Spring has sprung. Get out and shoot your Henry
Potential Issue With The New Side Loaders
Re: Potential Issue With The New Side Loaders
Hey it might be just fine and my concerns unfounded and I hope this is the case but the fact remains it is a very thin point on the receiver.
Like I previously mentioned I experienced a cracked frame on a .22 pistol once.
Like I previously mentioned I experienced a cracked frame on a .22 pistol once.
0 x
Re: Potential Issue With The New Side Loaders
This is true. I agree. And, I am not crying wolf. I just found the observation interesting. Looking at things from different perspectives can bring something into view. But as you stated, time will tell.ESquared wrote: ↑Tue May 14, 2019 9:55 amWell, we have at least one live tester among us, so a range report from BigAl would be great. Beyond that, all we can do is see what happens with other "early adopters," about which the interweb will undoubtedly keep us informed.
If that area is going to fail, it seems like we'll hear about it soon enough. If it doesn't, we won't. Beyond that, we're all just speculating.
0 x
Actions speak louder than words (Matthew 7:16-20).
Re: Potential Issue With The New Side Loaders
.
'Speculating' is a lot of what we all do here. Keeps goings on stimulating and interesting.
As far as the speculating so far, a lot of it sounds like guessing that a crack is imminent. Likely not. Perhaps with age and stress it's might be an eventuality, so likely not to 'hear about it soon enough' anytime soon. Speculating, it might be a long while, if it manifests. Speculating further, maybe Henry has some good mechanical and strength-of-materials-engineers and in modern design/manufacturing they have corresponding simulation software, that gives them confidence in the thinness there. One thing they haven't got is actual accelerated life MTBF data. Even an accelerated life test(ALT) takes time and the rifle is too new for enough test time to have elapsed to have useful data. Then there is test sample size. Minimum is 16 for an 80% confidence factor. ALT time can be reduced with a larger sample size. But in Henry's position, they are likely not doing any ALT, instead selling what might have been the test samples to customers for revenue. Customers then unwittingly become the source for any life time data that Henry eventually garners through warranty returns. That's my contribution to all that here 'specualtin'. Isn't this fun?
'Speculating' is a lot of what we all do here. Keeps goings on stimulating and interesting.
As far as the speculating so far, a lot of it sounds like guessing that a crack is imminent. Likely not. Perhaps with age and stress it's might be an eventuality, so likely not to 'hear about it soon enough' anytime soon. Speculating, it might be a long while, if it manifests. Speculating further, maybe Henry has some good mechanical and strength-of-materials-engineers and in modern design/manufacturing they have corresponding simulation software, that gives them confidence in the thinness there. One thing they haven't got is actual accelerated life MTBF data. Even an accelerated life test(ALT) takes time and the rifle is too new for enough test time to have elapsed to have useful data. Then there is test sample size. Minimum is 16 for an 80% confidence factor. ALT time can be reduced with a larger sample size. But in Henry's position, they are likely not doing any ALT, instead selling what might have been the test samples to customers for revenue. Customers then unwittingly become the source for any life time data that Henry eventually garners through warranty returns. That's my contribution to all that here 'specualtin'. Isn't this fun?
ESquared wrote: ↑Tue May 14, 2019 9:55 amWell, we have at least one live tester among us, so a range report from BigAl would be great. Beyond that, all we can do is see what happens with other "early adopters," about which the interweb will undoubtedly keep us informed.
If that area is going to fail, it seems like we'll hear about it soon enough. If it doesn't, we won't. Beyond that, we're all just speculating.
0 x
UPDATES: OR passes 114, "one of strictest gun control measures in U.S." https://henryrifleforums.com/viewtopic. ... 34#p213234
- CT_Shooter
- Administrator emeritus
- Posts: 5152
- Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2016 8:42 am
- Location: Connecticut
Re: Potential Issue With The New Side Loaders
Since HRA stands solidly behind their products, they obviously had the confidence in their design to release the rifle(s) as they are. If there's an unknown issue to address, they will mitigate it. Love this company. No speculation is required.
4 x
H006M Big Boy Brass .357 - H001 Classic .22LR - Uberti / Taylors & Co. SmokeWagon .357 5.5" - Uberti / Taylors & Co. RanchHand .22LR 5.5"
Re: Potential Issue With The New Side Loaders
If you look at your pics you'll notice the top of the receiver/frame on the Marlin is significantly thinner than the Henry. One could argue that's a weak area on the Marlin that should crack but it doesn't. The frame area you are referring to on the Henry also has significant depth and is highly unlikely to suffer a stress crack in that location. You would need a significant out of battery firing/explosion to even come close to considering pressure spike issues in the location you are referencing. Looks like a non issue to me.Mistered wrote: ↑Mon May 13, 2019 10:29 pmNo, it is how a long time, experienced owner of BOTH Winchesters and Marlins sees it.Sounds like how a Winchester man slams a Marlin
A Winchester is a top eject so this does not apply.
This same area on a Marlin is approximately a 1/4" - see attached pic.
scope-630x339.jpg
Now look at the same area on the Henry (identified with the red arrow) - considerably thinner:
NEW.jpg
I am simply pointing this out as an experienced gun owner (as well as a metal fabricator) this is a potential weak area and should have been designed with a little more 'meat' in this area - make sense?
I like my Henry and respect the company but I am NOT one who puts 'idolatry' of a product over potential problems I see - and might have been overlooked.
The fact remains this area is very thin and will be subject to a fair amount of concussion impact from the larger cartridges.
Heck they had rifles with the load tubes cracking and they weren't anywhere the receiver - just saying.
3 x
Re: Potential Issue With The New Side Loaders
Somebody is bored. It might be time to do some shooting?Mags wrote: ↑Tue May 14, 2019 5:41 pm.
'Speculating' is a lot of what we all do here. Keeps goings on stimulating and interesting.
As far as the speculating so far, a lot of it sounds like guessing that a crack is imminent. Likely not. Perhaps with age and stress it's might be an eventuality, so likely not to 'hear about it soon enough' anytime soon. Speculating, it might be a long while, if it manifests. Speculating further, maybe Henry has some good mechanical and strength-of-materials-engineers and in modern design/manufacturing they have corresponding simulation software, that gives them confidence in the thinness there. One thing they haven't got is actual accelerated life MTBF data. Even an accelerated life test(ALT) takes time and the rifle is too new for enough test time to have elapsed to have useful data. Then there is test sample size. Minimum is 16 for an 80% confidence factor. ALT time can be reduced with a larger sample size. But in Henry's position, they are likely not doing any ALT, instead selling what might have been the test samples to customers for revenue. Customers then unwittingly become the source for any life time data that Henry eventually garners through warranty returns. That's my contribution to all that here 'specualtin'. Isn't this fun?ESquared wrote: ↑Tue May 14, 2019 9:55 amWell, we have at least one live tester among us, so a range report from BigAl would be great. Beyond that, all we can do is see what happens with other "early adopters," about which the interweb will undoubtedly keep us informed.
If that area is going to fail, it seems like we'll hear about it soon enough. If it doesn't, we won't. Beyond that, we're all just speculating.
1 x
Actions speak louder than words (Matthew 7:16-20).
Re: Potential Issue With The New Side Loaders
Good observation. Thanks.Bugs wrote: ↑Tue May 14, 2019 5:58 pmIf you look at your pics you'll notice the top of the receiver/frame on the Marlin is significantly thinner than the Henry. One could argue that's a weak area on the Marlin that should crack but it doesn't. The frame area you are referring to on the Henry also has significant depth and is highly unlikely to suffer a stress crack in that location.
0 x
Actions speak louder than words (Matthew 7:16-20).
Re: Potential Issue With The New Side Loaders
Hey, I sincerely hope this is the case!Looks like a non issue to me.
0 x
Re: Potential Issue With The New Side Loaders
.
On that, Yup! The rest, words in the air.
On that, Yup! The rest, words in the air.
CT_Shooter wrote: ↑Tue May 14, 2019 5:48 pmSince HRA stands solidly behind their products, ... No speculation is required.
0 x
UPDATES: OR passes 114, "one of strictest gun control measures in U.S." https://henryrifleforums.com/viewtopic. ... 34#p213234
Re: Potential Issue With The New Side Loaders
.
It's raining here today
It's raining here today
0 x
UPDATES: OR passes 114, "one of strictest gun control measures in U.S." https://henryrifleforums.com/viewtopic. ... 34#p213234