Survivalist Forum banner

Henry AR-7?

13K views 66 replies 52 participants last post by  MadDawg 
#1 ·
Anyone actually handled/fired one?
I hear a lot about qualities/features etc;and they are said to be super accurate.
My question...How reliable do they feed?...Out of an 8 rd mag,how many will stovepipe/ jam?
 
#6 ·
Very accurate. Plastic barrel around sleeve seems cheap. Trigger slap. Optics have to be rimfire narrow rail not picatinny making options slim. Long length of pull. Iron sights work very accurate but the plastic front post drifted bad and needed glue. Rear sight not much adjustment but again it is accurate. Not a range gun but a true use to survive gun.
 
#10 ·
In the older guns like Charter Arms, the magazine is the culprit in them being jam-a-matics. It is as simple as the feed lip gets bent because it is unsupported. After it bends in a bit your rounds start driving up hard and missing the chamber. You can get a tiny screwdriver or pointy knife tip to pry it up a bit and back to GTG.
The cool thing about the Henry magazines is they fixed the feed lip problem by adding a longer tab that can be doubled back to the magazine wall and support the lip from ever bending. Problem solved now you got some reliability. Sad because I heard the Henry mags are not backward compatible with the Charter Arms ar7.
 
#11 ·
my only complaint is the lack of a foreend. you support it by the magazine or the barrel.

IMHO the takedown survival rifle rifle to have is the Ruger 10-22 Takedown

I have an AR-7 as a thing for other people to shoot when I take the 10-22 Takedown out, and as a teaching tool to show others why the 10-22 Takedown is better.
 
#13 ·
The AR7 (I have had a Charter Arms for 35 years, not often used, but never a problem, (you cannot use super hi velocity, nor subsonics)--has imho a specific purpose : It floats, and with black electrical tape around the but cushion , is sealed against moisture, so is for me a long term storage, all weather, hide anywhere prep the other 2 advantages are it breaks down shorter than any other (I have--and prefer-- a Papoose as well ) fittinn into a briefcase or fishing tackle box,, or a very small backpack and in a pinch, you can fire it 1 handed without the stock , which makes it very concealable as a handgun substitute if you have no handgun Comparing the AR7s to other .22 rifles is like comparing a pocket folding knife to a belt sheath knife
 
#14 ·
like mcguyver said, its a handy, compact tool. mine lives in my 4wheelers cargo box and gets used for plinking out in the bush. the newer henry ones eat up cci stingers no problem but still suffer with low velocity stuff but that might remedy itself after the springs soften up a bit more.

still though, those 10/22 takedowns sure are nice for a 22
 
#15 ·
Had new one bought in 2012. Put 500 rounds through it but it would only eat CCI mini-mags or better. Jammed a lot until I cleaned up the magazines which seemed to help it. Front post almost fell out after 300 rds but some super glue fixed that. Stock is huge, making it not very comfortable to shoot imo. Sold it and bought a 10/22 and put a sliding folding stock on it so it can still be taken backpacking without issues.
 
#16 ·
I've got one of the older model AR-7's. Got it from my father no telling how many rounds have been through it or how many times its been kicked around the floor of the canoe. Something has worn out in it and now its dang near full auto! Pull the trigger and it'll shoot 2 or 3 times then release the trigger and it'll fire another 2 or 3 times. It'll empty the magazine in 2 pulls of the trigger. It's no longer any good as a survival rifle but it sure is fun (and dangerous) to bring out on special occasions.

I've upgraded to a 10/22 take down now.
 
#18 ·
I've owned an AR-7. There's two basic problems with the rifle no matter who makes it.

1) It's fragile. I own pellet rifles that are built sturdier. I wouldn't stake my life on a rifle that fragile.

2) It has to be assembled before use. That's just a pain in the ass.

My advice would be to get a .22 pistol or revolver instead. A ruger Mark II or single 6 will be just as accurate, more portable, much sturdier and you can CCW it ready to go (no assembly required). I love day hiking with my single 6 on my hip. First 2 are snake shot with 4 .22 mags following. It's a very practical tool that's quickly available.

Don't take my word for it, go with what the pro's do....

http://www.usrsog.org/surfire.htm
 
#20 ·
I've owned an AR-7. There's two basic problems with the rifle no matter who makes it.

1) It's fragile. I own pellet rifles that are built sturdier. I wouldn't stake my life on a rifle that fragile.

2) It has to be assembled before use. That's just a pain in the ass.

My advice would be to get a .22 pistol or revolver instead. A ruger Mark II or single 6 will be just as accurate, more portable, much sturdier and you can CCW it ready to go (no assembly required). I love day hiking with my single 6 on my hip. First 2 are snake shot with 4 .22 mags following. It's a very practical tool that's quickly available.

Don't take my word for it, go with what the pro's do....

http://www.usrsog.org/equip.htm

gotta agree with you, i handled one and it felt like a cheap toy, ended up with the 10/22 TD instead.... i really want one of those Springfield M6 td's though... that'd be cool.
 
#21 ·
Ordered one for customer. It was/is junk. It would feed first round then jam, with all ammos, all mags, all the time. Sent it back to Henry.Someone took a worn out rat tail file and reamed the rear of the chamber, now it fires twice and jams, with all ammos, all mags, all the time.

I don't doubt that someone somewhere got a good one, just as I believe that Big Foot and the Loch Ness Monster are real too. I just have never seen one (working Henry AR-7, Big Foot, Nessie, or a working Lee Loadmaster for that matter, but I'm absolutely convinced that a working Lee LM is a lie) and no one seems able to show it to me when I show up to see this 8th wonder of the world.
 
#25 ·
I owned and used a Henry AR-7. It functioned without any problems for about 1,000 rounds. Easy to clean and assemble/disassemble. The only issue I had, and the reason I no longer have one, is that the storage is not waterproof, at least not the one I owned (one year ago). I stored it in the hold-all in the back of my pickup, and unbeknownst to me, the hold-all had a leak. I opened it to find the Henry under water, and when I retrieved it, I found that the barrel was corroded beyond saving, and the firing mechanism was also badly corroded. Both magazines still work, and have functioned flawlessly in the replacement I got recently, although they look ugly. I sealed the butt stock cap with waterproof tape.
 
#27 ·
If I am going to the woods to survive I'm not taking the weakest resource .
I am taking the BEST resource because my life and the lives of others with me are on the line.
I had an AR7 and as a last ditch stays away gun for an air plane you may never use and hope to get rescued , tile appropriate .
But not for an indefinite stay in the woods, with several hundred other people fighting over the same game.
Most every other person out there, is going to have something more significant.
Think for a while how many people have bought guns and how many plan on going in the bush .Please think.
 
#28 ·
I have owned several. All mine have worked fine. As some have mentioned, the front sight can float. I got to where I could squeeze it back to zero without looking at it, but I ended up shimming to prevent if from moving at all. All have been accurate to 25 meters. Certainly better than I can throw a rock.:eek: I recommend Mini-Mags for the most consistent groups.

Having said all of that, I have found that a 10-22 with an ATI folding stock is far more useful. (it will not, however, float!)
Or, as Will mentioned, a Mark II/III.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top