The Surprising Survival Rifle: Henry’s AR-7–Review

Buy Now on GunsAmerica
The Henry U.S. Survival AR-7 comes in basic black, and a complex cammo.

The Henry U.S. Survival AR-7 comes in basic black, and a complex cammo.

When I think of the Henry brand, I don’t typically think about survival rifles. The company is much more well known for their lever-action powerhouses. But Henry makes other things, too, and the U.S. Survival Rifle, or AR-7, is a winner. It is compact, practical, and the AR-7’s accuracy will make you think twice about your go-to rimfire rifle.

The basic concept is simple. Henry has refined a design that works into a rifle that blows away a lot of the competition’s rifles that don’t come apart. The U.S. Survival Rifle is a minimalist platform that works. When compacted, as it will be most of the time, the AR-7 is easy to stow. When put together, it is easy to use and surprisingly accurate. And the cost stays consistently under $300–sometimes well under.

For those unfamiliar with the concept, take a look at the image below. The barrel unscrews from the receiver, the receiver unscrews from the stock. Both the barrel and the receiver and two magazines fit inside the stock. When capped, it will float. It is small enough to stay in the car, and innocuous enough that it doesn’t much look like a scary gun (even when it is assembled).

Caliber.22 LR
Capacity8 round magazine (comes with 2)
Length35″ assembled 16.5″ when stowed
Weight3.5 lbs.
StockABS Plastic
SightsAdjustable rear, blade front
FinishTeflon coated receiver and coated steel barrel
The internal cavity of the stock holds everything together.

The internal cavity of the stock holds everything together.

Everything fits where it should. There’s no way that the gun can fire when disassembled. The stock will hold two loaded magazines (which hold 8 rounds each), giving you 16 rounds of rimfire to work with. Is that enough to survive? I guess it depends on how long you want to survive. One of the best things about the AR-7 is that it floats–at least for a while. It isn’t 100% watertight, so some seepage may occur, but it bobs long enough that you should be able to retrieve it.

Why go to such lengths? Who needs one of these? It is, above all else, a last resort gun. At least that’s how I was thinking about it before I shot it. It would be an ideal gun to take along on any kind of camp out or canoe trip. It is the type of gun that hides well in a car or truck, and won’t take up too much room. You could even toss it in a plane–if you are lucky enough to fly your own plane. In short, this is the gun you go to when everything goes wrong. But it would also make a good first (or second) gun for a young shooter, too.

It isn’t a man stopper, necessarily. Not that the .22 LR isn’t capable–it just isn’t what most of us would choose first. With that in mind, I’d still pair the AR-7 with a good handgun–probably a revolver in .357. But I digress. The AR-7 is big enough to take small game, and accurate enough to do so without ruining the meat. It is head-shot-on-squirrel accurate. In short, I wouldn’t put the AR-7 high up on the list for most preppers–though it could clearly be a part of a bug out combination–but it does make a handy one gun solution for short term stays in genuine wilderness.

The AR-7 is a modest gun. IT is an exercise in practical minimalism.

The AR-7 is a modest gun. IT is an exercise in practical minimalism.

The barrel screws right onto the receiver, and can be tightened by hand.

The barrel screws right onto the receiver, and can be tightened by hand.

Assembly takes just a few seconds. All of the parts are self contained, so there are no small parts to lose. The nuts are large enough that they can be turned with a gloved hand, even. Bolt the receiver onto the stock. Screw the barrel on. Pop in a mag and cap up the stock. Charge and make safe.

The back of the receiver. Note the two sizes of sight apertures.

The back of the receiver. Note the two sizes of sight apertures.

The barrel indexes easily.

The barrel indexes easily.

The stock before assembly.

The stock before assembly.

The cap on the AR-7 fits very well, which helps ensure that it will float.

The cap on the AR-7 fits very well, which helps ensure that it will float.

The stock screws onto the receiver through the grip.

The stock screws onto the receiver through the grip.

The magazine fits flush with the trigger guard, and is released by the lever that looks like it has a bite taken out of it.

The magazine fits flush with the trigger guard, and is released by the lever that looks like it has a bite taken out of it.

Let’s talk a bit about the functionality. This rifle feels small because of the thin lines of the barrel and the diminutive receiver. The stock, on the other hand, feels swollen. It has to hold everything, after-all, so it has to be big. The charging handle is the hardest part to master, as it is small and slides in and out of the bolt.

The charging handle, the little nub pictured here, slides back into the bolt, which keeps it out of the way.

The charging handle, the little nub pictured here, slides back into the bolt, which keeps it out of the way.

It is a simple blow-back design, and it works reliably, even when wet or dirty or fouled by the rimfire rounds.

It is a simple blow-back design, and it works reliably, even when wet or dirty or fouled by the rimfire rounds.

The sights are very easy to see, thanks to the front sight’s blaze orange color. It is a wide blade, but it gets the job done. The rear sight has an odd structure. It is a tube built into the receiver. Alone, it would work as a wide ghost ring, but it has a cap which is kind of like a Popsicle stick sized slat that screws into the back of the receiver. There are two holes in this, so it can be flipped so that wider or narrower holes can be used. It can also be adjusted up and down to allow for adjustment or personal preference.

The rear sight has two pin holes (one smaller than the other). It may not look like much, but it works.

The rear sight has two pin holes (one smaller than the other). It may not look like much, but it works.

The front sight is wide, and orange (which makes it easy to see on the dark backdrop of the woods).

The front sight is wide, and orange (which makes it easy to see on the dark backdrop of the woods).

The only feature of this gun that I would want to work on is the safety. This rocker bar design is really easy to dislodge. The very first time I used this gun, I went hunting for a squirrel. I wasn’t paying attention to the safety, and I found it in the not-so-safe position several times. I took to carrying the AR-7 with my thumb on the safety, holding it back. I’m not sure if this can be tightened–I assume it can, but I haven’t gotten around to that level of tinkering yet.

The safety is easy to bump out of safe.

The safety is easy to bump out of safe.

The left side of the gun protrudes out. This is where the barrel sits when compacted.

The left side of the gun protrudes out. This is where the barrel sits when compacted.

The magazines have channels stamped in that guide them into the gun, and into the stock.

The magazines have channels stamped in that guide them into the gun, and into the stock.

When all packed up, the AR-7 holds all parts, and 16 rounds of .22 LR.

When all packed up, the AR-7 holds all parts, and 16 rounds of .22 LR.

Now let’s talk about accuracy. I’ve shot these before, so I wasn’t completely blind-sided by the performance–but I was the very first time I shot an AR-7. Still, with this one, I pulled the trigger 5 times. I knew I was on target, as I was shooting at a rather wide target board, but still I had that pit in my stomach that comes from a gun that does exactly what you want it to do.

I stood back at 25 yards and popped off a round, rather casually. It clipped the bulls-eye. I pulled the trigger again. Again. 5 times total. Almost one ragged hole. It looked more like 3 shots than 5. I did it again. And again. I shot from 50 yards. The shots were wider, but still well within the kill zone of a squirrel.

This is actually five shots, made from 25 yards--shots were made from the shoulder, standing. This is the first five shots I made with the gun, but it repeated this performance over and over again.

This is actually five shots, made from 25 yards–shots were made from the shoulder, standing. This is the first five shots I made with the gun, but it repeated this performance over and over again.

The trigger breaks at 7 pounds. Maybe that's why they cal it the AR-7.

The trigger breaks at 7 pounds. Maybe that’s why they cal it the AR-7.

I wish I could tell you that I did kill a squirrel. I didn’t. Not because I didn’t try. I was actually looking forward to it. It seemed like a bit of an adventure. Long story short–I was out checking on game cameras on land that belongs to one of the GunsAmerica writers when I blew out a coolant hose on his Jeep. When I cranked up, the hose split and I could hear the engine dumping coolant, splash splash, splash. I was more than 5 miles down a road that required 4×4 low… anyhow. If you want to read that story, you can read it here. It involves a practical review of Henry’s Survival Kit–which they sent with the AR-7 for our review.

All I have to say is that those woodland squirrels are more gun-shy than New York Democrats. They’d bark at me, and then go silent. I had about an hour of daylight in which to secure dinner. I didn’t kill a damned thing. It wasn’t because I couldn’t, it was because I never saw anything to shoot.

The Marbles Catch .22 is ideal for holding extra rounds.

The Marbles Catch .22 is ideal for holding extra rounds.

Ten tubes hold five rounds each.

Ten tubes hold five rounds each.

I even had enough ammo, thanks to this whizzbang gizmo. The Marble Arms Catch .22. Unlike the exquisite Joseph Heller novel of the same name, or the trope that has grown out of it, there’s nothing confusing about the Catch .22. It is simply the best way to hold 50 rounds of .22 LR, and should be included with every sporting or survival .22 sold.

Take a good long look at the AR-7. It is so much more than a gun that you toss behind the seat of the truck. I’ve got to do some side-by-side testing under more controlled conditions to see how it ranks against the Rugers and Marlins–but I think it would either hold its own or out shoot them. I know it would if it had narrower sights. Smells like another article to add to the to-do list.

The Marbles Catch .22 has a slight cut out in the lid that blocks unwanted rounds from escaping.

The Marbles Catch .22 has a slight cut out in the lid that blocks unwanted rounds from escaping.

In all, the Catch .22 is thin enough to clip to your belt.

In all, the Catch .22 is thin enough to clip to your belt.

{ 103 comments… add one }
  • scott husson November 8, 2020, 5:44 pm

    Charging handle issue. I did not read every blog to check if I’m being redundant. Sorry.
    Must the safely be engaged so that the charging handle doesn’t just drop out of the bolt when unloaded? ( or loaded) I’m beginning to think I may have a defect.

  • Steve Bradley May 3, 2018, 11:04 am

    Please refrain from making political statements in your reviews. Not only was your assertion concerning Democrats wrong but it was rude and if you want the support of Democrats I suggest that you have an open mind because many many Democrats support the Second Amendment and perhaps you don’t know that but that is just the truth. So please in closing keep your politics out of your reviews and just so you know I am a liberal Democrat.

  • Steve Bradley May 3, 2018, 3:42 am

    It is a shame that you have to bring politics into your review. As a liberal Democrat and non hunter of animals, I support the right to bear arms. Period. Many Democrats agree and your assertion otherwise is not only rude but wrong and I strongly suggest that if you want to gain support of everyone, that you keep politics out of these reviews. You may not know this but many of those Democrats who you feel are gun shy are too busy practicing fighting skills with hand and foot, a skill everyone should have.

  • don russell April 20, 2018, 7:43 pm

    the AR7 is a pot-metal pos. If you dis and reassemble it much at all, the soft aluminum parts will wear enough to ruin your accuracy. the front sight and rear sight are not both on the barrel. Those of the papoose ARE. The problem with the Papoose is that Remington bought out Marlin and quality control went to shyte. Now that remington is in bankruptcy, perhaps the employees at marlin will buy it and return the quality. A well-made Papoose makes the AR17 look like a joke. It needs, however, a 7″ barrel, to keep regular .22lr ammo subsonic, a telescoping buttstock, and a silencer.

    • Mark August 3, 2018, 6:34 pm

      That was pretty much uninformed nonsence! They are ingenious, incredably light weight, reliable with high or hyper-velocity ammo, and accurate.

      • Ed Petrocelli October 1, 2020, 1:30 pm

        I’ve only owned this rifle for a couple of years, but the first time I tried it I put 21 rounds in a 4” bullseye from 50 yards and I don’t consider myself a great shot. It did jam occasionally when I used bulk rounds that were packed loosely- 200 rounds to a box. When I used the Remington rounds the rifle performed flawlessly.

  • marty jewell October 16, 2017, 11:15 am

    I got my AR-7 in 1982. Mine is a Charter Arms. To date have several thousand rounds thru my AR-7 and it still functions fine. That’s 35 years of reliability. My gun functions best with Remington Thunderbolt ammo. Rem. “goldens” work well too. For a “camping” gun you “can’t beat this thing with a stick”. Accurate, 2.5lbs and stowable, what more can I say.

  • Rem870 October 20, 2016, 6:02 am

    One of the best survival rifles. You can take it and 200 rounds of 22 lr. anywhere with you.

  • Kelly Johnson September 17, 2016, 11:39 pm

    My fiancee took me to cabela’s for my 21st birthday and bought me an ar7. It is the first gun I have ever owned but I have gone shooting with friends many a time and I find that all these comments about it being unreliable and a tendency to jam are misguided. First of all henry States that it works best with HIGH VELOCITY 22 LR AMMO. And it would seem that many people haven’t even tried the henry rendition of this gun. Please check this gun out before you start spreading false information all over the internet, because when you start “knocking it before you try it” you potentially keep people from experiencing the way this gun handles for themselves.

    • marty jewell October 16, 2017, 11:26 am

      Hey Kelly, you’re so right. I’ve had my Charter Arms AR-7 since 1982. It don’t like truncated cone ammo and hollow points can be a problem feeding. I feed mine Remington Thunderbolt ammo and it never jams. Just need to clean every 250-300 rounds or so. Remington “goldens” work well too. Mine still shoots great and is 35 years old! I’d never sell my AR-7. If it was good enough for James Bond, it’s good enough for me.

    • Greg Monday April 8, 2020, 7:59 pm


  • Eddy Vercelli July 4, 2016, 8:35 pm

    One of my daughters came to visit us in Florida with 3 of our grandkids ages 8, 10 and 12. A boy and two girls with the boy being the 8 year old.
    She asked me if I would teach him gun safety and how to shoot and I said absolutely. I talked to my wife and because it was our grandkids, she was easily swayed to my buying a Henry AR-7.
    Today, July 4th 2016, I took them to a indoor range and it wound up that not only did my grandson want to shoot but my grand daughters, daughter and my wife.

    I spent about 30 minutes on safety, another 15 on sight picture, and then I loaded the magazines and one at a time stood next to them on the firing line for added safety and let them shoot.
    It was so much fun I did not want to leave. My grandson shot first and put 5 of 8 on target
    My 10 year old grand daughter went next and shot 8 of 8 on target with 5 of them that I could cover with a 50 cent piece. My oldest grand daughter went next and shot 6 on target but all over the target
    She’s the 12 year old and I think she was afraid she’d break a nail or get her hair mussed. Lol.
    My wife shot 8 on target with 6 in the X ring and two just outside. My daughter elected not to shoot as she was watching the kids in between shooting.
    This is the first time ANY of them shot a gun. Granted I had the target at about 12 yards out but for a first time I was really happy.
    I shot at 25 yards and put 5 in the middle and the first three just and inch would be nice to be able to adjust the sight a little but once you fire a few rounds and see where they are impacting it is easy enough to adjust your aim point.
    This is with a gun straight out of the box and first time it was fired. I feel this gun is extremely accurate and for the price, 250.00 NIB is well worth the money for a plinker have fun target gun. We fired 130 rounds through it and had three misfires. On two the rim was definitely indented and on one I don’t know what happened. Still.with 130 rounds and only 3 misfires on a new gun, I think that was pretty good. Clearing just took pulling the bolt back and the round came right out.
    For anyone wanting a small, easy, fun gun, I would highly recommend the Henry AR- 7.

    The only thing I wish is since most shooters are right handed, Henry should have put the stock bulge on the other side or sell it in a choice of left hand or right hand shooters. The bulge is really big and hard to get a good sight picture because of having to twist the rifle a little to fit your cheek. If the bulge were on the opposite side you could get a good site as on a full size rifle.
    I would gladly pay for a retrofit new stock.
    How about it Henry?
    By the way, my wife loved the rifle and how easy it was to fire and how quiet it is. She said now we have something else we can do together that she feels pretty much an equal in doing. I think I am going to have to get an M1A now just to stay a little ahead. Lol
    Thanks for listening to this old Marine.
    Semper Fi,

  • Gabe R. July 4, 2016, 7:17 pm

    I don’t have any experience shooting the AR-7, but I can assure you that it is a great rifle. I got to take the reciever of one of these little guns apart, and the action is based off of the Winchester model 74. I have a Winchester model 74, and it is a great little rifle. I can assure you the Henry AR-7 is a great rifle; the gun it is based on is great and every Henry I’ve owned has functioned without issue.

  • Dave McNamara February 16, 2015, 12:12 am

    I just bought a Henry AR7. Wow I find it unbelievable that the US military would issue this inaccurate rifle to our troops. Mine didn’t group at all with large hole sight, so I flipped the sight over to the small hole, and hit the 12″ paper plate at 25 yards but they had a 5″ group. Not exactly a squirrel gun. I was shooting from a bench rest, and not freehand. Another thing about this gun was every time I squeezed off a round, it was like a bee stung me on the trigger finger. I never experienced anything like it in shooting. If I had a chance to try out this gun before I bought it, I would have passed. I might try it out with bird shot in the cherry orchards during cherry season. Don’t know if it will cycle though. I think I will sell this one at the gun show.

    • Kaleb November 8, 2016, 6:35 am

      are you kidding me? I had one of these guns back in the late 90’s before the improvements were made and it was incredible! never using peep sights before I was picking birds and squirrels out of trees with absolutely no problem from 35 yards

  • frank sanbower February 13, 2015, 7:36 pm

    I Was wandering if there’s a way to work the trigger pull? I like a lighter breaking point. I Think this is a nice little gun, an if it wasn’t for the cost! I would ad this to my bag.Coming from a family that processed there own meat. I seen 1,800lb. beef cattle fall to this cal. Placement! Without fail . I did find one for 229.00.

  • SCOTT W ROBINSON January 5, 2015, 3:34 pm

    I have read comments that the peep sight rear apperature holes are too small…simple fix…unscrew that blade screw and take it off…take a good look…you have a large peepsite there to work with…problem solved…just a few shots for POI…it works!!!!

  • Peter Osborne December 29, 2014, 12:06 pm

    Have they ever considered the rifle in .22 WRM? More range, a little more punch and it would seem an easy adaption. Also, those Drilling type survival guns, rifle top, shotgun under might be re-introduced at M-1 Carbine, /5.56 NATO/.17 rim fire or other better than .22 rim fire 20 Ga. shotgun under. I’d be inclined toward a .30 M-1 Carbine/20 Ga. personally. Henry would be the ideal builder for it, seems to me.

  • Charlie November 21, 2014, 10:31 am

    I have two AR-7’s the Henry is indeed a vast improvement over past versions of this gun. I have no complaints with my Henry, but the Charter Arms version is a lot of trouble. I did manage to get the Charter Arms gun to work reliably but only after I replaced the barrel with an aftermarket steel barrel through and purchased an aftermarket magazine as well. The Charter arms version is just as good as any other 22 with those add-ons . Problem is that one should not have to modify a new gun to get it to work properly. That being said, the Charter Arms version is no more and the Henry is a better gun

  • Larry October 30, 2014, 1:03 pm

    I have an old Charter Arms version…father-in-law had it before me. What can I say. It functions perfectly. Pull trigger…goes bang. accuracy is respectable too. for a survival weapon…small caliber…it will do fine. Cycles reliably with ammo it ‘likes’…I only use one kind and it works consistently. It has a pistol grip too…one regular/factory stowable rifle stock and one custom pistol grip he had made back in the 70s. This little ‘pea shooter’ is pretty cool and is fun to shoot/hunt small game with. Herny, being a very respectable gun maker, has definitely made improvements on the original design…fit and finish wise. The gun is basically the same and does what it is supposed to do. I like the concept. You can have these stashed/stored for a ‘rainy day’. Of course variety is the spice of life and other weapons can enhance you ability to ‘survive’. Be prepared and stay vigilant. ALL firearms are your friend in a pinch. Keep them clean and handy. Have plenty of ammo for the guns you depend on. Life is good in America. Take full advantage of our FREEDOM to be armed. Use it or lose it. JMHO

  • Rob October 29, 2014, 1:59 pm

    I am not a police or military armorer as some have stated. I am a gunsmith, and I can tell you from many first hand experiences, these things can be a nightmare to get to function. Because of the various mfg.’s over the years, the after market magazines, the poor tracking of minor mfg. changes, and the general lack of reliable information on the minor changes different mfg.’s have made, you can buy some of these guns, which look little used, but will simply never work properly.

    if you choose to buy one, do not buy a used one. Buy a new-in-the-box gun from Henry and only use Henry factory magazines. Henry’s customer service it outstanding and they will 100% stand behind there product and will correct any issue that might arise.

    Buying a used one is a crap-shoot, emphasis on crap.

  • John Siers October 28, 2014, 11:01 am

    I have owned one of these for a few years now, and agree with everything the writer said — it is really a great rifle. I’m convinced that those who disparage it are thinking of the earlier versions made by Charter Arms. I have one of those as well, and it is far less reliable and accurate than the Henry. Also, don’t try to use magazines from the Charter Arms version in the Henry, unless you want jams and feed failures. Henry magazines give no such problems.
    Like one of the other responders below, I note that you can actually stow three magazines in the stock (one in being in the receiver itself) giving 24 rounds total. There is no danger in this, since without the barrel attached there is no chamber for a round to go into and the gun can’t fire.
    One issue I have with the article is about the gun’s ability to float in water when stowed. Yes, it will (barely) — provided you have no ammo stowed in there. The weight of two or more loaded magazines will make it just too heavy to float; but note that it is still pretty much waterproof.
    Finally, one of the improvements that Henry added to the design is a rail on the top of the receiver on which an optical sight can be mounted. Of course, the receiver can’t be stowed with an optic on top, so it really isn’t much use unless you are going to leave the gun assembled after you sight it in.

  • Russ October 28, 2014, 1:37 am

    (stop kidding yourselves)

  • norm October 27, 2014, 11:19 pm

    It’s been many years since I owned a rifle, and know nothing about the AR-7. As a kid, my Grandpa gave me a Remington .22 single-shot; it was in the family many years. I personally witnessed Grandpa shoot the eye out of a woodchuck at 100 yards! I never could duplicate that feat; however, the Remington was incredibly accurate and dependable. Don’t remember what happened to it over the years; maybe my brother back East has it, or it was sold or given away when Grandpa died. I’m into handguns now.
    Interesting, to read the comments above; apparently it’s possible to still get a lemon among the good apples in Gunland.

    • Russ October 28, 2014, 11:26 am

      Go find that thing norm.
      Some of those old rifles are magic.
      They dont build firearms like they used to.

  • Rich C October 27, 2014, 8:03 pm

    I hope Henry has straightened this rifle design out. I had the Marlin variant (“Papoose”) back in the mid 80’s and it was by far the worst rifle I ever owned. I could not fire a magazine through it without it jamming every other round…no matter which ammo I used. Also the magazines would keep dropping out of the action. It was sent back to Marlin twice, but they couldn’t get it to work reliably. I ended up trading it in on a Winchester 9422….best decision I ever made!

  • Big George October 27, 2014, 6:31 pm

    When I first read about the AR-7 I rushed out to buy one for my ‘go-pack’. It is an ‘OK’ rifle, and if your plans are to have it for a ‘true’ survival situation, then it will work. Otherwise, don’t plan on this being a daily rabbit shooting rifle. The stock is beyond HUGE, almost to the point of being uncomfortable to shoot. I understand that it has to incorporate the entire rifle into a compact package. I ended up just placing my AR-7 in the box with my axe, machete, emergency ammo, fire starter, etc. It’s cool that the AR-7 is also waterproof and floats, but I figured if I’m floating down a river and see my rifle float by me, then I’m in a hellova lot more sheet than I expected! I ended up buying a Ruger 10-22 ‘Breakdown’. You can shoot it everyday and it’s as compact as the AR-7. I love Henry’s and own several, but this is not my favorite.

  • Matt a October 27, 2014, 4:41 pm

    I bought one of these in 1970! A bit beat up looking but functions as it should. The gun has had a couple of manufacturerers before Henry Arms took over. I like it.

  • David October 27, 2014, 4:04 pm

    I have had an AR-7 from about 1983 and the matching explorer 2 matching 22 pistol. Both still function great even with a lot of use and wear and tear. Great item to ad to your gear

  • Jim October 27, 2014, 2:11 pm

    I will stick with my Ruger 10/22, it just keeps going and going, no matter what. Clean it once in a while, and it shoots every time.

  • Sam Tanner October 27, 2014, 2:09 pm

    I have had no experience with the AR-7, and do know that some of the early ones by the original maker were complained about. That being said, I have had experience with Henry Arms. They are into quality, and if they are building and selling AR-7s you can bet on the quality of the product, and on them backing their warranty on any of their guns.
    My experience with the Ruger 10-22 has been dismal. My son, two grand sons, and I all bought 10-22s. We thought we were in hog heaven. Not so. All four of them had atrocious triggers, and we were lucky to get one inch groups at twenty five feet. My son and grandsons sold theirs, but I was stubborn enough to try and make mine work right. The first thing I found was that the wedge that holds the barrel into the action was so loose it is a wonder it didn’t fall out. I tightened that, made a jig to hone the trigger, and got it to shoot almost as good as an el-cheepo Western Field semi auto I had bought for $12.00 in a pawn shop for a beater truck gun. I was told the if I wanted to spend more than the gun cost for an after market barrel, and that much again for a custom trigger it would shoot great. That is not my idea of a great gun, or of decent quality control.

    • Russ October 28, 2014, 11:19 am

      Holy crap Charlie Brown ! 4 x lemon Rugar TD 10/22’s! Talk about a rock in the bag.
      What are the odds of that?
      Nobody I know has a junky Rugar. 10/22 or otherwise. Give them back to Ruger for a quality replacement.
      In my family we have 4 TD 22’s. Count my friends and we have 7 more. All work excellent.
      I can hit whatever I aim at, and that’s with iron sights, old eyes and coffee shakes, LOL.
      My son likes to shoot pennies and uses the hit ones to brag about.
      You got very unlucky. Or did you tinker them to death?
      Henry and Ruger are great American companies that back their products. Take advantage of this fact.

  • Mike DOuglas October 27, 2014, 1:58 pm

    I too got taken in with this piece of crap. Great idea. Horrible product. Jams every other round. Doesn’t matter which magazine I use, I have 6, and they’re all about the same. Don’t feed worth a damn. Shoots minute of barn door. Couldn’t hit the barn if you were inside it. Henry said it would “tighten up” after a couple hundred rounds. It hasn’t, and the magazines only seem to be getting worse. Did I just get the “Lemon”?

    Mine was made by Henry Repeating Arms in Brooklyn, NY.

  • Trapper John October 27, 2014, 1:43 pm

    These are great little rifles. I would love to have one of these in 22WMR.

  • Michael Douglas October 27, 2014, 1:31 pm

    I too got taken in with this piece of crap. Great idea. Horrible product. Jams every other round. Doesn’t matter which magazine I use, I have 6, and they’re all about the same. Don’t feed worth a damn. Shoots minute of barn door. Couldn’t hit the barn if you were inside it. Henry said it would “tighten up” after a couple hundred rounds. It hasn’t, and the magazines only seem to be getting worse. Did I just get the “Lemon”?

    • Bill November 1, 2014, 1:36 am

      What’s your serial number? I think we might have bought sequential guns. That barrel is just TOO light weight and the buttstock ONLY has room for the rifle. It would be a lot more valuable in terms of survival if the orange plastic filling up the rest of the space were to end up in a New Jersey dump.

  • Rick Peterson October 27, 2014, 12:53 pm

    Calling your rifle an AR-7 plays right into the gun haters hands. Those people think AR means ASSAULT RIFLE– NO! it mean Armalite Rifle. Then you stamp on it SURVIVAL rifle why? I can buy .223 or 5.56 cheaper and more plentiful than .22 . Whatever the game your playing is stupid. Any rifle, handgun, shotgun is a survival tool. I can build out an AR-15 platform for an extra 200 bucks and go deer hunting. STUPID IDEA- Makes gun owners look bad. Stick with what you know best-

    • Sam Tanner October 27, 2014, 2:23 pm

      It make no difference what name you put on it, if it takes a cartridge and goes bang some anti gunner is going o complain about it. As to the AR 15 being a better choice, it all depends on what you are looking for. If you are looking for enemy troops, have the space to carry it, and don’t care about noise, then go for the 15. If you are on a float fishing trip, are back packing into fishing streams, or packing in on horseback, then the compact AR-7 makes a lot of sense, along with a serious handgun for critters that might want to snack on you, or to kill your horse if you should get hung up in a stirrup. If for any of those reasons you might get stranded for a while I’d prefer the light compact .22. I could always use the .460 S&W to kill a deer.

    • Russ October 28, 2014, 10:51 am

      Walmart = .223/5.56 @ $.38 per round.——- .22 @ $.07 per round
      Please give. up your 5.56 less than .22 source, Thanks!

  • Ed C October 27, 2014, 12:30 pm

    I’ve owned several of the original designs, and none of them have functioned properly. Bah-Humbug!

    • TRapper John October 27, 2014, 1:48 pm

      When Armalite made them, they were good and worked very well. Then, Charter Arms bought the design. All of the Charter Arms manufactured AR-7s were junk and didn’t work properly. Now, they are made by Henry. Mine works great. I haven’t had any problems.

  • Orrin M. Knutson October 27, 2014, 11:19 am

    Dear Gun America,

    A lot of people don;t know the AR-7 was designed by the same fellow who designed the AR-M-15/16’s for the military. The AR-7 was intended as a survival rifle for
    B-58 “Hustler” heavy bomber crews and other pilots. It was stored in a “survival vest” with 200 rds of ammo and other lot of other survival goodies. Unfortunately, during the Viet Nam was polits and choppre crews didn’t like the bulky vests and rarely grabbed then as they evacuated a downed craft.

    In the late 70’s CHARTER ARMS bought the design and began producing black AR-7’s. I bought two more for my wife and son. It is a fun and accurate little gun, although it will jam when you beat up the lips of the magazines. Other that that ours have cycled ammo very reliably.

    I am an old has-been cop (30 years of honorable service). I still have my original ARMLITE AR-7 I bought for myself back 1960’s. (Think it cost me $59.95 back then!!!) We were having a violent labor union war going on and they began ambush sniping at police cars responding to call to disturbances and riots between union the guys and scabs. (all caprured shooter were union members!)

    Our only weapons allowed were our sidearms; S&W Mod. 10’s. Due to the sniping issue, we line officers thew a fit and were finally allowed to buy our own AR-7’s through the department(not yet available to the public)to hide under the seat. We had to qualify with it first, which included stopping our car, taking cover and assembling it in no longer than 45 seconds. (Strange times back then.)

    In years to come as things changed, our AR-7’s became our family hiking and backpack companions … and the wife and I still have ours lashed to the side of our Bug-Out-Bags, just in case.

    A friend bought one of the new Henry’s a year ago and he loves it, too!

    Respectfully and may God Save America,

    • Jon Mickley October 27, 2014, 5:33 pm

      Orrin, I remember the AR7 back when I started flying KC135s in Mar 1968. They were in our bail out kit which for pilots in ejection seats was the seat cushion. We just snapped it to our parachute harness when we had to bail out, a chancy thing to do in the KC135 for sure. Back then we would actually get to assemble one and fire it at the range, but eventually that was stopped. I also remember the “Hustler” as we air refueled them. Nothing like a trip down memory lane!

  • Al October 27, 2014, 11:13 am

    Illegal in NYC BTW: Any rifle with a feeding mechanism that holds more than 5 rounds;
    WT&. HR .410 with a .22 gauge converter (not as accurate) for now. Can’t wait to move out of the Northeast.

    • Robert B October 27, 2014, 11:37 am

      A big size soda from 7-11 is illegal in NYC, so that doesn’t surprise me one bit… lol

      • Russ October 28, 2014, 1:35 am

        OMG Robert, my exact thoughts.
        Get the hell out of there Al, even if you have to walk out.

        • Al October 28, 2014, 6:25 pm

          My favorite pack rifle until it was banned was a Norinco (Browning .22 clone) take down rifle: It held 11 bullets; Puma 1892 level action – 10 round .38/.357; Marlin Glenfield 25 bolt action .22 – 7 round: All my rifles were BANNED. And not one was a so-called “assault weapon”. It’s all about civilian disarmament – nothing else. They were ALL LEGAL, they were all REGISTERED. Now they are all gone. Just so you all know, there is no 2nd Amendment in New York.

    • D Hicks October 27, 2014, 6:41 pm

      Move to the south, it’s still free and I don’t mind a good Yankee!

    • Dave T October 27, 2014, 8:57 pm

      I hear You! I can’t wait to get outta here!. New Yorkers can have that satanic Cuomo, the highest property taxes in the US, the worst gun laws in the country (next to NJ) and Ebola. Too bad that idiot in the White House will follow us whereever we go.
      More people are moving out of NYS than anytime in history. I’d rather go up into the woods and hope the bears take me in.
      BTW, I have had an AR-7 by CA since the 70’s. You need CCI mags or Federal (same company).
      Good luck to you all, I’m gone.

  • Augest West October 27, 2014, 10:56 am

    Well, We have three choices now for a 22lr break down. This Henry look’s good…I didn’t do a comparison yet but There’s the Ruger and the Marlin. However I think this is the only one that the receiver breaks down…I think. I like the cartridge holder they added to the article.

    • Bill November 1, 2014, 1:28 am

      The Catch 22 cartridge holder is made by a different company. It’s only relationship to the rifle is that they both deal with the same caliber.

  • Greg Frazer October 27, 2014, 10:53 am

    I would buy one of these in a heartbeat if they made it in 22WMR or better yet .17HMR.

  • willowa October 27, 2014, 10:49 am

    I have owned one of these for years and have never had a function problem (I think the post about mags was right). I went shooting with a friend who has a ‘tuned’ Ruger 10/22 (a fine rifle, by the way) with a scope. At about 35-40 yards, I could hit just as many (Ponderosa) pine cones as he could, quite consistently.

  • Noel P. October 27, 2014, 10:41 am

    I still own an original AR7 and mine does not leak when waterborne. They are fine rifles and there were several books on making conversions of rifles for pistols and even automatic, which I would not recommend. There was for a while a barrel that while it had a steel rifled liner was basically covered with a nylon type of woven finish. They are not inaccurate but I worry about them being bent (which can easily be done) and then warping the accuracy. Henry produces good products but I’ll stick with my ex issue one that cost me all of $78.00 with extra magazines.

  • Ron October 27, 2014, 10:40 am

    The Henry AR7 is an improved gun over the older models.I had Charter Arms AR7 that jammed up quite often. Henry engineers redesigned the magazines and that seemed to solve the problem. You need to stick with factory magazines as the aftermarket ones on the internet don’t work as well..I haven’t had any problems with mine. The factory recommends high velocity cartridges so it will cycle properly.Keep the gun clean and oiled and you should not have any problems with the gun.

  • D Hicks October 27, 2014, 9:54 am

    I’m a Henry Repeating Arms FAN ,I own 2 of there lever guns and have 3 of there camp mugs,great American company I don’t have a AR-7 because I don;t want one,however i think it’s a good idea and always was.I sold a lot of the Charter Arms AR-7’s and never heard any bad feed back on them. Henry,Made in America,or not made at all.

  • Ralph W. October 27, 2014, 9:54 am

    One thing to note, my Charter Arms AR-7, using the iron sights, held its own against a Ruger 10-22 with a scope. Just sayin’.

  • Robert J Hinch October 27, 2014, 9:51 am

    I had the AR-7 years ago only mine was on an M-1 carbine stock and my wife could consistently out shoot me and I had a 22 rife with scope.

  • Ralph W October 27, 2014, 9:48 am

    I have the Charter Arms AR-7 that I paid $45.00 for in 1975. It has been a constant companion, and I carried it with me even while I was in the Army. In my experience, the rifle has always been very accurate, and once I found ammo that didn’t jam (hint: It doesn’t like hollow points), I never had any issues with jams or misfires. As for accuracy, as a matter of testing the shooter (Me), as well as the rifle, I can say that the AR-7 is very accurate. I could easily drive nails at 50 yards.

    I’ve never fired the Henry AR-7, but if it’s better than the Charter Arms version as has been suggested by those who have studied the history of the AR-7 up to Henry’s production, then I would say that it’s an awesome little rifle to keep in your car or truck.

    Lastly, I’ve taken this little jewel with me when I visit my kids, and when I’ve taken my grandkids shooting, it was the gun that they wanted to shoot. So all around, based on my experience, I’d recommend this rifle to anyone that wants something light and compact.

  • Keith Breedlove October 27, 2014, 9:42 am

    If you want to see it in action, watch “From Russia With Love.”

  • JJ October 27, 2014, 9:38 am

    The best .22 for a real prepper would be a dedicated .22 upper for their AR-15 style rifle. Carry the upper and carry a couple of mags. When you are out shooting squirrels and large, 2-legged squirrels start to cause you problems, you can quickly swap the upper and mags and give them some head-shots, too.

    • Calvin Grimalkin October 27, 2014, 3:04 pm

      I don’t know why a dedicated upper for an AR15 style would be better than a dedicated .22 rifle would be.
      For starters, an AR style upper takes up just about as much space as many compact 22 rifles, for instance a Marlin Papoose.
      Second, if you have an AR15 and a Marlin Papoose, you have two working rifles. If you have an AR15 and an AR22 upper, you really only have one rifle at a time.
      Plus most AR22 uppers cost as much as a good 22 rifle.

      Just my .02 cents worth.

  • T.Jefferson October 27, 2014, 9:37 am

    I would like this in the 22 mag or the .17 caliber.

  • Toby October 27, 2014, 9:27 am

    I guess this gun looks like it would be a handy backpack item as far as bug outs go. Thinking about my choice for a bug out gun, my kid’s Rossi Trifecta makes a much more effective survival tool. It may only be a single shot, but I have the option of 22lr, 20 gauge shot, or 243 win. With the bag it comes in, I can squeeze in more ammo and other things. IF i feel like its too heavy, I can decide what barrels are more important. My girls have smoked numerous deer with it so one 243 win. shot would go pretty far to feeding us in a pinch…

    • Russ October 28, 2014, 1:26 am


  • Manuel Collazo October 27, 2014, 8:43 am

    I used to own one of these beauties when they were made by Charter Arms. The AR7 is an excellent gun, very accurate and easy to handle. For its small size there is no recoil and it is relatively quiet to operate. I like the new standard rail system to add optical sights but in this platform it is rarely needed for the range the gun will normally be used in. Nonetheless if you are heading out camping or hiking in the woods it is not a burden to add an AR7 to your backpack. I made a canvas sleeve for mine that could be easily tied to the backpack.

  • Frank S. October 27, 2014, 8:22 am

    Maybe Henry has corrected the problem that earlier manufacturers had? Who made the ones you have, TJ Anderson? I’m not trying to be a smart-a**, would just like to know. Henry may be making an exact duplicate for all I know…

    I can see someone making a short barrel and pistol grip for the receiver. Two-in-one pistol/carbine, anyone?

    • tulsamal October 27, 2014, 10:40 am

      I guess Henry hasn’t ever done it but this design was produced as a pistol at one time. An ugly one…

      I remember when you could buy the rifle or pistol at one of those long ago hardware stores: Otasco.

      Ha, ha, a quick check of Otasco on Wikipedia says there are still a couple open in OK. I remember them from the 60’s and early 70’s.

    • Mike Kay October 27, 2014, 11:00 am

      Charter Arms did make a variant of the AR-7 called the Explorer II that resembled a Broomhandle Mauser. The barrels were not interchangeable between the rifle & the pistol due to the restrictions imposed by the NFA 1934. I agree that it would nice to be able to have one receiver that you could use to make either a rifle or a pistol out of, but unfortunately the Feds don’t see it that way.

      • Dave October 27, 2014, 4:13 pm

        The barrels are interchangeable but the site blades will be on the bottom. I have fired both this way and the operate fine but it’s like the old west trying to hit anything over about 50 feet away

    • Russ October 28, 2014, 1:23 am

      Stick a higher caliber pocket pistol & ammo in the buttstock for backup?
      I keep my PPQ .40 & other goodies in my Ruger 10/22 bag.

      • Bill November 1, 2014, 1:23 am

        No extra room … can’t even get a small scope in there.

  • Sergio October 27, 2014, 8:10 am

    When I was jus a teen on that old time it just was borned! Very interesting gun! While ready for use you can keep inside the stock some others survival materials as the ones for fishing. Pehaps now all days you have others choices in more efetived calibers and easy carried wepons!

  • jay October 27, 2014, 8:06 am

    i aspect nothing but the best when its comes to any ar

    • Bill October 27, 2014, 9:42 pm

      Well if you did your research you would discover I think that the AR in this case originally stood for Aerial recon. The original AR’s was to be placed into planes used in Vietnam in the case a pilot was shot down. I think!!!!!!

      • Administrator October 27, 2014, 9:45 pm

        No it didn’t. It stood for Armalite.

  • Gregg October 27, 2014, 7:33 am

    I’ve owned a half-dozen of these rifles and they are quite accurate and reliable. The original AR-7’s though weren’t made by Henry and I’ve also owned a couple of those. The Henry ones are a marked improvement, like night and day. And the price is right. Back before the big firearms scare I bought all mine for less than $200 apiece. Took a very good friend of mine shooting and brought along the little lightweight gun. He loved it so much that I gave it to him. Trust me, you can’t go wrong with this gun it’s great.

    • Robert B October 27, 2014, 11:32 am

      I bought a Henry AR7 less than two years ago from my local Cabelas for 180 bucks. Great rifle, never had any ejection problems using CCI and Federal ammo.

  • Greg October 27, 2014, 6:47 am

    I’d really like to see a side by side with the Ruger and Marlin as well. Hopefully it will include an endurance test; a survival gun is no good if it doesn’t go bang.

  • TJ Anderson October 27, 2014, 5:32 am

    Too bad nothing was said of this rifle’s troubled history of malfunctions. I own two of them, and have used every available type of .22 ammunition one can imagine in both of the two that I own. Same problems exist in both – primarily with failures to extract and eject. The AR7 has two recoil springs that serve to delay rearward bolt travel and then return the bolt to in-battery position. I’ve had to clip 3 to 4 coils from BOTH recoil springs to get both guns to function somewhat reliably. The other problem that you’ll have is that there are a large number of after-market magazines available, and you’ll never know which ones will work in your AR7 until you buy them. From what I can tell, there are subtle but critical differences in the AR7s manufactured over the last 30 years by Charter Arms, Survival Arms and now by Henry Repeating Arms. Buyer Beware! These rifles are NOT worth the steep prices they’re selling for now. For about the same price, you’re much better off buying a Ruger 10/22 with the new take-down barrel design.

    • David Shultz October 27, 2014, 8:25 am

      I’m 67 years old and have purchased three of these rifles over the years. They could be had for about $100 at one time. I will have to disagree with the posting that said they were not reliable and suffer from many problems. I’m also a former firearms instructor and armorer that attended many schools on firearms. Any firearm made today may have failures if the improper magazine is used. The cheaper magazines will fail all the time. If you purchase the factory magazine and feed the rifle good clean ammo, they will fire all the time. They are also as accurate as stated. They were first made to provide fighter pilots with a way to survive if they had to bail out. I also don’t think that these new rifles were made with any parts don’t work if kept clean. I will buy one in the near future. Great Boat gun!!

      • Richard C. Schmidt October 28, 2014, 11:33 am

        Dear Mr. David Schultz,

        Where can I purchase one of these long guns for $100 ? I am 72 and have a few pistols and two long guns.


        Richard Schmidt

      • Tom R. October 28, 2014, 7:45 pm

        I bought my wife a Henry lever action 22mag., I wished Henry would make the AR-7 in a 22mag. give that little extra knock down power.

      • Bill November 1, 2014, 1:12 am

        I’ve owned two of these for about 3 years now as BOB guns.

        Altough they are milled for scope mounts, the receiver will not store in the stock with a scope mounted. To be honest (backed up by your own story), I don’t think these eyes are “squirrel sharp” with the provided iron sights. North of ~50 yards, I NEED glass if I am planning on putting a squirrel, or even a rabbit, into the pot for dinner … so mine spends all of its time assembled with scope because, in a survival situation, I don’t want to have to waste even a single bullet on sighting in a scope. Those who carry BOB’s realize that they may come into play in circumstances where stealth is important so:
        It should also be noted that the barrel is NOT threaded for a suppressor and adding threads would require removing the front sight.

        The barrel is a steel sleeve inside of aluminum. That makes for light weight, but I do not find it to be especially accurate … nor does my wife. “Rabbits at 50 yards”, in my opinion, sums up the outer limit at which I would consider the gun reliable enough to entrust dinner to.

        There is neither a last round hold open nor a way to manually hold the bolt open. Since 99-plus percent of the time the rifle is in use will NOT be in dire circumstances, I consider that a serious flaw in the design.

        As your article mentioned, the Henry AR-7 holds an anemic 8 rounds per magazine, perhaps because they are manufactured in New Jersey. I’ve done a LOT of searching and have yet to find larger magazines designed for the HENRY AR-7. I can find larger capacity aftermarket magazines all over the place for the other, no longer made, versions of the AR-7 … but none for the Henry. I surmise (on slender evidence) that they are unwilling to license the feed lip design to anyone, preferring to sell the over-priced and anemic magazines themselves.

        I own several guns and the Henry AR-7 is the only one I would not consider buying again. Prospective owners of one need to look them over especially carefully to evaluate their suitability for your purposes. When I first started buying firearms after moving from a (then) restrictive locale to North Carolina I saw this AR-7 as a key part of our emergency preparedness.

        I am now trying to find a way to shoehorn a couple takedown 10-22s into the budget. .22 caliber is a great caliber for a number of uses and has the advantage of being lightweight enough that it is possible to carry 100 rounds or more without bogging down.

        I’m just not convinced that the Henry AR-7 is the best way to put them on target anymore.

    • Henry Gallego October 27, 2014, 9:12 am

      I agree you can’t go wrong with the Ruger. 10-22 the very best!

      • Russ October 28, 2014, 1:05 am

        That’s what I have.
        Shoots and looks better
        Perfect bug out .22

    • Tim October 27, 2014, 11:00 am

      I owned one of these back in the early 1980’s. I must have put upwards of 30,000 rounds through it (1,000 rounds per trip to the country x 30 trips). That was back when .22LR ammo was only $9.00 for 1,000 rounds. I found the rifle convenient and accurate. It did have several feeding problems that I traced to the magazine. The mag was a little loose and I discovered that if I gently pulled the mag forward (that is, in the same direction of the bullet travel) feeding problems went away. I suppose I could have tried other mags. But for one reason or another…. I never did. There were no problems in extraction. Eventually, the springs that push the firing-pin/hammer wore-out to the point that the cartridges were not always firing. They were dirt cheap to replace. So I just replaced all the springs. That took care of the problem. Total dis-assembly was darn easy. Assembly of the barrel/receiver/stock was even easier. For what it is, It’s a lot of fun. You can play chase the can all day long. I also have used the collapsible Ruger 10/22. The AR-7 isn’t the quality of the 10/22. But the AR-7 is fine for what it is. And it is a bit more convenient. But for $300!?!?!?! That’s a littler steep. I’ll go with the collapsible 10/22 for a little more.

      • Brian Henson June 25, 2016, 2:11 pm

        Stop talking about the old AR7. The Henry is a great little rifle. No jams or problems for me. I have hit and killed Prarie dogs from a hundred yards away. I have killed at least 40 of those little rodents in just a couple of days. To compare the old one to the Henry is like comparing apples to oranges. This new Henry version is awesome. Try it before you hate it. I have hit everything I have aimed it at. It is quick. Light and a lot of fun to own. Great training weapon. If I want to take a person down I have my Glock Handy too. This is a fun little rifle perfect for just about everything. It is not uncomfortable to shoot. I can shoot it all day long and have. It has out performed much more expensive rifles., and I hit more things with this rifle than my friends who have much more expensive set up and scopes. Don’t hate what you have no clue about.

    • jjd76539 October 27, 2014, 12:17 pm

      I agree with TJ’s post. The AR7 has been plagued with issues in the past and still might have these issues..And so many complaints about this firearm it makes them hard to sell.. the AR7 is in a niche category for a great idea but never has overcame the issues of the failures.. They are way overpriced … It is not something I would rely on as a survival firearm..

    • Jason October 27, 2014, 12:52 pm

      I believe your suffering under a misinformed understanding of how the gun is supposed to be used. I states clearly almost everywhere you look for info on the rifle that it cycles reliably with HV .22 ammo and may not do so with normal velocity ammo. I have owned 3 and all functioned reliably with HV ammo and standard velocity ammo when the spring trick you mentioned was done. The days of totally unreliable AR 7s is gone. Henry has a good a now reliable feeding (if you buy henry mags) rifles that cost way less then the average 10/22 takedown. I bought mine for 182.83 no tax free shipping and $25 transfer no way you can get a regular or takedown ruger for that ….. Just saying

      • TJ Anderson October 28, 2014, 12:21 am

        No “misunderstanding” here, son. I’ve been a police and military armorer for over 30 years. I know how to get guns working. As i stated above, I’ve used EVERY imaginable round available in my AR7s, including CCI Stingers, Mini Mags, etc. and had the same problems. My AR7s have been made by Charter Arms and Survival Arms and it’s possible that Henry is now making a better AR7 product.

      • TJ Anderson October 28, 2014, 12:29 am

        “I bought mine for 182.83 no tax free shipping and $25 transfer no way you can get a regular or takedown ruger for that ….. Just saying”

        Which isn’t saying much. You can still find Ruger 10/22 rifles on sale for under $200. I just bought one for $190. The Ruger take-down 10/22s are now selling on Gunbroker for $299 – with a threaded barrel! as you can see from the above article, the Henry AR7 retails for $290. Just saying.

      • Russ October 28, 2014, 1:14 am

        My Ruger TD cost $40.00 more than your Henry
        The Henry seems cool, but the Ruger is cool with tons of options.
        “Good is not cheap, and Cheap is not good” —->Y.G.W.Y.P.F.

      • Larry October 30, 2014, 12:05 pm

        I remember when 1022s were $129.00 on sale at Academy in Houston…not that long ago.(10 yrs maybe) and ammo was very cheap. Time flies when you’re having fun…lol. I guess this is the ‘new world’ and we have to live with much higher prices. I have always liked Ruger 1022s….but these little AR7s are pretty sweet and Henry seems to be making them ‘tight and accurate’…perfect for shtf scenario. Prices for firearms are going up but in the scheme of things, considering how long good firearms last, it’s not too fair to complain. Everyone has to make a living and Firearms Companies are what FREEDOM is all about. Find the ammo your little AR7 plinker likes to digest and reliability problems are solved…jmho. Have fun and be SAFE too.

        • DK Deuel October 31, 2014, 7:18 pm

          I bought my first 10/22 in 1976 at a store in downtown Salt Lake City for $69.99 if I remember right, the only thing I’ve had changed on it in nearly forty years were the magazines (went to 25 rounders). I now own three and am planning on a fourth. One in the truck, one in the camp trailer, one in the house, and one in a bugout bag. It’s really the only “indispensable” rifle that I own. I’ve toyed around with buying an AR7, but i keep ending up with 10/22’s instead!

        • Bill November 1, 2014, 1:18 am

          I have tried 19 types of .22 in my Henry AR-7 and have yet to find one that is particularly accurate out of the barrel of either of our Henry’s.

          I don’t mind folks making a living and I’m even willing to pay a bit of a premium to get 100% made in USA merchandise, but I don’t think that this rifle is worth this price. To be honest, unless I had NO other guns to carry, I think the best thing to do with it when bugging out is to leave it behind.

    • Dave October 27, 2014, 10:28 pm


    • Dave October 27, 2014, 10:29 pm


    • Natural October 28, 2014, 4:01 am

      The problem with reviews on any item in most magazines is 99% of the time the item being reviewed has been sent to the reviewer after being gone over with a fine toothed comb so there will not any major failures. A friend of mine bought 2 .22 LR Stoeger Lugers after reading rave reviews about them in a Gun Magazine. Both Pistols failed to feed or function properly. They were both sent back to the manufacturer for repair. When the firearms were returned after repairs, they were taken out again where they still failed to function properly. I also ran into someone who had several of the Stoeger Lugers that did not function at all. The only tests I would trust are the ones conducted by Gun Tests. They do not get hand pick products gone over with a fine toothed comb before being sent directly from the manufacturer. I have also written other magazines and criticized them for reviewing products that they either did not buy or try out from the item on the shelf at a store. They were not too happy with my criticism of their reviewing procedure.

      • Administrator October 28, 2014, 6:09 am

        That was true of the print mags but in general is not true of the internet reviewers for the most part. Henry takes review guns off the top of the pile they are a great company that makes great guns right here in the USA.

    • Gene December 13, 2015, 6:20 pm

      Please measure the diameter of the barrel tip and width of the sight on the AR7

  • Matt Eddins October 27, 2014, 3:24 am

    I have one of these and love it for my bugout bag. I want to note that you can store the receiver with a magazine in it. I bought an extra magazine and now have 24 in the buttstock. I have not checked if this affects its ability to float. I think I paid 10 dollars for the magazine. Nice article.

    • Laurence Warner October 27, 2014, 11:53 am

      I, too, ordered an extra magazine and carry it as you do. I absolutely LOVE this little plinker, and it rides in my bug out bag as well.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend