arg0naut22

don't get me wrong-- i love my 10/22 takedown, but i've been poking around youtube and the henry site, and found their survival rifle that breaks down and stores every component in the stock.

so.... i'm curious. anyone out there own both? or fired both? or once owned one but now owns the other and why?

honestly, it looks like a REALLY cool, compact piece they've put together. like, so small i could put it in my hiking camel(water) pack and no one would be the wiser.

wondering, do i "need" one?

Neon Horse

Have you held an AR-7? I thought they were a cool idea until I held one. I felt like I was holding the biggest pile ever. The stock is awful and the sights are worse. I would go the 10/22 and 10/22 takedown all day, every day. The notion is great, but the ergonomics and craft of the AR-7 are not.

I had the same thoughts as you about the survival Henry until I finall held one. Then I politely said, "No thank you!"

arg0naut22

i did notice with some curiosity that the folks in the various youtube videos were, obviously, holding basically the receiver and magazine since there was no fore stock to hold onto for stability.

Neon Horse

You should definitely pursue it if you like the firearm. I suppose my desire for the versatility and functionality was shattered when I held it. I am, however, fairly certain a 10/22 will sink in water versus the AR-7 haha it certainly is easier to conceal and bring on treks.

Bljohnso

I owned both the Henry AR7 first then the Takedown. The Henry is light and cheap feeling but has a purpose. It breaks down smaller and is light weight for a backpack. The 8 round mags are a downside but for a survival rifle is sufficient. Everything fits in the buttstock including 3 mags.

The takedown is a superior unit. Well made and solid. Better sights and much easier to shoot. 25 round mags are a plus. I'll finish by saying I only own one now and it's the Ruger!

Nick308

I've seen both and shot both, Ruger is a far better rifle, but not a survival rifle.
The Ruger is just a more convenient length when packed than a normal 10/22.
The kicker is I own a Marlin Papoose - great rifle, shoots as well as a 10/22, very light, and if you don't pack it in it's special case, almost as small as the AR-7 but much better quality. A good review of the papoose has been done by nutnfancy - see his YouTube channel.

Mayor Al

Assumming you want a survivor rifle, not a plinker/fun shooter. I would pass on both and either get a Mare's Leg centerfire lever-gun, or a handgun that you feel good about to put in your pack.
The 10/22 is head and shoulders over the Henry in this case...but other options offer a lot more to the outdoor 'survivor'.

I have an AMT Explorer II handgun. it is supposed to be the handgun version of the AR-7. In simple terms it is a real POS. I don't use it at all anymore, after trying a couple of times to make it hit a Sumo Sized outline target at 25 feet. (and failing).
Have you ever seen an uglier gun?

RockDoctor

As this poster, I owned the survival rifle and carried it fishing and backpacking. It does float! I bought it because it looked cool and it was all I could afford at the time. It is not very accurate and has a very limited purpose. Saying that, I realized I wanted a nice rifle that feels and shoots like a "real" rifle and purchased a basic Ruger 10/22 that I still have after 35 years. The Survival Rifle is long gone and not missed.

I haven't yet convinced myself I "need" the TakeDown since I often carry my Mark II or Lcr .38 and now my SR22p hunting and in the field and very comfortable with them.

arg0naut22

thanks, all. good points all around. think i'll hold off, and/or buy something more practical. down the road if/when money is a little less tight, i may still consider the henry but more as an interesting novelty.

VaGent

Mayor Al,
I try never to speak ill of any firearms, with the exception of one.
I had an AMT .380 that was a POS squared. It went back to Arcadia Machine and Tool three times (three strikes and.....). I'm glad I never owned any of their tools or machinery. But not to worry , they went bankrupt. I know there are folks who like them, but I always say if it's an AMT, run, do not walk to the nearest exit.

SmokingGun

I had an AR-7 - cool design, it's gone now......

KKBMTGG/go army

If you want a .22 that's compact and works, buy a 10/22 TD or a Marlin papoose.
If you really think it's important that it floats{who the he-- knows why} than buy your rifle a life preserver!!
That AR7 compilement is about as useless as nuts on a nanny. They're odd, akward and the ones that really work are not so common. There's a reason they were given short shift....They suck!
But hey, it floats....

Rivers2k

I was thinking today isn't the take down version redundant? I mean a basic 10/22 is a take down by removing one screw and removing the action from the stock.

I bet it would fit in the same bag the take down comes in.

but was to choose between the two the Ruger! not even a contest

RJTravel

Get the Henry AR-7. Toss the bulbous stock and replace it with an aftermarket ultra-lightweight stock. Disassemble and mirror-polish everything including both sides of the flat firing pin; feed ramp; and all mating surfaces. Drill out the apeture to 1/8". The result will be a totally reliable, accurate primary rifle weighing less than 30 ounces & 25 yard sub 1&1/2" groups. It is the equal of our Brownings, Mod 62, 10/22s, Marlins etc - in both iron-sighted accuracy and reliability. Perhaps not with optics, but not a concern for a grouse hunter. The AR-7 has retired all the others for the last 4 or 5 years. It's all I want or need. There is just one big drawback - it doesn't float with the aftermarket stock.

arg0naut22

no, it wouldn't fit in the bag. stock of regular carbine is about 8" longer than where the stock of the takedown separates. same thing with action and barrel. one could certainly do that, but the takedown bag that ruger makes would not work. one would have to make or have a custom bag made.