Henry brand 1892

[Missedshot]

If and if Henry built an 1892 like they build the 1860, wouldn't that be grand? No pun intended. An American made 1894 with the same quality and attention to detail as their 1860.

[Griff]

Frankly, I don't see it happening... Their advertising for their "modern" guns is all about the safety of and great feeding as a result of their front loading magazines. Or, rather, the lack of a King's Patent loading gate.

[Pete44ru]

If and if Henry built an 1892 like they build the 1860, wouldn't that be grand ?

Yep, It would most likely literally be grand - as in costing "one G" ($1,000.00), or more.


.

[AJMD429]

I do like Henry's, and I DO like the tube loading/unloading option......but I also like the option of 'topping off the magazine' with the receiver loading gate.

Still I may get a Henry 45 Colt levergun sometime....

[jdad]

The change in manufacturing process, engineering design, tooling, etc. makes it too cost prohibitive. The tube magazine, from a production cost aspect, keeps Henry in the affordable quality, "value", segment.

[44shooter]

It will never happen. Henry is stuck on a inferior loading system that has been obsolete for 150 years. And it's not about cost. It's about cheesy branding to tie their name with a rifle they did not develop.

Yes I know rimfires are loaded into tube mags this way. They are too small and soft for rear loading gates.

[rodeo kid]

I would not say it will never happen. Henry has proven with the 1860 and other new models it can build any rifle it decides to. I really do not understand the continued animosity towards Henry. They are an American company that builds all their products here and provide jobs to Americans. As far as a cheesy brand, it is my understanding they purchased the rights to use the name the same as Browning did with Winchester. God Bless.

[Griff]

...they purchased the rights to use the name the same as Browning did with Winchester. God Bless.

That is what they like folks to believe, and they infer that in their advertising. Tony Imperato's father, Louis, was the last CEO of Iver Johnson. The original Henry Rifle was produced by the New Haven Arms Co. The "Henry" was not the name of the rifle, it was simply the model 1860... the nickname "Henry" came as a nod to its designer, Benjamin Tyler Henry from it's users. There was no historic "Henry Repeating" anything for them to buy the rights to. Tony Imperato acquired the rights to produce a .22 lever action rifle, marketed in the US as the Ithaca mdl 72 lever action, which was produced by ERMA Werkes, a West German Company. Neither of which had any ties to the Henry name... Arguably, a masterful stroke of marketing genius...

Henry Repeating Arms infuriated many cowboy action shooters by advertising its "Big Boy" as being a legal cowboy action rifle before it was deemed legal... again, thru what some feel was less than honorable means. It was declared legal by the BOD of SASS, not thru any vote of the rules committee, which had recommended its rejection, IIRC. Although it met the declared, tube magazine, exposed hammer lever action rifle, it was not a "original or copy of a firearm of the period from 1860 to 1899."

FWIW, Browning did not acquire the rights to the name Winchester, either. Browning had been bought by FN-Hertzal (sp?). When Olin Corporation ceased production of Winchesters in 1983, they licensed the Winchester Repeating Arms company to produce guns with that name in the former Winchester plant. When WRA had their initial financial woes in the early 1990s, FN became a minority partner... increasing that participation to the point that WRA became a FN subsidiary. When it became financially infeasible to continue operating the Winchester plant, production was ceased in late 2005/early 2006. The name Winchester was again up for grabs. FN submitted the winning offer to Olin to produce guns with the name Winchester on them, and moved production to their other facilities...

Since FN is still building Winchester 1892s in its Miroku, Japan plant, Henry RA would be competing against an "original" at what would be a comparable price point. And truthfully, for a limited market... mainly cowboy action shooters, who have shown a predilection for inexpensive clones... plus, the design of the 1892 precludes its relative ease in modification to becoming a competitive arm to the relative ease of modifying an 1873 and Marlin 1894 to short-stroke the action, shortening time between shots.

[piller]

I have a Henry .22lr and a Henry Survival Rifle. I am going to order the .327 Mag Henry this week. I am saving my lunch money for a Henry Long Ranger in .308. I don't care about their attempt to tie into the original Henry, and I have my Marlins if I need a loading gate, as well as my Rossi.

Henry has great customer service. I have used it once and was taken care of exactly as I wanted. Great quality in the products and great customer service are important to me.

[Pete44ru]

...they purchased the rights to use the name the same as Browning did with Winchester. God Bless.

That is what they like folks to believe, and they infer that in their advertising. .

The "Henry" was not the name of the rifle, it was simply the model 1860... the nickname "Henry" came as a nod to its designer, Benjamin Tyler Henry from it's users.

FWIW

A copy of an original advertisement:




.

[44shooter]

I didn't say Henry was a cheesy brand as a whole. But their making of rifles without loading gates is a marketing ploy, i.e. Branding, to associate their company with the 1860 rifle. IMO that's cheesy. And so is fake brass.

They can make a 1892, but they won't make it faithfully. It would have front loading, weigh about a pound and half too much, and cost about what two Rossi's go for. Heck, if they decided to make say an A5 shotgun copy, you'd probably still have to drop shells down the front.

I have no problem with front loading on 22s or the 1860 copy. But on a more modern centerfire it seems incomplete to me.

That said their Erma copy is pretty good. The kids bolt gun they made was the best of that type I've ever seen. I wouldn't mind having an AR7 stowed away in my vehicles. The Long Ranger is very pleasing to my eye, even a little more than the BLR that it appears to be based on. Their new single shot rifles look nice too...something between utility budget guns and premium falling blocks.

[1894c]

I like Henry rifles (the loading tube is not a big issue with me), it's another choice, unfortunately the other choices are slowly fading into history... :)

[Missedshot]

The ar-7/survival rifle does not have a front loading tubular magazine. The 1860 is a very close clone also. When I suggested an 1892 I meant a clone. Just like we know the 1892 to be. With a loading gate, and a half-cock hammer, nothing that wasnt on the originals.