Henry Survival Rifle .22

[jimsouth]

This is the jimsouth review. If it were heavier, it might make a good club. I'm done. Actually, after I took a Sharpie & blackened the sight, things improved ( has that neon - day glo sight ). Certainly better to have one shoved into the back of your truck seat than not. Hollow points do not feed well ( at least in the one I bought ). This is no reflection on the high quality Henry is known for; just the little survival rifle. Oh yeah - the little knob used to yank back the bolt could stand an upgrade. I'll come up with something. Also felt weird looking down the sights; seemed like I had to tilt my head or tilt the rifle to compensate. Could just be me.

 

[USAF_Vet]

I was not impressed with it either. The stock is so wide its uncomfortable to shoulder. Recoil is next to nothing, so it didn't bother me. I didn't feel it balanced well, fit well, or really shot well.

 

[jeepnik]

The AR-7 is what it is. A take down, light weight just in case firearm. Folk complain about all sorts of issue because they are comparing it to standard weight, non take down rifle they use for target shooting, or small game hunting.

It was never designed to rip thru a thirty round magazine as fast as you can pull the trigger. Heck, the barrel is aluminum with a hardened steel, rifled insert.

The trigger is as simple and fool proof a design as possible. And, it was never intended to be a trigger for use on a precision target rifle. So yea, it's stiff (when new), and some what gritty. Although they do smooth up quite a bit over the years.

The hollow point issue is, like all .22lrs, individual to each rifle, as is the ammunition brand each prefers. But, if yours doesn't handle them well, a quick polishing of the feed areas takes care of that. Don't complain about a production firearm needing polishing. Think of the tens of millions of dollars spent yearly smithing high quality firearms.

Buy it for what it is. Use it for what it was designed for, and compare it to similar types of firearms, and it stacks up quite well

 

[Onmilo]

I have owned AR7s from Armalite, Charter Arms and Henry, all were dogs.
A good design on paper that has yet to work right in the real world.
BTW, My last, a Henry AR7, besides not feeding ANYTHING with reliability, the accuracy was poor and the front sight kept falling off.

 

[garyhan]

I owned two AR 7's. They were beyond a doubt the worst firearms I have ever owned. Minimum of three jams per 7 shot clip (using multiple clips). Groups were two inches at 25 feet. Barrel so fouled after firing a clip it looked like it had been shot with black powder. Could never scrub them clean. I bought the second solely to see if two firearms could be that bad. They were.

gary

 

[DPris]

Jeepnik has it.
Years ago I bought a Charter Arms version & returned it to the dealer, total junk.

Couple weeks ago I worked with a Henry.
Operation was flawless, with three HPs & a solid. Averaged about 3 inches or less at 50 yards. No malfunctions, no barrel fouling, no problems whatever.

Not intended to be a target gun, or a 30-million-round plinker, or a precision coyote buster.

As a stowable self-contained backpack, emergency kit, camp gun, or survival bunny buster out to 50 yards, mine is everything it needs to be.
It impressed me so much AS WHAT IT'S FOR & AS WHAT IT'S MEANT TO BE I gave one to a son-in-law for Christmas for his ATV gear.

If you don't try to view it as something it isn't meant to be, it fills a niche.
And, Henry has a black replacement front sight blade, if you don't like the orange one on it.
Denis

 

[FSJeeper]

DPris,

You are the first positive post I have seen on this Survival Rifle.

I have not owned a Henry made one but have owned several others over the last 20+ years that were total jamomatics. Complete junk. You could count on the first shot firing, that is it.

If the new Henry is indeed reliable, I agree with you, they would fill the emergency survival rifle role well.

 

[DPris]

FS,
Based on my previous experience over 25 years ago with that older version (which also liked to try to go full-auto), I've avoided the AR7 ever since, through the successive makers on down to Henry.

I was very leery about the quality.
Then I decided to see what Henry's done with the design. They've tweaked it here & there, and my results were what I said above.

It will never replace my Marlin, my Winchester, or my CZ as primary .22 users, but I can see it traveling the outback in the Yamaha with me & taking up half as much space, with three loaded mags stowed in the stock, as part of the breakdown gear on occasions when I don't take one of the other rifles for lack of plinking time.

If I plan to stop & plink, I'll take a "regular" rifle. If I don't, the Henry will be along as a "just in case".

I was frankly surprised. Expected problems with the gun that did not happen.
That's why I bought two, one for me & one as the Christmas gift.
Denis

 

[c.latrans]

Based on what I am reading here, my Henry model may be the only reliable unit ever produced. Agreed, the trigger and ergonomics suck, but with the standard peep it will hit pop can bottoms all day long at 25 yards. Granted it is not the rifle I reach for to head shoot a squirrel off of a limb half way up a big ponderosa, but I have no doubt I could tip one out of the tree. It resides in my boat, and has come in handy any number of times....just as it was designed to do. To be fair, mini mags are the only ammo I have come across which seem to never jam....no clue as to why, but they also shoot well, so that's what I feed it. Good luck with yours.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I've never seen one that I would consider my choice in a survival situation. I recommend before adopting any "survival" product, take it afield and see how it works during a week in the woods.

 

[DPris]

Good advice for both guns AND women.
Denis

 

[itsa pain]

The AR-7 is what it is. A take down, light weight just in case firearm. Folk complain about all sorts of issue because they are comparing it to standard weight, non take down rifle they use for target shooting, or small game hunting.

It was never designed to rip thru a thirty round magazine as fast as you can pull the trigger. Heck, the barrel is aluminum with a hardened steel, rifled insert.

The trigger is as simple and fool proof a design as possible. And, it was never intended to be a trigger for use on a precision target rifle. So yea, it's stiff (when new), and some what gritty. Although they do smooth up quite a bit over the years.

The hollow point issue is, like all .22lrs, individual to each rifle, as is the ammunition brand each prefers. But, if yours doesn't handle them well, a quick polishing of the feed areas takes care of that. Don't complain about a production firearm needing polishing. Think of the tens of millions of dollars spent yearly smithing high quality firearms.

Buy it for what it is. Use it for what it was designed for, and compare it to similar types of firearms, and it stacks up quite well

Amen to that good post. I have a older charter arms and it is great. It is not a bench rest gun nor an olympic match rifle, but if starving you can easily bring small game to the pot. It is not made to fire 3000 rds a week with nor do you have to dump 100 rds to get a rabbit. I throw in a little backpack hike in the woods put it together and have a blast and you can survive with it. Most semi auto 22 always work better with certain bullet, shape, weight ,brand.

 

[Onmilo]

If you really want a takedown .22 rifle that will work and work well in a survival situation,
Ruger 10/22 takedown or Marlin Papoose if you like magazine fed rifles.
FN/Browning Auto 22 if you like tube feed guns or really splurge and find a 20" barrelled Winchester 63 carbine
The synthetic stocked stainless Ruger or Marlin really would be best choices if you bring spare magazines along.
Lose or destroy a magazine, no biggy when you have spares.
Lose or destroy an inner mag tube & you're screwed, nobody seems to bring a spare along and the guns won't function without them.

 

[enine]

Mine works fine. I bought it new a couple years ago and the wife and kids loved to shoot it too.
I have an old Marlin which can't empty the tube twice without jamming so the Henry is more reliable than it.

 

[VA27]

YEARS ago I had an Armalite. No problems. Sold it in a fit of madness. I replaced it with a Charter Arms. No problems. Sold that one when I got out of guns because prices were going up and started collecting knives. That was in 1974. Got back into guns in '76 but didn't get another AR7 until the new Henry came out. It seems heavier and bulkier than the old ones, but mine works just fine. I guess YMMV?

 

[oldpapps]

Guess I'm just different. No, I think it is the weapon.

I bought an Armalite made AR-7 in the summer of 1963. I can't remember ever having a round not feed and fire. I always have hated the loosen the screw, shift and tighten rear sight adjustment. I have put multiple tens of thousands of any 22s I could find over the years threw it. I'm happy with mine. As I remember it retailed for $37.50 and I got mine for a flat $30 tax included. I did have to order a second magazine and it was not included. Do ya think a kid could walk into a store and buy one today?

 

[HB]

I have shot one and was not impressed. A good .22 pistol is more capable and even smaller yet.

HB

 

[DPris]

In comparing the AR7 to the Papoose & the Ruger take-down, you leave out one very important feature- the AR takes up far less room with everything stowed inside its own stock.

The other two require separate & relatively bulky carry cases.
For many of us, this is an important consideration.

And the Henry is a reverse-engineered version. The Henry allows three mags in the stock, not just two like the older models by other makers. The Henry can carry a mag in the receiver, plus two stock slots.

Henry kept to the basics, but did their own deal on the gun.
Denis

 

[itsa pain]

I have shot one and was not impressed. A good .22 pistol is more capable and even smaller yet.

HB

If in a canoe and it tips over or you fall into the water the pistol will sink like a rock the henry will float. We are talking a survival gun not a target gun. Most will never use for that but survival is what it is designed for.

 

[Merle1]

DPris,

You are the first positive post I have seen on this Survival Rifle.

I have not owned a Henry made one but have owned several others over the last 20+ years that were total jamomatics. Complete junk. You could count on the first shot firing, that is it.

If the new Henry is indeed reliable, I agree with you, they would fill the emergency survival rifle role well.

Well, I'm going to be the second. I have an original Armalite and it has never malfunctioned. It is clumsy, but it does the job it is intended for just fine.

It moist definately is not a target rifle, so don't expect to use it for one.

 

[Edventures]

the point of the rifle is survival . Its small and lightweight waterproof package is perfect for a stow away on a piper cub on a wilderness fishing trip ,or a pack gun on a walk in trip, fill it snake charmers it will make a rattler dance.
when I go off fishing trout in the U.P. I carry a savage 24 22mag 20ga in my scout . It breaks down fast and compact. same as the henry.
Im thinking its a good gun where you are glad you brought with ,not happy you left it home. but when I'm forced to stay out in the elements for a unexpected day or two I would rather be prepared.
My two cents I'll bill ya all later.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

the point of the rifle is survival . Its small and lightweight waterproof package is perfect for a stow away on a piper cub on a wilderness fishing trip ,or a pack gun on a walk in trip, fill it snake charmers it will make a rattler dance.

But "survival" includes actually hunting with it -- and on one so far has posted any hunting experience with an AR-7

 

[Merle1]

But "survival" includes actually hunting with it -- and on one so far has posted any hunting experience with an AR-7

So far I have been careful enough to not need it! But I have shot it enough to know it will get the job done on rabbits or squirrels.

Test BEFORE relying!

 

[chris in va]

I couldn't get mine to work, even with new mags.

 

[VA27]

But "survival" includes actually hunting with it -- and on one so far has posted any hunting experience with an AR-7

Back in the day I killed a short ton of bullfrogs with the Armalite. It was the only 22 I had and it never failed or I would have dumped it early on.