[Jeff Higgins]

The rail on this rifle is removable. The top of the receiver is drilled and tapped with holes at the same spacing as any Marlin, so it will accept any scope mounts or sights meant for Marlins. Granted, if removed, it would require a taller rear sight or a shorter front sight, but those are readily available as they interchange with those on any Marlin. A scope (God forbid...) could be mounted either to the rail or to the receiver, hairy palms notwithstanding.

As far as magazine and caliber choices, I believe the tubular magazine was the right call, along with chamberings suitable to such. Detachable box magazines, as on the Browning BLR, just make lever guns feel clumsy. They add width and depth, and a weird shape to the part of the rifle where we carry them. Part of the joy of traditional lever guns is just that - how they carry. The slim receiver, with the rifle balanced right in front of the trigger guard. Conversely, one of the worst rifle designs in the world for carrying is anything with a detachable magazine hanging out right there. Unless, of course, one only carries it from the trunk to the bench rest, then it really doesn't matter. Beyond that, I believe they are hedging their bets with regard to a detachable magazine of any kind, with at least a few states going after them regardless of capacity.

An iron sighted short rifle such as this, or a carbine, really doesn't need the velocity and range provided by bottlenecked rifle cartridges. Even with its peep sight and .44 mag chambering, this thing is useful out to a couple hundred yards. That's plenty. And it sure hits harder than any .223 out to 100 yards or so, especially on bigger, tougher animals.

I think S&W have chosen the right combination to appeal to as many as possible in today's market. Like I said, I'm sure they did their market research.