zeddm91/30
Active Member
Whats better AR7 or the marlin papoose
AR7 VS papoose
- Thread starter zeddm91/30
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast
Member Benefits:
No ad networks! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
IIRC, I think the guys over on the Canadiangunutz.com forum said the Papoose has issues over time. The Henry AR 7 has en excellent and virtual lifetime warranty though and while the Marlin may be better until it wears, the AR7 is the one I would choose personally. But I have never owned nor fired either and I am just going on what I read.
ThePhantomPatriot
Politically Incorrect
I own an AR7, its a good gun. The receiver AND barrel both go into a watertight stock. I'd recommend it over the marlin just for that factor. I don't know how it shoots compared to the Marlin, because every Marlin I've ever shot is 'out of the box accurate'.
cb51
Active Member
I had a papoose for a while, but while it was surprisingly accurite and shot rings around an AR7, I was never reliable enough that I had faith that it would make it through a full magazine without a jam. And it would jam in the most awkward way, aso that I needed the screwdriver blade of my swiss army knife to pry out the stuck empty case from being wedged on top of the incoming round from the mag. After two trips back to marlin, I gave up and got rid of it. A little heavier, the Marlin 39 TD is accurite, and totally reliable.
I'd rather have any other .22 carbine than a papoose. I have no patience with unreliable firearms.
I'd rather have any other .22 carbine than a papoose. I have no patience with unreliable firearms.
papoose vs AR-7
I had an AR-7 in the distant (pre-Henry) past. I never shot it enough to be assured of its reliability, but I was not impressed with its construction; it seemed a little fragile for a survival rifle. I owned a Papoose and shot it a great deal. As said above, it was quite accurate. But, I also noticed that as time went on it became less reliable, to the point that I concluded it was not dependable enough for its intended purpose. I am not sure either would be something I'd want to have as a backup .22 if I were going into the bush, or flying over it. I am still looking.
I had an AR-7 in the distant (pre-Henry) past. I never shot it enough to be assured of its reliability, but I was not impressed with its construction; it seemed a little fragile for a survival rifle. I owned a Papoose and shot it a great deal. As said above, it was quite accurate. But, I also noticed that as time went on it became less reliable, to the point that I concluded it was not dependable enough for its intended purpose. I am not sure either would be something I'd want to have as a backup .22 if I were going into the bush, or flying over it. I am still looking.
clandestine
AR-15 Savant
THIS!
hole punch
Paper Target Slayer
I bought a Henry Survival just because it was cheap and the action is kinda historic and anyways it all goes up in the buttstock.
While I think it's a cool gun and I don't want to get rid of it, it took awhile to 'break in'; it was real jammy at first and took hundreds of rounds as well as finding the right load for it (it likes 40gr high velocity - basically the more powerful the better) to strt working right. Neat gun. Not counting the initial issues, for $190 I'm pleased with mine.
Zero experience with the Marlin Papoose
While I think it's a cool gun and I don't want to get rid of it, it took awhile to 'break in'; it was real jammy at first and took hundreds of rounds as well as finding the right load for it (it likes 40gr high velocity - basically the more powerful the better) to strt working right. Neat gun. Not counting the initial issues, for $190 I'm pleased with mine.
Zero experience with the Marlin Papoose
jaredm1
Ultimate Member
Bump...
I'm looking at one of these two. I keep reading conflicting reports. A lot of bad things about the AR-7 in the past, but that now they are starting to improve. A lot of good things about the Marlin Papoose in the past, but now quality seems to be on the decline.
Quality and accuracy are the two main things I'm comparing (I don't care that the AR-7 can be completely stored in the stock). Also, anyone seen either one in stock at any of the industry partners in the Baltimore / Harford County area? I can't really seem to find the Papoose in stock anywhere, even online.
I'm looking at one of these two. I keep reading conflicting reports. A lot of bad things about the AR-7 in the past, but that now they are starting to improve. A lot of good things about the Marlin Papoose in the past, but now quality seems to be on the decline.
Quality and accuracy are the two main things I'm comparing (I don't care that the AR-7 can be completely stored in the stock). Also, anyone seen either one in stock at any of the industry partners in the Baltimore / Harford County area? I can't really seem to find the Papoose in stock anywhere, even online.
Biggfoot44
Ultimate Member
- Aug 2, 2009
- 33,490
My medium vintage Papoose has been 100% , and plenty accurate. It uses the same basic action as M60 that huge numbers of people swear by.
Don't have experience w/ AR7s , by by reports they had reliabilty issues in various generations. It looks cuter when stored inside stock. Either one won't store as compactly with scope attached.
The origional irons on Papoose suck , but I keep meaning to retrofit the current fiber optic ones like on M795. Then I would consider removing my (compact fixed power) scope to better be ultra compact.
Don't have experience w/ AR7s , by by reports they had reliabilty issues in various generations. It looks cuter when stored inside stock. Either one won't store as compactly with scope attached.
The origional irons on Papoose suck , but I keep meaning to retrofit the current fiber optic ones like on M795. Then I would consider removing my (compact fixed power) scope to better be ultra compact.
Forest
The AR guy
- Jul 13, 2011
- 985
I like my little Charter Arms AR-7, but it's no tack driver. While I prefer the aperture rear sight - the fact is the receiver has the rear sight while the removable barrel has the front sight. Even though the parts fit somewhat 'tight' it's never a perfect return to zero.
If you want to shoot at longer ranges I think the Papoose has an advantage over the AR-7 in that it's rear sight is attached to the barrel, so you don't lose zero when removing the barrel.
But there is no doubting the 'cool factor' of the AR-7. It stows in it's own floating stock AND James Bond used one to great effect in 'From Russia With Love'.
If you want to shoot at longer ranges I think the Papoose has an advantage over the AR-7 in that it's rear sight is attached to the barrel, so you don't lose zero when removing the barrel.
But there is no doubting the 'cool factor' of the AR-7. It stows in it's own floating stock AND James Bond used one to great effect in 'From Russia With Love'.
smokey
2A TEACHER
- Jan 31, 2008
- 31,581
no contest.....
http://www.browning.com/products/ca...&content=semi-auto-22-grade-i-firearms#center
beats both the papoose and the ar-7's asses handily
http://www.browning.com/products/ca...&content=semi-auto-22-grade-i-firearms#center
beats both the papoose and the ar-7's asses handily
cb51
Active Member
If I was setting up a survival rifle, I'd give serious thought to the CZ scout. It's a small 4 pound or so bolt action rifle darn near as small as a chipmonk. Near target grade accuracy, dead nuts reliable, and easy to clean from the breach end out in the field. Can be had with either 5 or 10 shot magazine.
jaredm1
Ultimate Member
Also nearly 3X as much...I'm also looking into the Marlin 795 which the Papoose was based on. Just wanted something quality, lightweight, and fun...I thought it would be cool if it could break down too. I'll make a few stops at some gun shops this weekend.
NY Transplant
Wabbit Season/Duck Season
I had an AR7 when I was a teen and it was the most accurate .22 I ever shot even to this day.
Everyone needs an AR-7. The fact that it floats, and stores in the stock where the metal parts stay clean makes it one of a kind. It is a Stoner design and works great after some tuning.
The gun becomes it's own air tight case, and stores it's own loaded mag. The Henry's store 2 mags. If you put a film of blue RTV on the buttplate it becomes totally water tight. Sealed it will store for years in crappy places like under truck seats or in a backpack and still "be there when you need it".
This is not a gun for everyday plinking, it is a bit clunky to get used to, but accurate enough MOS (moment of squirrel!). It IS the gun to have where you may need a gun but wouldn't want to carry around a 10-22.
The gun becomes it's own air tight case, and stores it's own loaded mag. The Henry's store 2 mags. If you put a film of blue RTV on the buttplate it becomes totally water tight. Sealed it will store for years in crappy places like under truck seats or in a backpack and still "be there when you need it".
This is not a gun for everyday plinking, it is a bit clunky to get used to, but accurate enough MOS (moment of squirrel!). It IS the gun to have where you may need a gun but wouldn't want to carry around a 10-22.
