Savage Single Shot Firearms > General Discussion

New Henry Repeating Arms single shot rifle/shotguns

(1/2) > >>

Mike Armstrong:
Anybody actually handled one of these?  In the ads they look to me like a modern take-off on the Stevens 94, not the 219/220 (bad choice IMO).  But they do come in some more modern calibers that might appeal to today's hunters.  The only rimmed rifle ctgs. are .44 Mag (ggod choice) and .45-70 (OWWWWW!).

All seem to be on the heaviest ("12 guage") frame (like the 219/220) and the mfr. has apparently told inquirers that they " have no current plans to make the barrels interchangeable."  Not a good call, IMO, but I don't know much about the economics of gun production, only what products I like.

If anybody has actually seen one of these "in the flesh," I'd love to know their impressions.

Garnett:
Mike, I had not even heard of them.  I looked them up and there are only two pictures on the web site.  A steel frame and brass frame model.  I think they look better than the H&R, but I really don't like the exposed hammer.  Other than being available in modern rimless calibers, I would much prefer the 219 or spend a little more, well at $400+, maybe a lot more, and get a Ruger No.1.  Sometimes, you just can't improve on perfection. 

Mike Armstrong:
Agree that the hammer wasn't a good idea, especially on the shotgun version.  And some of the most common "accidental discharges" are from young people who just can't master the de-cocking of a rifle or shotgun hammer in a time of stress or distraction, or whose too weak thumb slips off the hammer as its "almost" fully cocked.  A hammerless 219 or 220 is actually safer as a "trainer" for kids than a hammer gun.

Yeah, what were they thinking to copy the wrong gun?  I can't believe that any of the patents in the 219/220 series were an inpediment....

Mike Armstrong

Garnett:
Some where in my research I found one statement saying Savage sold the patent rights to the 219/220 hammerless singleshots "to a foreign company".

Mike Armstrong:
I wonder if they sold the rights outright or if it was a limited sale of manufacturing rights overseas.  If it was a European country, the patents would have expired ten years after the sale.  So they shouldn't be an impediment to reviving the 219/220. 

(Full disclosure, I am NOT a patent attorney, although I've worked with a few).

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page