Potential Issue With The New Side Loaders

[Mistered]

I have been researching all online content about the new side loaders and have been for the most part fairly impressed until I discovered a potentially serious problem - the very thin spot on the frame between the top of the load gate opening and the ejection port. I was trying to post a picture but the new upgrades may be preventing this for now.
The thickness at this point appears to be less than about 1/8" - and closer to a 1/16". This (in my opinion) is too thin for a frame location and I see a very real possibility of it cracking at this point.
By contrast a Marlin 336 has about a 1/4" (or greater) thickness at this location.
Hey - I am not passing judgement but am pointing out something I perceive as a very real problem.

[GunnyGene]

I think I know the spot you're talking about. I've only seen pictures, but it does look pretty thin at the aft end of the load port. However, it doesn't look like it's going to be subject to any significant stress in that area either. If it were going to crack, I think the test&eval on the prototypes would have revealed it.

But, I agree it is something to be aware of.

As a point of comparison, there are large areas on commercial jet liners where the skin is .08" thick aluminum, and stress cracking is very rare - usually associated with poor maintenance on aging aircraft.

[Travlin]

Does anyone really think that H.R.A. would build a rifle that they were not sure would be safe because of a design defect?

[JEBar]

Does anyone really think that H.R.A. would build a rifle that they were not sure would be safe because of a design defect?

absolutely not .... I have no doubt that their engineering and design staff have taken this and who knows how many more items into consideration .... that said, real world use often finds defects and/or weaknesses that didn't show up in the factory testing .... the good news is, when a Henry product has an issue, they will repair or replace it

[Ojaileveraction]

Sounds like how a Winchester man slams a Marlin
I mean, just saying.

I have been researching all online content about the new side loaders and have been for the most part fairly impressed until I discovered a potentially serious problem - the very thin spot on the frame between the top of the load gate opening and the ejection port. I was trying to post a picture but the new upgrades may be preventing this for now.
The thickness at this point appears to be less than about 1/8" - and closer to a 1/16". This (in my opinion) is too thin for a frame location and I see a very real possibility of it cracking at this point.
By contrast a Marlin 336 has about a 1/4" (or greater) thickness at this location.
Hey - I am not passing judgement but am pointing out something I perceive as a very real problem.

[Mistered]

Sounds like how a Winchester man slams a Marlin

No, it is how a long time, experienced owner of BOTH Winchesters and Marlins sees it.
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.

[GFK]

You got a good eye. Nice catch!

P.S.
I got a Marlin like that too.

[Mgderf]

Since this is no more than a receiver cover, how could this become an issue?
The "thin spot" is, as previously stated, not an area that will be subject to a lot of punishment.

The "battering" from fired cases will be negligible.
Ammo brass is soft, and the receiver cover is hardened.
I do not see this being a problem.

[Mistered]

Since this is no more than a receiver cover

This IS the receiver - there is no 'cover' as say on some Henry 22s. The thin spot I identified is part of the receiver.
The fact that ammo brass is soft has nothing to do with it. The case is supported by the chamber and the receiver absorbes the concussion from the fired round.
Ever seen a blown case? If so you would understand how much pressure is generated at the time of discharge.

[ESquared]

Well, 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.

[Mistered]

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.

[GFK]

Well, 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.

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.

[Mags]

.
'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?

Well, 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.

[CT_Shooter]

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.

[Bugs]

Sounds like how a Winchester man slams a Marlin

No, it is how a long time, experienced owner of BOTH Winchesters and Marlins sees it.
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.

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.

[GFK]

.
'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?

Well, 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.

Somebody is bored. It might be time to do some shooting?

[GFK]

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.

Good observation. Thanks.

[Mistered]

Looks like a non issue to me.

Hey, I sincerely hope this is the case!

[Mags]

.
On that, Yup! The rest, words in the air.

Since HRA stands solidly behind their products, ... No speculation is required.

[Mags]

.
It's raining here today

.
'Speculating' is a lot of what we all do here. Keeps goings on stimulating and interesting.
...[long winded boredom]...

Somebody is bored. It might be time to do some shooting?