The Henry 22's are not made with the quality of Marlin's 39 either. I know we have one of each, but then the Henry 22 is about half the price of a Marlin 39, even the Golden Boy, which we have was over a hundred less than a new 39A.
I compared a Golden Boy and a 39A, and I bought the Marlin without a second thought. I kinda liked the Henry Octagon, but never bought one. Then I paid $400 for an old (rare) 39M Octagon. No regrets.
That said, though, the Henry action is smooth, they use nice wood (as does Marlin -- their walnut is
better than 30 years ago, unlike anyone else's) and the basic Henry .22LR lever gun is a lot of fun for half the price of the Marlin. It's not a takedown, or all-steel, but it's a neat little gun. I didn't buy one of those, either, but I could see doing it if I didn't already have two .22LR lever guns to clean.
I have nothing in particular against the Henry rimfire offerings, especially considering price! I might want a .22WMR lever gun, and if I decide to get one, I'll be fine with buying a Henry -- what else would I get, the hideous Ruger?!?
But MSRP $750 for an overweight gun that can't be objectively any better than the 336C for $220 less MSRP, and I have to add my own sling swivels to carry the beast in the brush?
Like I said, if THAT sells, FN would be stupid not to reintroduce the 94!
WRT the foreign-made replicas, I think they're used for CAS. Very different market from a .30-30 deer rifle.