I was going to treat myself to a new rifle. I have always loved the looks and history of the Henry. Does anyone have any experience with either the Uberti or Henry replicas? It seems the Henry only comes in .44-40, where the Uberti comes in that and .45. Any opinions would be appreciated.

I have a Uberti made 1860 Henry in 44-40 that was made for Taylors & Company. Originally the 1860 Henry was in 44 Henry Rimfire. 44-40 is not the same in case shape but is rather close in other ways. The original 1860 Henry and 1873 Winchesters were never produced in 45 Colt. Both 44-40 and 45 Colt are great rounds and I enjoy them. When I got my replica Henry it was my first 44-40 and am very pleased with it. I loaded up some black powder rounds for it. Fun round to shoot and reload.

Do you reload? .44-40 is crazy expensive to buy, and you should even price the brass before you buy the gun. Also the .44-40 is a bottlenecked cartridge so you need to lube the cartridges prior to reloading. The necks are very thin, and won't last as long as a .45 Colt.

Not sure which Henry you're looking at, but they do make the original in 45 Colt. Have one sitting in my room right now. Unfired, so no opinion other than very nice fit & finish. Prettiest gun I own.
Still listed on the website, H011C.

I did notice they do make it in 45 Colt. I do reload as well. I always wanted a .44-40, but, depending on how much I plan to shoot it, may look into the 45.

I had a Navy Arms (Uberti) Henry Rifle for a few years,
I inherited it from my father, but never took the time to shoot it before someone offered me $$ for it,

it was very well made,

a friend that used to shoot one (similar model) in NSSA events told me that I should invest in a thick leather glove or where a welders glove on the support hand when shooting, with no handguard they tend to get hot

I do not have one, but have had the pleasure of cleaning my bosses Henry .44.

It is a beautiful gun with excellent fit and finish. The bras receiver, polished wood and blue finish are a great combination. He claims it shoots better than it looks.

I hope to get to shoot it soon.

I owned an Uberti Henry in .45 Colt for a few years in the mid-90s. It was well-made, nicely finished, and shot fine. It had the compartment in the buttstock for a cleaning rod, like the originals. This feature seems to be missing from some of the current Italian repros.

I've owned an "Original Henry" in .44-40 for the last two years. It's very well built, but in my opinion both the "brass" receiver and barrel/magazine are over-polished; I would prefer it to be more of a satin finish like the originals. It almost seems like Henry tried to make a shiny showpiece. Still, it functions great and with my handloads will just eat one big hole in the target at 50 yards from a rest.

If you're going to exclusively use factory ammo I'd recommend a .45 Colt as the ammo will be easier to find and less expensive. If you handload, it's probably a toss-up, although the Colt may have a slight edge in component prices. Some people make a big deal about WCF rounds being difficult to load; I think they're either repeating something they read or they're just not very competent.

Personally, I prefer the .44 as it seems to feed smoother and the semi-bottleneck case seals better, meaning that fired brass is a lot cleaner. If you're going to load black powder I'd definitely pick the .44-40.

If you are set on a Henry or an Uberti you can stop reading right here, as I can't comment on either from experience...

...if, on the other hand, you are open to a different suggestion then you might consider a Chiappa. For years I dismissed Chiappa until I actually handled one.

This is a post from almost 3 years ago that I started trying to learn more about Chiappa. The thread has been pruned but this is the original post I made on them. The clerk mentioned in the post below told me that Uberti produced the parts for Chiappa...but several years ago I noted some info on the Chiappa website that seemed to contradict this so I'm not sure which is true...they've since changed their website.

I haven't handled a Chiappa since handling the one below but if current Chiappas are as well made as they were a few years ago I would certainly consider one of their lever action rifles as a contender.


Years ago I was a frequent customer of a local gun store (supposedly now the largest in the state). However, after years of buying and thousands of dollars, I had a bad experience with the owner and decided that, with the exception of one quick visit to look for a specific hunting round, that I wouldn't shop there anymore.

Last week, the day before Thanksgiving, it just happened that our schedules synced up and one of my brothers and I scheduled some range time. My day was free so I decided to get to the range early to work on some shooting chores that needed to get done. The gun store that I had been avoiding is on the way to my range and, after hearing that they were running a SIG sale on the radio, I decided to kill some time and check them out.

The store is HUGE, thousands of guns and all the gear and accessories to go with them. You name it, they got it. I'd guess it would take a good 3-4 hours to really see all they have, but I skipped a few aisles and made a quick trip of it in 2 1/2 hours.

As I was moving slowly through the lever action section of the store I overheard a conversation between a customer and a clerk that had offered to help me earlier. The customer was looking at a Henry .22. The thing that caught my eye was that it had a blued receiver, and up until that point I had only seen Henry's with brass receivers. When the customer was done looking at the gun I asked to see it. Neat little gun.

While examining the Henry the clerk and I struck up a conversation about lever actions in general. Talk turned to Marlins and when I told him that I had read about the decline in quality after Marlin was purchased by Remington but that it was on the rebound he agreed that it was on the rebound, but still left something to be desired. He brought down one example and pointed out to me the so-so metal to wood fit and also that it had a matte black receiver mated to a glossy octagonal barrel, which just looked silly. The wood on it was pretty though. Overall, not horrible but not great either.

Then, he brought down another gun and contrasted it against the Marlin. It was extremely light (I'd guess 6lbs. max), fast handling, and just a pure joy to shoulder and point. The color case hardened saddle ring receiver was just exquisite. The antique-like open grain wood finish was really something to behold. It looked like somebody had cut down a 100 year old fence post and worked it into a rifle stock. The wood to metal fit was absolutely first rate. A craftsman took the time to work that stock to the gun. You could've taken this gun to a gun show and set it amongst several old Winchesters and it would've blended right in(minus the wear).

The action was smooth, just a joy to work. I've long been a fan of Marlins, but I have to admit that even though I have no problem with mine, the action on this gun put them to shame. And the trigger! Oh my! That trigger pull was really something, I mean it really complimented the smooth action. Even the Italian proof marks were a nice little treat. Hell, the receiver screws were even properly set and regulated.

So, the downsides to the gun? Well, for starters, the front sight blade just seemed odd on it. The example I handled was unfinished, a dull metal finish. It also struck me as a bit of an odd shape that really didn't compliment the gun. It was almost as if they finished this beautiful gun and then at the last minute realized it was missing a front sight and somebody cut a sight out of a tin can and pinned it on. Having said that, I'd bet the front sight was still plenty usable.

The only other downside... the thousand dollar price tag. But many of us have paid that before and you get what you pay for right?

The price tag didn't mention the model, but after checking their website I believe I was handling one of the Chiappa model 1892 and I think it was a Trapper model. The example I handled had a 16" barrel and was chambered in .45 LC, but also available in .357 Mag and .44 Mag, with other models of the 1892 available in .44-40 as well.

Chiappa Lever Action Rifles


Chiappa Winchester 1892 Lever action Carbine .357 Magnum You Tube review

So, a compact, light weight, fast handling, saddle ring carbine, with an action and trigger pull that is sure to put a smile on even the most demanding of shooters, and a metal and wood build suitable for hanging over your fireplace or wood stove.

But, no matter how well built a gun is, it must have flaws right? Tell me that it isn't very accurate. Tell me that it isn't very reliable. Tell me that it will come flying apart after very few rounds and that it is meant to be gazed upon only and not suitable for more than a few light cowboy loads and no field or range use.

I had heard of Chiappa of course, but up until now I had thought it an Italian maker of second rate repros and the Rhino. I would never in a million years have asked to see a Chiappa, but after examining this gun I'm so grateful that the gun store clerk took the time to show me this nifty little gun.

Tell me the good and bad of Chiappa.