Opinions on Henry rifles.

Status
Not open for further replies.
As an aside, I own a Winchester Sporter 1873 in .45 Colt; I just cannot get into the Henry configuration or the bling. I can say that the CEO/ Owner of Henry (Anthony Imperato) is one of the nicest men I have ever spoken with and I think that the Henry customer service is probably second to none. When you settle on the Henry model you like, I think that the Co. that built it will stand behind it 100%. Good luck with your selection.
 
I have an Uberti in 44WCF so I’m a little biased. I only shoot black powder cartridges and the 44-40’s thin brass bottleneck seals the chamber when fired which keeps the action clean as a whistle. Thick, straight walled cases like .45 Colt allows a lot of blow by which dirties up the works pretty quick. If you use smokeless powder that is less of an issue.
In my opinion the Henry Repeating Arms version is way over polished but if you have lots of extra loot I’m sure it’ll please you. I don’t mind a little honest wear on my less expensive Uberti. Either way, my Uberti Henry is my favorite firearm and it shoots like a dream with a buttery smooth action. It’s the first “assault” rifle as well.
 
I don't care for Henry at all, their guns or their marketing. Their guns have always impressed me as being cheap and poorly fitted & finished. Their rimfires are cheaply made with plastic parts and zinc alloys. Their centerfires are overweight and handle like a 2x6. I was in a shop a few weeks ago that had racks upon racks of leverguns in the open where they could all be handled without asking. It's been a while since I handled any of their centerfires so I shouldered one. Compared to the plethora of used Marlins and Winchesters, it handled terribly. Not to mention that the polishing on their octagon barrels is always dreadful. I wouldn't expect their 1860 to be any different.

The Uberti's are excellent rifles, well proven in CAS and cost a whole lot less to boot. If they had them in .44Spl, like this Cimarron 1866, I'd have one too.

IMG_7295b.jpg
 
I usually seem to always hear good things about Henrys. That said I probably won't own one. To me their ugly and I don't like the way they market as if their rifles are direct descendants of the original Henry rifle. They aren't.

Eventually I'll pick up a Uberti 1873 or 1866. Their rifles look a whole lot more like the originals and have a reputation for being very good quality.
 
I have the basic .22 WMR carbine that I enhanced by adding a new front firesight with integral front band and a wide loop lever, both obtained from Henry as after purchase parts. The lever really was a drop-in and the front sight really stands out. I put a Williams receiver peep sight on mine. Old eyes kinda thing...I keep it handy for small varmints and predators.

It’s one of the smoothest lever actions I’ve handled, and I have a crap load of Marlins, Remlins, and Rossi R92’s to compare. Liked it enough to order a Big Boy carbine in .327 Federal. Should arrive in around three to five days.
 
Don't have anything to say about there original henry replica. My father in law has a henry 22 lever. If you overlook the cast receiver painted black it is a real nice shooting little gun with nice wood and finish. I wouldn't mind one if it were given to me but I can't see myself spending my money on it.
 
The Brass receiver henrys aren't for everyone. They're pretty heavy with the octagonal barrel. The new Henry .22s don't use plastic parts. Prior to 2007 they had plastic barrel bands and sights. The new ones do not. In fact ,if you own an older one they will send you new metal ones free of charge to replace the plastic ones if you call them up. The new line of Big Boy Steel rifles are lighter. They don't have the heavy octagonal barrels. They aren't as light as a Rossi R92, but they weight 6.5-7lbs. They look pretty nice to me. Their All Weather models are nicer still. About the only negative to the Henrys(if you want to call it that) , is the way they load. Some people can't get past the lack of a loading gate. I don't mind it. But this won't matter if you're buying an Original Henry.

I'll have to check, but there was a gentleman on Youtube who owned both an Uberti clone and the Henry Original...He took them both apart and compared them. They both use MIM parts on the internals. The metal polish and bluing are better on the Henry he noted. But they polish it so fine that some of the crisp lines on the octagonal barrel aren't as sharp. The Uberti is polished fine and probably closer to the originals. The Henrys also cost about 5-600 more than the Uberti. So it all depends. Do you want to spend more on a copy made by an American Company , or a copy made by Italians. You'll probably be happy with both. I know what I'd spend my money on. But I like buying American when I can. Plus buying an 1860 Henry from Henry just seems cooler to me...
 
CraigC said:
I don't care for Henry at all, their guns or their marketing. Their guns have always impressed me as being cheap and poorly fitted & finished. Their rimfires are cheaply made with plastic parts and zinc alloys. Their centerfires are overweight and handle like a 2x6. I was in a shop a few weeks ago that had racks upon racks of leverguns in the open where they could all be handled without asking. It's been a while since I handled any of their centerfires so I shouldered one. Compared to the plethora of used Marlins and Winchesters, it handled terribly. Not to mention that the polishing on their octagon barrels is always dreadful. I wouldn't expect their 1860 to be any different.

The Uberti's are excellent rifles, well proven in CAS and cost a whole lot less to boot. If they had them in .44Spl, like this Cimarron 1866, I'd have one too.

View attachment 765873
Click to expand...
That 1866 is gorgeous....
 
Thanks guys!! All opinions welcomed even if you owned one or the other or not. :)

Did you guys have a chance to look at that video I posted? Any thoughts or opinions on that video or that guy's review?
 
I have 6 lever action rifles - all of them are Henry's. I do not have the one reviewed by Gunblast. Some people don't like them but I do and if I was going to purchase another lever action, Henry would be my preference. In my opinion, Henry and Ruger have the best customer service people. I have not dealt with every companies customer service but in addition to Henry and Ruger, I have dealt with Remington, Winchester, and Taurus.
 
Jimster said:
Just a reminder. Today’s Henry Repeating Arms Co has absolutely nothing even remotely in common with the original Henry firearm manufacturer. They have tricky advertising methods. Don’t be fooled. Just FYI.
Click to expand...
Actually, while they're certainly not a descendant of the company which manufactured the Henry, they do make a pretty authentic copy (not 44 rimfire of course) of the Henry repeating rifle produced by New Haven Repeating Arms Co.

I have 3 Henry rifles, one of which is the Henry Big Boy steel in 45 colt. I like this firearm because, like marlins, you can put a scope base on the receiver, since it ejects out the side. I also like being able to unload without jacking every cartridge through the chamber. It's also possible to remove the bolt for cleaning from the receiver end of the barrel without complete disassembly, as you can do with Marlins. I'm not sure I'd put a scope base on a brass frame receiver, would worry about torqueing the threads in the softer metal. However, the brass frame 357 is just heavy enough that it forgives a little extra wobble and is a nice shooter with iron sights. Fit and finish on both are very good. These are not the only lever guns I own, and I like other manufacturers for various reasons. Rossi 92's are incredibly light agile guns, and the Miroku/Winchester 1892 short rifle is a piece of eye candy.
 
Over rated and over priced.

The only reason to own a lever action rifle is nostalgia. No lever action does anything better than other action types from a performance perspective. At a distance Henry rifles sorta, kinda look like a traditional lever action rifle. But when you take a closer look it is easy to see they have taken lots of short cuts in design and manufacture to the point that they just don't qualify as replica's.

Not saying they don't shoot and function well. And they do tend to put a decent stick of wood on them. But to me they are neither fish nor fowl. I can buy the real thing used in most cases for less money.
 
marlin made a lever action center fire tube loader, 32 H&R mag cowboy. eastbank
 

Attachments

  • DSCN9467.JPG
    DSCN9467.JPG
    173 KB · Views: 14
  • DSCN9468.JPG
    DSCN9468.JPG
    132.6 KB · Views: 14
  • DSCN9469.JPG
    DSCN9469.JPG
    196.9 KB · Views: 14
I have a steel big boy in 357. Super smooth action, nice trigger, nice lumber. I really like it and have heard only good things about their customer service.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DM~
Last edited:
CraigC said:
I don't care for Henry at all, their guns or their marketing. Their guns have always impressed me as being cheap and poorly fitted & finished. Their rimfires are cheaply made with plastic parts and zinc alloys. Their centerfires are overweight and handle like a 2x6. I was in a shop a few weeks ago that had racks upon racks of leverguns in the open where they could all be handled without asking. It's been a while since I handled any of their centerfires so I shouldered one. Compared to the plethora of used Marlins and Winchesters, it handled terribly. Not to mention that the polishing on their octagon barrels is always dreadful. I wouldn't expect their 1860 to be any different.

The Uberti's are excellent rifles, well proven in CAS and cost a whole lot less to boot. If they had them in .44Spl, like this Cimarron 1866, I'd have one too.

View attachment 765873
Click to expand...
Henry rimfires are like a marlin 39 that costs 1/6 as much, but like others said, cheap parts, and paint instead of bluing. Ultimately, Henry big calibers appeals to the crowd that like heavy. Millions of AR's have been sold with silly HBAR setups, so clearly that a thing, but handle one before you buy. No experience with Uberti longarms, but the Cattleman nickle I had was exceptional, and I hear their rifles put their pistols to shame.
 
Review the current Henry, current Marlin and current Winchester. I would take he Henry. I owned two of their .22LRs, and they were well made and had nice fit. But, I likely would purchase the hard chromed model even though only the exterior is chromed.

JMHO,

Geno
 
It looks like you're interested in the 1860 replicas, in which case one thing I would want to compare is what kind of alloy Henry and Uberti are using for the receivers. The originals were gunmetal bronze. I've read Uberti seems to use some type of brass.

A sideplate from a Uberti was analyzed as 56% copper, 44% zinc:

The metal used in original brass framed Henrys and 1866 Winchesters was actually a form of bronze, commonly known as Gunmetal. Paraphrasing Mike Venturino in his book Shooting Lever Guns of the Old West, even though the 19th Century guns actually used a type of bronze for their frames, they have been called brass framed for so long that the term has stuck. Gunmetal was a bronze alloy consisting of 80-88% copper, 10-15% tin, and 2-5%zinc.

. . .

For a long time now I have been wanting to get to the bottom of exactly what Uberti is using for their Henry and 1866 replicas. A couple of years ago Happy Trails, master gunsmith, gave me a sideplate from a brass framed Uberti Henry that he had used when prototyping his conversion Henrys, and told me to do with it as I wished. About a month ago I cut off a chunk the size of my thumbnail and gave it to the head of engineering at the company I work for. He had it analyzed for me by a process known as X Ray Fluorescent Analysis. I just got the results today. 56% copper, 44% zinc. Not a trace of tin. Now it’s true this is just the sideplate and not the frame, but I cannot imagine why Uberti would be using different alloys for the frame and sideplates.

As far as I’m concerned, it looks pretty plain that Uberti is using brass, not bronze or Gunmetal, for their replicas of the Henry and 1866 Winchester.

Source
Click to expand...

Internet search returns this about the Henry Repeating Arms version:

The frame, a proprietary alloy formula that the company calls “hardened brass,” is cast in Ohio, machined in both Pennsylvania and New Jersey, and finally fitted and polished in the New Jersey plant. That brass, incidentally, has the same tensile strength as steel according to Anthony Imperato, and if you’re concerned about its longevity or overall strength with hotter .44-40 loads, he also says the rifle’s perfectly safe with any .44-40 load that meets SAAMI specifications, and that you can “rest assured this gun will withstand lifetimes of extensive shooting.”

Source
Click to expand...
 
I would like to see the test that were used to compare steel to any kind or blend of brass-bronze , I have worked both steel,soft-hard and brass-bronze and have all ways found steel harder to work. engrave-machine-thread-mill. the 1860-1866 were the only lever action Winchesters I know of that were made with brass-bronze recievers and even some the 1866,s were made of iron over brass-bronze. Winchester arms makers knew iron-steel was much better and made the rest of their lever action rifles with iron-steel from the 1873 on. eastbank.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

H
  • Locked
Henry’s original copy of Henry rifle
2
Replies
49
Views
3K
Driftwood Johnson
Driftwood Johnson
lemaymiami
Recall notice from Henry
Replies
0
Views
285
lemaymiami
lemaymiami
Ks5shooter
  • Locked
Custom Henry serial numbers available...
Replies
1
Views
411
maxxhavoc
maxxhavoc
C
  • Locked
Henry Big Boy steel vs Marlin 1894
Replies
16
Views
3K
Big_Al
B
E
  • Locked
Uberti 1860 Henry rifle -- action strength
Replies
7
Views
3K
DPris
D
Back
Top