Lever Action .22

My comments probably come off as snobbery, but it is my personal experience with one and my decision that analyzing what I spend in ammunition, I might as well pay more for a rifle that fits my desires.

I hope in no way this puts down anyone with their Henry's, like I said before mine functioned and shot well with the little bit I used it. One just have to be careful to maintain the finish as the Zamak will oxidize when exposed, hence the need for coatings.

Henry's coatings may have got better over time, the one I had was about 15 years ago, and it did not hold up at all, within 300-400 rounds it was flaking off. I probably could have sent it back to Henry, but once I saw what was underneath I just decided to part ways.

 

Local pawn shops and old school gun stores. Search online (for anything) now at a good price and you’re sure to get fleeced.

 

The only Marlin 39a's or Win 9422's I see under $600 are mismatched SN's (gunsmith specials) or ones that are pretty rough. It seems to me that anyone who owns one of the two knows what they have and a quick internet search tells them the story of what they are worth.

If I saw a decent looking Marlin 39a or Win 9422 for $500-600, I'd throw my wallet at them.

Most Marlins are going for $700-900 around here and Win9422's are $900-1,200. Gunbroker prices on both of those models are just stupid, seems like one will have to shell out $1,200 starting to get in the running for one.

 

I had a BL-22 one time and it had the worst trigger I've ever had on any rifle or handgun. I tried to get gunsmiths to work on it but they declined! Sold it at a gun show, guy just had to have it, bye, bye birdie!

 

IF they were junk, mine would have needed to have been repaired or thrown away by now, I say you are wrong about that.

DM

 

One of mine is the 35 year old Irma made Henry i shot a brick every weekend through when I was 10-16. Lol. Never an issue. There is simply nothing to break. The lever itself pushes the bolt back. All a single piece of steel. The firing pin is directly impacted by the hammer. The gun is made with the least amount of parts possible. Very Glock like in design

As far as the finish... ive seen more rusted out winchester and Marlin than I have oxidized Henry.

The Henry is BY FAR my least favorite lever action of the lot and I own several of every one. But they simply aren't junk. They are made to cost 1/3 what the others did. Back in 2000 they were just over 200 dollars. When dad bought the first one (Irma/ Ithaca) it was 99 dollars. Mid- late 80s. The win/ Marlin/ Browning was triple the whole time

 

Had a 39A an eon ago; it was the pistol grip version, and an absolute tank. A straight stocked, Trapper length, would be fun.
I've a Rossi gallery gun pump (like an '06 Winchester) with a tang sight, and it is a ball. Can't say I care for the most recent iteration of the Rossi pump.
Anyway, keep the tang sight idea for any lever gun, even if it means drilling the tang.
Moon

 

Rusted out 39A? Nah! My Mountie from 1956. I have owned it my entire life. It was bought by my grandfather for me NIB. I have put thousands of rounds through it and I am absolutely positive it is good for that many and more yet again.

 

Gotta love them all!
Would like to get a golden boy someday then the family will be complete

 

I'm just glad I have my '57 39A. Not looking for any others. Buddy has one of the nicer Henry .22 lever guns and it's mighty good looking and shoots fine. I think we just like the levers we have.

 

Oregon Trail, that picture belongs on the wall. Beautiful rifles sir

 

I've read criticisms of the Henry rimfire rifles, not just on the Forum, about their receivers, sometimes their innards. That hasn't been my experience. I have their base models in 22lr and 22 mag. After putting thousands of rounds through them without a single FTF or FTE and no loss of accuracy, the finish still looks fine. Mine are about five years old. Perhaps the older ones have the flaking problem. They may not be a rifle for the next fifty years like the Marlin 39a but at my age I'll never know. (If they don't hold up I'll just have to get by with a S&W K-22, Ruger 10/22, Ruger Mk II, or a scoped Contender.)

Jeff

 

The first firearm I shot was a Winchester 9422 thirty-eight years ago. My father owns it and the rifle still looks great, used, not abused. It is a great rifle, I enjoyed shooting it before he put a scope on it.

Of all the Henry line, it is the single shot rifles I prefer. Never shot any. Not many made it here, but I saw a few. I think I have never seen one lever in real, at the range, here.

 

My preference is Winchester. Got my first 94/22 .22Mag nearly 30yrs ago and added another in .22LR some years later. These guns were actually better made than their centerfire counterpart. All finely polished and blued milled steel. No stampings or plastic. No rough machine marks like I've seen on every Marlin of the era. The actions are finely fitted and slick. The Browning is easily on par with them as far as fit & finish, just a little different in operation. I'd place the Marlins a relatively close third.

I was critical of Henry for years, for much the reasons folks here have stated. The inner "receiver" is ZAMAK. The cover is aluminum. A few years ago I gave in and got one, then another. Now I have problems with both and they need to go back to the mothership. Whenever I break down and send them for repair, I won't keep them. Don't buy the hype.

No experience with the others but the Rossi does look more on the budget side of things.

 

This thread has me wanting to re-read "The Marlin 39A Club" thread. There is a life time of experience there.

 

Not even the 30+ year old Erma or Ithaca version? We have had them in the states for at least that long

Id put the Browning over the winchester in fit and finish alone. But I definitely like the winchester function more. The Brownings have that deep gloss stock and I've never seen one with a blemish. Some say it's more like an automotive clear coat. I know it's pretty impossible to remove. Deeper bluing too. Then a decent percentage (seems like half or more. Lol) were the grade 2 with decent machine engraving. Some special winchesters (golden spikes and the sort) were out there but not all that many. And like you i just don't see any machine marks, inside or out. My newest Browning is early 00s and my oldest is a first year 1969 and there is no difference in the fit and finish either. Pretty impressive.

 

I wouldn't.

The Browning stock has an epoxy finish that I've never cared for.

 

Would you mind telling us where you saw a reliable statement from a Ruger exec saying they had no plans to make the 39A?

You must live in some magical place where Marlin and Winchester lever actions go for “rock bottom” prices.

 

I've never been a fan either personally, but simply from a fit and finish perspective it's a step above rough sanding and a bit of stain on the Marlin/ winchester. It's an extra few steps that the others won't do.

I always figured it would look terrible after some use, and I have seen some well abused guns that showed scratches, but it's a pretty dang tough finish

 

I've only seen where they said they were focused on others first, when asked about the 39.

Either way the Marlin was made up until recently. The cost was prohibitive so nobody bought them. But it was still produced at least through 2017. They were over 3 grand new.

 

Thank you for having good taste. All of the levermatics (per my understanding) except for the model 62 had store brand cousins produced on the same assembly lines. I have a 30 carbine. I have easy access to the .256 that I will inherit someday in the hopefully far distant future. I killed my first deer with the .256 specimen that resides at my dads house. I have been looking for a rimfire version for reasonable money for a while. They are in quite short supply.

 

Yeah, I believe they were custom shop only. Still, never say never.

 

I just don't see it being likely. Ruger, known for making good guns but doing so as cheaply as possible..... have already said that new Marlins would be made up to Ruger standards, not Marlin old standards. IF they made the gun it would be investment casted and cheaped out as much as possible and old Marlin 39 fans would cry. And even then it would cost as much as the Browning, double the Henry or the chiappa 39A clone so likely wouldn't sell

Conversely if they made it correctly and up to the old standard it would be the same 1500-2000 dollars it was 5-10 years ago. People won't pay that for "just a 22", we have seen that for years and Ruger certainly knows it.

But I agree I hope I'm wrong and somehow they balance it out. I have a few old ones but might consider a new one for roughly the Browning price. Maybe 600. But for 1500-2k ill just buy 2 more old ones. Lol

 

I have NEVER, EVER seen a Marlin 39A wear out.

These guns are TANKS and can take hundreds of thousands of rounds with no issues and just routine maintenance actions. If Ruger decides to make them again (they won’t) they’d pale in comparison to the master craftsmanship of a vintage Marlin with its milled solid steel receiver etc.

As I stated before, you CAN find superb deals on them if you know where to look. Also helps to have family friends at the various shops. Private sales and even yardsales will turn them up.

 

^^^ Agreed ^^^ Look how Ruger put out a cheaper SA .22 with the wrangler and plastic frames on the MK .22s and plastic parts, stock on the 10-22.