Any thoughts on the Henry lever rifles?
- Thread starter pharaoh2
- Start date
ULTIMATE Solution for POOR HENRY Finish
Paint stripper, 0000 Steel wool, some elbow grease, polishing compound and you have a very good looking Henry 001. Might do this in a couple of years after this puppy has grown up.
TWO TONE at that!!!!!
Paint stripper, 0000 Steel wool, some elbow grease, polishing compound and you have a very good looking Henry 001. Might do this in a couple of years after this puppy has grown up.
TWO TONE at that!!!!!
easyrider604
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Greater Vancouver, BC
Hey Rottboy, Do it now! 
These were both around $350.....they are out there!
[/IMG]
Very nice finds Can-Down! Those are the deals that may come along only once on the EE, but it looks like lightning struck twice for you.
Last edited:
The top one was in the used rack at lever arms for$325.....
Now that blows my mind!
Seems to me that most times I left that store after making a purchase I was walking funny...and I don't wish to elaborate!
I don't really care much about .22 levers, so i really don't care what everyone buys, but I have handled a bunch of them. My observations are just that...observations.....they have a slick action, because it is not steel on steel, it is alum. on plastic or some such. This may not matter, time will tell, but the receiver and alot of internals are made of an aluminum type material, more effectionately known as "pot metal". If you're unsure, take a magnate to the various parts, again this may not matter, the design may overcome some of the materials...IMHO
You're observations are wrong. The Henry uses a steel bolt in an alloy receiver...exactly the same as the much loved Ruger 10/22. Only nylon parts are the barrel bands. One could argue they aren't aesthetically pleasing, but strength wise it's a wash. Structural composite parts are used extensively on many modern firearms with no ill-effect on durability or performance.
Erma and Ithica both marketed the same design rifle since the 70's, and there's many of them still going strong. A 30+ year old .22 rifle with a low round count would be the exception to the rule.
Is a Henry/Erma/Ithica .22 lever as high a build quality or as ultimately durable as a 39A or BL-22?, well probably not, and price reflects that.
So what does a 300$ Henry offer?. A reliable,accurate and smooth little carbine sitting in nice walnut furniture with a fantastic trigger.
Thank you S&S77 for clarifying that nowadays $300 can still get us something enjoyable to fire. Now for those who aren't .22LR fans, we're in a free country (not Syria). You can easily go to many other threads that entertains your fancy. This thread was started as an inquiry into the lever action rifles and the responses have generally been from those who have had good "hands-on" experiences and wanted to share them for the OP's benefit.
We've got to open our minds and accept that technology does bring us into different worlds. Only a couple of decades ago, they said that the Glock would never survive cause it was made of plastic - hello - its one of the best selling pistols in the world!!!!
Paint stripper, 0000 Steel wool, some elbow grease, polishing compound and you have a very good looking Henry 001. Might do this in a couple of years after this puppy has grown up.
TWO TONE at that!!!!!
Hmmm....It does seem preordained, doesn't it?
I just might have to try that. I suppose it would need to be clear coated to keep it looking good, or repolished often....
I'll try that if I end up stripping the receiver. Do you know if they can supply a metal barrel band as well?
As for the finish on your particular rifle it looks to me by your photos that the rifle has seen alot of use. I just sold a lightly-used Henry lever that had nowhere near the fine scratches your receiver shows.
Were you wiping it down lots with a cleaning solvent etc.?
You do realize these are 300$ dollar rifles, right?
I think a macro photo would show scratches like that on just about any painted surface. You can't even see them when you hold the rifle. It's been fired a fair amount but I doubt more than 1500 rounds. I carry it by hand, no sling, no hard use at all.
I just wipe it down with a microfiber cloth with a little Fluid Film on it, like all of my guns.
I know it's an entry level gun, I just feel a bit ripped off by the plastic parts that aren't mentioned in Henry's description of the rifle which I read before I bought it at a DU Auction. I handled it prior to the bidding and I didn't notice that the front site and barrel band were BB gun style.
My own fault, I looked at it and then I bought it. Fortunately it went for less than retail. Maybe the other bidders had better eyes than me!
If one was buying that gun by mail order the plastic parts might be a real surprise when the package arrived.
Do these plastic sights really affect the function of the gun? Anyone ever experienced accuracy issues with them? Has anyone ever had them break or fall off? Or is it just a purely cosmetic complaint? Thinking this will be my next purchase and wondering if the extra 60 or so bucks for a metal front sight and octagon barrel on the frontier model are worth it.
The octagon model is way nicer. The thing I don't like about those sights is you can't drift out the sight and change it for a different height or style of front sight.
I don't mind some plastic but really how much does it cost to cut a dovetail and slide in a suitable front sight? Charge me an extra $10........
I don't mind some plastic but really how much does it cost to cut a dovetail and slide in a suitable front sight? Charge me an extra $10........
bought the youth model for my 10 year old daughter and it works flawlessy.she can use it much easier then the bolt or semi guns we have.And now she wont even let me take it out the house.lol.very fun gun and the best 279 i ever spent at wss in lethbridge alberta
ive shot these as a kid and just about every other .22 lever gun, id have to say these are a junk gun i can see some guys having good things to say about them , but they are an american junk gun to cash in on the "cheap buyer" market. . like those zamak hi-point pistols or those little Jennings things with the zinc frame (that you cant buy here)..
the recever is made of a zinc alloy, like a diecast toy.. .... the feeding and the function is ok..... they seem to work smoothly with all ammo. when you work it fast..
the shape and size is good and they handle well.
its just the shoddy zinc parts that i dont like.. it the type of gun you can give to kids as a cheap new gun you know will function smoothly for a few years and dosnt matter if it gets smashed.. you aint going to be holding it in 50 years as the zinc will have started to break down by that time unless you stored in in a vacuum.
the Winchester 9422 is discontinued or id say get that. a proper gun. not a lever action stengun .
the norinco is a better gun in its materials than the henry, but dosnt have the cowboy look. i remember many years ago seeing one with a straight grip stock.. but never seen one like that in canada. anyway theyer cheap and you can muck about them with no guilt..
if i could get a henry for about the same prices id take that (180-220). rather not let my dollars to go to our pseudo-communist ethno-nationalist Han chinese expansionist friends.
if you want a lever gun in .22 magnum. i guess this is the only one now with the winchester out of the game.
if you were after a repeating shooter in .22 mag that was not a semiauto the rossi pump-action comes in .22 mag as well, it was a handy hunting gun ,if onyl they mad something like that in .22 hornet. or .327 Federal Magnum. that would be nice.. ..
the recever is made of a zinc alloy, like a diecast toy.. .... the feeding and the function is ok..... they seem to work smoothly with all ammo. when you work it fast..
the shape and size is good and they handle well.
its just the shoddy zinc parts that i dont like.. it the type of gun you can give to kids as a cheap new gun you know will function smoothly for a few years and dosnt matter if it gets smashed.. you aint going to be holding it in 50 years as the zinc will have started to break down by that time unless you stored in in a vacuum.
the Winchester 9422 is discontinued or id say get that. a proper gun. not a lever action stengun .
the norinco is a better gun in its materials than the henry, but dosnt have the cowboy look. i remember many years ago seeing one with a straight grip stock.. but never seen one like that in canada. anyway theyer cheap and you can muck about them with no guilt..
if i could get a henry for about the same prices id take that (180-220). rather not let my dollars to go to our pseudo-communist ethno-nationalist Han chinese expansionist friends.
if you want a lever gun in .22 magnum. i guess this is the only one now with the winchester out of the game.
if you were after a repeating shooter in .22 mag that was not a semiauto the rossi pump-action comes in .22 mag as well, it was a handy hunting gun ,if onyl they mad something like that in .22 hornet. or .327 Federal Magnum. that would be nice.. ..
Since you have first hand knowledge just like a few of us current owners, I must agree with you that the material used is certainly on the "cheap" side. But you have to agree that for $279++ its worth it for functionality, reliability and most importantly, accuracy (even with the plastic parts). Have owned and shot a Norc JW-21 and its material is substantial but forget about comparing accuracy and action smoothness to the Henry. I for one, don't plan to keep this as a collectable (will be doing that with my pre-64 Win '94 30-30) but will shoot dahell out of it and have tons of "CHEAP" fun. Not all of us are fortunate to have huge financial outlook in life as others and when something affordable comes along that can provide accuracy comparable or better than competitors, we grab it!!!! BTW, mine is a .22LR, like most in this post not .22mag.
Last edited:
caperbound
Regular
- Location
- Nova Scotia
Been shooting one for about 6 months now...I didn't realize the sight is plastic because I never looked a that close. If for some reason it does break off some day I will either buy another sight or put a scope on it.
So what's your point exactly?
You admit to having personal experience with the rifle and that it feeds and functions smoothly with all ammo, so what's the problem here?
I haven't seen one poster in this thread try and make this rifle out to be the creme de la creme of rimfires, I'm pretty sure Anschutz and Sako have that title.
And as to your personal theories of the receivers crumbling-away in a few decades...proof or GTFO. These have been around since the 70's, and unless you have picture-proof of such an event, I call balderdash.
The nylon front-blade works just fine, but was quite chunky {wide} for my tastes, so I went with the metal front sight as I heard it was slightly thinner and I like the white dot. It did tighten-up my groups slightly.
If you go back to the early pages of the thread I posted some side by side photos of the two sights for comparison purposes.
The target I posted was off-hand at 30 meters and was shot with the original nylon front sight. After shooting my H001L my buddy purchased one for his son, and the accuracy was very similar to mine and he's never bothered to change his front sight AFAIK.
For what it's worth from a durability standpoint I would think the nylon front blade would hold-up better to an impact then the pot-metal one.
Turkeyslayer 1300
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Russell, Ontario
I picked up an H001 when they first became available, have around 30k shells through it and have honestly only wped it down with oil a few times.
Great rifle, has sent many critters to there final resting place.
For 300$ its the best .22 you can buy.
Great rifle, has sent many critters to there final resting place.
For 300$ its the best .22 you can buy.
