Try It Again Or Stick With My First Reaction... The AR-7

[TrappedinCalifornia]

40 years ago, I had a Charter Arms AR-7 that I simply couldn't get to work consistently. Put another way, it was a jam-o-matic. I let it go and never looked back, until...

I was watching From Russia With Love the other day, got to thinking about the takedown .22 LR firearms I now have, and had noticed somewhat 'positive' reviews of the newer version from Henry. In short, I got to thinking I might have an hole in my collection.

Did Henry actually improve the performance or is still, pretty much, a jam-o-matic which is temperamental with regard to what it's fed? (I couldn't even get Mini-Mags to work reliably in the Charter Arms.) Might it be worth the $300 investment simply to have it or is it still, primarily, a firearm which only works intermittently, if at all?

[TKM]

The Rimfirecentral guys can't make them run well. One guy did but it took a month of tinkering.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

The Rimfirecentral guys can't make them run well. One guy did but it took a month of tinkering.

That's what I was afraid of and why I'm asking.

[Imageview]

Given its price point quality assurance has got to be low. Some folks have had more luck, some less. No one seems to have particularly good luck with the charter arms version, so that’s an improvement I guess. Very cool concept, execution less so.

I appreciate the packability of a takedown rifle, for practical transport and use my favorite in 22 is probably the Winchester 62 although break barrels (like an h&r single shot) are even simpler. The sights are a heck of a lot better than a ar-7, have greater capacity (although reload is much slower even with a speedloader), and aren’t much slower to shoot than a semi. I like shooting a marlin 39 better, but retaining the bolt when broken down is a bit annoying. A 10/22 works and is a good option, but one you are already familiar with. Skinner makes a good takedown bag, although the older ruger 10/22 td bag is also very good. I’m not a huge fan of the copper river backpack (too bulky), but it does work well and is easy to carry due to the form factor.

[FNGGlock]

A10/22 takedown with Magpul stock will be more expensive, but likely a better option.
Mine has been great. It doesn’t float though

[mitch1]

I have the charter arms AR7, the marlin 70PSS takedown and the ruger10/22 takedown. The AR7 works fine with factory mags and polishing the chamber. They are really rough
The marlin is probably my favorite. I have the metal trigger guard and some other parts from DIP on that. The 10/22, it is so far from OE that you cant really compare

[rg_1111@yahoo.com]

A 1022 with a folding stock. Might be a option.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

I took a look at an Henry AR-7 in the 'local' Sportsman's Warehouse today.

I think I'll stick with my first impression. If it works for you, great. But, after all these years, I refuse to own a firearm I don't have faith in as a reliably functional tool or one that I'd have to sink a bunch of money and effort into to make it 'marginally' such.

[DB>]

I have a friend that has the AR7 and likes it, I've been tempted to pick one up if I find one cheap enough...

That said, depending on how compact you want the result, there are several options with the 10/22 - starting with the takedown model, personally I like the Magpul backpacker stock, and I picked up an ultralight bull barrel as "upgrades" to a "basic" configuration.

If you just happen to have a stock 10/22 laying around, look at the "QBD" (quick break down) stock - it allows you to remove the barrel on a stock 10/22, and the buttstock folds for a very compact package that's comparable to a TD

And if you don't require a super compact setup, look at a Pro Mag PM272 stock, they can be had really cheap if you shop, and the "stock" folds. You are stuck with a standard profile barrel, but again, a quick way to "convert" a stock 10/22 into a more "tactical" compact package.

I've got 10/22's in each of the above configurations, all are fun to shoot, and maintain compatibility with Ruger aftermarket parts/mods and magazines... Just some ideas you might not run across in the plethora of 10/22 aftermarket customization options!

[TrappedinCalifornia]

I'm not going to list what I own; but, you will note that I said... "In short, I got to thinking I might have an hole in my collection."

I own a 10/22 Takedown and it's in a Magpul Backpacker Stock. I even have a Leupold 4X scope for it. There's a thread containing posts about my acquisition and 'build.'

It's not the only 'takedown' rimfire I own or have owned. You'll notice, in the OP, that I've even owned an AR-7 before; i.e., a Charter Arms. I believe there are many, quality, takedown .22 LR firearms out there. Well, there used to be. 😉

This thread was to ask about the Henry version of the AR-7 and what little feedback I've received specific to that, not to mention what I saw the other day, hasn't been encouraging. I don't necessarily think it's a 'bad' firearm. I do believe, however, that it will take more of an investment in time and money than I'm willing to commit to make it reliable and worth owning. Thus, I've put my money into alternatives.

With all that said...

Which is why I was seeking insight here.

[Sugarfoot47]

I have a camo version of the Henry model like in the above video. Bought to just have one along with my other 22 long guns. I've had it for three years and it only jammed once when I was breaking it in. It's all stock and hasn't had any work on it whatsoever. Using HV ammo that it recommends in the manual you shouldn't have any problems with it. One of the biggest problems ( if not the biggest problem ) with earlier Charter Arms versions was the magazine. Henry improved upon it and that made all the difference in reliability. I saw a video where the shooter used an early Charter Arms magazine in a newer Henry AR 7 and it had only marginal reliability, yet with the mags it came with he had zero problems.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

I have a camo version of the Henry model like in the above video. Bought to just have one along with my other 22 long guns. I've had it for three years and it only jammed once when I was breaking it in. It's all stock and hasn't had any work on it whatsoever. Using HV ammo that it recommends in the manual you shouldn't have any problems with it. One of the biggest problems ( if not the biggest problem ) with earlier Charter Arms versions was the magazine. Henry improved upon it and that made all the difference in reliability. I saw a video where the shooter used an early Charter Arms magazine in a newer Henry AR 7 and it had only marginal reliability, yet with the mags it came with he had zero problems.

It's a definite consideration and it's not the first time I've heard this.

[gorn5150]

I had a couple of charter arms AR-7's. The were real bad. I've had a Henry AR-7 for about a year now. It runs with no problem.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

I had a couple of charter arms AR-7's. The were real bad. I've had a Henry AR-7 for about a year now. It runs with no problem.

I'll give it another look the next time I'm in town. But, having been 'burned' by the Charter Arms and seeing 'mixed' input here, I'm still not too sure I'd go for it. Of course, the $33 surcharge levied by the State for funds to be used against us doesn't exactly ring my chimes either.

Oh well. It's only money. Uh... right?


Henry U.S. Survival AR-7

[Sugarfoot47]

What I would like to see is an experiment where someone uses Henry made magazines in an older Charter Arms model and see how reliable it is.