9422 vs 39a

Owned both. The 39a is the clear winner. It is a man sized gun in .22 caliber. Cycling and accuracy are superior.

I prefer the appearance of the Winny and its handling.

Out of 10, Marlin = 10; Winny = 8.,

Actually, the 9422 is the larger rifle between the Marlin 39A Mountie on top and the Winchester 9422M XTR on bottom:



For practical purpose they are the same size, feel the same in hand and are equally accurate and of equal heirloom quailty. The 9422M is a coyote killing machine.
 
Um, not really a huge fan of lever action rifles of any kind but find them interesting enough to own two.

Zamak has proven to be a durable material for rimfire guns. There used to be a poster that I believe was a member of this forum, now deceased, that did a torture test on a Henry lever action 22 that went something over 200,000 rounds and had one small part fail. After replacing it and finishing his test it was still good enough that he purchased the rifle from Henry for his own use.

The only 9422 I have experience with was one that belonged to my SIL. It seemed to be nice. It was sold due to an oilfield bust. A lot of years later I purchased a 39 A. I found it rather heavy with a rather stiff action and not anything exceptional in accuracy even after adding a peep sight. Then I ran across a Henry LBF and bought it. It proved to be more enjoyable to shoot than the 39. Much smoother action, nice wood, a little more accurate, and hung on target better for me. I sold the 39. Different strokes for different folks. Chose what you like and enjoy it.
 
Henry uses Zamak 5 which is pretty strong. They probably use it because of weight. Everybody complains about the 39A being heavy. The Marlin weighs 6.5 pounds. The 9422 weighs 6 pounds. The Henry Golden Boy weighs 6.75 pounds. If they made them out of steel or brass they'd weigh well over 7 pounds. Not to mention they would cost more. Henry Golden Boys are not exactly cheap at around 500.00. Some models cost over 1000.00. Y'all can bash them all you want but I've had mine for at least 15 years and never had one single problem with it and I've used it a lot. Like I already said I wish I had my 39 A back but there's no way I would give up my Henry for it.
 
I do like my '57 39A. A lot. But, then again. it's the only lever action .22lr I have. No flies on any of the others tho.
Like doubleh said, "Choose what you like and enjoy it."
 
Made the same year I was born and purchased by my grandfather I am told the day I was born.



Is not the 39A the oldest and longest continually produced firearm?


With some creative accounting.... yep. A lot of the 39s later years was a custom shop only gun. Very few if any actually sold. And the first 30 it wasn't actually called the 39. The bl-22 has been available in most any store since the late 60s. It's BY FAR the oldest currently produced.
 
Zamak has proven to be a durable material for rimfire guns. There used to be a poster that I believe was a member of this forum, now deceased, that did a torture test on a Henry lever action 22 that went something over 200,000 rounds and had one small part fail. After replacing it and finishing his test it was still good enough that he purchased the rifle from Henry for his own use.

The poster was Denis Prisby who posted as DPris IIRC and the round count was 20,000 rounds before the part broke. I mentioned this in post #43.

Have a look a post #39 for what Denis had to say about Henry Rifles.

 
Last edited:
My biggest problem with the Browning BL-22 isn't the size. It is what it is, a very small lever gun designed for children, complete with a trigger design that gave up sensitivity for no-pinching.
No, my biggest complaint is the design. If you've ever had one apart you'll know what I'm talking about. My BL-22 has been the only .22 rifle that has broken on me. There is a thin plate that inlets into the side of the bolt, and mine was just bent enough to lock the gun up. Even a brand-new part didn't fix it, I had to send the gun to a gunsmith to have it fitted.
They are tricky to get back together with several springs and parts that have to be lined up precisely and if they fall out of place as you reassemble, they get bent or broken. Ask me how I know.
 
Is not the Zamak being used because it is cheap and easily injected into a mold?
Zamak is inexpensive and very good for casting. Some of the Zamak alloys are pretty sturdy--maybe even better than some aluminum alloys, so simply stating something is made of Zamak isn't an instant indictment, but it's still not exactly what I want to hear if I'm contemplating a purchase.
Zamak has proven to be a durable material for rimfire guns.
Sure, I've heard tell that you can actually make gun parts out of plastic and still end up with a durable gun if it is designed properly. 😁
Henry uses Zamak 5 which is pretty strong.
Zamak 5 finishes and plates well. Zamak 2 is actually a little stronger and still weighs the same--it's also the most expensive alloy in the Zamak family. There are some aluminum alloys which are much lighter and stronger than any of the Zamak family, but I suspect that using them would significantly increase the price of the final product. Whatever Henry is using is good enough--there's no need for them to upgrade from a purely functional perspective, but understanding that isn't enough to make me, personally, want to spend money on a gun with Zamak parts. Call it a personal flaw...
The poster was Denis Prisby who posted as DPris IIRC and the round count was 20,000 rounds before the part broke.
I don't think the part broke, I think that's just when he either stopped the test or stopped reporting on it.
 
Denis and I went back and forth a lot in private with some good natured ribbing. He gave me a hard time for Uberti's and USFA's, while I gave him a hard time about paying too much for overpriced Colt's. We bonded over getting banned from the RugerForum at the same time, due to the same stupid argument with hard headed know-it-alls (don't say it :p). Anyway, we also differed on Henry's as I had a long standing disdain for them that I never kept a secret. It was from his constant goading that I finally gave in and got one. Then another. The first one started giving me fits on its first outing. The second waited until I spent $250 on upgraded wood and a peep sight before it stopped working. Both guns need to go back to the mothership and when/if they get fixed, I'll sell them and never buy another. I don't care how good their customer service is, I shouldn't have to experience it. As far as I'm concerned, those used Winchesters and Marlins on the market are worth every penny.
 
Still trying to figure out how the Marlin is "man sized" but anything else is not??? All of the guns in question have a received scaled to the cartridges they chamber and a full size LOP. Always thought the 39A was goofy looking with its dinky receiver and 336 buttstock.
Easy solution - pick them up and hold them. I agree about the receiver's appearance. Winny's always look more western... But the Marlin shoots better,
 
I will say my 9422XTR is smoother. I will say it's marginally more accurate for me.

It's the first rifle I ever bought. ca 1986. I mean I knew I was buying a lever .22, Winchester. That's about it. No idea, in 2023 the action and such would be a topic of discussion on something called the internets. :rofl::)
 
Had a 9422 trapper years ago because I couldn't find a 39- which everyone back then said was the best .22 levergun. Sold the 9422 and got a 39a- and wished I never sold the 9422.

There is your mistake right there. Selling a gun to buy a gun. Nooooo! Just no! You will always regret that. I really have to hate a gun to sell it. The 9422 and 39A are so similar and yet very different and with a different personality. Not better, not worse, just different. Selling one to get another would be like selling children or something. No way.
 
The poster was Denis Prisby who posted as DPris IIRC and the round count was 20,000 rounds before the part broke. I mentioned this in post #43.

Have a look a post #39 for what Denis had to say about Henry Rifles.

Thanks. I remembered his name but didn't post it. It appears that my shaky fingers added a zero and I didn't bother to proof read my post. Still it proves that guns made of zamak are up to the task of standing up to 22 rimfire.
 
My biggest problem with the Browning BL-22 isn't the size. It is what it is, a very small lever gun designed for children, complete with a trigger design that gave up sensitivity for no-pinching.
No, my biggest complaint is the design. If you've ever had one apart you'll know what I'm talking about. My BL-22 has been the only .22 rifle that has broken on me. There is a thin plate that inlets into the side of the bolt, and mine was just bent enough to lock the gun up. Even a brand-new part didn't fix it, I had to send the gun to a gunsmith to have it fitted.
They are tricky to get back together with several springs and parts that have to be lined up precisely and if they fall out of place as you reassemble, they get bent or broken. Ask me how I know.


I've had all the above apart many rifles many times. 94, bl, Henry, ithaca, marlin.

There is nothing in the bl-22 any more flimsy than the ejector on a 39. Yes it's a cheap fix. The 94 and the Henry have beefy parts and I can't fathom how you would hurt those two.
 
I've had all the above apart many rifles many times. 94, bl, Henry, ithaca, marlin.

There is nothing in the bl-22 any more flimsy than the ejector on a 39. Yes it's a cheap fix. The 94 and the Henry have beefy parts and I can't fathom how you would hurt those two.
Browning_BL22_schem.jpg


In the BL22, #3, the bolt cover plate, and #20, the ejector spring. Both are flimsy. If the fitment isn't perfect the bolt cover plate slips out of that inlet in the bolt, jams against the receiver wall during the lever stroke, then promptly bends enough to be unusable.
While you are reassembling the gun after replacing the bolt cover plate, the ejector spring MUST be perfectly placed, has no retainer other than a shallow divot in the receiver, and must be held down with your third hand as you assemble. If that spring moves out of place a millimeter during assembly, it is pinched between parts and bends beyond repair and you must order a new one. If it slips out of place as you place the ejector over the spring and don't notice, the first time you rack the lever you bend that spring beyond repair and must order a new one. I finally had to use lock tite to keep it in place to reassemble at the suggestion of my gunsmith.
 
Last edited:
Browning_BL22_schem.jpg


In the BL22, #3, the bolt cover plate, and #20, the ejector spring. Both are flimsy. It the fitment isn't perfect the bolt cover plate slips out of that inlet in the bolt, jams against the receiver wall during the lever stroke, then promptly bends enough to be unusable.
While you are reassembling the gun after replacing the bolt cover plate, the ejector spring MUST be perfectly placed, has no retainer other than a shallow divot in the receiver, and must be held down with your third hand as you assemble. If that spring moves out of place a millimeter during assembly, it is pinched between parts and bends beyond repair and you must order a new one. If it slips out of place as you place the ejector over the spring and don't notice, the first time you rack the lever you bend that spring beyond repair and must order a new one. I finally had to use lock tite to keep it in place to reassemble at the suggestion of my gunsmith.
I use heavy grease to hold them
 
Did you look at the picture in post #51?
Not, but I just went back to check it out. Thanks. My old memory must be foggy because the picture, if correct, doesn't remind me of my experience having previously owned the Winny and now the Marlin. Maybe mine was a Trapper? Don't know.
 
Not, but I just went back to check it out. Thanks. My old memory must be foggy because the picture, if correct, doesn't remind me of my experience having previously owned the Winny and now the Marlin. Maybe mine was a Trapper? Don't know.
The 24" Marlins have a fairly heavy barrel profile, fat forend and 336 buttstock. IMHO, the stocks look out of place on the little rimfire action.
 
Not, but I just went back to check it out. Thanks. My old memory must be foggy because the picture, if correct, doesn't remind me of my experience having previously owned the Winny and now the Marlin. Maybe mine was a Trapper? Don't know.

It is correct ;), because the top rifle is a Marlin 39A Mountie and the lower picture is a Winchester 9422M XTR. The 39A was in production an awful long time and there were several versions. There was a 39M, the M designating a carbine 20 inches barrel with a pistol grip stock and slimmer fore end stock. Somewhere around 1957 the "Golden" designation was added because they then came with a golden trigger. Go figure. My rifle, in post #51 is a 39A Mountie from the early 50s (not saying exactly ;) ). It has MG rifling and did not have a golden trigger. Somewhere about 1966 I met a young fellow who had a Golden 39A (24 inches barrel, fat fore end, pistol grip) and I was so smitten with the golden trigger that I just had to have one of my own and so jumped on my Raleigh English Racer and raced on down to the hardware store and ordered me one up and my grandfather helped me to install it. And yes, I still have the original blued trigger.



I had mounted a scope at one time and it lived on the rifle for decades. Not sure I recall when or why I removed the scope. The Skinners were added not so long ago as I can no longer see well enough to use the buckhorn sights. And yes, I put the buckhorn and elevator in the same place as the blued trigger. The hood is not original as my brother lost it in the woods somewhere about. All I know is it came home without and stayed so also for decades until I found another. I would like to have the correct hood but alas they are as scarce as hen's teeth. In fact, it is likely, that genetic engineers will devise a chik-a-saurous with teeth, before I find a period correct hood. And maybe it does not matter. Some things are forever and some things are made of Zamak.

Some wonder which came first, the chicken or the egg, a more pressing question to me is that if a chicken has teeth, will it bite or peck you when you catch it to wring it's neck for frying ;).
 
Last edited:
Back
Top