started laying suppressive fire. Then we would volly fire during his reload and do it again.. it stopped the flankers cold and we were able to use this tactic to push them back to there original line thus saving our fkan

I actually owned and fired one of these 1876 Winchesters in caliber 40-60. They were also made in 45-60 plus 45-75 and 50-95, all now obsolete, of course. Mine was a rifle with a 28 inch barrel (26 inch also made), but carbines with 22 inch barrels and muskets with 32 inch barrels were also manufactured. Altogether just under 64,000 were produced. Although I had some original ammunition and a tong tool and bullet mold, I was nervous about using vintage brass which had originally contained mercuric primers. The elemental mercury produced upon firing would amalgamate with the brass casing hardening and weakening it. Brass for the 40-60 can be made from 45-70 with the appropriate set of dies, but I was reluctant to part with $120 at the time. Fortunately I found a fellow at a gun show who was selling newly formed reloads (to help pay for the dies, I suspect) so I acquired forty rounds. Results at the range were disappointing, because all of the bullets keyholed and accuracy was poor. I suspect this was either due to the rough bore or the bullets being sized a bit on the small side. The 45-60 has the advantage of being a straight case, while all of the others are bottle-necked to some degree. Needless to say, never use smokeless powder to reload these old cartridges.

the proplem wasnt the firearm, but the supplylines. Ammo was not only pretty expensive, but they couldnt supply the amount of ammo needed on horse carts or packing horses. This stuff is heavy and back in these days there were many areas without Trains too

Okay, In Range now has to make a kickstarter for a time machine because I like the idea of the US Army going into the WW1 Armed with Winchesters latest and greatest, the M1895.

Very interesting! I have a soft spot for lever action rifles, can't wait to see the follow up video(s) on this subject.

This is the coolest video you guys have put out, and that's saying a lot!

Now imagine they ride hot air balloons, with snakes for ropes.

Ian, as for the rebel cap, a black slouch hat or a Hardee hat would be more appropriate as the most famous Henry armed regiments of the War of the Rebellion were the 7th Illinois, 64th Illinois and 66th Illinois infantry regiments. All three were in the Army of the Tennesee, the Midwestern army that fought at Shiloh, captured Vicksburg and was part of Sherman's army group in Georgia and the Carolinas. Anyway the soldiers of that army usually wore hats, very seldom did they wear those silly caps.

Man this is fantastic, youtube is worth something because of these guys! As was alluded to, there were other factors that made the mixed arms squad idea difficult in the day, the level of free function given to the individual soldier and the function of the NCO would have to change significantly to make the use of these, lets face it, much more expensive, and somewhat more delicate weapons. Deeper changes in doctrine would be required. In many places U.S. soldiers at this time spent a good deal of effort just trying survive malnutrition and the weather! The soldier training system just wasn't in place as it has been the last century. This is the coolest "what if" !

This is, from all the magnificient videos you've uploaded so far, the best one

Imagining a squad of WWII soldiers with lever action rifle

I haven't read all the comments, so forgive me if someone has already mentioned this... but, I have to wonder that if the Army did adopt a lever gun; if they would have pressured Colt to allow the .45LC loaded in a non Colt gun? Or, if the Army would have gone to a different pistol cartridge? Assuming that they retained a pistol caliber levergun. The .45-60 is really interesting too. Great "what if" discussion.

simply great topic & video!!!

I love videos like this. Very thought provoking

Sadly, some US Army units were still using Trapdoor Springfield rifles during the Spanish-American War.

Have you ever done a analysis or review of the 1884 Colt Lightning pump action rifle?

Don't know how I haven't seen this one until now. Wonderful conversation.

Your 'what if' lever gun video warmed this lever gun fancier's heart. Well done, guys!

There was lots of lever guns in the military, even though they were not "issue". Indian and civilian Scouts had them, officers could carry any firearms they wished, as could civilian employees of the Army such as muleskinners and hunters, railroad men, Pinkerton's, and woodcutters. There were many incidents where civilians on Army missions such as surveyors and telegraph wire men, reporters, geologists, and photographers defeated large war parties with lever guns. And of course...these groups were working together all the time.

Holy shit, I thought the title said What if the US Army adopted Laser guns in the 1870s. And that made think this was gonna be some weird tesla shit.

You guys are Mad. And this really needs to happen!

You two are awesome. Thank you.

I think early lever actions would make sense as early SMGS

1894 Marlins, for states that ban black rifles.

Hello from Suomi Finland! this was awesome vid. I hope that U do more videos like this.

great content and ideas!!!!

im giggling my ass off at 330 in the morning scrolling through the comments...

Very interesting thought. On the lever action squad vs. WW2 bolt action: You forget one very critical force multiplier here - the machine gun. German infantry squads were built arround the MG to the point where riflemen are almost reduced to protection of the MG crew. Most other nations had a lot of light machine guns which is in practice nearly the same firepower. That is the reason why a lever action squad would not be on the same level as a WW2 squad I recon.

Guys! This is a great concept. I am enthralled by it!

Awesome concept guys, I would love to see more in-depth analysis of lever guns I'm fascinated by them and hope to own a modern Henry .45-70 sometime. There does exist modern pointed ammo with soft tips for lever guns btw, check out Hornady for one

Now I want to know how well a squad outfitted with the lever-actions you mentioned in this video would fair against a typical Whermacht squad.

Not only that, like it did in russians (7.62x54R), it would handle the bolt-action rounds as it progressed.

I so want to sit down with you guys, drink some beer and talk weapons development in the latter 19th century. Its a hobby of mine. You're on the right track with the tools and available technology.

The idea is awesome. What I would want is for you to build on it and have period-correct uniforms and strategy narration like that deadliest warrior TV show - each time you get a historical idea and the weaponry to follow suit. 2 Gun is fun and all but if there's enough paying interest you could start up a new channel dedicated to this. So excited right now!

You guys fans of Harry Turtledove? Read "Guns of The South".

I'd be interested to know in real terms how reliable and squaddie proof the 1860 &1866 were when they were the new high tech thing. Would they be rugged enough for field use? Genuinely don't know, I guess they probably would have been though.

I've always thought about this so glad I'm not the only one!

awesome vid, make more of these what if discussions! i do think adopting henry's would been a superior choice even if you have 2 or maybe 3 times less of it compare to trapdoor single shot rifles, cuz you are more fast pasting and you can take down targets faster which will actually make the henry riflemen feel superior and confident, the enemys moral will boost down cuz you will have stress opening up your breech/trap of the gun under fire but pulling just a lever for your next round.. i dont see where anxiety comes in for that

This is kinda like "If Russians had Fedorov's assault rifles in WW1/2" The military system was just too conservative to adopt supremacy weapon

I just got a "stoner" thought us cavalry still with their 45-70 trapdoors vs. Native American warriors with like some mp5 10mm's. holy mother of god, were screwed. LOL

LOVE THIS ONE! Thanks guys!

Please continue this thought experiment. I Love it!!

what if... napoleon had a b-52 at the battle of waterloo?

my basic thought is that during the Spanish American war we see Lever guns employed in action and while the tactics are not there yet they were not quite the game changer that you are presenting them as. While it's easy to write some of the lack of adoption off as the army/Gov missing the potential there was at least one issue that the soldiers using the rifles at the time found to be a real usage problem. The ability to use and manipulate a lever action while prone is noticably harder to do than the comparable bolt guns of the erra.

Great concept-keep it going!

Very very interesting concept. This definitely needs to be fleshed out more.

By the time smokeless powder, bolt actions, and ammunition clips came about, lever guns were far out classed. A bolt gun using a five round en-block clip has a far higher rate of fire than any lever gun. The only issue the armies had was still thinking they needed a cartridge with an effective range of 1500 meters. Those armies that adopted 6.5mm cartridges and the 6mm Lee Navy were on the right track.

Most casualties came from disease in war until the mid 20th century. The most effective squad would use soap and boil their drinking water. Not sure that a lever gun would have changed history too much.

I remember asking myself this question when I was 10 and shot a friends bolt action rifle after having used lever actions since I had started shooting. Good stuff.

In the civil war Custer's Calvary used the Spencer and won. During the southern plains Indian war he still used Spencer's and won. Before the northern plains Indian war they had to give up their Spencer's and use the new Trapdoors and they lost bad! Side note: I might of missed something when you were talking about the 1876 but the 45-75 was the original cartridge for that model the 45-60 came out in 1879. 45-75 = 350 gr bullet at about 1380 fps.

awesome video guys

very interesting idea ! I love to see where this goes !!!

I have been thinking about that for years, you guys are right on the dot about it.

This is why I follow you guys.