AR vs. lever action reliability

[HavocMan 13]

AR, without question. My Winchester's are range toys. My AR's are tools.

[JC_68Westy 1,024]

+1000 on the M-14

[RUTGERS95 890]

Please back your statements. There are published numbers for mean rounds to failure of parts and so on for the AR platform. Please provide the numbers of the lever gun.  Like how many rounds before the bolt fails? How do you define "reliability"?  

 

Just to be clear, you are saying that the military carries spare parts in their pack so they can service their guns mid firefight, but if they didn't have said parts they would be better served by leverguns? I want to make sure I understand what you are saying.  

 

Also seriously .. ease of use? Have you ever shot one prone, off side, etc? Its good to know that ergonomics have been perfected 120 years ago or so. 

 "Just to be clear, you are saying that the military carries spare parts in their pack so they can service their guns mid firefight, but if they didn't have said parts they would be better served by leverguns? I want to make sure I understand what you are saying."

 

stop being retarded, that's not what I'm saying or inferring. a lick of common sense goes a long way

 

you really think a lever will not be more reliable than an AR?  How many moving parts on a lever vs an AR?  How many issues do we have in the stan and iraq due to the fine dust fouling up the actions?   You ever talk to armorers coming back from over there with all the issues they've had due to the environment and lack of properly maintained weapons?  I'll bring my cousin who just got back and let him explain to you at the range just how much bs the 'reliable AR' myth has become.  There are tons of unreported weapons related issues that have gotten men hurt and killed because of parts or full system failures.  Great weapon system no doubt but not nearly the model of reliability people tout because of their limited range time.  We baby the crap out of our ARs but your talking a numbers game here in adverse conditions with less than ideal maintenance habits. 

 

 

lever is absolutely easier to use, to argue otherwise is foolish.  I can train my 7 yr old to use a lever in under 30 minutes to include cleaning.  I cannot do that with an AR.  Now in the OPS scenario, that is important. 

[RUTGERS95 890]

agree... calling BS on lever being easier to use...

 

AR - point and click..

lever - point click then cycle gun manually

 

certainly not easier.. 

 

try teaching kids the two platforms side by side and report back.  Take a 7yr old, 10yr old, a democrat and then tell me....lol  Hell I've see new shooters not even load their magazines correctly.

 

now for fun...

[vladtepes 1,060]

try teaching kids the two platforms side by side and report back.  Take a 7yr old, 10yr old, a democrat and then tell me....lol  Hell I've see new shooters not even load their magazines correctly.

 

now for fun...

 

 

I am discounting the mentally disabled.. 

[RUTGERS95 890]

Some people have visions of playing call of duty in real life, and some have done it in real life. I for one have used the 16 in the butthole of the world and it let me and my crew down frequently. Everything from hajji being drugged up and getting hit multiple times with a 556 but still stays in the fight, to seeing American servivemen either killed or injured because of failures of their weapon. Trust me from experience being in the shit isnt like a video game or being at the range at cherry ridge, you get dirt and dust in places you never thought you could get dirt, and in real life nothing is worse than a weapon failure. Nothing is like having to shout to your crew that your weapon jammed, and hearing someone else shout back me too. There is more to weapons reliability testing than youtube videos, ar15.com, and shooting at the range. I carried one in real life and seen all of its inadequacies in real life, i for one will never carry one again if my life depends on it

 

 

agree

 

the problem here is that people tend to think in a vacuum.  I'm not saying the AR is inferior to a lever but less parts, simpler to operate, clean, maintain, and teach period.....

[RUTGERS95 890]

I am discounting the mentally disabled.. 

lol...well played....

 

you see my point though right?  I'm not saying the AR isn't great and a better weapon, I'm merely pointing out some variables for the OPs scenario. 

[vladtepes 1,060]

and just to add.. "easier" is assuming that the shooter understands the weapon.. as in it is easier to reload an AR over a lever gun.. 

[vladtepes 1,060]

lol...well played....

 

you see my point though right?  I'm not saying the AR isn't great and a better weapon, I'm merely pointing out some variables for the OPs scenario. 

 

you forget about people with one arm.. wouldnt an AR be better for them.. lol

 

the post asks what would YOU choose.. not some idiot that is completely unfamiliar with guns.. 

[blksheep 466]

I'm not buying it. Even in the Old West they would have taken an AR.

[Vlad G 345]

 "Just to be clear, you are saying that the military carries spare parts in their pack so they can service their guns mid firefight, but if they didn't have said parts they would be better served by leverguns? I want to make sure I understand what you are saying."

 

stop being retarded, that's not what I'm saying or inferring. a lick of common sense goes a long way

 

you really think a lever will not be more reliable than an AR?  How many moving parts on a lever vs an AR?  How many issues do we have in the stan and iraq due to the fine dust fouling up the actions?   You ever talk to armorers coming back from over there with all the issues they've had due to the environment and lack of properly maintained weapons?  I'll bring my cousin who just got back and let him explain to you at the range just how much bs the 'reliable AR' myth has become.  There are tons of unreported weapons related issues that have gotten men hurt and killed because of parts or full system failures.  Great weapon system no doubt but not nearly the model of reliability people tout because of their limited range time.  We baby the crap out of our ARs but your talking a numbers game here in adverse conditions with less than ideal maintenance habits. 

 

 

lever is absolutely easier to use, to argue otherwise is foolish.  I can train my 7 yr old to use a lever in under 30 minutes to include cleaning.  I cannot do that with an AR.  Now in the OPS scenario, that is important. 

 

 

Oh good, calling me retarded will certainly make you point stronger.

 

Arguing with you about it is certainly foolish on my part, so how about this, you bring your lever gun, I bring my AR and we meet at the range. Lets see who is more EFFECTIVE on the same targets and challenges for say .. 300-400 rounds?  Lets see who's gun fails first, is more accurate, can reach further, breaks first, works at odd angles.

 

You want to talk bs, then put your money where your mouth is. Name the time and place.

 

I can get someone's argument that they don't like the AR and would prefer a M14/AK/SCAR/whatever, the AR is surely not perfect, but if you want to tell me the levergun is a better platform I'm simply going to call you out. If you can't train someone in 10min to clean one, that is your own damn fault not the platforms fault.

[Vlad G 345]

Oh and another thing, every mechanical device fails. Yes the AR fails in certain adverse conditions, but guess what EVERYTHING fails. It's mechanical device not a magical wand of death. It isn't even a perfect mechanical device, but every damn weapon system has a failure point. Sure, every soldier will bitch about how his gun failed at some point, you can probably go back to the Romans and there would be some town crier bitching how the troops Gladius is rusting in sea foam and you can travel in the future and see people complain how their plasma rifles will fail on alien goo melts through battery compartment.

 

I fully understand that this not something a soldier who depends on their weapon wants to hear, but crap breaks. Every damn thing man can make, nature can unmake. There is no perfect weapon, it is a all a series of compromises.

 

But in no way do the failures of modern weapons justify using weapons designed right about the same time as smokeless powder.

[2 trip_nick 0]

The OP gave two choices, AR or Lever.  Leave your other guns home and answer the question.

[RUTGERS95 890]

vlad, you seem to get your panties in a was pretty easily.  you need to relax a bit as your original inference was well...retarded.  It's ok, we all make retarded mistakes at times.

[RUTGERS95 890]

you forget about people with one arm.. wouldnt an AR be better for them.. lol

 

the post asks what would YOU choose.. not some idiot that is completely unfamiliar with guns.. 

I was merely responding with some variables for consideration.  I can't help if some people get bunched panties because their precious opinion and beloved AR views are based on going to the range and shooting 200 rounds and thinking their firearm is from der sonnenkinder.....

 

 

what would I choose......I take neither and bring the m1a because that's what I have earmarked for a bug out gun.

[A-Tech 8]

We baby the crap out of our ARs

I beat the SHIT out of my AR's. I'm no more afraid to scratch them as I would any other tool I own...because that's what they are...tools.

 

 

lever is absolutely easier to use, to argue otherwise is foolish. I can train my 7 yr old to use a lever in under 30 minutes to include cleaning. I cannot do that with an AR.

 

Tell that to this girl...I've never once thought the AR platform was in any way difficult to clean or disassemble.

 

 

[jrfly3006 42]

I'm pretty sure if you took a good sample of shooters...put them in front of some dark forest somewhere , not knowing who or what was inside and said "you have to go in there and survive for a while...take only one gun...and then place an AR with 4 15 rd mags and a Marlin 336 with 60 loose rounds in front of them....the overwhelming majority are gonna grab that black gun...IMHO..

[Vlad G 345]

vlad, you seem to get your panties in a was pretty easily.  you need to relax a bit as your original inference was well...retarded.  It's ok, we all make retarded mistakes at times.

 

Oh no, you made some pretty strong statements sir, and I've asked you to back them up. You called me retarded. Very well, I'm willing to put our theories to the test and see which one made a mistake. I'm willing to have some else record the experiment, and post it here for all to see. I'm willing to eat crow if my position is proven wrong, and yours is proven right.

 

The question is, are you willing to put your money where your mouth is? 400 rd test, my AR vs your lever gun. Each part chooses how 200rd are shot in whatever way they think they can make the other person's gun fail or be proven impracticable. No cleaning, no spare parts, tests done on the clock, if a gun jams you clear and keep going.

 

Yes or no? Do you believe in theory hard enough to prove it?

[usnmars 136]

Eh, yall can keep your plastic. Im gonna stick with stopping power and reliability. You can fantasize all you want about becoming a post apocalyptic "operator." But i am planning on making every shot count so i'll need some stopping power. I am thinking about motor oil as a lube, not space age teflon or amphibian lube or whatever they are peddling on ar15.com this week. How many levers are 100yrs old or more and still taking deer?

[Vlad G 345]

usnmars. my invitation is open to you as well. You sir are a veteran, and I'm am a overweight middle aged computer programer. Certainly if you think a lever gun is more reliable, I'll gladly meet you at the range and I'll certainly eat crow if I'm proven incorrect.

 

Also, I'm not really sure who here was fantasizing about anything, last I check we were just disusing comparable reliability of different platforms so I'm not really sure where you are going with that.

 

Also, ask me the question about how many guns are 100years old in .. oh .. about 50 years. I'm curious how many ARs will be around then vs Lever guns (stupid legislation aside).   You statement is like saying look how many more 70 year old 1911 are there compared with 70 year old Glocks. Well yeah, sure.

[Parker 213]

I'm pretty sure if you took a good sample of shooters...put them in front of some dark forest somewhere , not knowing who or what was inside and said "you have to go in there and survive for a while...take only one gun...and then place an AR with 4 15 rd mags and a Marlin 336 with 60 loose rounds in front of them....the overwhelming majority are gonna grab that black gun...IMHO..

 

Although I love the Marlin's, an argument could be made for the M94 over the 336. The M94's top ejection is easier to work with for clearing jams/misfeeds, and one fitted with the solid crosspins vs. the cheap rollpins would be optimal. Fewer parts and simplicity are in the Marlin's favor. 

[Vlad G 345]

Side note, Marlin 336 has 89 parts, and the A2 Ar15 (which is worst case scenario as many current models have fewer parts in the handguard and stock areas, and sights as well) is 101 parts. I'm willing to be my ARs have less then 90 parts. Win 94 looks like 81 parts

[vladtepes 1,060]

I was merely responding with some variables for consideration.  I can't help if some people get bunched panties because their precious opinion and beloved AR views are based on going to the range and shooting 200 rounds and thinking their firearm is from der sonnenkinder.....

 

 

what would I choose......I take neither and bring the m1a because that's what I have earmarked for a bug out gun.

 

 

I go through between 100 and 500 rounds per range session and well over a thousand rounds between cleaning on my 14in ar..... i am very rough with my guns.. definitely do not baby them..... 

 

 

and being a "post apocalyptic operator" is not going to be dictated by ANY gun... not an AR.. not a lever gun.. none of them...

 

 

I was only taking the question at face value.. AR or lever gun... while I have definitely shot lever guns.. I would not want one in an "end of the world scenario".. the AR15 is extremely common... with common ammo.. and common mags... it is easy to operate from more angles than a lever gun.. and faster to reload.... I having pushed my personal gun to filthy levels do not see the mass failure everyone complains about.. maybe if I were in the middle east and had sand in every inch of the gun it might be different... but I am not.. I live in PA... i beat the shit out of the gun.. it keeps running... 

 

if you think a lever gun is better.. then by all means go for it.. I dont.. 

[SgtToadette 59]

I vote lever gun because I'm a glutton for punishment.

[Parker 213]

Side note, Marlin 336 has 89 parts, and the A2 Ar15 (which is worst case scenario as many current models have fewer parts in the handguard and stock areas, and sights as well) is 101 parts. I'm willing to be my ARs have less then 90 parts. Win 94 looks like 81 parts

One can easily split hairs over actual working parts and "parts" between the 336 and 94. Whether you want to count grip caps, grip cap screws, filler screws, buttplate and screws, Marlin's "bullseye" mounted in the buttstock, swing swivel studs and post-84 crossbolt safety parts as "parts" and they might just be even. Disassemble a Marlin of its necessary working components and I think it is simpler and fewer.

[Vlad G 345]

Fair enough, but how exactly do you want to count them? By the same standard I can strip who knows how many parts from the AR count, all the buttstock components, sling mounts, etc, etc. I think we can all agree the AR takedown pins also never really fail, so can I subtract that?

 

My point isn't to be a pain in the butt with counts, but that parts count isn't actually a meaningful standard of reliability. You can have complex machines that rarely fail and simple ones that fail often because of design, metallurgy, fitting, etc.

[Parker 213]

Fair enough, but how exactly do you want to count them? By the same standard I can strip who knows how many parts from the AR count, all the buttstock components, sling mounts, etc, etc. I think we can all agree the AR takedown pins also never really fail, so can I subtract that?

 

My point isn't to be a pain in the butt with counts, but that parts count isn't actually a meaningful standard of reliability. You can have complex machines that rarely fail and simple ones that fail often because of design, metallurgy, fitting, etc.

 

All true. When it comes to metallurgy, both lever guns (the early ones) are comprised mostly of forged steel parts. They have for over a century endured the test of time. The 94 is typical Browning, more parts than necessary in some cases.

[mipafox 438]

AR, and leave the bore snake. ARs don't need cleaning. And they are far more reliable than levers and last longer.

[usnmars 136]

AR, and leave the bore snake. ARs don't need cleaning. And they are far more reliable than levers and last longer.

Dude, step away from the crack pipe..........

[mipafox 438]

 

Dude, step away from the crack pipe..........

 

 

How so?

 

I've never put 100 rounds through a lever without some sort of cycling malfunction. I've put 10K+ through ARs without any malfunctions.

 

School me.