I've been a big fan of lever action .22's since I got my first one as a small child many, many years ago. I've been buying and shooting Winchesters, Marlins, Ithaca's, Browning, and Henry rifles ever since. Not once do I recall ever getting my finger pinched in a lever. If that does happen to you, then you're doing something wrong. I love all of the different models and don't have anything bad to say about any of them. Check out all that you have access to and buy the one that fits your stature and wallet the best. As was already mentioned, don't fret over buying used. Just look it over well and take a knowledgeable friend with you if you're able. Best of luck in your quest and happy shooting!
Best new lever action in .22lr?
- Thread starter moodorf
- Start date
If you could find a nice, vintage JM 39a, that would be the one to get. If you can't find one of those, a hunt for a Winchester 9422 would be the way to go (IMO), and either .22 is as nice as the other, IMO again. Then, for a new one, the blued Henry would be the one for me. My wife has a Henry Golden Boy, and one that was made in NY, too. It's a pure thing of beauty, and shoots very well, but personally, I don't like the drop in the stock. Not a big deal, but if it had the same drop as the blued Henry, it would be perfect. The action on the rifle is truly a wonderful thing. I can't remember ever having a jam on it, either. It really has been totally problem free.
I got to borrow a 9422 in .22 magnum a long, long time ago to use in a 5-shot match to win a frozen turkey. Won the bird, but the gun wasn't for sale. I really wanted that rifle, but alas...
I got to borrow a 9422 in .22 magnum a long, long time ago to use in a 5-shot match to win a frozen turkey. Won the bird, but the gun wasn't for sale. I really wanted that rifle, but alas...
I might give the Henry a try. I heard some comments on the alloy receiver and got pretty worked up for a couple days. I have concluded (short of owning one for a decade) that is a non issue.
The OP mentioned "mixed" reviews. The only mixed revies seem to be from Marlin owners who have not actually purchased a henry. The customer reviews are unanimous.
I dont lke the tube feed on the centerfire henrys, and just prefer my older marlins. The thing is old marlin is no-more. And we are talking rim fire.
I would not mount a scope on a lever,but; I like aparture sights. The octagon barrel will take a front globe. Here is a thread I have book marked for my reference on the Henry forum of rimfirecentral.
http://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=804553
scroll down to post number 5 and take a look at the marbles rear and lyman front sights.
I dont have one yet, maybe in the next year I will set enough aside to get one in 22mag. For rimfire hunting, I am 22mag, all the way. More versatile than the 17 and more range and power than a LR.
The OP mentioned "mixed" reviews. The only mixed revies seem to be from Marlin owners who have not actually purchased a henry. The customer reviews are unanimous.
I dont lke the tube feed on the centerfire henrys, and just prefer my older marlins. The thing is old marlin is no-more. And we are talking rim fire.
I would not mount a scope on a lever,but; I like aparture sights. The octagon barrel will take a front globe. Here is a thread I have book marked for my reference on the Henry forum of rimfirecentral.
http://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=804553
scroll down to post number 5 and take a look at the marbles rear and lyman front sights.
I dont have one yet, maybe in the next year I will set enough aside to get one in 22mag. For rimfire hunting, I am 22mag, all the way. More versatile than the 17 and more range and power than a LR.
I went through the same process a few months back in my search for a new production lever .22. I didn't like the glossy stock on the BL-22, didn't care for the alloy receiver or clumsy lines of the Henry. I ended up with a grade II FLD octagon Browning. It comes with satin walnut, brushed nickle receiver, and a 24" barrel, which gave me the looks and feel I was after. The trigger is not light, but given my penchant for double action revolvers, I don't find it a hindrance to accurate shooting. I have shot two bricks out of it at this point, and I am very happy, it is smooth, fast, accurate, and a joy to carry in the woods.
In thinking back between the two Henry tests, the current sample with 28,000 rounds through it & a never-cleaned bore shot as well at the end as that Browning did last year at the beginning.
As far as the alloy receiver goes, you're dealing with two hefty die-cast parts- the outer cover & the inner actual receiver, on the Henry.
I have raw castings here of both, and they are surprisingly heavy. Very solid.
They are Zamak 5, one of the hardest of the Zamak family, and far from the "cheap pot metal" that the ignorant & the unknowing seem to get stuck at.
Combined, they are more than strong enough to hang everything together on.
If you don't like the looks, that's individual preference.
But any other concerns about the alternative construction methods are unfounded.
As far as I know, I'm the only one who's run a Henry rimfire levergun this far & this hard.
I was a bit skeptical back in the '90s when the guns came out, but no longer.
Those receivers are simply a non-issue when it comes to function & durability.
Period!
And re the Browning- it has an alloy receiver, too.
The outside is steel, the inside actual receiver is aluminum.
Denis
As far as the alloy receiver goes, you're dealing with two hefty die-cast parts- the outer cover & the inner actual receiver, on the Henry.
I have raw castings here of both, and they are surprisingly heavy. Very solid.
They are Zamak 5, one of the hardest of the Zamak family, and far from the "cheap pot metal" that the ignorant & the unknowing seem to get stuck at.
Combined, they are more than strong enough to hang everything together on.
If you don't like the looks, that's individual preference.
But any other concerns about the alternative construction methods are unfounded.
As far as I know, I'm the only one who's run a Henry rimfire levergun this far & this hard.
I was a bit skeptical back in the '90s when the guns came out, but no longer.
Those receivers are simply a non-issue when it comes to function & durability.
Period!
And re the Browning- it has an alloy receiver, too.
The outside is steel, the inside actual receiver is aluminum.
Denis
I have a Marlin 39a that was made around 1981 IIRC and as much as I like it I haven't shot it in close to 10 years. My Ruger 77/22 is my choice of 22s these days. I have no plans to sell it either.
But I do want a Henry 22 but in 22 mag. I like the traditional model over the silver or golden models. The review by DPris just makes me want one that much more.
One thing about the Marlin 39a I have is that it shoots like a target rifle. It is so accurate it is almost criminal not to have a scope on it. I like the romance of an open sighted lever action but you can only shoot as well as you can see. And this gun WILL shoot.
But I do want a Henry 22 but in 22 mag. I like the traditional model over the silver or golden models. The review by DPris just makes me want one that much more.
One thing about the Marlin 39a I have is that it shoots like a target rifle. It is so accurate it is almost criminal not to have a scope on it. I like the romance of an open sighted lever action but you can only shoot as well as you can see. And this gun WILL shoot.
Not really. The Marlin has an all steel receiver. That doesn't make it any better than the Henry. The take down screw on the Marlin is just butt ugly. The Marlin isn't any more accurate than the Henry. The Marlin action isn't as smooth as the Henry. The Marlin isn't any more reliable than the Henry. Points go to Henry.
I don't think people are putting down the Henry so much as acknowledging there are other choices with greater refinement if you are willing to spend more money. At it's price point the H001 is a fine rifle, but if you want to pay more, you can get a rifle with a steel receiver cover, better wood to metal fit, clean and square lines, and an overall appearance and feel closer to classic lever rifles.
For the record, I have shot a 17HMR varmint express belonging to a relative, it works fine and is accurate. I don't like the finish on the alloy receiver cover which sticks out from the blued steel barrel, I don't care for big block script used for marking the barrel, I think the barrel band is too chunky and thick, and I don't care for the big eye-catching screw heads on the receiver.
I guess it comes down to aesthetics for me, but at then end of the day, if you are buying a lever action rifle in 2016, you are likely on a nostalgia kick to begin with, and aesthetics are important to that end.
Last edited:
Lot's of good used rifles if you look and take your time. The Henry rifles may shoot great, but I've not seen anything they make that isn't butt ugly. It takes more than a shiny finish on wood and metal, their rifles lines and looks are just wrong.
There is no practical advantage to owning a lever action, a comparable bolt or semi-auto does every thing better from a practical perspective. The only reason to buy a lever is to have a gun that is either an original, or a faithful copy of the original. Henry rifles do neither.
There is no practical advantage to owning a lever action, a comparable bolt or semi-auto does every thing better from a practical perspective. The only reason to buy a lever is to have a gun that is either an original, or a faithful copy of the original. Henry rifles do neither.
