Lever Gun Series: Why not the 1860 Spencer?

Published on April 14, 2018
Duration: 30:27

This video compares the 1860 Spencer Carbine and the 1860 Henry Rifle to determine why the Spencer, despite its military adoption and more powerful cartridge, was ultimately less effective than the Henry/Winchester designs. Testing reveals the Spencer's manual hammer cocking and slow cycling make it significantly slower to fire than the Henry's automatic cocking action. While the Spencer offered more stopping power and range, the Henry's superior rate of fire and capacity made it the clear winner for sustained military use.

Quick Summary

The 1860 Spencer rifle was significantly slower to fire than the 1860 Henry due to its manual hammer cocking requirement after each lever cycle. In contrast, the Henry's toggle-link action automatically cocked the hammer, enabling a much higher rate of fire, as demonstrated in speed tests.

Chapters

  1. 00:00Intro: What If Lever Guns?
  2. 01:10Rifle Specs: Spencer vs Henry
  3. 02:18Ballistics Comparison
  4. 04:08Spencer Speed Test (7 Rounds)
  5. 05:43Henry Speed Test (7 Rounds)
  6. 08:27Manual of Arms: 1860 Spencer
  7. 11:27Manual of Arms: 1860 Henry
  8. 14:22Blakeslee Tubes & Speed Loading
  9. 18:36Historical Context & Conclusion

Frequently Asked Questions

Why was the 1860 Spencer rifle slower to fire than the 1860 Henry rifle?

The 1860 Spencer required the shooter to manually cock the external hammer after each lever cycle, whereas the 1860 Henry's toggle-link action automatically cocked the hammer, allowing for a significantly faster rate of fire.

What were the main advantages of the .56-50 Spencer cartridge over the .44 Henry Rimfire?

The .56-50 Spencer cartridge fired a heavier 350-grain bullet at similar velocities to the .44 Henry's 200-grain bullet, providing significantly more energy for stopping power and long-range lethality.

Did speed-loading accessories improve the Spencer's performance against the Henry?

While accessories like Blakeslee tubes aimed to speed up Spencer reloads, the video demonstrated they were often fragile and prone to jamming. Crucially, they couldn't overcome the Spencer's slow firing cycle, making it inferior to the Henry's sustained fire capability.

Why did the Union Army adopt the Spencer rifle if the Henry was faster?

The Union military chose the Spencer for its ruggedness, a closed action less susceptible to dirt, and its more powerful cartridge. However, the Henry's massive advantage in sustained firepower and capacity eventually proved more decisive for military applications.

More Reviews Videos You Might Like

More from InRangeTV

View all →