No rimfire for SHTF

[davidsaidwhat]

I have not shot the Marlin in maybe 20 years, so this is from memory. It also has a 4x Simmons I think short scope, so not apples to apples comparison here.. I bought it for fun use when duck hunting. In the afternoons, we would stand up 6 spent shotgun shells at roughly 50-75 feet and take turns seeing who could knock down all 6 with the 7 round mag, resting on the 2x4 rail of the front porch of the camp. Loser(s) paid for the beer next time out. We never measured distances, but it was far enough to make it challenging. The scope reticle would mostly cover the entirety of the target.

The Marlin is stainless first off. I like stainless by default, and for a "survival" item, even more. The trigger is much, much better. Not a match trigger by any means, but not the legally required units of today that almost needs two fingers to pull. The sights are probably a wash, but I never shot the Marlin without the 4x scope, so I'll avoid that comparison. And even though the Marlin requires a separate case to cobble everything together in one place, that case allows scope/dot type sights.

I believe based on memory that the Marlin groups better, but again, scope vs irons make that suspect. We were shooting 12g shells at 50ish or more feet, and routinely hitting all 6 in 6-7 shots. With bulk HV ammo. Sometimes there were many rounds of sudden death to establish who was on the hook for next weekend's beer supply.

I really meant my original post to be more of a review of the new Henry rifle, but since I made the comparison, I understand asking for details. Hope this helps.

 

[XLR308]

My BIL recently purchased the newest variant of the AR7 made by Henry.

View attachment 8419394

I took it to the range last weekend and was able to make 16 shot groups (two mags) at 50 feet slightly under an inch from sandbag rest. The groups were dead center with no adjustments needed. The stock sights are decent (fixed peep rear with two aperture choices, somewhat windage adjustable orange front that is a little too wide for my tastes), and the trigger has got to be 8 pounds or more and not anywhere near what I would call "crisp." But overall, it's a great little breakdown rifle that is very light weight, accurate enough, and serves its intended purpose well.

One side note, the stock is VERY thick, due to the need to place the receiver inside of it. It is not uncomfortable to hold and aim, but it's not great either. And there is a bias in the design for right handed shooters. The receiver is not centered, but pushed to one side, when installed. If you are left handed, be sure to check one out in person to make sure you feel the fit works for you.

I have Marlin 70SS that I like better by every measure there is over the AR7, but it's no longer sold I think. And it's a bummer that model did not come factory threaded. Still wondering if it's worth threading it since I have 4 other .22's that are factory threaded.
View attachment 8419377

Those are all fair assessments of the AR-7.
I don't think my trigger is that heavy but it is the old original rifle and in all fairness I haven't ever put my trigger pull guage on it.
The grip is a bit meaty now that you mention it but I have big hands so I never really considered it but can definitely see were some might find it awkward.

The main two things that I can see you didn't mention comparing the Marlin to the AR-7 is ,#1 take both into a very dusty dirty or sandy environment and without taking an additional case the Marlin isn't going to fair as well were the stock on the AR-7 is it's protective case.
#2 the AR-7 will float if you drop it in or lose it in the water due to capsizeing in a canoe or losing your footing crossing a body of water. I know hypothetical but it is meant to be a no frills survival tool.

 

[davidsaidwhat]

Those are all fair assessments of the AR-7.
I don't think my trigger is that heavy but it is the old original rifle and in all fairness I haven't ever put my trigger pull guage on it.
The grip is a bit meaty now that you mention it but I have big hands so I never really considered it but can definitely see were some might find it awkward.

The main two things that I can see you didn't mention comparing the Marlin to the AR-7 is ,#1 take both into a very dusty dirty or sandy environment and without taking an additional case the Marlin isn't going to fair as well were the stock on the AR-7 is it's protective case.
#2 the AR-7 will float if you drop it in or lose it in the water due to capsizeing in a canoe or losing your footing crossing a body of water. I know hypothetical but it is meant to be a no frills survival tool.

To address the items I forgot to address in the post above, yes, you are correct. AR7 is purpose built, and due to that purpose and build, it is "clunky" to me. I offered to sell my 70SS to my BIL and he wanted the Henry anyway. He obviously thinks like you do.

 

[XLR308]

To address the items I forgot to address in the post above, yes, you are correct. AR7 is purpose built, and due to that purpose and build, it is "clunky" to me. I offered to sell my 70SS to my BIL and he wanted the Henry anyway. He obviously thinks like you do.

It's just a tool in my opinion not the best but not the worst it just serves its purpose for me fairly well.
I also have one of the little cricket synthetic rifles I toss in a back pack occasionally, it's so small it' almost looks comical but is surprisingly accurate and takes up shit for space and I can shoot it pretty well for how small it is.
Its almost as compact as the takedown and weighs less.