.22 Lever Plinker...

[CajunBass]

I've got a Marlin 39A that I bought new in 1982. It is EXTREAMLY accurate and is a squirrel killing machine. About the only thing "wrong" with it is it's heavy. It should be, it's pretty much a solid hunk of steel and walnut. You will never regret buying one.

I've never fired a Henry, but I have looked at them, and have thought about buying one. I don't think they'll ever attain the status of a Marlin, (or a Winchester 9422) but they seem to be from my observations, and from reports I read here and about, to be good guns.

If I was just looking for a plinker, I'd probably buy a Henry. It would do the job. I suspect the finish on the receiver (cover) would show wear quickly though. If I wanted the better rifle overall, the Marlin is in a class by itself and IMHO, is well worth the difference in price.

I must be the only person in the world who thinks the "Golden Boy" is the ugliest, most gaudy rifle I've ever seen. I wouldn't buy one if they cost less than the standard Henry, much less pay more.

 

[GZOh]

Does WINCHESTER still make a lever-22?...

 

[az_imuth]

Does WINCHESTER still make a lever-22?...

No, not since around 2005-2006 when they discontinued production of the 9422.

 

[Geno]

Both my Marlin 39A and my Henry Golden Boy lever-actions are wonderful. Both are reliable and accurate. Of course, the Marlin is heavier, and the price higher. Neither would be a mistake. No scope for the Golden Boy.

Geno

 

[snakeman]

I love my henry. It's been through everything and is still my favorite 22. It's super accurate and super reliable. That said here's a interesting new candidate

http://www.uberti.com/firearms/silverboy-lever-action.php

 

[PX15]

FWIW:

I'm a big time Marlin 39 fan... I have a 1950, 1975, and 1996 39A, and two 1970 Model 39 Century Limiteds as well.

I love 'em all.

But every time a conversation about the various qualities of lever-action 22 rifles came up on the various forums it seemed to turn into a two way pissing contest between the Marlin 39 family lovers, and those who prefer the Henry's.

So, I figured the best way for me to settle the argument FOR ME was to just buy a Henry, shoot it "head to head" with my Marlins and make up my own mind.

So yesterday I did that..

I bought a new Henry HT001Y (youth or "trapper" version). The gun shop had both the HT001 (regular length) and three HT001Y's. My ignorance of Henry's was such I didn't even know there WAS a "youth model".

I held them both, and for some reason the shorter (more "carbine" style) appealed to me so I bought one of those. My bride was with me and she liked the "looks" of the HT001Y so much that she bought one for herself. (Consecutive serial number to mine no less).

We came home and I gave them both a cursory cleaning and we went "out back" to our firing range to test them out.

Both rifles needed the rear sights adjusted for windage correction, but it was an easy process, and pretty soon they were hitting pretty much poa/poi..

So, after only one day of owning a Henry lever action rimfire rifle here's my observations.

The metal receiver of the Marlin "looks" light years better and of much greater quality than that of the Henry, but the slick lever action of the Henry puts that of the Marlin 39's (or at least of the 5 I own) to shame.

Or, if snail snot is considered extremely slick, I'd say the action of the Henry is definitely "snail snot" slick.. My Marlins, while ok, are simply not nearly as slick..

I was surprised in that I like the dark walnut wood of the Henry's a lot, altho the various woods on my Marlin's are quite nice too.

Accuracy, head to head, is not something I've had the opportunity to observe yet, but I'm thinking even when I do it won't be "apples to apples" because the extra weight and barrel lengths of the Marlins (even the Century Limiteds) I believe will make for tighter groups than that of the shorter barreled, lighter Henry HT001Y.

I will add that I think all of my Marlins and my sole Henry are each inherently capable of greater accuracy and smaller groups than my average marksmanship skills are capable of taking advantage of.

I'd say, to my mind, the Marlin 39 is obviously of "higher quality" overall than the Henry, but that quality comes at a price.. I only paid $267.50 OTD for my Henry, and each of my Marlins were much higher to buy than that.

I think a person looking for that "hand me down" heirloom quality rimfire rifle would be better served with an older Marlin 39A (pre-cross bar safety/pre-rebounding hammer models).. New production 39A's have a bad reputation for quality issues at present.

I think a person looking for the "best bang for the buck", and one who wants a "shooter" more than a "collector" would be well served with a Henry..

I'm not selling my Marlins now that I have a Henry, but then I'm not selling the Henry either....

Nice to have choices, and in my opinion, a person won't go wrong whether he/she buys a new Henry or an older Marlin 39..

It all boils down to personal preference, and isn't it nice to have choices?

I will say that if I wanted to plink out in the back yard with my Buddies I'd probably pick up my 1975 Marlin 39A with the excellent Williams peep sight.. (that sucker is awesomely accurate).

But if I were a critter killer (I'm not), and I was planning on spending the day in the woods carrying a 22 cal rifle around it would be the lighter, shorter, Henry for sure.

No offense to anyone, just personal observation..

Best Wishes,

Jesse

 

[Win73]

The Marlins have become so expensive I hate to treat one rough.They are also longer than the Henry's unless you find a Mountie and they are even higher than the standard length.

Here is my Marlin 39A Golden Mountie, 1967 vintage. That gun has had thousands of rounds shot through it. I hope to pass it down in a few years to my grandson who is now five months old.

 

[GZOh]

Thanks for the comparative analysis Jesse, it was very helpful and informative.
Went to a gun shop today and held both a Henry H001T ($425) and a Marlin 39A ($625).
Without question the Marlin was a heavier and seemingly, better made rifle. However, the owner, who has had the shop for almost 40 years,
said the 'older' Marlins were the way to go. He indicated that the newer Marlins (serial M XXXX) were not in his opinion the same. He felt, as you indicated, the Henrys were a very well made rifle and for the $$ a very good value. He gave me a range which rents both Henrys and Marlins and recommended I shoot BOTH. So that will be my next venture.
Again, thanks to all for the input.

.

 

[jsimmons]

The Golden Boy has a more severe comb drop than the standard non-brass models. For the life of me, I can't understand that, but whatever. You have to shoulder both the Golden Boy and the standard rifle to see which one fits you better. If the standard rifle fits you better, but you just gotta have the brass look, you can have the receiver cover brass plated by an aftermarket company (check the RimfireCentral Henry forum for a link).

 

[az_imuth]

The Golden Boy has a more severe comb drop than the standard non-brass models. For the life of me, I can't understand that, but whatever.

The drop in the comb is intended to loosely resemble the stocks on the genuine Henry's, old Winchester '66, '73, etc. Personally, I don't have a problem with the drop and can shoot it just as well as any of my other lever guns. Some folks like 'em, some folks don't. As PX15 stated, it's nice to have options.

 

[jsimmons]

I own a Henry H001T Frontier (the one with the octagon barrel). It's going on six years old, and I have over 12,000 rounds through it. It's got the smoothest action I've ever experienced, and the trigger is outstanding right out of the box. Everyone that shoots it wants to buy it from me.

The rifle has never had a malfunction (not counting ammo that didn't fire, but that's ammo, not the rifle, and every .22 rifle eventually has an issue with ammo). I used it for Cowboy Lever Action Silhouette competition, and did so well against the Marlin guys that a couple of them actually went out and bought a Henry H001T and started using them in the matches.

I see people claim that the Henry isn't going to last because the receiver isn't made of steel, or that the paint on the receiver cover is eventually going to chip off "because, well, that's what paint does". My rifle will probably out-live me, which is all that matters, and I probably headed off the paint problem by stripping it off (it took three days and repeated soakings in paint remover to do so). Because I was going to use the rifle for silhouette competition, I replaced the sights (like you probably do with practically any off-the-shelf rifle you buy).

In my oh-so-humble opinion, you simply cannot go wrong buying a Henry .22 lever-action rifle, especially if you choose the H001T. They're reliable, good looking, accurate, and completely made in America (from material sources, to machining, to final assembly). Here's mine:

 

[Win73]

Here is my '73 Winchester, 1891 vintage.