Henry AR-7

[M60A1Rise]

Thanks and i'd agree a 10/22 would be better. But that does look very nice too.

[71MUSTY]

I have taken many a rabbit with my Charter Arms AR-7 (same as the Henry) without a scope. Also with my Ruger MK I bull barrel. Not sure why you need a scope for 50 yards.

[FNGGlock]

Unless every laat ounce matters I would just get a 10/22 takedown with a Magpul stock. Add the barrel adapter for a red dot and a simple lightweight red dot. Allows you to take more and mags.

I use this setup for a small lightweight 22 when camping.

[Oceanbob]

Unless every laat ounce matters I would just get a 10/22 takedown with a Magpul stock. Add the barrel adapter for a red dot and a simple lightweight red dot. Allows you to take more and mags.

I use this setup for a small lightweight 22 when camping.

post image online

[echo1]

Agree 100%. I went thru this exercise years ago and had 2 charter arms models. Seriously cute back then but very unreliable. I sold them off.
Eventually I revisited a .22 woods, plinker, small game, maybe protection, but something that could be stuffed into a backpack and out of sight.

I decided the 10/22 takedown with Magpul stock and with my crap eyes I got a Holosun 510C in green for my astigmatism. Wow, it has shake awake and just picking the weapons up turns on the green display. Battery life is about 10 years….
So because that Magpul is so lightweight it’s effortless to tote around. Almost like a toy. You can stuff (with the right options) 110 extra rounds in the buttstock and run a double mag of 20 more up front. No single shot stuff.
Yeah, I built extras for my adult kids….




post image online

Pretty cool rigs. What are those boolit holding do-dads? PAX

[Oceanbob]

Pretty cool rigs. What are those boolit holding do-dads? PAX

[Oceanbob]

[echo1]

Thanks for the scoop, PAX

[Big Chudungus]

My old excellent thread about a takedown concept based on an AR barrel, probably butchering up an AR action into minimalist bolt action.

Idea is "WTF don't got a spare AR barrel, and likely a crappy old AR action that is maybe not up to reliable fast shooting, but is still in theory functional and can be manually cycled".

fly weight breakdown skeleton single shot pack rifle?https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1735230

[brassburnz]

I've had a few Charter Arms AR-7 rifles and still have an Explorer Pistol with two barrels. They are fun plinkers, but not 100% reliable for follow-up shots and not all that accurate. Ruger 10/22 is more reliable and able to provide much better accuracy.

However, the most accurate and reliable .22 rimfire I own is an original Marvel Precision Unit 1 conversion. I have two of them. One is mated to a Colt Series 70 frame and the other to a Rock Island Armory (RIA) frame. Both have a rail for mounting optics. With standard velocity ammo (Eley, Wolf Match, Aguila SE), both units can shoot sub-1/2 inch, 5-shot groups at 50 yards. Easily capable of making head-shots on rabbits and squirrels at that distance.

I used the Marvel for shooting Bullseye. Ultradots with a 1" tube sit on them now. A Holosun or other micro red-dot would save weight and allow holster carry. From a rest, I can shoot better groups with either Marvel than I can with a Ruger 10/22 Target with the bull barrel or a Thompson Center Contender with a 10" bull barrel.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

Years ago, I had a Charter Arms AR-7. I won't go so far as to say it is the 'same' as the Henry in that each company's (and there have been several) iteration of the AR-7 has had 'unique' challenges. My Charter Arms version was accurate, when it functioned. But, with apologies to James Bond (who was using an Armalite), that was the crux of it for me... when it functioned.

A Springfield Armory M6 Scout I've owned killed many a bird and, given the iron sight setup, was as accurate as I could desire with the .22 LR so long as I did my part.

If accuracy was my criterion, then a CZ 452 Ultra LUX, both with and without a scope, has served me quite well.

A Ruger 10/22? I've had several over the years; but, only managed to hang on to a couple of them. I'm still playing with the Takedown version in a Magpul Stock and have a Leupold FX-I 4X scope with QR rings so that I can use it with or without the scope readily. In other words, the 10/22 is adaptable and a workhorse, but not necessarily a panacea or something 'special' in pretty much standard configurations.

Is there a 'best' among the above? It depends on your criterion/criteria and such is reflected in the various 'recommendations' made thus far in the thread. Given the OP...

I am looking for the ultimate ultralight backpack small game hunting rig. I hope to do some 3-4 day overnight walk about trips and want to hunt. I am considering the Henry AR-7 but not sure if I would need to remove scope every time I broke it down, no need to use the stock for storing the barrel. I want to leave the reciever, barrel and scope assembled when storing in the pack. Does the scope need to be removed every time it’s stored?

...I'm not sure the AR-7 is going to be the 'ultimate' based on a seeming desire to leave the receiver/barrel/scope assembled when 'stored.' Such is not the design intent.



Of course, if you're not going to use the stock for storage, but want to leave the receiver/barrel/stock assembled in a package which is lightweight and 'packable' where 'accuracy' is fair-to-middling... it comes down to your perceived priority. Are you looking for lightweight or packable or accuracy?

I don't necessarily see the 'pack-rifle' as any more 'packable' than an M6 if you are going to leave a scope/optic attached. Doubly so with an AR-7. In fact, the Chiappa Little Badger would pretty much fall into the same category.



If lightweight is the overriding criterion, then the Pack-Rifle is, as you say, close to 'perfect'...



Insofar as 'accuracy,' that becomes a relative factor. It's not going to be as accurate as the CZ 452. It's not likely to be as accurate as the Ruger when the rapidity of follow-up shots are taken into account. In other words, it's a compromise, just as the M6 and AR-7 are.

But, that's the crux of it. What are you willing to compromise? That's what the above recommendations reflect.

[44fred]

Years ago, I had a Charter Arms AR-7. I won't go so far as to say it is the 'same' as the Henry in that each company's (and there have been several) iteration of the AR-7 has had 'unique' challenges. My Charter Arms version was accurate, when it functioned. But, with apologies to James Bond (who was using an Armalite), that was the crux of it for me... when it functioned.

A Springfield Armory M6 Scout I've owned killed many a bird and, given the iron sight setup, was as accurate as I could desire with the .22 LR so long as I did my part.

If accuracy was my criterion, then a CZ 452 Ultra LUX, both with and without a scope, has served me quite well.

A Ruger 10/22? I've had several over the years; but, only managed to hang on to a couple of them. I'm still playing with the Takedown version in a Magpul Stock and have a Leupold FX-I 4X scope with QR rings so that I can use it with or without the scope readily. In other words, the 10/22 is adaptable and a workhorse, but not necessarily a panacea or something 'special' in pretty much standard configurations.

Is there a 'best' among the above? It depends on your criterion/criteria and such is reflected in the various 'recommendations' made thus far in the thread. Given the OP...



...I'm not sure the AR-7 is going to be the 'ultimate' based on a seeming desire to leave the receiver/barrel/scope assembled when 'stored.' Such is not the design intent.



Of course, if you're not going to use the stock for storage, but want to leave the receiver/barrel/stock assembled in a package which is lightweight and 'packable' where 'accuracy' is fair-to-middling... it comes down to your perceived priority. Are you looking for lightweight or packable or accuracy?

I don't necessarily see the 'pack-rifle' as any more 'packable' than an M6 if you are going to leave a scope/optic attached. Doubly so with an AR-7. In fact, the Chiappa Little Badger would pretty much fall into the same category.



If lightweight is the overriding criterion, then the Pack-Rifle is, as you say, close to 'perfect'...



Insofar as 'accuracy,' that becomes a relative factor. It's not going to be as accurate as the CZ 452. It's not likely to be as accurate as the Ruger when the rapidity of follow-up shots are taken into account. In other words, it's a compromise, just as the M6 and AR-7 are.

But, that's the crux of it. What are you willing to compromise? That's what the above recommendations reflect.

Very well presented. Glad I read this before I responded. You said just about everything I was thinking.
We want an accurate, scoped bolt action or semi auto for hunting but almost no weight to pack. Set your priorities and make the decision.

[echo1]

In KALI I don't think it's legal to shoot fowl with a .22. PAX

[sigstroker]

Years ago, I had a Charter Arms AR-7. I won't go so far as to say it is the 'same' as the Henry in that each company's (and there have been several) iteration of the AR-7 has had 'unique' challenges. My Charter Arms version was accurate, when it functioned. But, with apologies to James Bond (who was using an Armalite), that was the crux of it for me... when it functioned.

Friend of mine had an Armalite. It might be the worst gun I've ever tried to shoot. I think we might have gotten 3 rounds to go off, at most. Bad firing pin strikes. The ergos are terrible because the stock is offset to provide the large hole for the barreled action.

Even though it weighs more, you'd be much better off with a 10/22 takedown. Forget the Magpul stock though. Just more weight with no added functionality. Magazine storage? Big deal, just stick the mags in the takedown backpack. As someone else mentioned, for lightest weight, either that pack rifle thing or just a pistol is probably your best bet.

Or go nuts with a 10/22 takedown and a carbon fiber barrel and stock.

[pinger]

Magpul makes two stocks for the takedown. One is heavier and one is lighter than the factory stock. The lighter one that barrel clips into the butt is actually really nice... and light.