AR7 survival rifle


PDA






ChrisAHF
March 27, 2008, 06:08 PM
Anyone have any experience with one of these? its exactly what im looking for but ive heard it can have reliability issues. THat would be a huge problem being a "survival" rifle. Thanks.

If you enjoyed reading about "AR7 survival rifle" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
R.W.Dale
March 27, 2008, 06:16 PM
Reliability issues WOW! that's an understatement. If you can get even one bullet to come out of the bbl of one of these pieces of garbage you're way ahead of the game.

To top it off the example I had experience with had a bent bbl from the factory. What was cool was that instead of being bent at one point the barrel had a graceful arc for it's entire length.

There simply isn't enough bad things that can be said about the AR7

mp510
March 27, 2008, 06:18 PM
You would be better of looking into a Marlin Papoose.

bearmgc
March 27, 2008, 06:19 PM
And why not a Marlin lever action for a survival rifle?

ChrisAHF
March 27, 2008, 06:43 PM
Wow, thanks for the info. I really "dodged that bullet".

Chipperman
March 27, 2008, 06:49 PM
Well, not really b/c the bullet probably would never have made it out of the barrel! :neener:

What about the old Henry survival rifle? Those are supposed to be pretty good, from what I've heard.

lee n. field
March 27, 2008, 06:58 PM
Anyone have any experience with one of these? its exactly what im looking for but ive heard it can have reliability issues. THat would be a huge problem being a "survival" rifle. Thanks.

I had a Charter Arms gun, back in the late '80s. Not reliable. It's sole interesting feature is that it floats.

If I wanted something to fill the " little bitty survival .22" niche, I would get a Ruger 10/22, fit it with a Butler Creek folding stock and the shortest barrel that wouldn't get me in legal trouble in this backward, benighted state. Keep the iron sights, put your choice of optics up top.

gunnerh
March 27, 2008, 07:07 PM
The Armalite AR-7 I got in the late 60's is still working fine. It never was a nail driver but it fit under a canoe seat and floats. I still take mine when I use a canoe. A lot of companies have made them: Charter Arms, Henry and others. There was even a pistol version (called it ugly is insulting ugly). Some worked and some did not.

ChrisAHF
March 27, 2008, 07:28 PM
Whats the general concensus on the Henry survival rifle?

valtr0n
March 27, 2008, 07:33 PM
What about the Springfield M6?

Chipperman
March 27, 2008, 07:33 PM
The Henry is basically an updated version of the AR-7.

I've heard generally good things about them, but have no first hand experience.

bannockburn
March 27, 2008, 07:37 PM
I had one of the Charter Arms AR-7's years ago; workmanship and materials used were marginal at best. Functionability was intermitant and accuracy was practically non-existant. Not a gun I held onto for very long.

ceetee
March 27, 2008, 07:50 PM
I bought a Charter Arms AR-7 back in the early eighties. It's never been a tack-driver, but it's always been easily "minute of squirrel" accurate. It got buried behind a bunch of stuff and mostly forgotten from sometime in the mid-nineties until last fall. I pulled it apart, cleaned it well, lubed it up, and took it to the range. Still "minute of squirrel" accurate. I let Mrs. Ceetee run a few magazines through it, and her only response was, "Hey! I like this!"

The only time I ever had any problems or jamming was when shooting with some crappy after market 15-round magazine.

gopguy
March 27, 2008, 08:05 PM
The early Armalite AR-7 with the flying Pegasus logo was a decent little gun. I have several early ones and they all work fine. The later Charter's and Henry's have issues. Sometimes tweaking the magazines are enough, sometimes not...

One of mine was used as a prop gun on the old Get Smart TV show in the 60s.

Here are a pair of mine on the Get Smart website.

http://www.ilovegetsmart.com/gsgun.html

ChrisAHF
March 27, 2008, 08:10 PM
Anyone have any first hand experience with the new Henry ones? Ive seen them at gun shows before. My freind had one too, im gonna ask him about it.

lee n. field
March 27, 2008, 09:05 PM
The Henry is basically an updated version of the AR-7.

UPdated in what way?

Carl N. Brown
March 27, 2008, 09:07 PM
If a thread is titled "worst gun" or "favorite gun" someone
is bound to mention, curse or praise the AR7 Explorer.
I have a Cosa Mesa Armalite (pegasus logo) AR7 that works
well and a Charter Arms AR7 Explorer II pistol that is ...
interesting. Nice basis of a "space gun": I added a sling,
long eye relief pistol scope sight and a laser.

When there are problems with the AR7, they usually fall into
predictable categories:

1) the magazine feed lips are sprung or bent;

2) the feed ramp (on the magazine) is bent;

3) ammo is not roundnosed;

4) ammo is wimpy bulk-pack;

5) chamber has been peened by after-last-shot click-oops-I-am-dry;

6) chamber has been peened by dry fire;

7) chamber has been peened by 100s or 1000s of extractor impacts.

Number 8 came to me when I tried firing my AR7 barreled action
without the shoulderstock: if the buttstock is not held rigidly
to the shoulder, the bolt will not recoil correctly.
Veteran pistol shooters are aware of the phenomenon known as
"limp wristing" an auto pistol and causing it to jam;
AR7s seem to be subject to "weak shouldering" and jamming: the bolt
needs something solid and immobile to recoil against.

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=52721&stc=1&d=1170799291

Carl N. Brown
March 27, 2008, 09:13 PM
THAT GET SMART GUN
Years ago the Herter's hunting and fishing catalog offered dolled up versions of the AR7: one styled ater the Thompson, one styled after the M1 Carbine, and one styled after the Mauser C96 broomhandle pistol. I am willing to say that gun mention by gopguy may have come from Herter's.

Avenger29
March 27, 2008, 09:45 PM
Just stick with a Marlin Papoose or a 10/22 w/ a nice folding stock.

Can someone tell me why a semiauto blowback action .22 is marketed as a survival rifle? It seems to me that a somewhat picky action would not be very desirable as a basis for a survival weapon, especially considering how dirty blowback .22s get...a break open, bolt, or lever action .22 would seem to just make more sense...

ceetee
March 27, 2008, 10:43 PM
Can someone tell me why a semiauto blowback action .22 is marketed as a survival rifle?

When they work (like mine does), they work well. I've never noticed any ammo sensitivity. It's fairly accurate, fairly corrosion-resistant, fairly weather-resistant, and packs up into a fairly small package. If I had my AR-7 and a field full o' rabbits, I wouldn't worry overmuch about going hungry. It's not a combat rifle, nor is it a sniper rifle (as the guys that make James Bond movies would have you believe), but how is it not a survival rifle?

Avenger29
March 27, 2008, 11:01 PM
but how is it not a survival rifle?

I don't consider it a survival rifle. Yes, it's compact and fairly corrosion resistant, as you said. But I just think that there are FAR better choices to either make a survival rifle from, or base a survival rifle on. The Springfield M6 series is an excellent example of true survival rifle. Purpose designed, tough, reliable, and with an action type that won't be jamming or getting dirty. Plus, it combines .410 with the .22LR (or .22Hornet and a couple of other rimfire calibers, I understand).

Give me a 16 inch bbl bolt action .22. Make it out of good quality SS and gunkote it. Give it a synthetic stock with a folding mechanism. Or a wire type folding stock. Make it either a single shot or detachable magazine fed. Or give me a Springfield M6. Or a SS break open .22LR only single shot. Whatever, it's going to be a better rifle than the AR-7.

It won't be swoopy or sexy. But it will be extremely durable and get the job done.

lee n. field
March 27, 2008, 11:01 PM
1) the magazine feed lips are sprung or bent;

2) the feed ramp (on the magazine) is bent;

3) ammo is not roundnosed;

4) ammo is wimpy bulk-pack;

5) chamber has been peened by after-last-shot click-oops-I-am-dry;

6) chamber has been peened by dry fire;

7) chamber has been peened by 100s or 1000s of extractor impacts.

Number 8 came to me when I tried firing my AR7 barreled action
without the shoulderstock: if the buttstock is not held rigidly
to the shoulder, the bolt will not recoil correctly.

Magazines got problems (out of the box?) Can't reliably use lots of the .22LR that's out there. Doesn't have a bolt hold open. Etc.

Did I mention that the action springs and action spring guide got tangled and bent to the point that the gun would not cycle the first time I shot mine?

All of which makes me thing it could have been better designed and that quality control on the manufacturing was and is somewhat lax.

Avenger29
March 27, 2008, 11:06 PM
Magazines got problems (out of the box?) Can't reliably use lots of the .22LR that's out there. Doesn't have a bolt hold open. Etc.

Did I mention that the action springs and action spring guide got tangled and bent to the point that the gun would not cycle the first time I shot mine?

All of which makes me thing it could have been better designed and that quality control on the manufacturing was and is somewhat lax.

Like I said, doesn't sound very "survival rifle" worthy to me...

rangerruck
March 27, 2008, 11:17 PM
supposedly , Henry worked out all the probs with the ar7, but I'm gonna let someone else take that chance...

Dannno
March 27, 2008, 11:44 PM
I've got a Henry, has always worked fine right out of the box. Sometimes fails to feed the next round when it gets really dirty. None of the spring/magazine/failure to shoot problems previously mentioned.

The 8YO likes to shoot it so it goes to the range pretty much every trip. Also, I have a 4x scope that goes on sometimes. Shoots decent enough groups at 50yds.

YMMV

mp510
March 27, 2008, 11:44 PM
What about the old Henry survival rifle? Those are supposed to be pretty good, from what I've heard.

I have looked at 2 of them. 1 was $89. Aside from the $89 haveing the foul looking silver finish, both felt very loose, and had a really hollow, cheap feel to them.

I also looked at an Armalite, and it was a nice rifle. However, it seemed as though it had been damaged or wore at some point- the bolt/ charging handle seemed sluggish. For the price, it wasn't worth the risk.

I almost bought a Charter Arms online once, LNIB, but the price on it made it not worth it. I also figured, there has got to be a reason why it is being sold, given the designs rep.

mp510
March 27, 2008, 11:47 PM
What about the old Henry survival rifle? Those are supposed to be pretty good, from what I've heard.
The Henry's haave a plastic barrel with a rifled steel liner. :)

Huddog
March 27, 2008, 11:50 PM
I have one in the back of the safe. I never had reliability problems with it but the sights are so off I have never figured how to hold off so it would hit anywhere near where I wanted the shot to go. Thus it stays in the back of the closet. It was marketed as a survival gun because you could easily place it in a bug out bag or vehicle or boat and forget about it until you need it. I would trade it or sell it but I just can't do that to someone.

jpwilly
March 27, 2008, 11:53 PM
I had a Charter Arms gun, back in the late '80s. Not reliable. It's sole interesting feature is that it floats.

Something else that floats comes to mind! :what:

I have an AR survival rifle...it shoots .223 Rem :neener:

mp510
March 28, 2008, 12:02 AM
Can someone tell me why a semiauto blowback action .22 is marketed as a survival rifle? It seems to me that a somewhat picky action would not be very desirable as a basis for a survival weapon, especially considering how dirty blowback .22s get...a break open, bolt, or lever action .22 would seem to just make more sense...
Diffirent strokes for different folks.

My Papoose (70P- wood and blued steel) is 100% reliable with high velocity ammo, except when the primer is bad (misfires- I have no control over). My dad likes mine so much, he bought one (this after years of telling me my Papoose is junk, why do you like those things, there's no friggin forend, etc....). His is the 70PSS (currently produced model)- synthetic and stainless. With one mag, it was reliable, another needed custom lip adjustment to feed reliable. With the adjusted mag and the good mag, his is no pretty much as reliable as mine.

Conversion Kits- I have a Colt conversion kit with my AR- which would allow it to perform double duty for survival (plus, taken down, an AR is very compact- and would be even moreso if it was a carbine). The kit is virtually 100% reliable, with all high vwelocity ammo- except when I do something bone headed, like not put the mag in right, or manage to sneak an eleventh round into the magazine.

A youth sized Rossi Matched Pair (with the synthetic stock- the drop and pull feel a bit better for the grown man than the wood youth model, though you can fit the wood youth model with a 1" screw on recoil pad) would fill that roll very well. Can even switch between 20 gauge and .22LR- covers big game, small game, birds,defense, etc.... They also make a .22/.410 model. I have one, with fiber optic sights, that was procured NIB from Dick's for less than $100. Disassembled (disassembly/reassembly takes a couple seconds) it has it's own carry case, and is small enough to fit in a rucksack.

Marlin made a .22WMR survival bolt gun with the Model 25 action in the '80s for 2 years. Barrel unscrewed like the Papoose. I would sort of like to find one of those eventually... I saw one on Auction Arms once.

Daisy made "The Legacy" in the late 80's and early 90's. 10 shot rotary mag, adjustable synthetic stock (wood optional), plastic/steel sleeved barrel, grooved aluminum reciever. I could hit cans regularly at 70 yards with it.

Lever Actions- they are more expensive, can be picky and fail too. I know people who have had all sorts of bad experiences, including with top notch lever actions like the Marlin 39. That said, they did make a survival model- the Marlin 39TDS- it's now discontinued and they are expensive, even used.

herohog
March 28, 2008, 12:09 AM
I bought one new (Charter arms?) in the late 70's. It went full-auto if you squeezed the trigger real slow then held it in it's sweet spot! I brought it right back to the shop I bought it from and traded up to a 10/22 and never looked back! The "broom handle" pistol based on the rifle is an even bigger POS!

chris in va
March 28, 2008, 04:47 AM
I had a used Henry...briefly.

Couldn't get through a whole mag without jamming hard.

Then there's the lack of ergonomics. Weird at best.

I spent more time taking it apart and reassembling it than shooting! Interesting concept, too bad it didn't work.

Owlnmole
March 28, 2008, 06:54 AM
I'll second mp510 and others and say that the Marlin 70 Papoose is a great little gun and more rugged and reliable than the AR-7 series. No, it doesn't do the barrel-in-the stock party trick and yes, it's heavier, but it is supposed to float in the carrying case (though I have never tried it).

I have one of the older ones, blued finish, wood stock, bright red nylon carry bag, bought new at a little gunshop in Vermont's Northeast Kingdom where I used to teach many moons ago. I used to keep it in the trunk of my VW Fox with whatever beer cans and the like that I had saved from the trash and blow a box of ammo plinking at an old quarry on the weekends. It was always reliable for me with cheap or pricey ammo and the factory 7-shot mags.

If really using it as a survival rifle bagging small game and living off the land, don't forget that you can still use CB rounds, .22 shotshells etc. just by loading them singly, even though they won't properly cycle the action.

Despite all the arguments about stopping power, etc. I'd still feel pretty good if I had to investigate things that go bump in the night with that Papoose in my hands loaded with seven Yellow Jackets.

Carl N. Brown
March 28, 2008, 07:17 AM
The complaints about warped barrels with the AR7 comes from one of the interim manufacturers and in their production, the composite barrels did not stay on the market long.
A bad barrel in an AR7 can be fixed by just buying a replacement barrel; installation is easier than with most guns.

My Armalite AR7 has a steel tube in aluminum shell and it shoots well.

Sight adjustment is elevation with the rear sight, windage by drifting the front sight in its dovetail.

That said, the takedown guns that I take with me on the mountain in anticipation of actual need are:
- Baikal Bounty Hunter, 12ga side-by-side double, or
- Taurus .22 Mag pump-action, 16" barrel, or
- M6 Scout .22 over 410 folder.

I guess that makes my AR7 a range toy and plinker, and not a survival gun.

ceetee
March 28, 2008, 08:52 AM
1) the magazine feed lips are sprung or bent;

2) the feed ramp (on the magazine) is bent;

3) ammo is not roundnosed;

4) ammo is wimpy bulk-pack;

5) chamber has been peened by after-last-shot click-oops-I-am-dry;

6) chamber has been peened by dry fire;

7) chamber has been peened by 100s or 1000s of extractor impacts.

Number 8 came to me when I tried firing my AR7 barreled action
without the shoulderstock: if the buttstock is not held rigidly
to the shoulder, the bolt will not recoil correctly.

Magazines got problems (out of the box?) Can't reliably use lots of the .22LR that's out there. Doesn't have a bolt hold open. Etc.

Did I mention that the action springs and action spring guide got tangled and bent to the point that the gun would not cycle the first time I shot mine?

All of which makes me thing it could have been better designed and that quality control on the manufacturing was and is somewhat lax.

Like I said, doesn't sound very "survival rifle" worthy to me...

Hey, don't get me wrong... I'm not saying that there aren't a wide variety of other choices out there. Some of which may even be vastly superior choices. (I seem to recall quite a few horror stories of inaccuracy and parts breakage when the Springer M6's came out.) Whan I am saying is that I have never personally experienced any of the above problems with my old, beat-up POS Charter Arms AR-7. Maybe I'm just lucky, and I happen to have got the only one even produced that works right. Either way, mine has proven to be dependable, and plenty accurate enough to feed someone in a survival situation. Are there better choices out there? Maybe yes, maybe no. Is the AR-7 a bad choice? Not for me, it's not.

gopguy
March 28, 2008, 10:26 AM
THAT GET SMART GUN
Years ago the Herter's hunting and fishing catalog offered dolled up versions of the AR7: one styled ater the Thompson, one styled after the M1 Carbine, and one styled after the Mauser C96 broomhandle pistol. I am willing to say that gun mention by gopguy may have come from Herter's.
__________________

Carl,

When I bought the gun at the gun show the fellow I got it from told me the story his uncle worked on the show as a prop man. When the series was canceled they sold off props they did not want. There were a handful of these rifles done up like Thompsons his uncle got. I had no memory of these on the show, and I watched Get Smart as a child in the 60s'. The asking price was not much more than any other AR 7 and the conversion is very well done.

I did not give the story any more thought until I saw that magnet in the book store...


I now wish I had gotten more info from the guy, like his uncle's name so I could prove the provenance of the rifle. As I said at the time I thought he was BSing me. I have shot it and it works well, but since finding the magnet and seeing reruns with the gun, it is a safe queen.

MCgunner
March 28, 2008, 10:44 AM
I'm on my second, first got ripped off. Both have been good, reliable, packable guns for plinking and hunting. I farkeled mine out a bit. No longer has the floating stock and I put a scope on it. It's what I take on the motorcycle when I wanna hunt squirrel with rifle in East Texas. I'll be doing more motorcycle trips with gas what it is, now. Mine were/is both Charter Arms versions. I have no idea about current production ones, but they are pretty handy. I don't shoot mine all that much, have other .22s. It's a niche gun in my collection and has its place. It's not uber accurate, but it's as accurate as my out of the box Ruger 10/22, about par as plinker grae .22s go, 1" or less 10 shot 25 yard groups. Not a target gun, but wasn't intended to be. It's deadly on squirrels, though.

Oh, I have the explorer 2 pistol, too, and it shoots fine! Not a bit of problem with it and quite accurate. The trigger suck on all of 'em. After shooting a hundred rounds out of that explorer 2, my trigger finger will be sore from the effort, LOL.

herohog
March 28, 2008, 11:29 AM
Oh, I have the explorer 2 pistol, too, and it shoots fine! Not a bit of problem with it and quite accurate. The trigger suck on all of 'em. After shooting a hundred rounds out of that explorer 2, my trigger finger will be sore from the effort, LOL.

I had always wanted one until I got mine... used. Because it was used, I can't blame it all on the gun. However, the ergonomics SUCKED and I have big hands! The "broom handle" is Huge and the trigger is a mile away, and yes, it had a heavy pull.

mainmech48
March 28, 2008, 02:27 PM
I've had four made by different manufacturers. It's my considered opinion that the flaws are in the execution rather than in the basic design.

My first, and the one I wish that I still had, was an original Armalite. As a young man I did a great deal of semi-wilderness camping and hiking, and made frequent extended 'float fishing' trips. It always went along and worked just fine. Unfortunately, it was lost when my camping/emergency duffle was stolen by someone who jimmied my car's trunk.

The next two were Charters. Both were poorly made compared to the Armalite and neither was reliable at all.

The last is a Henry. After fewer than 500 rds, the barrel sleeve developed a crack at one corner of the extractor cut. Henry won't repair or replace it under warranty unless I send the whole weapon back at my own expense. Just sending in the old barrel for examination and sending me a replacement is apparently not an option according to at least three of their CS phone monkeys.

The paint also started coming off the receiver with the first touch of bore solvent.

All in all, I'd spend the extra money for a Ruger 10/22 Compact and a synthetic folding stock. If it's just gotta float, buy a special case to stow it in.

Grunt
March 28, 2008, 02:55 PM
The one I have is made by Survival Arms and it's a mixed bag. It's been reliable with everything I have fed it but it's also got a problem of double-firing when you release the trigger. I probably should replace the hammer and trigger to see if that will cure it since the parts are fairly cheap. It's also accurate enough for what it is but the front sight is cranked over to one side quite a ways. The plastic barrel with a steel liner doesn't really garner much confidence from me and any pressure on the barrel will radicaly shift the POI. Right now I make sure I hold it with my weak hand off the barrel completely and I've considered upgrading it to a steel barrel. However, even with a steel barrel, I think the nature of the beast is just one where you don't touch the barrel on anything at all unless you want your POI to shift.

MCgunner
March 29, 2008, 10:03 AM
I don't like what Henry has done with the plastic barrel crap. The Charters I have/had were aluminum/steel sleeved, no plastic. I've had some jamming problems with a magazine now and then, just bent the feed ramp on the magazine to the sweet spot and cured the problem. I've also read that chamfering the chamber throat slightly helps some of 'em, but I never did that.

I don't think I'd buy a Henry version, don't like that plastic crap barrel.


Quote:
Oh, I have the explorer 2 pistol, too, and it shoots fine! Not a bit of problem with it and quite accurate. The trigger suck on all of 'em. After shooting a hundred rounds out of that explorer 2, my trigger finger will be sore from the effort, LOL.



I had always wanted one until I got mine... used. Because it was used, I can't blame it all on the gun. However, the ergonomics SUCKED and I have big hands! The "broom handle" is Huge and the trigger is a mile away, and yes, it had a heavy pull.

I have fairly large mitts even though my fingers are kinda skinny. I don't have a lot of problem with the ergos. The thing is pretty decent accurate, but the trigger pull is less than desirable and not a lot you can do about it. I bought five or six triggers trying to file 'em for less creep at least, one turned it into a full auto, that was fun, LOL! I gave up and stuck a stock trigger back in the thing and lived with it. Ain't like I shoot the thing much, anyway. I ordered it back 20 years ago for 70 bucks, just bought it cause it was cheap. LOL I got at least 70 bucks worth out of it. I gotta say, my 70 dollar Phoenix Arms HP22 is more fun to shoot and pretty accurate, itself. It has had a few more problems, but Phoenix has a great customer service dept. But, neither is a Ruger, after all, LOL! I just get in a mood to buy something every now and then and don't have much money to buy it with.

The rifle has a place in my collection, a reason for being, a travel gun for the motorcycle. The pistol, well, it's kinda worthless. No sense trying to sell it, either, not worth squat, LOL.

DDG89
March 29, 2008, 11:24 AM
Between my shooting buddy and myself we owned 3 Charter AR7 guns. All bought new. They were picky about ammo. We don't have them anymore as we bought other guns.

vyper61
May 18, 2010, 01:13 PM
I own a lot of weapons. The ar-7 being one of them, I keep it reasonably clean, I stay away from subsonic and weak ammo and it runs like a singer sewing machine. I love it. Mine was made by Henry Arms. The ones made by Charter arms had some issues, Quality control being one of them.

Al LaVodka
May 18, 2010, 10:47 PM
Love the design of the AR-7 with its rear sight on the receiver and the front sight on the tip of the screw-on barrel. For cryin' out loud, just don't buy one of these P'sOS already!

The real M6 was .410 and .22 Hornet for a reason -- the .22LR is the weakest cartridge and the hornet was the smallest, most universally efffective for its size and weight, centerfire. Think .222 Remington, .223, the era...

I can't get over people thinking the .22 LR is a survival (or defense) cartridge anyway. Yeah, someone's takedown .22 pump is better than nothing if ya need a .22 LR. Try something more like a .22 Mag. than a .22 LR if you can. At 100 yards they still have the velocity of a .22 LR at the muzzle and 50% more energy than a .22 LR would!

Al

SharpsDressedMan
May 18, 2010, 11:33 PM
Ha! Sean Connery shot down a helicopter with one! Don't underrate the Ar-7!

wayne in boca
May 19, 2010, 03:57 AM
I have a Survival Arms version,made in Cocoa Beach Florida.I believe this was the second incarnation of the AR7,made before the Charter Arms version.I think I gave 100 bucks for it.It has been a dependable performer and has never malfunctioned even once.I had it for ten years before i discovered that the rear sight was adjustable(slides up and down when the screw is loosened).It shot a little over two inches high at 50 yards and was dead on at about 80 yards.Now it will shoot pretty little groups at 50 yards.I don't shoot it much but I would think it should be a decent survival gun.The Charter Arms and Henry versions seem to have problems,from what I have read many times.The Armalite and Survival Arms were apparently better made.The Henry has one good idea though,the space for two mags in the stock,instead of just one.

amd6547
May 19, 2010, 08:00 AM
I am on my third Charter Ar7...the first two got sold to friends after they shot 'em and found out how fun they are...all 3 have been reliable and accurate. I also own one of the ugly Explorer pistols...got it at a gun show in a private sale for $50...it has also been reliable.
I still have couple of the old Ramline plastic 25rd mags, and they have worked well for me.

icedruid
May 20, 2010, 12:30 AM
Had one a long time ago. (So long ago I can't remember who made it.) At the time I thought it was the greatest gun on earth. Of course, I was only 10 years old at the time and it was my first semiautomatic.

I sold it off to buy something different and didn't have an ounce of regret. That is, didn't have an ounce of regret until they released a James Bond movie a few years later where he used one. It wasn't so much that he used one as the fact that the serial number on the one I owned was A45007. I still would have sold the gun but with that serial number probably would have been able to get some extra $$$ for it.

degunner
May 20, 2010, 02:00 AM
I have one by Charter Arms, bought mine used and the only thing other than good HV ammo is to dremmel a small ramp at the chamber/ barrel I have had no feed issues since then. Mine runs awesome and the kids like it too.
Have seen a lot of ftf issues with 'em, my little dremmel work was inspired by one my grandfather did when I was a kid. My uncle still has it and still works well to my knowledge. Have heard of problems with the magazines too, but never had a problem with mine.

Carl N. Brown
May 20, 2010, 09:08 AM
The resurrection of this thread inspired me to take my Charter Arms AR7 Explorer II pistol out of storage to the range to check the zero on my scope sight (long eye relief pistol scope).

I have two magazines with the gun and took Federal bulk pack ammo. I was consistently hitting broken bits of clay pigeon and small cans left on the backstop at sixty yards. With the older magazine, it shot perfect 8 shot runs. With a newer magazine it jammed on the second and third shots (comparing the two, the left feed lip was bent). I later reshaped the bent magazine lip to match the undamaged magazine.

The ergonomics of the AR7 pistol are really clumsy and make my actual C96 broomhandle Mauser feel graceful in comparison. But, it takes down into a smaller package than a rifle and may go along with me to the mountains when I might not be inclined to take a larger gun.

If you enjoyed reading about "AR7 survival rifle" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!