Talk to me about AR-7's

1911fan

I have decided to look into the AR-7 as something to go into the station wagon cargo bin, to live with the rest of the survival equipment (in the high desert bordering the Sierra, conditions can vary from 100+ degrees and no water in sight to six or eight feet of snow in sub-zero temps).

I know that Armalite made the first ones, Charter the second ones, and Henry (under U.S. Survival) the third. I'm particularly liking the Henry, with storage for both mags and eight rounders instead of seven. Are any REALLY better than the others or are they all just so much monkey-poo?

Various sources have mentioned that the feed ramp can be kind of wonky on all three versions and, as a result, will only feed solid-point round nose ammo reliably. Is this the straight skinny?

If that is indeed the case, I had thought to have some snake shot to be fed in manually, then the mag inserted, same-same hollowpoints. Will this work? Will the bird shot cycle the action?

I know I missed the $100 window so what could I realistically expect to pay?

I've seen aftermarket mags holding fifteen or twenty rounds. Is this just a gimmick or do they really work?

Your insight and experiences would be greatly appreciated.

Thanx,

ed

DoctorWho

I have had quite a few AR-7s, damaged original magazines or crappy aftermarket caused jams with the ones I had.
If I had to choose a firearm for such a purpose, I might go with a Ruger 10-22 pistol instead.
With a quality scope, it would be a great compact survival gun more parts too.

Jayhawker

I've owned a couple, being what it is...don't except it to stand up to hard use...
Personally, I'd go with a good .22 pistol...

Bigslug

I'd be looking at the current version of the Marlin Papoose, were I after that sort of thing: http://www.marlinfirearms.com/Firearms/SelfLoading/70PSS.asp

The AR7 is one of those tools that you never hope to use, and not just because of the dire situation it would be used in - it's simply not much of a tool. The Marlin, OTOH, is a perfectly serviceable .22 that is adapted to the survival role. The only real drawback I see to the takedown system is a warm barrel on your hands in the event you go nuts with your plinking.

DoctorWho

I figure it is better to go with something that was made in great numbers, has a long well proven history, tons of aftermarket parts and accessories, add a good scope and bipod to the Ruger 10-22 pistol and I think it would do well.

DoctorWho

It comes pre=chopped as a pistol,
and you don't have to add anything else to it if you doan want to. :tooth:

DanChamberlain

CP

I don't own one, but it probably has essentially the same handling qualities as the TC Contender as far as being able to use as a pistol. The Contender can be fired pretty effectively as a pistol, and with a rest, right up there with rifles.

Dan

BigDanS

Or you could opt for a real gun in a real caliber. The .22 is a fine survival gun, but you can get a KelTec Sub 2000 in .40 S&W or the KelTec SU-16C in .223.

SU-16C



SUB-2000



D

tennmike

I have one of the Charter Arms AR7 rifles I bought in the early 1980s. I haven't looked at the new Henry offerings. The Charter Arms version I have has a barrel of aluminum with a steel barrel liner. It will only feed round nose bullets reliably; the truncated cone type hang up on the bullet shoulder when feeding. It is marginally accurate with a scope. I attribute this to the lack of solid barrel mounting with the less than tight fit of barrel to receiver, and not being able to tighten the aluminum barrel nut adequately.

I have shot the Marlin Papoose rifle, and it is superior in every way to the AR7. If I had it to do over, I'd not have bought the AR7. OTOH, if you can find a used AR7 really cheap, they make an adequate knockabout rifle. Get a scope and mount for the AR7 if you buy one; the sighting system on the AR7 sucks big time.

gunrunner428

I agree with the Marlin Papoose option, either the older blued/wood or the current/recent stainless/synthetic. Not as tidy a stowed package as the AR-7, but it does have flotation in the case in case it gets dumped out of the boat. And as far as scoping the AR, you might as well get a non-takedown Marlin 795 or Ruger 10-22, 'cuz you'll never get the AR in its own stock with an optic installed. Rather pointless for that gun IMO.

Now, if you want points for class, find the out-of-print Papoose-like version of the Marlin 39 - I think they labelled it the 1897 or the 39 TDS, 16" barrel and a similar "Papoose" case.

Antonio

Another vote for the Papoose; friend of mine has a stainless steel one and it works flawlessly. Best performance is with Federal American Eagle .38gr. RNCCHPs

Uncle BS

I would go with the Papoose or something from the Ruger Mark series, depending on size requirements. My FIL has a Mark V with a red dot (no magnification) on a B-square mount. Its ugly as hell but I can tear a ragged hole in a target at 15 yards, off hand. With a rest, accuracy would improve greatly.

DanChamberlain

As easily as the Ruger 10/22 takes the barrel down, I'm surprised someone hasn't developed a quick release take-down model

Dan

30-30shooter

you could go with one of those 22 pump takedowns or a take down lever rifle. something else to consider would be a rossi matched set single shot, has a case and you can have 3 calibers for the space of one. if your willing to go with a shotgun instead you could could get one of the mossberg jic's