PistoleroWadcutterGANG
Member
I do not like the appearance and or overall design. Yet I would try one to get empirical data on overall function / accuracy.
A new revolver maker enters... Henry
- Thread starter NorthBorder
- Start date
bigpower491
Member
Jeff olson
Member
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2019
- Messages
- 935
What a joke. At $900+ it's destined to fail. Just ugly.
KevininPa
Member
Huh.........so a New England Firearms and a Nagant truly can breed. Whodda thunk.
Madcap_Magician
Member
I'd kind of like that, honestly. Some of the aesthetic finishes from the single-action era - gold bead front sight, octagonal barrel, polished, nitre-blued screws, color case hardening on the frame, hammer, and trigger, nice walnut grips, that sort of thing.
The front sight is so large and gaudy looking from the side but then it appears to be a thin blade from the rear. Who in their right mind would think this was a good idea? It's the worst of both worlds. Either have the sights be small but decent looking, or large and easy to use.
At that MSRP they are directly competing with solid options from Colt, S&W, Ruger and Kimber. Good luck with that.
Riomouse911
Member
Ahhhhh, no. No Thant you.
^ I found the inspiration for the design. ^
Take every possible funky angle, cut and shape and assemble it into a handgun.
Again, I’ll pass.
Stay safe.
^ I found the inspiration for the design. ^
Take every possible funky angle, cut and shape and assemble it into a handgun.
Again, I’ll pass.
Stay safe.
marksman13
Member
Hard pass. Looks like an RG. They’ll be out of the revolver game faster than they got in it.
Pat Riot
Contributing Member
I would have to see and hold one to make a decision on them, but they look like odd with that barrel / ejector rod set up.
DeepSouth
Random Guy
Maybe not a beauty queen but for a beater or a range gun, if it seems like decent quality I’d buy one…. Not for 900 bucks but I’d consider one at a decent price.
Driftwood Johnson
Member
Colt came up with that idea way back in 1878 when they chambered the Single Action Army for 44-40, the same cartridge the Winchester Model 1873 used. And then in 1884 with the 38-40 cartridge.
I have never been a fan of Henry Repeating Arms because they still have misleading information on their website that they are somehow related to the original 1860 Henry rifle made by the New Haven Arms Company, which later morphed into the Winchester Repeating Arms Company.
I would never buy one of these, but I must say it is a clever idea to include three different front sights, so the revolver can be regulated to specific ammo.
Mark_Mark
Member
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2021
- Messages
- 18,010
I personally LOVE the ejection rod!
Mark_Mark
Member
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2021
- Messages
- 18,010
let’s take a look at the fit and finish before saying it’s not a $900 gun! I bet is really good! But it’s definitely not a safe queen like a Python or a Korth
JCooperfan1911
member
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2020
- Messages
- 2,709
For that price the quality better be there.
They’re awfully proud of them it seems.
Kimber made a good revolver on their first swing at it. Maybe Henry will as well? I am also seeing their Big Brass Boy levergun is now available in .357 magnum.
They’re awfully proud of them it seems.
Kimber made a good revolver on their first swing at it. Maybe Henry will as well? I am also seeing their Big Brass Boy levergun is now available in .357 magnum.
NIGHTLORD40K
Member
Can't help but think they should have bought the now unused Dan Wesson tooling from CZ....
DeepSouth
Random Guy
I understand what you’re saying but regardless of the overall fit, finish, and general quality, I have other things on my list in the 1k neighborhood… I’ll never make it to this one for that price.
PistoleroWadcutterGANG
Member
Please don't give the angry gorillas at Henry any ideas please. ESPECIALY that one.
stonebuster
Member
When I think "Gunfighter" I think of single action & the old west. Judging from posts so far, maybe they should've named it the "Edsel."
GarnetandBlack
Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2023
- Messages
- 35
I have no idea why someone
Regardless of fit and finish, that is not a $900 revolver with those features. No rear sight, as plain Jane wood as is possible, just no way it can make it to that price point in value with what it is. Someone pricing it is smoking crack.
Virginian
Member
Nope. I am a strong devotee of what I call style. Henry has yet to impress me.
Mizar
Member
You are kidding, right? Just look at the pictures - side plate, crane, grip frame, grips... If this is the best they can do, I'm not impressed at all.
Pat Riot
Contributing Member
It’s not so much the exposed rod as it is the lame barrel contour around it. From the butt to the front of the frame everything looks great and then it’s like the designer went out back had a few beers and a doobie, which he or she shared with someone that approves designs, then came back and finished up for the day hurriedly so he or she could go play Frisbee Golf.
In my opinion, that thing better have a damn smooth trigger and be as accurate as all get out to make up for the looks of that barrel or I am pretty sure it’ll be a “flash in the pan”.
To be fair though, I will have to see one in real life before rendering a final judgement in regards to whether or not I would buy one. AND if the MSRP is the “shop price” at $928 I will pass.
Pat Riot
Contributing Member
I am just wondering…
Did this revolver get posted on April 1st and we are just now hearing about it?
Did this revolver get posted on April 1st and we are just now hearing about it?
chicharrones
needs more ammo
I think folks would complain if this unfortunately styled Henry was $400.00. And I agree with them.
The only way I’d see this worth consideration of the asking price is if the gun actually held a Hollywood amount of ammo in the cylinder. AKA never needs a reload.
The only way I’d see this worth consideration of the asking price is if the gun actually held a Hollywood amount of ammo in the cylinder. AKA never needs a reload.
Similar threads
