Henry 41 mag replacement

True--but I have to assume that while this was in development they came upon some kind of loads that would do better than 5" at 100 yds.
Click to expand...
Each rifle is an entity unto itself
Any information they can give you will only apply to the rifle they used.

I suspect your groups will tighten up just by trying a few different bullets.

If you don't want to shoot factory loads, it seems pointless to find one that's accurate
 
Each rifle is an entity unto itself
Any information they can give you will only apply to the rifle they used.

I suspect your groups will tighten up just by trying a few different bullets.

If you don't want to shoot factory loads, it seems pointless to find one that's accurate
Click to expand...
True--but I've been reloading for a lot of rifles for a lot of years--you would expect a premium-priced rifle to manage some degree of decent accuracy with quality off-the shelf ammo I would think.

Not every customer is willing to spend the time and money to find the holy grail load that will group decently.

Cleaning--even after an hour of soaking and running patches of copper-killer, and I still can't get the bore clean. This is after a sum total of only 10 bullets down the tube ever. Can't imagine having to clean this much after each use! :confused:
 
In your shoes, because it's a common issue with lever guns, I would slug the barrel to feel for bore constrictions under any dovetail cuts or anywhere else in bore. Firelapping would then be the next step.

This will also give you a bore diameter to set your bullets by. The SAAMI standard allows the groove diameter to be 0.409-0.412". If you have 0.411" cast bullets and a 0.412 groove diameter, you will tend to get leading and never get much accuracy. My Marlin 1895 shoots best with cast bullets that are 0.002" over groove diameter. YMMV, but keep the bullet sizing in mind and don't be afraid of being slightly over. The standard practice of making lead bullets 0.001" over nominal groove diameter is because you can combine that with maximum dimension brass and still have it fit in a minimum chamber. Bigger bullets, if you have such brass and such a chamber, can jam. However, very few companies make maximally thick brass, so it is seldom an issue.
 
Thanks unclenick--I do have some LC bullets that are slightly over .410 and may run some of those through. I'll look into the slugging as well--I suspect a slightly undersized bore, but that's just a guess. It's amazing how much crud is coming out after just a few shots--but I also suspect the barrel--like many I get these days--has one of those "baths" that covers the bore as well as the outside of the barrel. I hate those interior treatments as they never seem to last in the bore, and also can take tolerances out .001 or more depending on thickness. Not saying Henry does it--but it sure looks like it.
 
I have some Cast Performance GC 255 gr bullits which, when loaded to the cannelure, result in a COL of 1.645 or so. Not SAAMI-happy. I called Henry, and asked if that's OK (seems to chamber fine) and not surprisingly was told "who knows--it's a new rifle. we recommend staying within SAAMI specs" (I understand lawyer-induced company speak).
 
Am I missing something here?

It looks like garbage with 5 round down it, send it back (yes I know again but sooner or latter you should luck out and get a decent one!)
 
Am I missing something here?

It looks like garbage with 5 round down it, send it back (yes I know again but sooner or latter you should luck out and get a decent one!)
Click to expand...
I'm not especially pleased either--but I don't know if this is "normal" for levers or not; having only owned a rossi (which is SS but never showed signs like this)
 
OK--so today I went out with some loads that more or less replicate one of my best 44 mag loads--used w296 with large pistol magnum primers and cast performance 255 WFNGC bullits.

First off--since I lived to tell about it :D--the rifle had no apparent issues firing the cartridges which measured at 1.645 OAL. In fact, seem to shoot better and cleaner that way.:confused:

I managed to get a couple of groups that approached OK at 100--so I think there is hope still. One thing I've noticed is that the "clunkiness" of the action, along with what feels like a very heavy trigger pull to me--is likely having at least some effect on my ability to get off some good steady shots.

I've decided rather than playing "musical guns" with Henry and sending them back and forth--I'm simply going to take this one apart and see what I can do with polishing some of the parts--I especially feel reducing the trigger pull should help.



This one would have been a fairly decent group if I hadn't pulled the shot in the upper right.:
 
I'm not planning on sending mine to a gunsmith, but I have polished the trigger and hammer which smoothed it up very nice. Did the same on my .357 as well.
 
I'm not planning on sending mine to a gunsmith, but I have polished the trigger and hammer which smoothed it up very nice. Did the same on my .357 as well.
Click to expand...
When cycling the bolt--it still catches hard on the hammer making it very clunky--does yours do that? Where did you polish yours? I'm guessing my trigger pull is about the same as a stock mil-spec AR at around 5 to 6 lbs, very difficult to get a shot off without some pulling (at least for me)--did you get your pull down any?
 
Took her out again today after cleaning the bore--and the results were just as bad as ever--in fact worse than even the first gun. So off to Henry it goes again. I have already decided that I will sell it when it gets back--so if anyone is interested PM me.
 
Mine cycles smoothly over the hammer, in fact it just cycles pretty smooth period. It has since the start. Honestly, for the price I feel the finish on the barrel could be much better, and the wood finish could be much tougher, other than that I'm reasonably happy with both my Henry's. Compared to the prices on used Marlins in .357 and .41 they are a bargain and while for me fit has been great and finish could be better I would bet performance wise both of mine would go toe to toe with the Marlins for a lot less money. It's too bad that your experience has been so sucky, and even though given enough time I'm sure it would get sorted out under their warranty, it's a real PITA to keep sending something back and forth when you'd just plain rather be enjoying using it. Heck, since your sending it back again anyway, I'd still take it out and shoot it one more time, maybe it will be right this time. As for any polishing I just smoothed up the trigger and sear with a little red rouge and my dremel using a small buffing wheel. Made for a much smoother trigger with a nice crisp let off. Without using a trigger gauge I would guess the trigger pull is in the 4.5-5.5 lb range which doesn't bother me too bad as long as it's clean and smooth.
 
Funny you mention it--I just got a call tag and was informed--just like the first time--That I should remove the mount and anything else I added. I did that--and just like you say, I said to myself--let's try her out one last time with just the irons.

So I loaded up a few 210 xtp's driven by w296 and set up a hard to see (for me) target at 72yds. I have very bad farsightedness--so both irons are just a blur to me. After a couple of shots to adjust the sights--I shot a 4 shot group that measured about 3.25." The bore, however, appears to be heavily fouled with copper again--so I guess I'm in for a day or two cleaning.

Just like with the first rifle--something about having the scope mount secured to the receiver I believe is throwing the accuracy off... badly. The huge mystery of it all is that the mount is very securely torqued down and loktited with high-temp red.

I am completely stumped as to what the cause is. I asked Henry the first time to let me know what, if any issues, they found with the first rifle--but I never heard back about that.
 
Have you tried this scope on another rifle to make sure it's not the problem? I've only been shooting mine with irons and like these sights so much I'm sticking with them for range use and plinking. If I ever decide to hunt again I'll probably go with a scope.
 
Have you tried this scope on another rifle to make sure it's not the problem? I've only been shooting mine with irons and like these sights so much I'm sticking with them for range use and plinking. If I ever decide to hunt again I'll probably go with a scope.
Click to expand...
Yes--I did test both scope and rings on another rifle and they worked just fine--and I know for sure the mount on the Henry was rock solid. I'm convinced that somehow--I have no idea how--the mount is somehow affected the shots (the same thing happened with the first rifle--too much of a coincidence if you ask me).

BTW--I get a a heavy amount of bore fouling after just a few shots--are you seeing the same thing?
 
Well, that's a bunch of suck.
I'm sorry to hear about your troubles.

It sounds like Henry has some 'tweaking' to do on their .41 Mag rifles, and may have used some low quality barrels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top