Henry AR7 Survial Rifle

I have been interested in them too. I just dont know about the quality. Like so many things, I have hear mixed reviews, tending to be on the poor side. However, let us know when you get yours. I think it would be fun and if its average or better in accuracy, for a take down rifle, I think that would be good.



I'm not expecting superior accuracy, gust functional...........

I've been looking at them lately too. I too would like to know if the quality and performance is worth having. It would make a nice knock around plinker. The price would be cheap if it's functional and reliable.

I've had mine since '05 (the silver one) after sending it back to henry 4 times it shoots good.The rear sight screw stripped but otherwise it's pretty accurate.The reason for sending it back so much was due to feeding and ejection problems.The cartridge would get smashed in between the boltface and the feeding ramp.It's actually one of my favorite guns now.

Roger:Ive found that it only likes high-velocity ammo like velocitors or aguila interceptors.

Two words.

Marlin
Papoose

I have one and have been thinking of selling it. The Henry is much better than the Charter. Their customer service is the best in the business. Mine functions well with high velocity shells, but I also own a CZ scout in .22 over .410 and when I take survival guns out to shoot, I find that I prefer the scout.

I've had a Charter Arms AR-7 Explorer since about 1984. Yeah it jams too much but still is an interesting rifle so I've hung on to it. It does better with high velocity ammo as mentioned above. Wish it was more reliable.

I've had the Henry AR-7 for a good while. Like some .22s, it has ammo preferences. Rem. bulk pack is a no, Fed. bulk not so good either. Runs like a sewing machine on Mini-mags and believe it or not Rem. Thunderbolts. Pretty accurate to boot.

I just finished putting a Henry survival rifle back together last week for a customer. They don't seem too bad in a pinch but it's not they type of gun you are going to go out and shoot 10,000 rounds in a weekend with. The barrel is plastic with a steel barrel insert. The barrel extension is also plastic which surprised me. I guess its cheaper to make an injection molded barrel than it is to machine a steel barrel extension and install it. My personal opinion is that I am sticking to my Thompson Conender. .22 lr is a little light for black bear. Just my $.02

I picked up my first AR-7 at a pawn shop in L.A. back in the '70's. I thought it was great - a rifle that you could put in a backpack! It made many trips down the L.A. River, and shot many rats on the breakwaters of Long Beach. I had to sell it to help pay for our move back to Oregon.

That was OK, as I found another just below Rainy Falls a few months later (along with a lot of other provisions). It was a constant companion for a couple of years and more than served its expected function. More than once it was the difference between eating and going hungry. Then, I suspect, Dad pawned or sold it when I was off on a job.

I won't say that I miss it very much. I don't hate it, either. It did it's job.

I have never owned one, but have always been intrigued by its design. The only thing that I don't care for is the big bulky stock (I know it needs to be for storage...but how many are used for that?). I contemplated purchasing one and getting a custom stock for it...but that would cast about the same as the rifle, so I decided against it. I really wish that they would come out with a nice small lightweight folding stock for it...would make the ideal backpack rifle.

I had one, wouldn't get through two shots without jamming...on any magazine or ammo. Plus the sound it makes when firing is weird.

If you don't have your heart set on .22 LR I'd go with a Kel-Tec SUB-2000 It folds up to a 16" length while the Henry is 16.5" compact. You have your choice between a 9mm and a .40, I'd go with the 9 myself. That's my personal choice for a SHTF weapon.

If you don't have your heart set on .22 LR

Click to expand...

I would imagine that would be a deal breaker...it would be for me because the 9mm/.40 is pretty useless as a backpacking rifle (not well suited to any game)...anyways welcome to THR!

In my opinion, resist the temptation to buy this gadget gun... I had an unreliable one and my friend went through two before giving up. I second the Contender suggestion.

m brother in law has one.. its ok feels too cheap my .22lr survival is a stevens model 62 semi-auto with small 7x20 scope mounted on it. its pretty accurate.

I currently own 5 Marlin Papoose .22lr's. I no longer own a henry or CA AR-07, after owning several that would FTF, FTE, ect. My most recent M70PSS has 2000+ rds through it with I think 2 FTE's. Probably more the fault of the ammo than the gun. My experience with the AR-7 was about 15% FTF, FTE.

t2e

They aren't much of a survival rifle. A survival rifle must be accurate and dependable; the AR-7 is generally neither.
A Marlin Papoose or one of their take-down lever guns would be better choices. So would an NEF .22, since they can be taken apart quite easily; and it would be inexpensive, too. You could stick a good folding stock on a Ruger 10/22, if Marlins and NEF don't appeal to you. There are still yet more options if you can use a handgun well.
"But wait!" you cry, "the AR-7 floats and those others don't!" If floating is important, just use a floating gun case. The Papoose comes with one. A similar one can be purchased or made pretty inexpensively for the other guns.
Once you commence to surviving, gimmicks like floating and coming apart don't matter. You're going to put the gun together and leave it that way. You're going to want it to absolutely and for sure go bang and put the bullet where you were aiming. Malfs and misses when you are surviving are seriously bad juju. They both mean going hungry, for sure. Misses mean wasted ammo at a time when every round is critical.
AR-7's are an okay idea that has but seldom been executed well. They're a gimmick gun and a range toy. Would I choose one as a survival rifle i.e. bet my life on one? Not hardly.

I guess that I've been lucky. Both of my AR-7s were perfectly reliable, if awkward. My main complaints with them were with the thick, bulky stock, poor pointing characteristics, and the difficulties they presented when shooting left-handed (I was practically blind in my right eye at the time).

If you just want it to have it, and don't expect much out of it, then you should be happy.

If you just want it to have it, and don't expect much out of it, then you should be happy.

Click to expand...

I don't know about that...............I bought one last January for similar reasons, and now I'm thinking of selling mine. It runs fine (on CCI ammo) but the combination of the bulky stock and way too light barrel make it virtually useless to me.

A little quick web searching shows NEF .22lr single shots for under $150. That's cheaper than an AR-7 and a better survival tool to boot.

The henry Survival .22 was quite possibly the first gun I fell in love with. I first saw it on whatever Jim Scoutons old show was called (not shooting USA, I think it was called American Shooter). When I was a kid. Ever since then I have wanted one, dont know why I have not bought one other than when I handled one in a gun shop the gun was much bigger than I imagined. I am sure I will one one eventually but I have bought other guns when they had the Henry in stock.