9422 vs 39a
- Thread starter 4570Tom
- Start date
nettlle
Contributing Member
I have owned both. The 9422 is lighter and a nicer carry for hunting. Both were equally accurate. I liked the looks and feel of the 9422 more but not saying one is better than the other. Both are great guns.
Armored farmer
Member
I have a 9422XTR in 22mag. It is accurate and very smooth action. Nearly too nice to carry.
My late friend had a 39a. His widow kept it for a farm rifle. I would have paid dearly for it. It was extremely accurate.
39a are also take-down. I like that.
Maybe because the grass is always greener......I would choose the Marlin.
It's pretty classic.
My late friend had a 39a. His widow kept it for a farm rifle. I would have paid dearly for it. It was extremely accurate.
39a are also take-down. I like that.
Maybe because the grass is always greener......I would choose the Marlin.
It's pretty classic.
Mosin77
Member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2019
- Messages
- 1,587
I have a Marlin 39a. My feeling is that it’s nice but it’s a “real” rifle. I can take it out, shoot it, and treat it well -but not absolutely baby it. Mine has a repaired crack in the stock so it’s not a museum piece. Every 9422 I’ve held has been glassy smooth and also in pretty much perfect condition. I’d never want to take it into the field lest I put a scratch on it.
Thus my feeling is mostly based on the examples I’ve seen… but my sense is that more Marlins are shot and more Winchesters are showpieces. I’d love to find a well-used 9422 to really put it through its paces. It’s a much newer design than the Marlin.
Thus my feeling is mostly based on the examples I’ve seen… but my sense is that more Marlins are shot and more Winchesters are showpieces. I’d love to find a well-used 9422 to really put it through its paces. It’s a much newer design than the Marlin.
My grandfather, a gunsmith, recommended the 39 over the 9422 when I bought mine nearly 50 years ago. He said both were good, but touted the forged frame of the 39.
I've since owned both, and feel the lockup on the 9422 is clearly superior. (It's sufficiently strong for the 22 Mag). Both the 39 and 9422 are great guns; I'd buy whichever appeals the most. I still have the 39, but not the 9422.
I've since owned both, and feel the lockup on the 9422 is clearly superior. (It's sufficiently strong for the 22 Mag). Both the 39 and 9422 are great guns; I'd buy whichever appeals the most. I still have the 39, but not the 9422.
silicosys4
Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2012
- Messages
- 3,667
At one time I had a 9422, a BL22, and a 39a. The only one I still have is the 9422.
The 39a is too heavy and large for what it is. The BL22 is too youth oriented, the opposite of the 39a and is too dainty for me.
The 9422 is smoother than either the Marlin or Browning, carries perfectly, feels heavy enough but not too heavy, and is plenty accurate.
The 39a is too heavy and large for what it is. The BL22 is too youth oriented, the opposite of the 39a and is too dainty for me.
The 9422 is smoother than either the Marlin or Browning, carries perfectly, feels heavy enough but not too heavy, and is plenty accurate.
nettlle
Contributing Member
I had a scope on my 9422. It was a nice setup. My 9422 didn't carry a scope any worse than my 39A.
Riomouse911
Member
No 9422 graces my safes, but I have lever rifles from Henry (3), a BL-22 Micro Midas and a 1966-vintage 39a Golden Mountie.
The 39a as @silicosys4 posted above, is pretty hefty for a rimfire rifle. They are accurate and well built (overbuilt?), so one makes a great rimfire trainer for a hunter using a 336. But I personally think the 39a is a juuust little bit too much of a good thing for a handy carrying, woods-toting rifle.
Neither the 9422 or the 39a will be inexpensive buys if you find a nice one, lots of folks still want them and they have both been out of production for a bit. If you are able to find what you are looking for, let us know what you think.
Good luck and stay safe.
The 39a as @silicosys4 posted above, is pretty hefty for a rimfire rifle. They are accurate and well built (overbuilt?), so one makes a great rimfire trainer for a hunter using a 336. But I personally think the 39a is a juuust little bit too much of a good thing for a handy carrying, woods-toting rifle.
Neither the 9422 or the 39a will be inexpensive buys if you find a nice one, lots of folks still want them and they have both been out of production for a bit. If you are able to find what you are looking for, let us know what you think.
Good luck and stay safe.
nettlle
Contributing Member
I have a weakness for bolt action 22s. That's what I cut my teeth on. When I bought this I sold the 39A and 9422 because I didn't shoot either anymore. It was a good decision.
The 39A Mountie is the same size as the 9422.
My 9422 is an XTR and is .22 Magnum. Between the 9422 and the 39A neither is a mistake but I would probably grab the 9422. Both are all steel heirloom quality rifles with no black painted or faux brass plated Zamak pot metal like the Henry.
Last edited:
Wife has a 9422 and 9422 mag. I have a model 39. She prefers the Winchester, but, her hands are much smaller and it is lighter to carry. However she enjoys shooting the 39 also. I have no preference as both are fine rifles. Here 22 mag is great for coons and woodchucks. I can sling 3 or 4 shots at running ones before they get out of the yard.
Bazoo
Member
I have owned both. The Winchester is an okay gun... but it doesn't have the big gun feel that a Marlin 39 does, similar to the way a Henry 22 rifle feels. The Marlin is heavy, just heavy enough it feels like a centerfire. It's a tactile pleasure to shoot. The feeling of precision machined parts moving as you lever, the sounds, it's much more satisfying than a Winchester 9422.
FWIW I hunted chucks w a Ruger #1B in .243 win.
I'd set up on a field, and take a 9422M iron sighted.
If nothing was out (maybe too early) I'd go along a nearby creek or ditch and take the .22 mag for close range fun.
Alas, my eyes got old, so an iron sighted .22 mag (or .22 lr) is of no use to me.
I'd set up on a field, and take a 9422M iron sighted.
If nothing was out (maybe too early) I'd go along a nearby creek or ditch and take the .22 mag for close range fun.
Alas, my eyes got old, so an iron sighted .22 mag (or .22 lr) is of no use to me.
I've had both. I liked the Winchester better by a wide margin, especially compared to the 24" barrel and pistol grip Marlin. The 39M with a 20" barrel and straight stock went a long way toward leveling the field, but I still liked the Winchester a lot better.
crestoncowboy
Member
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2011
- Messages
- 3,307
I have several more ive bought since that old picture. But I still have them all. Id take a 9422 anyday, all day... over a 39. Id put the 39 and bl-22 in a distant second place. Miles ahead of a Henry/ ithaca. Lol.
The marlin is fat and heavy comparatively yet is no more accurate and if anything is weaker. Not that it matters with a 22. Any would last about 50 lifetime.
The 39 is a takedown but it's not a very convenient takedown (the manual says to whack it on the ground... after you pin a part down). And even taken down both halves are about as big and heavy as the winchester anyway.
If the Browning didn't have that crap trigger that moves with the lever id put it about the 94 or marlin.
The typical marlin is almost 7 lb. The 94 is 6. The Browning is under 5 and the Henry is just over 4. They all shoot just as well as the next.
Last edited:
hawg
Member
I had a 39A but foolishly sold it back in the 80's. I wish I could get it back but there's no way I'd give up my Henry Golden Boy for it.
We like what we like, but I just have an aversion to Zamak. Lipstick on a pig or fake brass plating on Zamak -----. If it were actually brass instead of "Brasslite" I might change my mind. The Henry product is just not in the same class as either the 9422 or 39A.
tubeshooter
Contributing Member
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2006
- Messages
- 2,143
Have a 39A; never shot a 9422 but I did get to hold one a time or maybe two.
The Winchester did feel lighter and trimmer than the Marlin, which is a great gun but can feel just heavy enough to be a little irritating sometimes.
The Winchester was in decent-to-good shape. By that point the asking price was around $700 or so, and I decided I didn't need it that bad. I'm sure it would have made a fine addition to the stable, though.
The Winchester did feel lighter and trimmer than the Marlin, which is a great gun but can feel just heavy enough to be a little irritating sometimes.
The Winchester was in decent-to-good shape. By that point the asking price was around $700 or so, and I decided I didn't need it that bad. I'm sure it would have made a fine addition to the stable, though.
crestoncowboy
Member
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2011
- Messages
- 3,307
The Browning is crazy light. Lol.
The Browning has a far better mag tube latch too. Even back in the 60s. The one pictured is a first year grade 2. I have the bl-22 in everything from gr1-3 and first year up to about 14ish?... the triggers all suck but everything is exactly as good now as it was in the 60s. VERY few guns can say that. Lol.
But yeah the trigger is still pretty darn bad
Last edited:
hawg
Member
Zamak doesn't bother me. It's strong it just has a low melting point. I'm not going to be working on it with a torch. I like the drop in the stock and the octagonal barrel. It's every bit as accurate as the 39A and the action is smoother than snot on a porcelain doorknob. I've had mine for 15 years or so and the receiver cover isn't chipping or flaking. If it ever does I'll just get another cover.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
The Winchester is a better made rifle with better fit & finish over virtually any other levergun made in the US in a long time. All milled steel and the action operates like a Swiss watch. Marlin is a distant 3rd behind Browning and Henry is racing to the bottom.
hawg
Member
Have you ever owned a Henry?
