AR7 survival rifle
- Thread starter ChrisAHF
- Start date
- Status
R.W.Dale
Member
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
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
Last edited:
Chipperman
Member
Well, not really b/c the bullet probably would never have made it out of the barrel! 
What about the old Henry survival rifle? Those are supposed to be pretty good, from what I've heard.
What about the old Henry survival rifle? Those are supposed to be pretty good, from what I've heard.
lee n. field
Member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2002
- Messages
- 4,321
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
Member
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.
Chipperman
Member
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.
I've heard generally good things about them, but have no first hand experience.
bannockburn
Member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 26,312
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.
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.
The only time I ever had any problems or jamming was when shooting with some crappy after market 15-round magazine.
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
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
lee n. field
Member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2002
- Messages
- 4,321
UPdated in what way?
Carl N. Brown
Member
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.
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.
Carl N. Brown
Member
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.
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.
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...
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...
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?
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
Member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2002
- Messages
- 4,321
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.
rangerruck
Member
supposedly , Henry worked out all the probs with the ar7, but I'm gonna let someone else take that chance...
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
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
- Status