Author Topic: Winchester Says Good-Bye To The 9422 (Read 4006 times)

jh45gun · « **Reply #30 on:** March 30, 2005, 07:50:24 AM »

Quote from: rzwieg

I have a Henry US survival rifle. The magazines give me fits BUT the company has replaced four of them, plus the barrel and stock. Still, I'm going with a Marlin. One more pay check!

Not sure what is with your gun but it sounds like Henry is trying their best to satisfy you. This model has had a checkered past as it seems several companies have marketed it from Armalite to Charter Arms to Survival Arms yet JB Woods in Several books gives the gun satisfactory reviews. I kinda doubt that Henry made new machineing for this model and bought some ones elses machineing from one of the previous companies that made the gun. SO the Henry model would not be any different than previous models. Other folks who have had the Henry survival claim to like it and it is not a complicated gun so I cannot see much going wrong with it. Jim

kevin.303 · « **Reply #31 on:** March 30, 2005, 11:16:39 AM »

Quote from: jh45gun

I promise I will not say that to you Kevin. I am curious what happened with it to be in the shop though? Jim

i let someone but a box of CCI stinger through it and it spit out an extractor. it did jam with winchester wildcat and when it gets really dirty, but with copperplated american eagle ammo it works fine.i usually put a full brick through it in one day so it's getting quite a workout.

victorcharlie · « **Reply #32 on:** March 30, 2005, 11:26:35 AM »

All right.....I don't know what I'm talking about.......here is a sample of the control Bejing has on it's people....

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1548&ncid=1548&e=9&u=/afp/20050330/lf_afp/afplifestylechina_050330144713

jh45gun · « **Reply #33 on:** March 30, 2005, 01:52:01 PM »

Victor Charlie that is neither here nor there I did not even read it all for the simple reason it has nothing to do with guns and My comments were that China makes some good guns and I was disputing the comments that they do not. It does not matter wether it is slave labor or not. Before you get on your soapbox about this consider the other products that you may use like your fancy tennis shoes or designer jeans??? Korea and the other Asian countries are no different that China when it comes to sweat shops ect. Evidently it does not bother you guys to buy a TV or a DVD player ect ect ect but you can take the moral high ground on guns. It does not wash guys. Jim

JohnClif · « **Reply #34 on:** March 30, 2005, 07:52:29 PM »

Jim, I'll say this: I make every effort to buy from any other country except China to the point of not buying a new VCR for quite a while until I could find one that was made somewhere other than China.

Yes, some Chinese guns can be perfectly functional. Yes, Chinese quality control is all over the map. Yes, the state of Chinese politics and their intentions towards the US and the West in general have nothing to do with the quality of their firearms.

I can't equate giving money to today's China for a Norinco product with giving money to the Yugoslavian government today for an M48 Mauser, or the Polish government today for an M44 carbine, or the German government today for a WWII-era K98. Those other countries are democracies and their government isn't using the money to beef up their arsenal as part of their plan to eventually confront us militarily.

That's why I don't buy Chinese weapons or ammo anymore.

Re the Henry, if you're happy then I'm happy. To each his own.

jh45gun · « **Reply #35 on:** March 30, 2005, 08:34:57 PM »

You make some good points John I do have to say though that some of the cold war guns we are buying to day still are countries like Russia and its satelites that we have had conflicts in the past and who is to say what the future will bring. I do not like China's politics myself I will say I have seen some very nice guns come out of there. Maybe not anything you would rate as custom but not all that bad either.

victorcharlie · « **Reply #36 on:** March 31, 2005, 02:39:08 AM »

Just for the record, the sneakers i wear are New Balance, and I've never owned a pair of "designer" jeans.......have a few pair of liberty overalls and Levis.........

Do I have some Chinese made products? Yes I do, but I make every effort to buy products other than Chinese when possible.......

What I was try to point out about China.....is the control the government has on every aspect of chinese lives.......now ask yourself......how motivated would you be to produce a good product if you knew it was making no difference in your situation? Show up, and get paid......Trust me, the Chinese themselves are not concerned about quality.........Granted, there are "foreign experts" that are there to keep quality and other issues under control.....I was one......it's not an easy job..........

jh45gun · « **Reply #37 on:** March 31, 2005, 05:00:07 AM »

Not saying VC or John that you do not have valid points and not to say that maybe some Chinese guns do not meet the standards they should. I am saying though the the 3 or 4 examples I had a sks a 45 copy and a browning copy were nice guns and the Norinco Walther Olympia copy I have is a excellent gun from fit and finish to the way it shoots. It puts the Ruger Target MK II GOV I had to shame and that was a accurate gun.

SingleFan · « **Reply #38 on:** April 01, 2005, 10:21:23 AM »

JonClif

I'm with ya' bro. Doesn't matter if I can 'completely' control contributing to that which I disapprove, I do it to the extent that I can. I don't have a weight scale yet 'cause they are all made in China.

If you won't stand for something you'll fall for anything.

I've read both extensive posts. Truth is, I've had (2) 9422's and neither have been 'great', but it's good enough to keep me from buying Chinese.

I'm a perfectionist with guns, and haven't seen a lever yet that shoots like my TC, or any of the bolt guns I've had.
Got any suggestions on how to mod the 9422 to wring out some performance?

jh45gun · « **Reply #39 on:** April 01, 2005, 06:29:17 PM »

SingleFan I suppose you will scoff at this because it is a Henry and since you claim to be a perfectionist. I do not know how tight your TC shoots. I shot a group at 50 yards that measured under a half a inch for a 5 shot group. One shot was a flier to make the group that just under a half inch the other 4 were in one ragged 30 cal size hole. That for a lever gun is good enough for me. Gun was standard Henry 22 mag shooting CCI FMJ. Scoped with a Leupold M8 4x. Yea I think enough of my Henry that it wears a Leupold compact 4x and that is the most expensive scope I own and it is on my 22 mag lever gun. You may say go figure but this combo gets the job done. Jim

JohnClif · « **Reply #40 on:** April 04, 2005, 01:36:49 AM »

One thing we can be thankful to Kimber (of Oregon) and the US government for... the industry discovered what it takes to make a consistently accurate .22 rifle. The secret is in the barrel, and more properly in the chamber configuration.

The Winchester 9422, like most factory repeaters, had a design goal that included reliability with ANY ammo you could run through it over accuracy. The chamber is not as tight as the target barrels you can get from aftermarket suppliers, nor is it as tight as you'll find on most currently-manufactured bolt-actions (like the CZs). Bolt actions can get away with tighter chambers because the leverage provided by the action design (the shooter is pushing on the bolt and all of his strength is available to chamber the round) is much greater than that of a lever action.

The only way I know to get a 9422 to shoot up to a Kimber or something like it would be to get a gunsmith to take an aftermarket barrel and fit it to the gun.

My personal 9422 shoots under 1" at 50 yards, and that is more than suitable for what I use it for. It is certainly 'minute of starling' accurate, and I have had no problem shooting English Sparrows at 20 yards or thereabouts with cheapo Federal American Eagle $10 a brick ammo. It also shoots well with CCI CB Shorts and CB Longs. Not match grade accuracy, but any starling or English Sparrow within 20 yards is in mortal danger.

Because of the different ammo design (and tighter SAAMI-spec'd chambers) I bet the 9417 .17 HMR versions of this rifle will shoot as well as the Savage and Marlin bolt actions in that caliber.

I enjoy my 9422 (and my other non-match-grade .22 rifles also) for what it is... a lot of fun, a quick shooting rifle that eats any ammo I can throw at it, and a good companion for a day's rabbit hunting, varmint shooting, or plinking. Within 50 yards the misses are all my fault.

jh45gun · « **Reply #41 on:** April 04, 2005, 02:53:36 AM »

You may be right John and a inch at 50 yards consistantly out of a factory rifle is not bad. My gunsmith says if the will shoot MOA at 50 yards they are a decent 22. You are right about the chambers but even some of the old model 22's shot well. I think it was the realization that every gun shoots what it likes so try different ammo was a large thing in guys finding out their 22 could shoot. Back when I was a kid you bought a box of ammo and if it shot a inch or two at 25 yards it was good enough to hunt with. Now we know with ammo it likes a lot of guns I think will do that inch at 50 if it is a good well taken care of gun though I suppose there are exceptions some will not. I guess I am lucky my Romanian 69 and my Henry 22 mag will both shoot under a half at 50 with ammo they like.

SingleFan · « **Reply #42 on:** April 04, 2005, 01:34:50 PM »

Jh45-

I'm not sure what you mean in your reply about 'claiming to be a perfectionist', I simply meant I like guns that deliver accuracy and the fit and finish are there. If the Henry meets your bill of goods go get 'em.

Besides, my post reply was more to the other partner...you'd already expressed your opinion on the matter regarding purchases on imports, I stated mine and I don't agree with yours.

Glad for you and your Henry. As for the TC, it outshoots most bolts; including the Kimber I sold that the TC replaced. Flyers - I don't like 'em unless I caused it. If it's the gun, I either fix it or get rid of it. Like the single six I had. Had the work done..flyers gone.

That is great accuracy.

jh45gun · « **Reply #43 on:** April 04, 2005, 02:02:30 PM »

No insults meant you said you were a perfectionist so I replyed to that. Nothing meant by it unless I meant you like every thing just so and with shooting nothing wrong with that. Just wondering what is with your last Single Six Comment? DID not like it or have problems or what??? The last one I had you could not hit a barn with so I got rid of it though I thought my eyes at first may have been to blame as I am getting past the 50 mark. Well needless to say it was the gun because I can shoot this Norinco Walther copy like a house a fire it is very accurate and the sights are finer so I know it was the SS and not me. So just wondering why your last comment. Jim

JohnClif · « **Reply #44 on:** April 04, 2005, 02:47:26 PM »

It's been my experience that a .22 LR-chambered rifle that shoots MOA (1/2" or smaller) groups at 50 yards is a VERY accurate .22. Most decent .22 rifles will shoot 2 MOA or better at that distance (1" groups or smaller).

A .22 WMR that shoots 1" groups at 50 yards with good ammo (something with the Sierra PSP, for instance) is what I would consider a so-so rifle. The .22 WMR is a more accurate cartridge, with good bullets, than the .22 LR, and so is either of the .17s. A good WMR should be able to approach 1 MOA at 100 yards on a calm day, and a great WMR will shoot MOA or less.

Again, I'll take 1" groups at 50 yards if it means my rifle will easily digest shorts, longs, long rifles, CB caps, etc., and realize that versatility and reliability have a price.

Also, pistols (rifles with barrels with integral chambers) are inherently more accurate than revolvers. There's no cylinder gap to jump, no chamber to get misaligned with the barrel, etc. I would hope that a decent pistol is more accurate than a decent revolver.

Ruger's quality control is slipping. I don't know if this is caused by a complacency at the company or if it is a result of a misguided attempt to cut the bottom line and increase profits. I do know that if they don't make a serious effort to ensure high quality they are in trouble, because the other gun companies aren't sitting around.

mjbgalt · « **Reply #45 on:** April 04, 2005, 02:57:14 PM »

i will take one inch at 50 yards considering i wouldnt ever shoot ANYTHING past that with a .22 since its about useless at that range since i have a .17HMR and a .243.

i never understood why people even measured at 50 yards....does anyone really shoot groundhogs or varmints at longer ranges with a .22?

lol

-Matt

jh45gun · « **Reply #46 on:** April 04, 2005, 04:12:52 PM »

Quote from: mjbgalt

i will take one inch at 50 yards considering i wouldnt ever shoot ANYTHING past that with a .22 since its about useless at that range since i have a .17HMR and a .243.

i never understood why people even measured at 50 yards....does anyone really shoot groundhogs or varmints at longer ranges with a .22?

lol

-Matt

And where did you get this fountain of information?

While the 22 is no powerhouse it is capable of killing critters past 50 yards. More deer have been poached with a 22 than you can shake a stick at. No not condoning it but just stating what is true a 22 LR well placed will drop animals as large as a deer and past 50 yards though I suppose most were shot at closer ranges. Many folks would consider a 22 would kill better at say 100 yards than your 17HMR. I am one of them. Guys shoot prarrie dogs all the time at longer ranges with a 22LR. The verdict on the 17 is still out as I have not read any articles on shooting prarrie dog size critters at longer range. I have read that they are a washout on animals the size of coons and woodchucks. Jim

mjbgalt · « **Reply #47 on:** April 04, 2005, 05:26:00 PM »

i'm not saying that it doesnt have its place or its underpowered. just that a lot of people have said on this forum about longer-range shots with lower-powered calibers...

i just cant see, myself anyway, using something like a .22 at 75 yards. if i am wrong i would love to hear why...its not old technology and i dont think its a worthless round, just that in my experience, even if one will shoot an inch at 50 yards...

1) i am a decent shot and it would be damn hard to hit a squirrel in the head at that range, which is the only place i wanna shoot em

2) at 50 yards it starts to lack the punch on groundhogs or bigger animals.

nothing personal, and youre allowed to think i am ignorant in this case, i dont mind lol.

i just feel like there is a niche for each my my guns and after 50 yards or so i would rather step it up.

-Matt

-never said i had a fountain of knowledge, just stated my opinion like everyone else here.

jh45gun · « **Reply #48 on:** April 04, 2005, 06:09:04 PM »

Matt, I never said you were ignorant Never meant to imply that either. Just wondering where you were coming from if you figure 50 yards is your limitation with a 22 great but it is not for every one some can shoot farther and some would be better off at 25 yards. The 22LR has been doing a job for years before the 22 mag and the 5mm and the both 17 rimfires came along I would suspect it will keep on doing that job for years to come.

mjbgalt · « **Reply #49 on:** April 04, 2005, 07:05:35 PM »

sorry, i didnt mean to take offense but i thought you were being sarcastic about the fountain of knowledge comment. My apologies for the smart remark.

yeah, i figure 50 yards is about it for the .22 in my hands. i am a good shot but the things i hunt with a .22- rabbits and squirrels- are just too damn small to hit at more than 50 yards unless theyre really holding still lol.

-Matt

jh45gun · « **Reply #50 on:** April 05, 2005, 01:33:40 AM »

Yep every one has a comfort level of their shooting and I get into the habbit of shorter range shooting as that is the distance most of my hunting is done. 50 yards is a lot easier to hit at then at a 100 expecially with open or peep sights or low powered scopes. I think though that all it takes is practice and that you can stretch that comfort level by practice expecially with the 22's by learning how much to dope the wind and holdover ect at 100 yards and beyond. I myself am going to shoot some longer distances this year to challange myself and my abilities. As if you think about it hitting a target at 50 yards with a good rifle can start to get boring. At a hundred yards then it may get a little more challenging until you figure out that range also. I have read articles about guys shooting long range with 22lR for prarrie dogs and making killing hits at some fairly long ranges after they learned the hold over and wind doping. Jim

SingleFan · « **Reply #51 on:** April 05, 2005, 10:09:39 AM »

Jim,

Your mention of 'flyers' spawned my thoughts about my six. Out of the box a decent shooter, but one chamber would give me a flyer.

Dave Clements did some work for me and now it's fantastic. Even the 22 mag cylinder shoots great. It was costly though. Gun went from shooting 1-1/2" groups at 25 yards to 1/2" on a bad day with the match grade chamber cylinder.

SingleFan · « **Reply #52 on:** April 05, 2005, 10:21:52 AM »

Just reading through your interaction with Matt regarding the 22lr vs. the noveau .17's. Interesting that you feel the 22lr is better for taking game than the .17's.

I haven't bought one of the .17's but considered doing so. Candidly, I'd rather stick with the 22lr or mag because of the cost of ammo etc, but have heard so much buzz about the .17's that it seems they outclass the 22lr, or even magnum depending on who you talk with.

So fill me in, because I haven't done the 'on game' comparison. Seriously, why do you feel the 22 is as or more effective? There are things I don't like about the .17s, but if the on game performace is better with them, I may make the jump.

Let me know your thoughts.

jh45gun · « **Reply #53 on:** April 05, 2005, 01:36:46 PM »

WEll I may be doing them a diservice but I do not think so. But remember this is my opinion and I am sure it will be disputed as soon as I say I like 22's better. I just think the 17's do not have that much to offer across the board for hunting, as target shooters I understand they are great. Both of them should be considered for animals 5 pounds and under I do not care how many folks stand up and say how many coyotes they shot as they never tell how many they wounded either. I have read articles that they would not even anchor a chuck well. Price of ammo may make a differnce to some I know I shoot my 22 lR a lot more than my 22 mag just acount of the price of bullets. The 22 mag really outclasses the 17's as far as a hunting round goes and with the 22 mag you can change bullet profiles to take care of darn near any situation you want. Both 17's are severely limited in bullet styles and ammo makers. Same with the 22 lR you can get subsonic, or Target, or high speed or hyperspeed cartridges to do darn near any thing you want with the limits of the 22 including cb caps to mimic the performance and low sound of a pellet gun the 17's do not have that versatality either. Still it all boils down to choice so what ever trips a persons trigger. I myself think they are limited to targets and real small animals. Well my 22 LR can do that and yea while not as flat shooting or maybe as tight of groups I can still do it. Want a little more I can grab my 22 mag. I feel the 17's being limited just do not offer me that much as long as I have a 22 LR and a 22 Mag. I have read too many articles stating the 17s are for small animals only which I tend to believe and my 22's can do that. As far as the coyotes go I would not reccomend it. Grizzly bears and Moose have been killed by the 30/30 too but then I would not reccomend that either.

Your comment about inch and a half groups with you Single Six heck I would have been happy with that at 25 yards it shot pie plate size groups both cylinders. To be fair the gun I had back in the 70's shot good but the last two single actions I bought sucked they were used and like new at the gun shop now I know why. Jim

quickdtoo · « **Reply #54 on:** April 17, 2005, 10:21:43 AM »

I'm jumping in here late on this topic, the 9422....I have a NIB never fired 2001 NWTF Jakes GOY 9422 that I picked up at an NWTF banquet with the intention of giving it to my grandson when he got old enough, but my daughter in law decided she doesn't want him to have it, so I'm considering selling it, anyone have an educated guess on what it's worth? I did a search and found one that was listed on an auction site but not sold, bid was at $450 and apparently may have had a reserve of $900 since that was the buy it now price. That's way more than I think it's worth, but I actually have no idea other than what I paid for it which is considerably less than $450.

Thx,

Tim