The Henry is a decent cheap plinker. But with plastic sights, plastic barrel bands and an aluminum receiver that is painted black it is simply not anywhere near the same quality as a blued steel Winchester of Marlin.
Mine didn't come with plastic sights, or a plastic barrel band. So what if the receiver cover is painted and is not steel? That has absolutely nothing to do with the quality or durability of the rifle. For what it's worth, I stripped the paint off my cover/band, and despite putting 12,000 rounds through the rifle since 2007, I haven't hasn't been a single weapon malfunction (probably because the "lesser quality" receiver cover doesn't have anything to do with the rifle's utility.
They are fine as a plinker that someone wants to get on the cheap. They seem smooth and accurate enough and they do put a decent stick of wood on them. But long term they will be in the scrap heap while the other 2 are still being handed down for many generations.
Henry has been selling them for almost 20 years, and I honestly haven't heard of a single one that is "on the scrap heap" yet. I used mine to great success in NRA Cowboy Lever Action Silhouette, and had no problems keeping up and even surpassing the guys with Marlins (nobody was using 9422's at the time).
While the Winchester or Marlin will cost a bit more today, those 2 will appreciate in value and be worth quite a bit more than you paid in a few years. The cheap Henry's will depreciate and be worth next to nothing in a few years.
Yeah - I found a 9422 at the gun show a few weeks ago, and the guy as asking $1500 for it - a .22 lever action. That's just absurd.
And yes they do have a history. They have been made since sometime in the 60's or 70's under at least 3 different names. You sometimes see the older versions on used gun racks under the Ithaca name. They simply don't hold up.
Henry Repeating Arms has as much to do with previous copies of the "Henry" rifles as Glock has to do with the M1 Garand. Their history, and their .22 lever rifle in particular, started in 1993.
It seems to me that Henry's unlimited lifetime warranty (the life of the rifle, regardless of how many times it changes hands) is a pretty bold statement to make given the rifle's perceived weaknesses.
Final point, I can recall a single comment from a Henry owner bad mouthing a Marlin or 9422, yet Marlin owners refuse to show the Henry the same kind of respect.
My rifle is six years old and is about about 150 rounds shy of the 13,000-round mark (which might be surpassed this weekend if I get a chance to go to the range). It's still as smooth and accurate as it's ever been, and the trigger is an absolute joy to pull. Was it less expensive than a Marlin? Yes. Is it any less accurate? Nope. Does it show any sign that it's about to go tits-up? Nope. Is it a collector's item? Heck, I don't know, but I don't care either. Are the sights competition quality as it comes from the factory? Nope, but show me a non-specialized rifle that fills that requirement.
You guys that trash Henry's are really doing yourselves a disfavor, but I guess that's your loss. Me buying a Henry means there's more Marlins for you, and I'm certainly okay with that.