Lever Gun Series: Mud Test - 1860 Henry Rifle

As part of our ongoing endeavors in regards to determining the viability of lever guns as potentially serviceable military arms, we're testing the 1860 Henry Rifle with the InRange mud test.
Will it survive?
InRange is entirely viewer supported:
/ inrangetv

[@Hostilenemy]

Civil war veterans have been waiting for this video. I'm glad they can finally get some closure.

[@fate4466]

Comments not disabled, because people don’t have their ego invested in it.

[@COIcultist]

Fate. I like that. It's like the real BS news that never has a comment section or they have a comment section but not on the subjects where they don't want to know the opinion of the great unwashed.

[@BigMek456]

The people who have their ego invested into this gun are probably so old that they can't use a computer efficiently enough to spam hateful comments

[@r6984]

@@BigMek456 I'm sure they are compiling a strongly written letter

[@RangerOfTheOrder]

I personally dislike them disabling the comments. It's fun to laugh at those with butthurt egos.

[@ironstarofmordian7098]

Damn right

[@COIcultist]

2nd time around you didn't have an empty cartridge to eject the mud above it? Empty lifter and mud fell into the breech. Late edit 23/11/18. This video was hosted on the 20th yet when I go to the home page this video isn't shown, likewise if I go to the page listing videos. I can only find this video by back tracking through the "Bell" notifications or going to the "Playlists" page and selecting "Mud & Dirt". Why isn't this indexed on the other two pages?

[@nchunter8918]

Exactly my thoughts, so basically if the gun was loaded or at least had an empty in it when it was dropped then you had much better chances of it running when you picked it back up.

[@TJWDawg]

That's what I was thinking. They were half right. The lifter ejecting the casings out the top did clear the mud, BUT there needs to be a casing to fill the middle of the lifter, otherwise the mud gets pushed out on the sides, and falls through the middle.

[@MonkeyDespot]

Exactly.

[@a.d.knight5695]

Exactly what I was thinking

[@AlexanderTzalumen]

yeah, with ACP there's going to be mid on that little lip the round rests on at the end of the headspace, and with the force applied to try forcing the action shut, that's not coming loose with a light rinse anyone.

[@ericmoney4572]

I'll have you know this is stressing out my 3 year old with this video. She's sitting beside me saying "Oh no, it's dirty and nasty. Gonna wash you gun, you gun is dirty, making a messy gun!" on the verge of tears...

[@Rory_Flynn]

I had similar feelings

[@svugo]

I think the first go was a success because of the spent casing kicking mud out on extraction. Second go was with empty chamber so even though the extractor kicked some mud out there was still a big hole in the middle.

[@christopherlebaron9401]

"I think you should load it again and put more mud in the magazine tube"

[@threebog]

What if we load it with mud? Will it cycle?

[@TheFranssiBrother]

..gun firing mud rounds when?

[@josephl2586]

1860 Henry: more reliable than an AK

[@rcspoon1]

If there was a live or spent round in the chamber when it was mudded for the second time I feel it would have passed again or atleast been better then not being able to get the first one into battery. so if you have to carry this gun a minimum of a spent case in the chamber if you dont trust the halfcock safety will help you chances. was both a great vid and hard to watch

[@noneyabusiness3253]

rcspoon1 this gun didn’t have a half cock so you couldn’t carry it with a live round in the chamber

[@Dnanidref]

with the 1st try you had an spent case in the chamber. I think it ejected the mud more forcefully than the lifter alone.

[@H_412]

I was going to say that 'he thought it was perfect, it wasn't, the improved one became popular' sounded exactly like the Borchardt story. Interesting result, and always fun to have a surprise in there.

[@spldrong]

Hey i got a really nice Winchester 94 that you CAN NOT borrow.

[@sawyernorthrop4078]

Still waiting on a WA2000 mud test

[@Stonekinaggressor]

You had a cartridge in the action in the first try and it pushed out more mud while reloading. You did not in the second try. Thats probably why it worked just fine the first time

[@1ohtaf1]

I was surprised the gun didn't jam after the first mudding, you might have been able to empty the gun by pushing the elevator (with the cartridge in it) down with the bolt open and letting all the cartridges slide out the front of the magazine. I think what really helped the gun during the first mudding was that it had a spent cartridge in the chamber, so during extraction and ejection, it would have prevented some mud from falling into the action when the bolt was retracted, and when ejected, it would have flung some mud (that would have otherwise landed on top of the next cartridge, in the path of the extractor) away with it. Interestingly, with these toggle link actions, as long as the extractor removes the cartridge from the chamber, once the lifter block pops up, there really is no place for the cartridge to go but out of the gun.

[@jak1259]

It would be interesting to see the disassembly of the gun to get the mud out

[@jasonmcmillan4373]

Well wow. Really surprised by this, clearly the Henry was not as susceptible to dirt as I thought. Nothing can take the place of real world testing. Off to watch the Spencer mud test now!

[@GoBIGclan]

Make this a playlist please! Thanks for keeping this series going

[@redracer405]

As a big level gun fan, it was great to see the old Henry do well in the mud test. Can't wait for the Winchester '66 and '73 tests.

[@yop_cholo]

That one was physically painful to watch. As if you were torturing some finely tuned piece of clockwork. That scritching noise when you tried to force the cartridge in ? It'll haunt me for a while...

[@alexc3504]

it's not like he took an original 1860 henry. It's a faithful reproduction. Don't worry about it.

[@yop_cholo]

@@alexc3504 I know, I know. It doesn't have the historical value. But it's a close mechanical copy. ;)

[@alexc3504]

@@yop_cholo true enough but still.

[@nickbeckwith6211]

I am with you Em, there just seemed something truly sacrilegious about this one, even if it was "just a replica."

[@yop_cholo]

@Ramona Quam Haha yeah, really felt like that didn't it ? ;)

[@Predalien195]

I have to agree with some people here about the second test. When you opened the action mud fell into the breech. That being said I honestly feel it did rather well considering the age of the design and think that this already is showing it was a much better rifle. But ya know... the US Ordnance Department didnt exactly have an amazing history for getting us the best weapons.

[@keithplymale2374]

Ordnance was a failure point from the Civil War till the M-14. About there best small arms were the 1911 and the M-1. And the men who designed each were not part of Ordnance but civilian gun inventors.

[@Predalien195]

@@keithplymale2374 Indeed, but that's the point. Instead of going with a better design they just chose to modify an existing one and adopt an inferior one as well. But these kinds of things still go on well into today. While the Mossberg 590 was the only shotgun to ever completely pass all US trials, you still see way more Remington's in inventory at most armories.

[@j.yossarian6852]

@@Predalien195 Shotgun noob, what makes the 590 superior?

[@Predalien195]

@@j.yossarian6852 Did you seriously say "shotgun noob"? Really... Well that right there already tells me you likely arent smart enough to understand the reasons but I'll try. Again... ONLY shotgun to ever COMPLETELY pass all US Military trials. That means it was the only one... If that's not enough reasons of why it's superior, perhaps you should take a look at the civilian market and compare Remington shotguns to Mossbergs right now. Remington guns are having SEVERE quality control issues, Mossberg is not. The location of the safety is a matter of preference for some but the tang safety of the Mossberg is in a better location. Unless you are using a model with a pistol grip, you dont have remove your finger from a firing position to activate or deactivate the safety unlike the Remington.

[@j.yossarian6852]

@@Predalien195 Off your high horse pal, I was referring to myself as the shotgun noob.

[@357magdad]

I think it would be an interesting test to fire black powder cartridges through on of these to see how the fouling affects the reliability. It would be interesting to see how many black powder rounds can be fired before the action or barrel gets too dirty to run. This could also lead to a video on how these would have been field cleaned in the old west.

[@Karelwolfpup]

must admit, quite surprised by the result, pleasantly so

[@DocOmaley98]

Again where you guys shine is the mud tests. It’s really awesome to see the Mythbuster aspect of the channel and explaining why certain guns fail and some succeed. Great video and maybe you guys could bring back the sand test.

[@GOBRAGH2]

I love the lever gun project. Keep it going!

[@SgtStinger]

One thing you missed doing: Getting the round out in to the elevator, and then pouring water on there. Might have cleared the extractor notch.

[@gavindavies793]

wouldn't that lead to grit in the barrel, which is a bad thing?

[@SgtStinger]

@@gavindavies793 I guess that depends on how much water one would use. Fair argument though, soldiers often don't have that much water.

[@CountArtha]

"Water?" I think you mean "whiskey." What kind of cowboy would have WATER on him?

[@gavindavies793]

what kind of cowboy would waste whisky cleaning his gun? Drink the whiskey and them piss on the gun.

[@matt1523]

ANGRY WORDS BECAUSE I HAVE EMOTION ATTACHMENT TO INANIMATE OBJECTS!!!!!

[@LUR1FAX]

To me this seems to actually be more reliable than rumored. I like being surprised by the results. Keep up the good vids, guys!

[@dudelit6482]

Remington Model 8 for mud test 2019!

[@lunarpking]

The violent action of the model 8 would probably sling mud out of it for a few rounds at least.

[@j.yossarian6852]

Hmmm, they might do the Chauchat, which is a similar action isn't it?

[@soylentgreen7074]

Very surprising results!

[@glennschunemann4800]

Note to self: When muddling my Henry leave a spent casing in the chamber. ;) The empty casing seemed to help push the mud out of the action during ejection.

[@ADRay1999]

For another mud test, why not try testing the Sig m17 and the Beretta m9 for comparison

[@bowlofrice8]

MAC has an m9 test

[@OrElseUWillDie]

@ScoobTEQ trusting an IWI shill? Not even once.

[@TheRealColBosch]

@@ravissary79 By the original theory, any piece of information is a meme, be it as simple as an image of a cat with an amusing caption or as complex as the Christian Bible. So I agree, just saying "it's a meme" is a worthless statement.

[@kingwiththeax6880]

Andrew Dalton Ray, no. MAC does pistols, and has done both of the ones you suggested. In Range should stick to historical long arm repeaters. Stop commenting you idiot.

[@jangounbrained]

Kingwiththeax Historic Long Arm repeater like the HiPoint or Glocks? InRange has done both modern pistols and rifles, and it would certainly be interesting to see how the M9 and M17 would behave in the patented InRange Goo!

[@RockIslandAuctionCompany]

I'm not as worried about the magazine tube, as I am about the open ejection port on top. There is no way this poor gun stands a chance.

[@tastychunks]

Hey I've heard of you guys before :)

[@Nemod70]

How did I miss this one for a week!

[@derweibhai]

Havent even watched yet, this isnt going to end well. Love these vids!!!!!

[@derweibhai]

Color me surprised. It worked!! Crazy......

[@josephlagasse8614]

Love the lever gun stuff.

[@kickinrocks6055]

You actually did a mud test on that beautiful rifle. Wow. You're amazing.

[@murderousintent7838]

YEEEEEET LEVER GUN SERIES also what about the later winchesters though, I'm guessing the 73, 76, 86, 92, 94, and 95 are much better than the Henry in mud (the 66 is pretty much the same as the Henry so I would guess it would do the same)

[@soylentgreen7074]

Arsenic Poisoning he already has done an 1895 in the past.

[@charlesadams1721]

I believe he stated near the end that they would be doing other lever actions, specifically doing the 1873 which he called an “iconic firearm”

[@ADRay1999]

Arsenic Poisoning: they’ve tested the Winchester 95 and it worked flawlessly so I guess maybe in the future they might test the other Winchester rifles

[@murderousintent7838]

oh didn't know, good thing it did otherwise Russia would have lost a ton of money from buying them in WW1 because of the mud in trenches

[@commonsenseless9894]

Idk, if I were just going off assumptions I would think that the Browning Winchester opens up more of the action to mud and grit getting in compared to prior models. Especially when open, then it's just waiting for mud to fall in and gunk it up

[@loupiscanis9449]

Thanks guys

[@Batmack]

Holy crap, mind blown

[@gnarshread]

Hot damn do I love these mud tests!

[@smithjones1906]

Great test, these are always fun. We need to donate you some Missouri mud, though.

[@RalphReagan]

That turned out far better than I thought

[@Carland17]

The first test had a spent casing in the action, the second test did not. Im guessing the spent casing was the difference in making sure the mud did not get into where it did.

[@Carland17]

This is not a judgement or a criticism, just an observation of how one small variable might be able to change the outcome.

[@xb0xisbetter]

Mud test round per minute showdown, AK vs Henry. Since they're both now repeaters, and the Henry was made for human beings to comfortably cycle, it may have a shot, even with the awkward tube magazine.

[@yurei8368]

Oh that poor beautiful Henry... I honestly imagine dust would be a bigger issue than mud would for that design. As a million people have pointed out, the ejector+a spent case (or a live one, if you're desperate) can clear big, heavy detritus from the action and get the gun going, but desert moondust grit is not so easily dealt with. Perhaps that's the real reason the military wanted the open mag tube dealt with - the gun is surprisingly proof against mud and crap when run properly, but all that openness makes it more susceptible to dust issues/buildup over time?

[@Blozox]

I think the reason it failed on the second round is that there was no casing that would have pushed the mud out of the action, on the second mudding there was just a big "hole" there. Just my guess

[@DeadPollo]

that moment you stop watching dirty stuff to get stuff getting dirtier

[@RebSike]

The Henry is an absolutely gorgeous gun imo

[@kentuckyjustice1408]

I agree with the "camera man" when he said (paraphrased) more mud went into this than normally would have, but I still love my Henry rifles. I, like many others, have my share of black rifles, but I can't help loving these lever guns. I hunt with a lever gun (about) 75% of the time, large and small bore. It's hard to beat 'em. "Thumbs up" from this Kentucky boy.

[@yuriyromaniw6629]

"Mortaring" a tube magazine filled with centerfire ammo....

[@timothyruggles3031]

wow that was amazing

[@misteralfredo]

Interesting, the difference might've been due to the spent round being/not being in the chamber. It seemed like ejecting the brass cleared any potential ingress that could've taken place. The second run was with an empty chamber, allowing dirt to get into the breech.

[@ExUSSailor]

I love these videos, they're very informative, and, often very surprising. However, this one hurt a little to watch.

[@Girder3]

Nice to see some more lever actions go through the test. This also makes me wonder how well pump shotguns would do in the mud test. We've already seen bolt actions go through this test with varying results.

[@solarwind3656]

H&K has built up this lore about the HK416 being "mudproof, waterproof, sandproof", which begs the question: how much mud does it take to stop an HK416? Perhaps you could try an MR556 mud test.

[@gatmanaug]

did not expect that wow

[@commonsenseless9894]

Oh Lord! It hurts to watch such a pretty gun go through such injustice! But never the less I'd say that was a pass, did better than the AM M1 and most other things you've tested. The Henry continues to impress!

[@braxtonb3787]

Glad to see the wheel barrel found its way home

[@usergonemad]

I'd regard that as a pass, since you would literally have to submerge the gun in mud - like a horse had stepped on it - to replicate the amazing amount you poured over and into it on the first run. The second run was hilarious overkill. Thanks for the great content!

[@m1garandlvr420]

I think what contributed to it failing the second mudding was due in large part to the fact that there wasn't a spent casing covering the mouth of the chamber. Also when the elevator comes up with a spent cartridge in the middle it clears more debris. Side note: this is just nitpicking but the consistency of the mud was different. More liquid to run into the small crevices.

[@ditto1958]

Uberti makes really good guns. The one thing that bothers me, though, is that weird red color they put on their stocks on lever guns. The wood on the guns from Henry Repeating Arms looks much nicer.

[@Deathbyreality1]

Could you said that with the elevator the way it is the henry is a "self cleaning gun!"...

[@wikikomoto]

as much as i love these videos, i feel the mud test is a little flawed. it really is up to the mud god to decide what tiny piece of debris goes where in the end

[@ktinga1]

I think the biggest reason it passed the first time was the empty case kept the action pretty well sealed, and anything that got beside the case was pushed out by the lifter while the case held a lot of the mud up and out of the way.

[@michaell4187]

Damn!!! Ian throwing shade at Borschardt

[@unclebuck4er467]

The difference was the loading of a cartridge in the gun prior to dunking. If you had a round in the chamber first the mud would not be able to fall in the chamber. So if you carried the rifle in locked and cocked, it would work. if you carried it unloaded and had to chamber first without clearing the ejection port the act of loading will cause a fail.

[@davidcool5189]

I am shocked that the gun worked at all after being mudded. I thought for sure that getting mud in the magazine was going to immediately disable the Henry. Eagerly awaiting more lever-gats!

[@ThomasRonnberg]

I'm so glad certain companies make replicas of these fine rifles. Otherwise it would be very very very difficult to watch some of the mud test videos...

[@dannythehonestgamer6051]

The Henry had a major production issue that simply made it impossible to produce it in large numbers, witch is why only about 14 000 were made and why it was replaced by the Winchester 1866. That the barrel and magazine tube are made in a single piece. That made it a wery hard piece to make, and it took it´s sweet time to make it aswell. A lesser problem was that the .44 Henry rounds were not wery powerful and were not realy goof for shooting at any range over 200 yards. And even that was pushing it. The .44 Henry is basically a pistol round by modern standards, and not a wery strong one. That said if the enemy were up and close it was the rifle you wanted to have if you could afford it. A Spencer works aswell, anything with more than one shoot capacity were better than a single shoot rifled musket.

[@CaptainCock99]

holy shit am i impressed by that first run

[@keggerous]

Well color me shocked and impressed.

[@New2Kendo]

Those early Henrys beutiful rifles, I want to pick one up after rhe holidays possibly

[@Supercereal4]

Shoutout to the guy firing full auto in the background

[@paulhinds4840]

All the comments have brought up an interesting factor. When mud testing semi-auto actions the gas and violent ejection does tend to throw out mud and grit - especially the direct had impingement AT action. Having a cartridge case in the chamber of a lever action allows it to clear the ejection port. One wonders how well the new Henry with closed magazine tube and side ejection would do.

[@GretchentheAlligator]

So the rounds can be set off when loading the tube, awesome!

[@Super-Kuper]

For the conclusion of this series, I would really like to see, "what is the best we can do with a levergun platform using modern available parts" project. I'm sure our friends in CA would appreciate it.

[@tartcartpas1]

I think Ian was right it's mud getting in to the ejector channel. I cant wait to see the '73 test 'cus I sure ain't doing it to mine. Also correct me if I'm missing something but I'm pretty sure the way to fix that jam is pull the bolt back press the loading gate down with your finger then pull the round out of the chamber.

[@fellsbane1126]

I think the spent case in the chamber probably helped to keep keep the mud out of the chamber and ejector port as well as push it out when loading a fresh round. The second attempt was done with an empty chamber.

[@ernstbergerbrent]

Probably had something to do with it. When he cycled it I saw mud fall into the action.

[@aussiebloke609]

It appears the first attempt worked because it had a spent cartridge in the chamber. When this was ejected @ 2:14 the lifter _and_ the empty cartridge pushed the mud out of the way. The second time @ 4:50 it was an empty chamber - and the lifter has a big hole in the top for the mud to fall through. This shows if you want carefully as he works the action - first time around, it threw a big clod of mud up into the air. Second time, it was just a little splash - the rest evidently falling gently to the side or falling in.

[@GoBIGclan]

Manual of Arms when mud covers your winchester henry... Best chances are if a round or casing is currently in the chamber to push the mud out and not allow seepage. Furthermore, cycle quickly, maybe upside down too?

[@TheJdizzle227]

One thing I noticed in the video is that you left a spent casing in the chamber during the first time you applied the mud. It seems like that might have shielded the chamber and extractor from any kind of obstruction for a repeat shot, as well as the ejected shell casing helping to expel the initial excess mud and debris

[@gladiatordude3723]

Suprisingly well for a 1860s weapon

[@Landsharkitis]

when he mortars it and mud comes out, that was gnarly

[@Johnyrocket70]

All right, nothing like loosening up the tolerances with a good wet sanding. Will be more reliable now. Maybe a bit less accurate if you altered the chamber specs.

[@aqui1ifer]

On the topic of the US adopting lever guns; by the time smokeless powder arrived, would the Army have continued to use lever guns by the time the Winchester m1895 arrived? Given how that Mud test on that 1895 went it seems quite underrated as far as “modern” repeating arms go. Imagine an 1895 in .30-06 with a Springfield stripper clip guide!

[@soylentgreen7074]

aqui1ifer those exist. There’s multiple on gunbroker.

[@bowlofrice8]

aqui1ifer the Russians contracted some winchester in 7.62x54r

[@soylentgreen7074]

Drew Martin yup, they also have some 44 russian smith & model 3’s (schofield’s) they bought anything they could get their hands on in desperate times. I believe the 7.62x54r 1895’s had stripper clip guides but I’m not 100% certain.

[@ryangshooter_1682]

@@soylentgreen7074 yes the Russians ordered 300000 rifles and they had requested stripper clip guides that would fit Mosin Nagant and Winchester 1895

[@Qsaws_]

Impressive

[@droppinplates6665]

during the first go when he mudded the gun there was a empty round in the chamber and when the gun ejected that round to put the first one up in it self cleared its self / then on the second go there was no round in the chamber which made all the difference it allowed mud into the extractor which wouldnt happen in the field if the weapon was loaded

[@MarvinCZ]

It seemed to me the ejecting cartridge helped clear a bit of mud from the top of the action. The blob of mud that fell into the open action in the second attempt seems to be the piece that the ejecting cartridge removed before.

[@Josh93B93]

Well, i'm going to give up on commenting, ive been waiting for responses from you on multiple videos over the last 4 years, have yet to ever get a single reply, I'm not mad, still enjoy watching the channels and wish you guys luck for the next year

[@spacephantomranger]

gonna be honest... i did not expect that to do what it did on the first run!

[@christopher-vj4hn]

Spent cartridge first time around definetly help push mud out. Without it mud just fell right into the action

[@Agent96006]

Hi Karl, I know you made a video talking about what would happen if the US military adopted lever guns. But could you go more in depth with other weapons that could have been advantageous for the military to have back then?

[@largegoop]

“That poor thing,” ~ Ian as Karl covers the Henry with ‘soupy’ mud

[@leathery420]

Good video. Though I would have tried to mortar the round into the lifter then dump the water. The round probably tracked mud into the chamber not allowing the rounds to go in all the way.

[@212driller]

I'd love to see an 1894 mud test.

[@VadarVadar]

At the second attempt the case ejecting was Missing which made space for the mud compared to the first try

[@takogonikanetniukogo]

*Takes a deep breath* Well, its still handles the mud better than AK

[@sundoga4961]

That really is a high level of reliability. You're never going to get perfection, but something that can take a mucking and keep on chucking is what you want in the field. I wonder how well the trapdoor Springfield would handle this?

[@barbatoslupusrex8712]

Lever-action on my birthday? Nice

[@Theporkchopsandwhich]

At 0:451 you can see the mud fly up and a small glob fall down into path of the action as you cycled it. Karl working the action seemed more vigorous on the first run as well.

[@visionaryfirearmsllc9999]

The reason it worked the first time and not the second time was due to the spent case in the chamber. When opening the action the first time the spent case pushed out any mud. The second time since there was no case it just fell into the action.