Henry? Why Not?

[jsimmons]

I'm curious to understand why there aren't more than a smattering of Henry pistol-cartridge lever gun references here. Is there something inherently wrong with the rifles? (I'm talking "I've seen-it-happen" facts here, not opinions based on hearsay or "us-versus-them" emotions.)

I just don't understand why they're not more highly regarded here. They have a smooth action out of the box, they're available in all three of the standard calibers (and soon, a .30-30), they are (IMHO) darn fine looking rifles in their own right, and too a man, every reviewer has praised the gun with nothing bad to say about them (grain of salt taken very liberally). Lastly, they certainly aren't out of sight as far as pricing is concerned compared to other manufacturers of similar products (Marlin cowboy rifles are just as costly - if not a little more so - than a similarly chambered Henry.

I currently own a Henry H001T (blue octagon) in .22LR, and I recently decided I wanted to get a .357 mag lever gun. Based on my experience with the .22 rifle, I personally see no reason not to get a Henry, but I'm concerned that there's almost no talk of them at what is considered to be *the* place to talk about lever guns.

So what's the deal?

[Jeff Quinn]

They are good guns, but heavier than I like. I like my leverguns for their handiness while hunting. If I am carrying a nine-pound rifle, I opt for more power. I prefer a .357 levergun to weigh closer to six pounds.
The heavier weight is fine for competition, but I do not compete, and prefer a lighter carbine.
Just personal preference. Nothing against the gun at all. It just doesn't fit my needs as well as a 16 inch 92.

[dr walker]

My guess the reason there is not more Henry Big Boy posts, is less forum members own them.
I have shot one in 44 magnum, it seemed like an alright gun. It did everything my Marlin does, loading was different, but not a big deal.

I dont really like the brass frame.

The local gunshop has one for $700.

The Marlin I bought in 44 magnum was $425. (not cowboy model)

I am looking forward to seeing the blue one in .30-30.

[J Miller]

1: They are too heavy.

2: The guts are basically a copy of Marlins design.

3: Marlins, Winchesters, Rossis are lighter, and handier, and less expensive, and work just fine.

Joe

[kirkwood]

My Golden Boy is one of my favorite guns. The only thing I changed was I added the optional bright brass band to it. I don't consider it to be a heavy gun for an adult - although it may be heavy for a youngster.

[jsimmons]

My Golden Boy is one of my favorite guns. The only thing I changed was I added the optional bright brass band to it. I don't consider it to be a heavy gun for an adult - although it may be heavy for a youngster.

I'm actually asking about the Big Boy. It is heavier than others in it's class (8.6 pounds or something like that). The octagon barrel is the reason.

[meanc]

I think it has a lot to do with the brass frame, the plastic sights, the aluminum receiver, the weight, those four unsightly reciever screws, etc...

As for me, I've got the H001T that I...

1. Cut the barrel down to 16".

2. Dovetailed the barrel for a post front sight.

3. Cut 1 1/2" off the rear stock (easier for my daughter to shoulder)

4. Got the rear metal barrel band from Henry.

5. Added a saddle ring from a Winchester 94.

6. Can shoot groups into 1 1/2" and better at 50yds.

6. Love to shoot the heck out of.

[jsimmons]

1: They are too heavy.

Too heavy for what? I'm going to be Cowboy Lever Action silhouette, not hunting.

2: The guts are basically a copy of Marlins design.

That's the first time I've ever seen someone say that, but even if that's the case, doesn't that make the rifle functionally equal to the Marlin?

3: Marlins, Winchesters, Rossis are lighter, and handier, and less expensive, and work just fine.

You've mentioned weight twice - ask and answered.

What do you mean by "handier". Is that a derivative of the complaint regarding weight?

When you compare the Marlin Cowboy gun to the Henry pistol cartridge guns (which are also classified as cowboy guns, BTW), the cost difference swings ever so slightly in Henry's favor.

I guess what you're trying to say is that you have a Marlin and/or Winchester, and you see no reason to have a Henry. I was looking for anecdotal evidence as to why the Henry seems to be ignored here. I thought there might be something fundamentally wrong with the rifle that had eluded my week's worth of google'ing.

I realize the Big Boy is fairly new on the scene, but after eight years of production, I figured there would be much more discussion going on.

[Pisgah]

By all the reports I've read, the Henrys are good, serviceable rifles. But, they are heavy, they are expensive, and -- sorry, but this is my opinion -- they are flat-out ugly.

[Swampman]

Henry makes a nice cheap .22.

Their centerfire guns are way too heavy & too expensive. I'd rather have 2 Marlins for the same money. I was willing to pay $495.00 for my Marlin 39A because it's twice the gun the Henry .22 is IMO.

If I was still into CAS I'd choose something other than the Henry, because it isn't a replica of anything.

[Idahoser]

[jsimmons]

I think it has a lot to do with the brass frame, the plastic sights, the aluminum receiver, the weight, those four unsightly reciever screws, etc...

As for me, I've got the H001T that I...

1. Cut the barrel down to 16".

2. Dovetailed the barrel for a post front sight.

3. Cut 1 1/2" off the rear stock (easier for my daughter to shoulder)

4. Got the rear metal barrel band from Henry.

5. Added a saddle ring from a Winchester 94.

6. Can shoot groups into 1 1/2" and better at 50yds.

6. Love to shoot the heck out of.

Ummm, we're talking about the Big Boy models, not the smallbore models.

But since you mentioned it, the H001T doesn't come with plastic sights or plastic barrel bands. I believe the receiver is steel (it's blued, but I could be wrong), and the receiver *cover* is made of ZAMAC (zinc aluminum magnesium and copper)

What's the problem with the brass frame on the Big Boy? Is it a weak point in the gun? Does it have feed/eject problems?

Four unsightly screws? The Marlin 1894c has four screws just on one side. How is that any less "unsightly"?

[Grizzly Adams]

[quote="jsimmons"]

I currently own a Henry H001T (blue octagon) in .22LR, and I recently decided I wanted to get a .357 mag lever gun. Based on my experience with the .22 rifle, I personally see no reason not to get a Henry, but I'm concerned that there's almost no talk of them at what is considered to be *the* place to talk about lever guns.

So what's the deal?[/quote]

Can't speak for others, but I just don't fancy them. I prefer classic Winchester and Marlin lever gun designs and personally, being as diplomatic as I can, I don't find the Henry BB to be a very good looking rifle. But the thing that bugs me most is the way they trade on the early history of the Henry and Winchester line, while in reality there is NO connection! Just my personal opinion, and worth what ya paid for it!

I suggest that if you find nothing to object too - well go get one of them!

[J Miller]

jsimmons,

For general use, I don't want a heavy pistol caliber rifle. For hunting, I don't want a heavy pistol caliber rifle. For target shooting I don't want a heavy pistol caliber rifle.

I handled a Henry Big Boy in .45 Colt and that rifle was ungainly, awkward, and just too heavy. Almost 9 pounds compared to around 6 for my Marlin.

Yes I have a Marlin 1894 Cowboy, bought it new and it didn't cost what the Henrys do. I also have a Winchester 94 Trapper and I've had a Rossi 92. All of them nicely balanced, handy, and easy to carry.
Some years back I had a Marlin 1894 Cowboy with the 24" octagon barrel. It balanced far better than the Henry, and didn't weigh near as much.

I have no complaints about the rifle design except that they could have shown some originality on the inside like they did on the outside.

Those are my reasons for not buying a Henry, what more of an answer can I give you?

Joe

[jsimmons]

I've never had one, but the opinion I've built from hearsay would put the Henry in the same category as a Taurus handgun. Alright, but if you can have a S&W why wouldn't you?

Better hedge against inflation that gold.

Nothing is as bad as the Taurus handgun, and like I said, I'm more interested in facts than hearsay.

[jazman]

I like the Henrys, and have a large loop .22 carbine. I was going to get a Big Boy in .357, and compared them side by side with Rossi, and bought a Rossi. It was the weight thing for me too, the Rossi is great in the brush, very handy carbine. If they weighed the same I would have bought a Henry in a second. I like everything else about them, fit and finish, the company itself, and the fact every piece is made in America.

[2ndovc]

How 'bout that they're just Butt Ugly!

That's just an opinion but as a Winchester guy and if I'm going to pay the kinda scratch they want for the centerfire Henrys I'm going to buy something with some class!

no offense intended it's just an OPINION!

[kirkwood]

I'm actually asking about the Big Boy. It is heavier than others in it's class (8.6 pounds or something like that). The octagon barrel is the reason.

You asked about opinions of Henry's in general.

[Grizzly Adams]

How 'bout that they're just Butt Ugly!

Har!

[engravertom]

I'm very interested in the 22's, but the Big Boys are ,indeed, exceedingly ugly. There is just no way around it. I also don't like the forward loading feature on that type of rifle. Doesn't bother me on the rimfires, since they all seem to come that way. The weight would bother me also.

I don't hate that they exist, they are just not for me.

If somehow they could make them look close to the original Henry rifles, I would probably change my tune.

BTW, I've only heard good things about them. Looks count for me though, all else being similar. It is not just Henry's either . I just will not buy a gun that looks ugly to me. Life is too short!

Take care,

Tom

[Jarhead]

By all the reports I've read, the Henrys are good, serviceable rifles. But, they are heavy, they are expensive, and -- sorry, but this is my opinion -- they are flat-out ugly.

I really like Winchester and Marlin and own both a Model 71 Carbine and an 1895GS. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and often times so is quality. I like the "Golden Boy" Henry and will probably get one in a .22 Mag. They only weigh 6.75lbs. When I was in the Marines we packed the M14 ,which weighed over 9lbs, all day long. We did complain about it though Packing a heavier rifle keeps you in shape and burns calories....helps from getting a big gut

[Andrew]

jsimmons,

There is no way to take a rifle into a lab and scietificaly define it as "Good". It all has to do with personal preference. Guns are an extension of you: so if it don't fit, it don't work. I hate to be a wet blanket, but all you're gonna probably get on here are opinions.

[Leverdude]

I'm curious to understand why there aren't more than a smattering of Henry pistol-cartridge lever gun references here. Is there something inherently wrong with the rifles? (I'm talking "I've seen-it-happen" facts here, not opinions based on hearsay or "us-versus-them" emotions.)

The reason thers only a smattering of Henry owners here is that most of us were shooting leverguns before the current Henry company was dreamed of. Most of us already found the one we liked & since both major manufacturers already chambered guns in the calibres Henry is starting to use there is no reason to switch. I thought about the Big Boy when it first came out but the brass frame made me nervous & the price tag cinched it.
Unlike the other makers they dont have a plain jane model you can buy to see if you like it. Just me but I wont spend their cost on an experiment.
If they had a $350 model I'd have one.

I just don't understand why they're not more highly regarded here. They have a smooth action out of the box, they're available in all three of the standard calibers (and soon, a .30-30), they are (IMHO) darn fine looking rifles in their own right, and too a man, every reviewer has praised the gun with nothing bad to say about them (grain of salt taken very liberally). Lastly, they certainly aren't out of sight as far as pricing is concerned compared to other manufacturers of similar products (Marlin cowboy rifles are just as costly - if not a little more so - than a similarly chambered Henry.

They are highly regarded by those that have them.
I'm not sure of these standard calibers your talking about. Far as I'm concerened the 30/30 IS the standard levergun caliber so theyre only now getting up to speed.
Again I think price is a big part of it. Marlins CB is expensive but its bought by guys who already know Marlins for the most part & even if they dont the Marlin name has been stamped on lever guns since 1881, its place is secure. Also again, the CB is the top of the line, the Henry Big Boy really needs an entry level gun to get folks interested.

I currently own a Henry H001T (blue octagon) in .22LR, and I recently decided I wanted to get a .357 mag lever gun. Based on my experience with the .22 rifle, I personally see no reason not to get a Henry, but I'm concerned that there's almost no talk of them at what is considered to be *the* place to talk about lever guns.

So get the Henry & give us a report!
Like you said the guys that have them like them. I'v only handled one 44 Big Boy. Its basically a Marlin copy (So why not get a Marlin) with a transfer bar system. I think the reason they load from the tube instead of thru a gate on the reciever is because its so Marlinlike. They had to change a few things for legal reasons. I saw pictures of prototypes of the Big Boy with a loading gate. I'd bet their lawyers, or Marlins lawyers, said they better figure something out.
Anyway, the one I handled was jammed up just like a Marlin gets with the lifter stuk under a case in the tube so I couldn't shoot it. I could have cleared it but the guy didn't believe it so I didn't. It was pretty dang heavy tho & its not from the Oct barrel but from the brass reciever. I'v got alot of OCT barrel guns & most times theyre lighter than a similar length round barrel. Measure one if you like. Marlins OCT barrels measure less across the flats than do round barrels. Corner to corner they are like a round barrel. Henry's barrels might be a heavier profile but that hunk of brass weighs too.

So what's the deal?

I think I covered it but would add that their advertising leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I dont like the way they associate their company with the original Henry. They allude to it frequently & its just wrong. Not one item they make has anything in common with B Tyler Henry's design. Its very misleading & IMO borders on immoral.

[TedH]

I like the standard model Henry 22 that I have. Well, all except for the plastic sight/barrel band. The Big Boy is just too dang ugly for me. I don't think I could keep one if somebody gave it to me.

[Grizzly Adams]

I think I covered it but would add that their advertising leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I dont like the way they associate their company with the original Henry. They allude to it frequently & its just wrong. Not one item they make has anything in common with B Tyler Henry's design. Its very misleading & IMO borders on immoral.

+2

[meanc]

Ummm, we're talking about the Big Boy models, not the smallbore models.

Not to be nasty, but Ummm, did you look at your first post? Could you please tell me where you stated you were only discussing BIG BOY MODELS ????

As I see it, you only spoke of Henry's in general and only mentioned the 22lr H001T, the 357mag, and 30-30

But since you mentioned it, the H001T doesn't come with plastic sights or plastic barrel bands. I believe the receiver is steel (it's blued, but I could be wrong), and the receiver *cover* is made of ZAMAC (zinc aluminum magnesium and copper)

You're absolutely right, I have the standard H001 model.

Which does have the plastic parts, the four unsightly, screws.

And the ZAMAC reciever comes in only one flavor for the H001 and H001T....

Painted!!!


And those four screws stick out like a sore thumb, nothing is the least bit subtle about them.


I like my Henry now, as I have made it the way I want it. It was dirt cheap, and believe I payed $150 for it.

It's not a 9422 or a 39a so I wouldn't have felt too bad if I messed it up.


But, when money matters, most enthusiasts would rather spring for a Marlin or a Win 94. And I think this board is full of enthusiasts.


Oh yeah, they just don't appeal to me in the looks department.

[Chuck 100 yd]

Like others, I just cant get past the UGLY !!
They may be the slickest, most accurate, etc. etc. etc. , but if its ugly, it`s a NO for me!

[fomocofan]

Just for the record... No plastic parts on the Golden Boy .22...if you dont like the std Henry, stop complaining and get the GB!!

[C. Cash]

Yeah...for me it's asthetics also, and growing up loving the Winchester and Marlin designs. The Henry center fire rifles just don't interest me personally, but I am glad to see them do well and that folks have bought them. Any American gun company I am extremely glad to see do well. The only one that looks nice to me is the Goldenboy with the octagon barrel. To each his own. Functionally, there would be nothing keeping me from them except the affore mentioned weight. I like a light, balanced and fast handling carbine. Again, to each his own.

[ursavus.elemensis]

I've got a Henry Big Boy .44 Mag lever rifle. It is my "main shooting rifle" that i take to the range. My Winchester model 94's are my "collection rifles" which I shoot only rarely because, a.) they're "collectible", and b.) With my vision, I can't see through the iron sights and I just get very frustrated at the bullets not even hitting the targets, (and I will not scope a pre-serial number 1,600,000 Winchester model 94). I think the looks and lines of a Winchester model 94 define the very most attractive firearm ever made in the history of the world.

OK, a few points to consider:
1. You asked for input regarding the Henry's so you are getting the input that you requested.
2. The action on my Henry .44 Mag lever rifle is as smooth as butter and I've never had a problem with mine despite shooting 75-125 rounds per range session about 2-3 times a month.
3. It is heavy. It is heavy enough to be a pain to handle the rifle, particularly when loading the rifle from the loading port on the mag tube. Put a scope on the rifle, as I have, and it is really hard to find a place to hold the rifle without literally holding the scope while loading the magazine tube. I really wish they had a loading gate design.
4. The heft and weight does reduce felt recoil. Having said that, the crescent butt plate has sharp edges that make firing .44 Mag rounds impossible when wearing a t-shirt during summer months, It is really a situation where I can't use the rifle to its actual intent because the only time I can fire the .44 Mag cartridges is when I'm wearing a down coat in the cold winter months. Otherwise, the sharp edges of the butt plate cut into my chest. Am I a wimp? Maybe yes, maybe no. But you try to fire 75 rounds of .44 Mag from a Henry Big Boy with a t-shirt on and let me know what you think about the experience. Can't learn to shoot well if you flinch before pulling the trigger...
6. Honestly, and I'm not afraid to admit this, I bought it because at the time that I got it, I did not know that Winchester 357's and 44's were available, and I had never heard of GunBroker.com, etc. My model 94's were my "museum pieces" and I wanted a "main shooting rifle" to take the range, shoot a lot, and one that I would not feel bad about putting a scope on. I wish I'd bought a Winchester 357 or 44 lever rifle instead of a Henry.
7. One good thing about the Henry Big Boy's is that you will NOT feel bad about drilling into them to put a scope on them, and their cantilever scope mount is kind of cool, and I might just use one to add a scope to my Arisaka T99. Might.
8. Back to the weight issue, which you have noticed is a bug-a-boo for many of us. Yeah, it is heavy, particularly with a scope on it. Makes it hard to fire a box of ammo while standing up. Fatugue sets in, even though I am physically fit and lift weights daily, it sets in when trying to hold the rifle on aim shot after shot while standing. The weight is a mjor issue.
9. People criticize the rifles for not resembling anything historic, which I think is monumentally unfair. Internally, yes, it does not resemble any mechanism of historic significance. But externally, it DOES look like (not an identical copy, but darn close ENOUGH) a Winchester model 1866. No, they're not the same, and there are differences like the loading gate vs. tube fed magazine, etc. But the Big Boy rifles do look similar ON THE OUTSIDE to a Winchester Yellow Boy 1866 rifle. Not as exact as we can get these days with replica guns, but it looks similar.
10. I hate the name "Big Boy". I am a pediatrician and we use the term "Big Boy" to apply to a 3 year old who feels older and bigger than his 14 month old little brother. Compared to the 14 month old, the 3 year old is a "big boy". We of course follow the declaration that he is a "big boy" by asking him "how big are you?," etc. It's all a childish game that I would like to leave behind me when I'm not at work. I absolutely HATE the name "big boy".
11. A lot of people in the CAS world hold a grudge against Henry becaue the company does imply that they are the corporate descendant of Benjamin Tyler Henry's company. Actually, that would have been Winchester, then maybe Olin (maybe not, depending on how you define coporate descendant), then perhaps Browning/FNH. So, the current Henry Repeating Arms Co. has NOTHING to do with the original Henry rifle company, and a lot of people really do care that they go around pretending to be the descendants of the original Henry rifle company. For the CAS crowd, that counts for more than you'd think, and it does make a negative impact. I'm into model trains and a lot of us getting really miffed when Norfolk-Southern or Union Pacific claim to be the corporate descendants of some of the "fallen flag" railroads like the PRR, New York Central, etc. At least they can point to the fact that they bought the darn corporate descendants of those railroads. Henry Repeating Arms did not buy anything related in any form to the original Henry rilfe company. They just decided to use a similar name and explot the heritage. I don't really care one way or the other. But it really makes a lot of people's blood boil.
12. I thought about getting a Henry .30-30 in blued steel, round barrel, and I think I'll pass due to the tube fed magazine.

[Marlin .35]

OK!!! You want just the facts. Well here they are.
1. Too damm expensive!!
2. Too damm heavy
3. I am not going into the woods with a gold receiver an not expect for some person or animal to see me!!
4. If I got a scratch on my steel Marlin, I can fix that with cold blue. What do I fix scratches on brass with.
5. The brass is not all the way through, its just a cover. I feel safer tapping a steel frame for a Williams foolproof, than a simulated, thin brass frame. I know the drilling would eventually go inth the steel part, but brass tends to wear easier, and I don't want any oblong holes on my firearm!!!
6. They really are ugly and seem to be made for a "DANDY', rather than a hunter or cowboy shooter.
7. If you desire one, go and get it!!! And good luck!! Art
PS. I don't think they as accurate as my Marlin!!! At least with the ones my friend has!!!

[ursavus.elemensis]

Oh yeah, the thing about going into the woods with the brass receiver...I got to comment on that:

Now, don't get me wrong, I like my Henry .44 Mag lever rifle, and I take it to the range a lot. However, nothing's more ridiculous looking than the picture of the simulated hunter posing with his brass Henry .30-30 lever rifle on their website...the guy looks like he just stole the thing out of some manor house up on the hill, and now he's stealthily making his "escape" through the woods. He does not look like any hunter I've ever seen in the woods! I can just hear the deer talking amongst themselves, "Hey Bambi, what the hell is that?" "What the heck does he think he's doing with that piece of jewelry out here in the woods?" "Gosh, if Santa had that guy on the front of the sled, he wouldn't need Rudolph..."

[lever-4-life]

I have shot the big boy along with a browning 92 and a marlin 94. All were .44 mag, but the marlin was more accurate the browning was easier to carry. All in all they are nice guns but for ME they are too expensive for what they are. I like them and be more than happy to give one a home if the price was right.

[Hagler]

jsimmons,

I love my Henry .22LR carbine, with the large loop lever. I want a "T" model with a 16" barrel. All of the plastic stuff does not bother me. A great rifle, very smooth, and at a great price. My H001L is utterly reliable, and much more accurate than I am.

I do not desire to own a Golden Boy, mainly because I do not have a soft spot for "yellow rifles". The Golden Boy has exactly the action as the H001-series does, but the outside of the yellow gun does not appeal to me.

The Big Boy falls to the same fate as the Golden Boy, as far as I am concerned. It is "yellow", too, and I do not care for that. Weight is an issue for me, too. The Big Boy is a bit heavier than I like a levergun to be. Price is part of the equation, but when I do not want to buy the gun, I do not think its price matters to me.

FYI: Marlin rifles, generally, also do not appeal to me. I think most of them look funny, with their fat wood, and the lever pivot bump under the receiver. Some of the first Marlins had some good style to them, but the newer ones leave me flat. The 39/ 39A looks funny, too. It has a tiny receiver, but really fat wood.

I really like Winchester 92 carbines. They light my fire. The 94, 95, 9422, and all of the modern Winchester leverguns don't hold my interst.

I could go on, and on, and on, but the upshot is: all of the above-mentioned rifles do exactly what they are supposed to do, and many do that quite well. Preference is they key here, and the Big Boy is just one of many rifles that does not call to me.

Still your "Paco Kelly's Leverguns" friend,
Shawn

[ornery]

Ok...I can't STAND it! Just gotta' add my 2cents The Henry .22 lever is a knock off of my antique Erma/IJ lever. And from comparing it s/s not as nice with all of the modern upgrades. (ie. zinc, plastic, paint, etc.)

As to the big bores, my friend has a 45lc, there ain't enough days in a year to handload for that sucker so it will shoot with my '94 45lc. Sorry, but facts is facts.

AAAANNDDDD.. where in the universe did they find the DORK for the ad..talk about an advertisement for a retroactive birth control pill. I saw that pic and were me, I'd just flat quit.

[Hagler]

ornery,

The current Henry .22 lever rifles are not knockoffs of the brands you mentioned. They are all visions of the same brain: the late Louis Imperato. Erma made the Ithaca 72 & the Erma EG 71. Iver Johnson called it the "Wagon Master". Both Ithaca & Iver Johnson were run by someone named "Imperato". Today's Henry repeating Arms Company is presided over by Anthony Imperato. He has said that manufacturing was moved to the U.S. because overseas manufacturing costs were become prohibitive. The Imperato family has been in the "gun business" since the early 1900s. They knew a good design, and they managed to hang onto it.

Shawn

[ornery]

Hag' Thanks!

[meanc]

Is it just me, or do Jsimmons and fomocofan seem a bit oversensitive and cranky about the Henry rifles in this thread?


I've got nothing against Henry, now that I modified mine, I love it.

Probably the best $150 I've ever spent, except for that time I was in Osaka and there was this bar....

Anyway, I don't like the Golden Boys either.

[engravertom]

I don't see the resemblance to the '66, personally.
The Golden Boy is closer, but the big boy doen't get in the same ballpark, IMHO.

Tom

[Scott Young]

i have posted somewhere at some time that i wanted a series of goldens. it was due to the fact that i wanted a brass reciever. something about the muted, dulled brass reciever sets off the older rifles. i have a friend that has an actual yellow boy. it is fine. my desire was to get the current "copy" and round the appropriate corners to soften the ugly out of the new henry and to remove the shine so that the metal could get that aged brass patina. but i got to handle one this last week. the drop in the comb is too much for me. i have been shooting my 94s and 336s so long that the big drop doesn't feel natural. secondly, i understand the brass isn't brass? it want have that aged brass patina and will always look like it is gold chromed plastic.

i haven't wanted the painted version until i saw one on here stripped and boy that looked good. i may look into a t model to strip and play with.

as far as been stated heavy, ugly, bright, and doesn't balance. i will buy a japan winchester before a henry. at least it will carry the same smooth lines i love.

[jsimmons]

Is it just me, or do Jsimmons and fomocofan seem a bit oversensitive and cranky about the Henry rifles in this thread?

Believe me, I'm far from cranky about it. I can understand that some people have misconceptions about some aspects of the Henry .22's, and I strive to correct these misconceptions. I would perform the same Sservice for Marlins if someone said something I knew to be untrue, so it's not just about Henry's.

I've got nothing against Henry, now that I modified mine, I love it.

I don't own a rifle I haven't modified in some way - and only one of them is a Henry.

Probably the best $150 I've ever spent, except for that time I was in Osaka and there was this bar....

I think I went to that same bar once.

Anyway, I don't like the Golden Boys either.

I think they're pretty, but the comb drop was excessive for me (and the H001T was cheaper).

[Sixgun]

While I have never owned any, I have shot and examined many Henrys. I even load for a buddy who has a Big Boy. I think they are well made shootin' irons with fine fit and finish. I have also never witnessed a feeding problem like I have with Marlins. Best of all, they are AMERICAN made.----------------Sixgun

[jsimmons]

Oh yeah, the thing about going into the woods with the brass receiver...I got to comment on that:

Now, don't get me wrong, I like my Henry .44 Mag lever rifle, and I take it to the range a lot. However, nothing's more ridiculous looking than the picture of the simulated hunter posing with his brass Henry .30-30 lever rifle on their website...the guy looks like he just stole the thing out of some manor house up on the hill, and now he's stealthily making his "escape" through the woods. He does not look like any hunter I've ever seen in the woods! I can just hear the deer talking amongst themselves, "Hey Bambi, what the hell is that?" "What the heck does he think he's doing with that piece of jewelry out here in the woods?" "Gosh, if Santa had that guy on the front of the sled, he wouldn't need Rudolph..."

Umm, that image is photoshopped (and very poorly at that). It seems like a lot of the catalog images are photoshopped.

[homefront]

.32-20, .32-40, .38-55.
If Henry builds some good looking steel and walnut rifles in these calibers I'll buy one of each.
.38-40 and .44-40 wouldn't hurt either, and the Big Boy could handle those right now. Antique that brass, soften the corners. $879 MSRP? Make it $679 and guys will give it consideration.
My .02.

[jsimmons]

i have posted somewhere at some time that i wanted a series of goldens. it was due to the fact that i wanted a brass reciever. something about the muted, dulled brass reciever sets off the older rifles. i have a friend that has an actual yellow boy. it is fine. my desire was to get the current "copy" and round the appropriate corners to soften the ugly out of the new henry and to remove the shine so that the metal could get that aged brass patina. but i got to handle one this last week. the drop in the comb is too much for me. i have been shooting my 94s and 336s so long that the big drop doesn't feel natural. secondly, i understand the brass isn't brass? it want have that aged brass patina and will always look like it is gold chromed plastic.

i haven't wanted the painted version until i saw one on here stripped and boy that looked good. i may look into a t model to strip and play with.

as far as been stated heavy, ugly, bright, and doesn't balance. i will buy a japan winchester before a henry. at least it will carry the same smooth lines i love.

Based on your description, the rifle you handled was a Golden Boy, and indeed, the comb drop is - IMHO - excessive, and the receiver cover is merely brass plated (I personally think that the brass plating was a mistake on Henry's part, and they should have used real brass like they did on the Big Boy).

If you want a less "striking" appearance on a Big Boy, I would guess that you could hit the brass parts with some 000 or 0000 steel wool to knock the polish down. However, don't do this on a Golden Boy unless you want to risk scraping all the plating off.

[Leverdude]

Some folks seem conused about the Big boys reciever. It is SOLID Brass & will dull down pretty quick if you use it & dont polish it.

None of their rimfires have a steel reciever either. Magnets are grand things, but they wont stick to a Henry reciever.

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy

As a very new member of this forum I am probably risking offending a lot of veterans here, but I will tell you exactly why I don't own any products of the Henry Repeating Arms company, and why I never will.

Their advertising is full of deception.

The Henry Repeating Arms Company has absolutely no connection to the historic Henry rifle, manufactured by the New Haven Arms Company from 1860-1866, yet their web site and published catalogs are full of photographs and references to the 1860 Model Henry. Read their Henry History page. It is a wholesale glowing historical tribute to the 1860 model Henry, but the HRAC has no connection at all to that company. They simply chose the name because it was in public domain, and attempt to link themselves to the historic name by association.

Phrases like "a descendant of the venerable gunmaker" are a complete fabrication. Linking themselves to 'President Lincoln’s Henry', the ornate presentation model Henry that was presented to Lincoln is nothing more than riding on the coat tails of another company. I could set up a new business manufacturing cars and call myself the 'Packard Automobile Company', but would they really be Packards?

Just two weeks ago I was shooting at my club and a member showed up with a brand new Big Boy. He was very proud of his shiny new rifle, as any owner of a new gun would be. Then he told me that he had decided to buy it because he had just seen a Henry rifle on Antiques Road Show and really liked the look of the rifle. I bit my tongue real hard when he told me his rifle was the same as the one he had seen on TV, and the design was very old. I did not have the heart to tell him that he had been totally duped by deceptive advertising and the rifle he held in his hands had absolutely no connection at all to the 150 year old rifle he had seen on TV, and the design was completely different. No point in ruining the man's day, he was a nice old guy and he was having a good time with his new rifle.

I have no bones to pick with the HRAC's customer service. It is exemplary and they do stand behind their product. A lot of folks like the HRAC simply because it is an American company, and that is fine too. From an asethetic standpoint, I personally find the Big Boy to be ugly, but that is not the source of my displeasure. My beef is that a company finds the need to misrepresent its product in order to market it, rather than simply letting the product stand on its own merit.

The original poster has said he intends to use a Big Boy in Cowboy Action shooting. If he intends to shoot at matches sanctioned by the Single Action Shooting Society, the Big Boy is a SASS legal main match rifle. It is not legal for NCOWS competition.

In the CAS world the Big Boy is a hot button issue. The rifle came up for formal approval twice, the first time about 3 years ago. It was voted down. This was based mostly on the fact that the Big Boy is not an accurate reproduction of any historic rifle and does not fit the specific requirements:

'Rifles or carbines used in the main and team matches must be original or replicas of lever or slide action rifles manufactured during the period from approximately 1860 until 1899, incorporating a tubular magazine and exposed hammer.'

The Big Boy is simply not a replica of anything manufactured between 1860 and 1899. The fact that it is a lever gun with an exposed hammer and a tubular magazine does not make it a replica.

This was a problem for those who had already bought one and had believed erroneous statements made by HRAC that the Big Boy was already approved for SASS competition. It was not. About a year later the Big Boy was again brought up before the Territorial Governors of SASS for approval, and this time it passed. It still did not meet the requirements, but SASS decided to make an exception.

As I said earlier, the Big Boy is approved for SASS sanctioned CAS matches. As such if you show up with one on my posse you will get no grief from me, you are playing within the rules. But I will never buy any of their products based on the companies deceptive advertising.

Hope I haven't offended too many veterans here, just This Cowboy's Humble Opinion.

[DennisD]

I did not have the heart to tell him that he had been totally duped by deceptive advertising and the rifle he held in his hands had absolutely no connection at all to the 150 year old rifle he had seen on TV, and the design was completely different. No point in ruining the man's day, he was a nice old guy and he was having a good time with his new rifle.

Good for you!! I found out the hard way (from feeling bad afterward) that it is best not to offer comments unless directly asked to do so; and even then with moderation.

[JB]

I enjoy playing with my 44 mag. Henry. I actually prefer the tube load to the the loading gate. It's probably more accurate than my Marlin or Winchester 44's, but it is heavy. It wouldn't be my choice for hunting, but it's a blast at the range.

[ornery]

ooooooooo good lick on that one.