It was originally called the AR 7 and has been made by many different companies over the years. Design goes back to the early 1970s. It was supposed to be used by the military for flight survival packages. I had my first one in 1973. Good little gun. Shoots fine if it is like the original. Not a tack driver if that is what you are asking. Stock floats in water so it is hard to lose. I would have another one if the price was right.
It is good for what it is, a survival rifle. Mine, before I sold it, a Charter Arms AR7, was finicky with ammo, jammed occassionally, and was difficult to aim well with a funky little round hole rear sight. Incidentally, after assembly the stock won't store anything unless you want to take out the spacers meant to hold the receiver, barrel, and magazine (the Henry might hold two mags. vs. one for the CA version, I think...)
With all that said I'd buy another for under 100 bucks or so. It is pretty cool and is quite well balanced when assembled.
I thoght about that one too.... there may be a better opion in pistol form for a survival .22lr. Look around even a mark 3 has to take up less space. If I see -$100 I would not pass it up if it's a good one.
Traded mine some years back, but it made a handy firearm to carry for back packing.
Still have the Charter Arms pistol version...Both shot okay, but had the worst (or close to it) trigger I've ever had on a firearm.
The rifle was more ammo picky then the pistol. for some reason.
I've got one of the Charter arms version. It's OK. It jams more than I would like. the internal part of the trigger has been broken and repaired. I've been meaning to order a new trigger. Maybe it will work better then. The don't like to get dirty. It is more accurate than I expected. Over all, I like it for what it is.
I have one of the charter arms AR7 versions in a pack in my truck. once you find the right ammo works well. used for small game while camping a few times. Likewise I would buy another for the right price.
These aren't very well made. The barell is a thin rifled steel tube wrapped in plastic. They work for a few days of woods survival but I wouldn't trust my life to one for any prolonged period of time. They are a handy disposable .22 and that's about all they are good for. I've owned several. I think the original AR7 is the best of the bunch.
A stainless Marlin Model 60 is cheap and very accurate out of the box. I think better than a 1022.
My brother has a Henry. His is surprisingly accurate for how light and small it is. To me it feels like a toy because to much of it is plastic or nylon. Even the barrel is nylon with a steel insert. My brother has had some problems with his though. It is finicky with ammo, and he had to send it back once because it would not eject the spent casing all the way. Personally, I prefer the 10/22 but the AR-7 is definitely better if you are going to be on the move on foot. It only weighs about 2 pounds and the whole thing breaks down and stows inside the buttstock. It even floats in water!
I did gunsmithing work for years and dealt with some of the Henry Rifles in all forms. I wouldn't buy a Henry, except to use as a pry bar or boat paddle. The Henry Survival rifle is about a 6th generation make over of a rifle that worked at one time. Back in the late 60's and early 70's they were designed and made by Armalite. That's the "original Military Armalite". After financial problems and mis-management, the Armalite name was sold and the company collapsed. The AR-7 Survival Rifle as they were designated, were used in the military in a limited and experimental basis for pilots. After the fall of Armalite, the design was bought by Charter Arms. When Charter collapsed the first time, the design was dropped and later taken up by a company called Survival Arms and a few other fly by night companies. The newer Henry Rifles, that I have seen and tried, are poorly fitted, have lousy molding, and machining. Several of them could not be put together when they came new in the box. I had to return 3 out of the 6 we had in a shop I worked in. Almost none of them functioned, and if they did, they were very ammo picky. Magazine quality was just as bad. About half of the mags would actually function in the gun without constant malfunctions. I seriously doubt any of these problemss have been corrected, considering the plastic and cheap pot metal parts you find on the "high Quality" lever action guns. Believe me, it's a cute gun, but it ain't worth the trouble of failure when you need it most. Your best bet for a compact 22 semi auto is a Ruger 10-22 with a folding stock.
Had one for longer than I care to remember. Used it several times, found that it was very finicky about ammunition. Also, demounting it could be a bear - had to hammer on the barrel lug to get it to release. It shot fairly well, considering everything. Woodsmanship definitely required if you want to use it for survival. Twenty feet is a good range for a confirmed kill on anything that a .22 will take down.
I just bought one of these today.
I have not shot it yet and am planning to do so soon in order to test it out.
The thing that attracted me to it is the fact that it can be broken down.
So far I have 2 questions about it:
1) why is the spare magazine so hard to get out of the stock magazine holder? I had to use a knife to raise the plastic bar in order for the magazine to slide out because a small bump on the magazine kept it from coming out because it would hit the plastic bar!
2) Is there any company or person that makes alternative stocks for this rifle? Any alternative would be fine but If there are some that still retain the storage function that would be great. Please provide me with links to any place that sells parts/accessories etc.
Some years ago I had one of the early Charter Arms AR7s. It was a smooth working, accurate little gun. Then I got short of cash and sold it. Somewhat later I was offered a Henry AR7 for $25.00. I couldn't resist and bought it. When I got it home I found out why it was so cheap; the barrel with its flimsy steel liner and plastic outer covering was BENT! I went to looking and found a real steel barrel on Ebay (before they quit carrying real gun parts); it cost $19.00 plus $5.00 shipping. The new barrel stowed in the stock properly and the AR now placed its bullets accurately but the action was rough, feeding was iffy and the trigger was heavy and gritty. Being somewhat of a gun tinkerer I figured that I couldn't hurt the little snapper if I tried to smooth the action and trigger. Disassembly is straight forward. I polished the parts with oiled wet-or-dry sandpaper ending with 600 grit to polish them. Once back together, the action was noticibly smoother and trigger was smooth and somewhat crisp. Downside is that the trigger still has that crummy rick-tick release and return feel.
On magazines, many time feeding problems are caused by defective magazine lips or by weak springs. A different magazine is often the cure.
Polishing an action doesn't take a degreed gunsmith to do the work. IMHO a person who is careful and can remember how the parts fit can do the job.
The AR7 still isn't my main go-to gun but it fits in a backpack and is now accurate enough to bounce a beer can at 20 yds. I've even used it to hunt close in squirrels.
Here is a source of AR7 parts; probably enough to rebuild even the funkiest POS.